Guest guest Posted May 3, 1999 Report Share Posted May 3, 1999 Year2000_Outbound_Mail_See_Below (AT) year2000 (DOT) com wrote: > Part 2 > > May 2, 1999 > > This is part two of our special coverage of the BrainStorm > Year 2000 National Symposium Series that took place in > New Orleans, LA March 29 - 31, 1999. The next BrainStorm > Conference is in San Francisco on June 28-30. Stay tuned > for special discounts from Year2000.com. > > Covered by Jon Huntress, jon (AT) year2000 (DOT) com, for the Year > 2000 Information Center: http://www.year2000.com > > If you wish to from this list or change your > subscription address, please see the note at the end of > this message. > > Our special conference coverage has been sponsored by > Fidelity Technology Solutions - TRACER 2000. This > organization provided the resources necessary to cover > the conference, so please check out their web site if you > have a chance. > > ********** The State of Other Nations > > Stephanie Moore of the Giga group gave a report as to > how the rest of the world was doing. This was timely as > many press stories are beginning to feel better about the > Y2K situation of the United States, but are questioning > how the rest of the world is doing and what effect this will > have on the US. > > She began by telling the audience how difficult it is to > get meaningful information from many countries. For > instance in Saudi Arabia, getting any information is > challenging, but in Russia there is a general lack of > awareness at the management level. She emphasized > that every company needs to make contingency plans > if they deal with foreign companies, regardless of what > country they are in. Make sure that any company, > business partner, supplier or subsidiary that affects > your bottom line is compliant. If they aren't, you must > have a back-up plan. > > I noticed in the press very recently that Russia had > asked for 8 billion pounds for help with Y2K. Stephanie > pointed out that only a year ago they thought they had > very few problems. This means there is a real question > here as to whether this was a new projection of Y2K > costs or just the discovery of a new "cash cow." I think > the latter. Just as some managers have discovered > during the last two years that they could fund their pet > projects by tying it into year 2000 compliance, I expect > some will see this as a whole new source of foreign aid. > > Stephanie reported that, in most foreign countries, there > is a general level of ignorance at the executive level, and > most small- and medium-sized concerns have not done > very much. In France, the IT people are working on the > problem, often in secret, while the managers ignore them > and the issue. There is general feeling in Europe that the > year 2000 problem is an Anglo-American conspiracy. > > Stephanie recounted an interesting story that happened > to her when she was being interviewed about Y2K on > French TV. The interviewer was polite and knowledgeable > and asked her the right questions during the interview, > right up until the end. Then he popped his zinger question. > He asked Stephanie if all this concern about Y2K was just > > hype so American consulting firms could get more money > out of France. The question took her off guard to such an > extent that she had no answer, which is just the way he > wanted the end of the interview to go. > > She said the United States is the only country working on > contingency planning and the only country with extensive > executive-level awareness. The United Nations is trying to > raise awareness of the problem but often has to pay the > airfare of delegates to go to the conferences to ensure > their presence. Italy is doing almost nothing while, on the > Pacific Rim, they are at least talking about it. She said > the main obstacle to success is that the executives still > have little or no understanding of the problem. > > This highlights the main reason this problem is so pervasive > and misunderstood. The year 2000 problem is very difficult > to understand, especially for someone with no knowledge of > what software is or how it is made. I think the main year > 2000 problem is the general level of ignorance beyond the IT > circle. Some people say we could have avoided this problem, > and I even heard that statement at this conference from > presenters who should know better. If everyone knew then > what we know now this might be true, but the executives in > the rest of the world are where our executives were one, two > and three years ago. While this attitude shows the > marvelous effectiveness of 20/20 hindsight and gives good > ammunition to the lawyers, it doesn't help solve the problem > one bit. > > Because of the ignorance problem, there is no way we could > have done this any differently. I wish the education process > could have gone faster, but it didn't. And judging from the > relatively stable number of people who think the end is > coming, it still isn't happening. We have to work now with > what we have, not with how we wish things could have been, > or spend our time singling out those to blame. > > There are other obstacles to consider. Stephanie said there > is a huge disconnect between the CIO and IT departments > and the CEO. In many cases, the executives sponsor, but > don't empower. This is also fairly common over here. The > executives are leaving the business decisions to IT when > these people don't have an enterprise view and can't make > these decisions. > > Worldwide difficulties that exacerbate the problem are the > Asian financial problem, Japanese banking, and the Russian > economy. Difficulties also come from the introduction of > the EMU in most of Europe. Stephanie reported that many > IT departments are stealing money earmarked for EMU > transitions in order to fix Y2K. > > I found a news story a few months ago out of Europe, urging > IT people to work on the EMU because there was another > whole year to work on Y2K. Stephanie said that year 2000 > affects everything, not just the financial system software, > and is much more serious than the introduction of the Euro. > But many who are involved with the Euro think just the > opposite. She pointed out that most of the work on the Euro > is coordinated while the Y2K solutions are individual, often > unique, and created in isolation of everyone else. This will > > cause lots of problems when it comes time to test the > systems with other systems. > > ** Sponsor's Message: Fidelity Technology Solutions - TRACER 2000 ** > > The Scan Compare Utility, as well as an evaluation copy > of TRACER 2000, may be downloaded at no charge from > the TRACER 2000 website at http://tracer2000.fidelity.com/ . > To get more information, including a white paper on how to > continuously re-validate your software, e-mail TRACER 2000 > at:tracer2000 (AT) fmr (DOT) com . > > ********** End of Sponsor's Message *********** > > Editorial coverage continues: > > So where are the nations of the world relative to each other > and fixing their systems? According to Stephanie, Latin > America, the Pacific Rim, and Eastern Europe were in the > awareness/inventory stage of finding what and where the > problem is. Europe is in the impact assessment phase, which > is repair and fix. The US, UK, Canada and Australia are in > the testing implement phase, which is installing and testing > the fixes. > > In Asia, the situation is mixed. China says it is addressing > the problem, but of 500 companies asked, 53% still don't > know what Y2K is. China has the added difficulty of having > lots of pirated software because of their differing perceptions > of intellectual property. Japan is supposedly having troubles > with contingency planning and supply chain issues because, > to ask a supplier or a customer how they are coming along > with their fix shows a lack of trust and is impolite. Stephanie > said the general thinking is that Japan has underestimated > the problem and that their lack of contingency planning shows > that the managers still don't understand the problem. > > She said Germany, Belgium, France, and especially Spain > are behind and in significant danger of year 2000 failures, > even though they are ahead on the Euro. The utilities over > there are not in bad shape and they are doing some creative > things. The French electrical utility is asking all their > major customers what their electric needs will be for the > week before and after new years. There is less job-hopping > going on in Europe and, while there is almost no contingency > planning, the people of Europe have had a forced education > in contingency planning that is superior to anything on our > side of the pond. This is because of what Stephanie called > "human induced" infrastructure failures, or strikes. They > have so many strikes in Europe that people are accustomed > to having parts of their society going down or being > inaccessible for protracted periods. They know what to do. > The bad news is that, while Britain is ranked high, many > > companies are not ready. The U.S. Government ranks > Germany on the same level as Japan. In Germany there > is little public information available and a general reluctance > to discuss or plan. Italy just set up a committee to deal with > Y2K and Spain is one of the least prepared. Interestingly > enough, in another session, one of the speakers cited the > Gartner Group statistics on Europe and was contradicted by > a Swedish man sitting just behind me. He said the Gartner > numbers were just guesses and in Sweden they had a more > accurate index called the "Garlic Belt". He said that the > level of year 2000 compliance is inversely proportional to the > consumption of garlic in Europe, meaning that, as you go > South, the consumption of garlic goes up and the level of > compliance goes down. The "garlic belt" tends to confirm > Giga's findings. > > This illustrates the major problem in trying to assess how > the rest of the world is doing. Meaningful statistics just > aren't there. It may well be that how a company or country > deals with disruption is more important than how many > systems are fixed. I have been exchanging mail with an > engineer in Latvia named Lucas. Two years ago, I asked him > how he thought it would be. At that time, he was about the > only person in Latvia who even knew there was a problem. He > predicted the worst, but then added, "But look what they > say can happen. Intermittent power, scarcity of goods and > services, no gas, no garbage pick up. We HAD that for fifty > years under communism. We can do that!" > > Stephanie didn't really cover the third world in her session > but, at the end, she said there were far fewer things to go > wrong because their infrastructures are older and simpler > and the countries, as a whole, still remember how to do > most processes with paper and pencil. But she said there > is just no way to predict if it will be business as usual or > what the impacts would be. > > Next week will be contingency planning. > > Best practices, > > Jon Huntress > jon (AT) year2000 (DOT) com > The Year 2000 Information Center > > http://www.year2000.com > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.