Like most of the population of the
There is a lot of virtuous outrage (partly fuelled, as ever,
by public envy of personal wealth) over the situation of the gentleman at
Barclays who may or may not be answerable for some stupefyingly corrupt behaviour
in the Bad Old Days just before the world ended in 2008. I don’t wish to add
any further silliness to what is already a hysterical issue, but I am mystified
by his defence that it wasn’t him, that there were people who worked for him
who were responsible, and he didn’t know.
OK – I’m not actively involved now, and maybe values have
changed, but it seems to me that:
(1) If they pay you a lot of money to be in charge, then
ultimately you are accountable for what happens in your area.
(2) Naturally you cannot know everything that goes on, but
you are obliged to stay on top of things – to ensure that governance,
procedures, rules and an ethical culture are in place to check that staff know
what they can and cannot do, and to enforce correct behaviour. If you do not
manage to do this – and it will not be easy – then you have failed in your job
and you are answerable.
(3) Thus (in my extremely humble opinion) the man from
Barclays either knew what was going on – in which case he is culpable – or else
he was not in control – in which case he failed in his job and is therefore
still culpable. It’s a tough life in a top job – that’s why they get all that
money.
Anyway, that’s not what I wanted to write about. I wanted to
write about the Krell.
If anything, I am more alarmed by the software failure at
NatWest Bank last week – a system change caused problems which separated many
of NatWest’s customers from their money for a period of days, and generated
huge inconvenience and actual hardship. Scary.
On a smaller and less disastrous scale, I had a
customer’s-eye view of the recent switch of Bank of Scotland to Lloyd’s Bank’s
computer systems. It wasn’t good. For a period of some months, the bank was
running with an interim system which had customers queuing up to fill in slips
of paper in a manner such as I had not seen since the 1980s. Retro banking. I
am confident that Lloyds and Bank of Scotland did their best in a difficult
situation, but for a while their systems were really not fit for purpose. It’s
a dangerous sign, but on a number of occasions I found myself thinking that
this would not have been tolerated in my day.
My day? What the blazes has it got to do with me, then?
Well, as it happens, I was a computer person for almost all my working life. By
the late 1990s I was in charge of all business software development for a very large
financial institution which shall forever remain nameless, and I knew the guys
who had the equivalent roles in most of the UK banks – and they were good. They
would not have rolled out any system which didn’t work, or which used customer
inconvenience as a buffer to tide them over.
So what has changed?
Well, I was also around when the seeds of the coming storm
were sown in the 1970s and 80s, so I have a very fair idea what I’m talking
about. Which brings me to the Krell.
I don’t remember the details – maybe you do – but in the film The Forbidden Planet the Krell are a mighty, super-intelligent race of beings who have died out (for reasons I also cannot remember – perhaps they smoked), and part of their legacy is a collossal underground computer installation, which has been running for thousands of years and is still running – and nobody knows what it is doing. That’s the important bit – since no-one knows what it is doing, no-one dares switch it off.
Right. Back to the 1980s.
In the 1980s I was a business systems analyst. We were
hotshots. We would go into a traditional business department and we would ask
them all about what they did and how it worked. We would capture the expertise
of some very experienced and intelligent, professional people, and we would
draw dataflow diagrams and build data models and we would automate their processes.
It was brilliant. We used to make people happy – we took huge amounts of
drudgery out of their jobs, we built in safeguards and automatic audit trails,
and we saved them enormous amounts of money. When Jeannie who did the
commission work became pregnant and left (and people did things like that in
those days) then they didn’t need to replace her. Not only that, but any new staff
who did come in required much less training, since a lot of the expertise and
decision-making was now built into the computer system.
Fantastic. It was a wonderful job – people actually loved
us. I have never been so happy at work.
Move the clock on 10 years. It is time to go back to one of
our departments and their 1980s systems, and see what needs to be done to get
things squeaky again – because there is now an accumulated tangle of 10 years
of emergency fixes, rushed changes to support product launches and new
regulations. Time for a detox.
Problems. If the analyst sat down with the new department
manager in 1990, he might well be talking to someone who had no experience of
this area before the systems were put in. It was almost certain that this
manager would be unaware of some of the business rules, because they were now built
into the desktop system – they just happened automatically. Similarly, the new model of the
business process they agreed on might well omit a vital job which happened every night at 2am
in the middle of a batch run which no-one understood any more.
Around this time, we used to talk a lot about system
ownership. Business managers would laugh at this, and produce comic visions of
putting their system in a bag and taking it home, but by and large they had
washed their hands of understanding. When the computer systems arrived, responsibility
for understanding the business shifted by default to the IT people. They had,
after all, got everyone into this mess.
Well, the bad news is made even worse by the fact that the
computer analysts had moved on as well, and the constant focus in the business
world will always be to cope with new changes. Maintaining the old stuff is a
lower priority – especially when it comes to allocating the budget. Yes, we
know the roof is leaking and the foundations are sinking, but what we really
want is a shiny new barbecue and some of that decking stuff. Great.
Everyone remembers that there was a huge panic prompted by
fear that the year 2000 would cause disastrous software failures – a lot of
money was spent and a lot of effort expended. Since we are all still here I
guess it worked, but the thing I remember most is the effort that went into
digging into that mysterious old software – paying over the odds for people who
knew how it worked and – most scary of all – finding people who could still
read the ancient languages it was written in. Looking, in fact, for surviving
members of the Krell.
And still time passes, and still the software deteriorates,
and still our understanding of what the great machine is doing becomes more
hazy. Yes, business managers should have paid more attention and kept in touch
with how things work, and – certainly – IT people should have spent less time
obsessing about crap like Information Engineering and client-server and
object-oriented and (who can forget...) artificial intelligence, but the fact
is that they didn’t. Lots of money should have been devoted to keeping the old
systems up-to-date and clearly understood and operationally viable, but it
wasn’t.
The Krell are dead. The machines are still running. The
problems at NatWest are just the beginning, gentlemen. The decay of old systems
is exponential. Building replacement systems is not possible, because nobody
any longer understands what it is they would be required to do.
Welcome to the beginning of the end. I must have a look on
Amazon and see if I can get a cheap DVD of The
Forbidden Planet.
I think I can best sum up my response as "yup".
ReplyDeleteA very informative read Sir, from an interesting perspective. Grim reading for this old Anti Capitalist New Ager :-) I guess we are all at the Mercy of those failing systems, and as you say it did cause very real suffering for those in our Society that live on a pittance, of whom there are far too many.
ReplyDeleteGreat read,
Lee.
Lee - you are absolutely right. Anyone who is a bit hard up is immediately at risk if anything goes wrong with availability of money. The more we come to rely on a service which offers instant access, or 24-hour online banking, or anything which makes convenience and reliability a selling point, the more we are screwed if it fails. I'm getting a bit paranoid about technology in general, which is a real change for me - my wife's car turns on the windscreen wipers if it detects water on the screen, turns on the lights if it senses it has gone dark, applies the parking brake if it thinks you need it. Increasingly, I find myself thinking "something else to go wrong - just what problem is this solving?".
DeleteI am hoping that the NatWest disaster gives a high enough profile to this kind of risk to get the banks to change some of their priorities, before some really cosmic failure takes place.
Frightfully, yes. Even worse, we have done this to ourselves.
ReplyDeleteBest Regards,
Stokes
Yes we have - and mostly we've done it in a spirit of the most supreme arrogance. No-one has ever been as clever as we are at this instant...
DeleteA thing I don't understand in all this demonising of banks is, why haven't the credit card companies had a roasting as well? In the overall scheme of things, they were at least as much to blame for inflating the bubble of unrepayable credit. I don't know how the numbers stack up, but I would be interested to see how the amounts now being handed over to bail out struggling economies compare with the ludicrous total debt that used to be spread worldwide across many millions of personal credit card and bank accounts. Is it possible that these deficits are not new, but have just shifted to a different place? [Answers on a used 5-pound note, please, to Chateau Foy]
Fascinating post Foy - I'm reminded of CS Lewis's writing on "the bigotry of the present", the idea that we are so much smarter than those who came before us.
DeleteA most sobering and thoughtful post, sir. I think the same thing is true of the military, from what I see. So many of our admin, financial, comms and logistics systems are now a kuldge of various systems and upgrades, and the expertise behind it is diffused by the churn of military postings and outsourcing to contractors. We become more and more reliant on a few long time civvie workers who embody our institutional memory.
ReplyDeleteAnother science fiction work which comes to mind, and which you indirectly point to, is Ursula K. Leguin's short story, "The Machine Stops". In my youth that seemed like a farfetched fantasy. Now, not so much.
We are the Krell.
Just revisiting this post in the light of events at TSB last week ; 'oh yes, of course we can easily port the data to a new system..'
ReplyDelete