This Executive Update is about implementing outsourcing. We will discuss the analysis of the situation we intend to outsource, the enforcement of service-level agreements (SLAs) and operation-level agreements (OLAs) between areas, the contractual aspects that shelter us, and the development of requests for information (RFIs) as well as the preparation of requests for proposal (RFPs). Finally, related to implementation is an element frequently forgotten: the possibility to reconsider the current internal organizational structure.

IT executives are continuing to keep an eye on the US and world economies and are looking for ways to cut expenses to meet reduced spending goals. One option is to consider establishing an offshore development team or outsource to an offshore vendor. India, Eastern Europe, and now China are all viable locations with skilled labor and many outsourcing options.

How compatible are agile software development processes, such as XP, with the production of secure code? I am often asked this question and sometimes, indeed, confronted with the suggestion that they are not. Yet, my experience shows that not only is agile development compatible with secure code, it is an enabler. This Executive Update examines a recent unusual incident in the world of open source software, providing some insights in support of this position.

Certain things, such as death and taxes, are inevitable. Conflict is one of them. If you know it is coming, even if unlikely, shouldn't it be part of the risk management plan? We plan for other contingencies; why not conflict?

This Executive Update is the first of three in a series that aims to share different viewpoints regarding three phases of an outsourcing strategy: feasibility analysis, implementation, and operation. Each phase features different levels of complexity. In the first phase, we assess the likelihood of putting outsourcing into effect. During the implementation phase, the decision has been made, and we are challenged to implement it the best way possible, avoiding operational disruption and future problems. Nevertheless, the biggest challenge is the operation phase; when we get there, outsourcing has been implemented, and our responsibility is to handle the new arrangement efficiently.

Oddly enough, American universities may be leading the way in outsourced e-mail. Both Microsoft and Google have made inroads within universities across North America. For budget-strapped universities, it's almost a no-brainer, and many are voting with their feet. Why manage the rapidly growing size of e-mail when someone can do it for you? And for free, too.

In the first Executive Update of this two-part series,1 we set out a financial model that companies can use to evaluate potential investments in virtualization technology. We worked through the first two steps of the model -- data collection and financial analysis -- for our example company, Big Host, which is based on composite data from our recent work.

Everyone has a perspective about return on investment (ROI). Lots of calculations, models, and algorithms allegedly precisely measure the impact of alternative technology investments. There is strategic ROI and tactical ROI; there is "soft" ROI and "hard" ROI. There are as many ROIs out there as there are RBIs in the major league. What do we make of the ROI smorgasbord?

A quick Google search tells the story. Value networks are "hot" -- hot enough for the term to generate 15.5 million hits. The same search two years ago yielded about 30,000 hits. Narrow it down to a discrete term, and it still pulls 250,000. Want a bigger number? Try "social networks," clocking in at 35 million. Or "business networks," at 15 million.

Hannibal of Carthage was one of the greatest military strategists of ancient times, and his methods are still studied today. He is probably best known for the herd of elephants he drove into Italy in the third century BC, which he used to terrify the Roman legions.

The advantages of collaboration in furthering product ideas, responding to challenges, and extending corporate or departmental capabilities are now well known. Much recent attention has been fostered by new technologies and new capabilities falling under the general heading of Web 2.0 or Enterprise 2.0.

As the US economy continues to be affected by domestic and world events, IT managers are raising the topic of moving some or all IT activities to parts of the world where labor is less expensive. Companies are looking for ways to stretch their budgets. With remote communication modes more easily accessible and stable, and in view of the increased levels of global management experience, the conversation about offshore development teams is one worth having.

Not too many years ago when we invested in startup technology companies, we'd set aside about 10%-15% of the funds we raised for the technology infrastructure. This was a high percentage of funds going to PCs, servers, and software -- especially when every dollar was precious and necessary for marketing, product development, and, of course, sales.

In January, a Cutter survey reported that a growing number of organizations now use virtualization technologies, with application development and testing as the most common use.1 More recently, a Business Technology Trends & Impacts Executive Update noted that virtualization "has become increasingly important in data centers over the past several years, as companies have sought to contain costs, reduce physical server use, and improve efficiency."2

We were ramping up on a new engagement, going over the architecture and technology choices the team had made for the project, and it seemed like something wasn't quite right.

IT environments and platforms are becoming more capable of satisfying incrementally demanding operational requirements, and development methodologies are evolving accordingly. To achieve streamlined and agile processes, complex systems rely increasingly on flexible, unified models and integrated system views.

Innovation has emerged as a strategic necessity in an age of rapid and continual change as well as diminishing life spans for competitive advantage in new products. Innovation is a requirement, but fostering it within the corporation has long proven problematic. It demands changes in corporate culture and an emphasis on collaboration rather than on competition.

Many of us struggle with getting real business value out of new techniques and practices. Agile software development is no different than any other development method in that regard. If you practice it "by the book," you may or may not get the business values you need.1 I hope you have clarity about the business values that are most important to your teams and your organizations.

This Executive Update analyzes the results of a recent Cutter Consortium survey of 103 IT organizations worldwide that focused on the effectiveness of IT governance practices.1 Our aim is to better understand how governance practices, linked to financial management practices, influence the value that IT brings to the business or organization.

"User interface architecture," a colleague scoffed recently, "is nothing but an invention for letting Web designers charge architects' consulting rates." I couldn't disagree more.

In January 2008, Cutter Consortium conducted a survey that asked 101 end-user organizations regarding their use of business performance management practices. The goal was to determine the degree to which companies are implementing business performance management techniques and technologies.

I'm in the process of fulfilling my lifelong dream of being a pilot, as I'm close to finishing the training for my private pilot's license. During this venture, I've been struck numerous times by the parallels between the principles and practices of aviation and those of agile software development. Many principles are based on common sense and clear communication.

Today, companies find themselves in the third and fourth generation of offshoring, perhaps managing a handful of discrete sourcing efforts across many operational domains. As the number of sourcing initiatives proliferate, the need for a systematic and holistic approach to their daily management comes into stark relief. Could a portfolio management approach offer a solution?

In a recent Dilbert comic strip, you see our hero-turned-user-interface developer ask nonchalantly, "I designed the user interface myself. How do you like the colors?" Just behind him is someone more like your typical user representative looking on -- in horror. Funny or familiar, there's actually more going on here than you may at first think.

Innovation is natural to people. When someone says "I am only human," he or she is admitting being innovative -- and doing things differently. That being said, often we don't harness our innovation effectively. We don't always rally others to support our innovative ideas.