Last July, Saugatuck Technology blogged on the possibility that “rip and replace” of legacy systems was a potential approach some businesses were considering, to allow for greater agility. This would have significant repercussions across the industry but has this started to occur in force horizontally? Or in any specific vertical?
The benefits of “rip and replace” can be significant, as can the risks. How would a CIO prepare their organization for this strategy? Wouldn’t a baseline utilizing an I/TBM approach be recommended to drive business unit involvement and buy-in? Looking at day to day operating costs where mainframes act solely as large data repositories for static customer accounts, these operating costs can be miniscule when compared to costs of a new system. With the business value proposition for “rip and replace” potentially more challenging to define, transparency afforded by an I/TBM approach would seem to be a mandatory first step.
From the Saugatuck blog:
“How best to manage architectural disruption – accelerating Rip and Replace? We had some terrific conversations with both user and provider executives about the accelerating pace of technology innovation, and how many companies are having a hard time staying current,and leveraging the emergence of the New Master Architecture – and its array of technologies (Cloud, Social, Mobile, Advanced Analytics and Big Data). Ironically, this is in some cases delaying the pace of Cloud adoption. One subtle and not yet well articulated theme that emerged from our discussions, supported by some of the key findings detailed in our recently published 2013 Global Cloud Business Adoption, Trends, and Planning Positions Research Report (1231SSR, 27June2013) – is that we may be entering a period of accelerated “rip and replace” of core systems, rather than following the historical practice that all new advancements merely layer in on top of existing footprints, or the traditional mantra that “legacy systems always stay in use.”