Geographically Distributed System for Catastrophic Recovery
LISA '02 Proceedings of the 16th USENIX conference on System administration
| Hi-index | 0.01 |
The glamor in the IT domain is in the project. Major projects command the attention of the profession; methods for managing, controling and planning projects have been developed and refined; metrics, testing and validation routines, and quality assurance processes are fundamental. On the other hand, much of the day-to-day routine of the IT function is concerned with continuing, rather than project-based, work. Operations, security, quality assurance, skill development, recruitment and many other activities are not normally created and managed as projects. Different values, practices and issues are involved. The area of disaster recovery planning (DRP) is also an ongoing commitment. While writing a DRP plan may be a small project, maintaining the organization's preparedness to deal with disasters, crises and contingencies is never-ending. This paper examines the background to the low commitment to DRP in many organizations, working from the perspective of the IT professional. We describe a sample survey of Australian organizations where the responsibility for DRP is clearly shown to fall on the IT manager, in the relatively few organizations that take it seriously. The paper raises the question of links between job attitudes of IT personnel and the DRP practices of organizations. Conclusions are derived showing a need for organizational commitment to the less glamorous but necessary issues of DRP. Strategies for overcoming this resistance include defining "active", terminating projects for DRP, and making DRP more attractive in project terms.