Self-healing Systems

When we want to change something, should we do it in one fell swoop – or should we let it happen iteratively?  Should we build an elaborate mechanism of checks and balances that ensures that no mistakes are committed – or should we be lenient and let the system recover from mistakes?  These questions stem from one of the most fundamental challenges any designer encounters: should we design a complex system, or should we develop a simple system that grows organically?

Of course, the answer to this age old dilemma is KISS – Keep it Simple, Stupid!

Let me explain.  In one of our internal systems we keep the information of employees and their managers.  Our employees frequently move between projects.  It is necessary to keep track of who is managing whom in a timely fashion.  How do we do that? As the manager-direct relationship is not trivial, we had a process where the outgoing manager informs the HR department about release of their direct and the new manager requests that employee to be assigned to them.  Now the problem is that for the managers this is a chore.  And not one, but two managers need to synchronize their actions to make this happen.  The direct, for whom this change is very important – as her performance review is at stake – has no control over the process which routinely used to drag for days or even weeks.  The process had been designed to ensure that the changes, whenever they are effected, are always correct. But this process proved to be too painful for the key stakeholder, viz. the direct. 

We decided to invert the process completely. We now allow employees to change their managers by themselves.  The immediate reaction was of panic. Sacrilegious! How can you allow someone to arbitrarily change their own manager without any approvals? What if they play a mischief? If they mess it up what will be the consequences and who will clean the data? However, soon everyone reconciled to the simple “organic” nature of the change. Why would anyone play a mischief? If they do, won’t they get caught quickly? (We have notifications built in.) In case someone messes up – isn’t correcting it also simple?

The ability to spot an aberration quickly and letting it be corrected swiftly, as a part of the process itself, is the hallmark of a “self-healing system”. 

The celebrated Gall’s law (John Gall) states: A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked.  To further quote Wikipedia, this law is essentially an argument in favor of underspecification: it can be used to explain the success of systems like the World Wide Web and Blogosphere, which grew from simple to complex systems incrementally, and the failure of systems like CORBA, which began with complex specifications. Gall's Law has strong affinities to the practice of agile software development.

Gall’s law, fundamental as it is, is applicable to any field you could think of.  In fact, chances are you may already have used it – or may have seen it being used - somewhere. If that’s the case, can you share your experience? In any case, why not put the Gall’s law to use in our everyday life?

- Abhay Patil

Four Cultural Signatures

Recently I came across a book titled Corporate Cultures. This book, written by Terrence Deal and Allan Kennedy, is a classic on the rites and rituals of corporate culture. The authors combine insights from anthropology, psychology, sociology and management into a work that outlines the effect of corporate culture on strategy and performance.

 Fig: Four Generic Cultures

In describing the various types of company cultures, Deal and Kennedy present four cultural archetypes.

•       Macho – A world of individualists who take high risks and get quick feedback on whether their actions were right or wrong

•       Work hard, Play hard  – Employees take few risks, with quick feedback. Culture encourages maintaining high level of low-risk activity

•       Bet-your-company – Years pass before employees come to know whether decisions paid off. Big stakes decisions. High risk, slow feedback.

•       Process – Little or no feedback, hard to measure what you are doing, so people concentrate on how it is done. When taken to extremes, it is bureaucracy.

Can you place your organization on this map? What kind of culture do you have? Personally, what kind of culture are you comfortable working with? When a person’s behaviors stick out as being different in your company, can you discern the cultural reasons?

Harbinger Systems Hat-trick

The year 2014 has brought another reason to cheer for Team Harbinger. For the third year in a row, Harbinger's name will feature in the FORTUNE magazine, thanks to a prestigious award. Yet again, the International Association of Outsourcing Professionals has named Harbinger Systems in its select list of global 100 companies.

The IAOP serves 120,000 professionals drawn from the $6 trillion global outsourcing industry. It uses an independent panel of experienced outsourcing buyers to pick the top 100 companies. The panel uses four critical characteristics: size and growth; customer references; organizational competencies; and management capabilities.

Our big thanks to customers, employees, suppliers and well-wishers for their unwavering support in the pursuit of Harbinger mission. Harbinger Systems is proud to be building some of the world's coolest software products in education, talent management, healthcare and other applications. Harbinger works closely with independent software vendors, including Fortune 500 global tech leaders, mid-size companies and start-ups. In close partnership with them, we use our expertise in security, mobility, cloud and web technologies to develop and test great products.

Putting DISC Profile to Use in Your Team

Managers often struggle in coping with the different working styles of different team members. One common error for a manager in dealing with a team member is to think - why can't this team member behave more like me? The answer lies in the different behavioral tendencies people have. The DISC profile is a great tool for understanding the behavioral tendencies of a person. 



Dominance. People with a high D score are known to be result-oriented. You can count on them to get things done. They may come across as being rough around the edges, but they won't mind straight talk from you.

Influence. People with a high I score are friendly, talkative, and full of enthusiasm for new ideas. They will get started with things in no time, but don't count on them completing everything they start. They are prone to exaggerating, and easily over-estimate themselves and others.

Steadiness. People with a high S score provide the glue that holds the team together. You can count on them to tell you how everyone on the team feels. They may come across as being resistant to change. They will want to make sure everyone is on board with a new idea before jumping into it.

Conscientiousness. People with a high C score are perfectionists. You can count on them for producing quality work, and getting it right the first time, always. They are very focused on the the task at hand, and may appear reserved. They won't interrupt when you talk.

Are you curious to know what your DISC profile looks like? There are several free tests available online that only take a few minutes, and you will get your full profile! Click this link to take yours now.