1 / 10

Liberty Mutual & WebSphere Portal

Liberty Mutual & WebSphere Portal. Infrastructure Assessment April 3, 2006. Project Status. Employee portal performance environment migration (3/24 - late) Employee portal QA environment migration (3/24 - late) Consumer portal production environment

gritton
Télécharger la présentation

Liberty Mutual & WebSphere Portal

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Liberty Mutual & WebSphere Portal Infrastructure Assessment April 3, 2006

  2. Project Status • Employee portal performance environment migration (3/24 - late) • Employee portal QA environment migration (3/24 - late) • Consumer portal production environment • Not expected to be OS-complete until at least 4/5, risks production target 5/13 • Consumer portal production mirror environment 4/14 • Agent portal production environment software complete 4/23, production 5/20 • Employee portal (5 environments through production environment) • Software-Complete 6/1, Production 6/24 • IBM observes risk in schedule, skills and execution

  3. IBM Findings: Best Practices Gaps • Project Staffing / Leadership / Skills – Most Critical • IT Process • IT Architecture

  4. Leadership / Staffing / Skills • No infrastructure staff tech lead for Portal • High Risk • Confusion and delays in execution • IBM Recommendation: Identify resource with a high level of proficiency for whom Portal is #1 concern • Portal Skills Competency • No focus on developing expert level Portal competency (Center of Excellence) • High Risk • Unstable team resources, mentoring and focus gaps, overhead on training new resources, insufficient number of highly skilled resources available to meet project milestones • IBM Recommendation: staff augmentation

  5. Staffing / Leadership / Skills • Project Management • Resource pool sizing and skill set not managed in project plan • Scoped as "environment build" instead of new-product "technology introduction“ • Infrastructure project management is split across Infrastructure and PMIS organizations. • High Risk • Important aspects of new technology introduction are not addressed • Confusion in ownership. Risks and tasks go unmanaged under assumption they've been addressed elsewhere • IBM Recommendation: Centralize PM & reporting efforts and revise plan to mitigate above issues • General lack of understanding about how portals will be deployed and who will deploy them • High Risk • No clear ownership of portal deployment activities • IBM Recommendation: formalize leadership, task ownership and create detailed deployment plans

  6. IT Process • Performance Testing • No focal point for performance testing • Performance test teams are overextended and late to start • High Risk • Critical path to on time delivery of LM apps • Effort to fix performance problems can be high. • IBM Recommendation: Identify testing leader and consider tactical staff augmentation • Limited use of SCM and automation in build and deployment process • High Risk • Repetitive manual work is error prone and inefficient • No automation means no process control • IBM Recommendation: implement process that leverages versioning and automation

  7. IT Process • No basic tuning for Portal prior to Performance tests • Medium Risk • Efficiency issue; wasting resources to do performance testing on an untuned portal • IBM Recommendation: complete baseline tuning before initiating testing efforts • Performance Tests not aligned with real world scenarios • Medium Risk • Since current application requirement is one portal page with one portlet, scope of Portal-specific testing is limited. This will impact future scenarios with additional complexity. • IBM Recommendation: Consider expanding scope of testing • Deployment does not use empty portals for new environments • Medium Risk • Deployment Inefficiencies • IBM Recommendation: Follow best practice and deploy to empty portals

  8. IT Process • Inconsistent naming conventions • Low Risk • Unnecessary source of management complexity in the long term • IBM Recommendation: Implement consistent naming standards

  9. IT Architecture • Performance environment does not mirror Production environment • Medium Risk • Incomparable performance test results • Inconsistent environment may result in troubleshooting and problem determination in production (late problem identification) • IBM Recommendation: Acknowledge testing limitation and mitigate when feasible • Implementing WP 5.1 on WAS 6.0 which is supported but not optimized • Low Risk • Adds complexity to installation • IBM Recommendation: automate installation activities

  10. IBM Executive/Lab Involvement • Steve Mills, SVP & Group Executive, Software Group • Quarterly Meetings to discuss synergy between Liberty Mutual IT strategy, and IBM Software direction • Ken Bisconti, VP IBM Workplace & Portal • Since January 2006, working with Dan Eckerson and team on aligning proper resources to support CFIP & CSW projects • Adam Cook, Portal Lead Developer • Lab Advocate assigned to Liberty Mutual to assist in facilitating lab support and influence product direction to reflect customer requirements

More Related