Pourquoi les développeurs sont les héros oubliés de la crise sanitaire ?



Faced with the ever-increasing imperative on DevOps teams to quickly put applications into service, developers are under and withstand considerable pressure.

Businesses have faced challenges of all kinds since the onset of the health crisis, and developers were no exception. Of course, they had to make sure they could work remotely, but they were also faced with increased activity linked to the massive demand for online services caused by the lockdowns.

However, are leaders aware of the plight of developers and do they fully appreciate the importance of the contribution of these teams in accelerating the digital transformation undertaken by many organizations?

Support development teams

A recent study conducted by Couchbase with 450 IT managers, in France, the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany, to report on the extent of the challenges overcome by developers in terms of digital transformation, ensures that business leaders believe that the role played by the development teams over the past year is essential.

With many companies forced to roll out their originally planned five-year digital transformation plans, within a matter of months, 92% of those surveyed agree that developers have provided tremendous help.
As adapting to new ways of working and adjusting to the rapidly changing market have become the norm, it is no surprise that developers have been the real heroes of this achievement. It is clear that by being flexible in adjusting their goals when needed and in channeling their resources, they have been instrumental in crisis response efforts.

A growing sense of discontent

While developers play an essential role in companies’ digital transformation strategies, they are also under great pressure. They had to find a balance between an often trying daily role and the need to contribute to innovation, while being confronted with the switch to telework. Faced with the ever-increasing imperative on DevOps teams to quickly put applications into service, developers are under and withstand considerable pressure.

It’s no surprise, then, that when organizations were asked about the reasons for complaints from their developer teams, 49% indicated that developers had to multitask in a limited amount of time. After a year where responsiveness to unforeseen events has been the norm, it’s arguably inevitable and understandable that developer teams are behind on their current projects. However, this is a problem of management and resources, which must be remedied so that companies continue to operate.

The importance of setting specific goals

If organizations fail to maximize the potential of their developers, there is concern that progress will be slowed down and companies will find themselves left behind by their competitors. Interestingly, despite the importance of developer contribution to the smooth running of the business, 40% of respondents struggle to set clear and measurable goals for developer teams.

Obviously, equipping developer teams with the right technology tools is a priority for DevOps success, but making sure they clearly understand the long-term goals and strategy of the business is just as important. to ensure this success. Teams can then identify and solve the problems they face, and ensure that the skills and talents of developers are put to use in a way that pays off over time.

The path to follow

Solving these issues and reducing the pressure on developers requires equipping teams with the communications tools, guidance, and technology they need to get there. This means that they must be freed from the constraints linked to technological heritage which is sometimes not suited to their mission, and no longer expect them to adapt immediately to new technologies. By taking the time to communicate transparently with developers, by trying to accurately estimate their contribution to the company, by taking into account the obstacles that stand in their way, leaders will undoubtedly help teams to be more efficient and effective. more efficient.

This is all the more important as the value of developers to the business is undoubtedly on the rise. As proof, we have seen a 20% increase in their workforce in 2020. If CIOs can recognize and reward their vital work, it is imperative that they support them in the times to come, starting by communicating more effectively to ensure that they are working towards the same objectives, in collaboration with the IT team at large. The pressures associated with digital transformation will certainly not go away, but taking action like these will help ensure that the obstacles ahead are more surmountable.



Source link

Pourquoi les développeurs sont les héros oubliés de la crise sanitaire ?



Faced with the ever-increasing imperative on DevOps teams to quickly put applications into service, developers are under and withstand considerable pressure.

Businesses have faced challenges of all kinds since the onset of the health crisis, and developers were no exception. Of course, they had to make sure they could work remotely, but they were also faced with increased activity linked to the massive demand for online services caused by the lockdowns.

However, are leaders aware of the plight of developers and do they fully appreciate the importance of the contribution of these teams in accelerating the digital transformation undertaken by many organizations?

Support development teams

A recent study conducted by Couchbase with 450 IT managers, in France, the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany, to report on the extent of the challenges overcome by developers in terms of digital transformation, ensures that business leaders believe that the role played by the development teams over the past year is essential.

With many companies forced to roll out their originally planned five-year digital transformation plans, within a matter of months, 92% of those surveyed agree that developers have provided tremendous help.
As adapting to new ways of working and adjusting to the rapidly changing market have become the norm, it is no surprise that developers have been the real heroes of this achievement. It is clear that by being flexible in adjusting their goals when needed and in channeling their resources, they have been instrumental in crisis response efforts.

A growing sense of discontent

While developers play an essential role in companies’ digital transformation strategies, they are also under great pressure. They had to find a balance between an often trying daily role and the need to contribute to innovation, while being confronted with the switch to telework. Faced with the ever-increasing imperative on DevOps teams to quickly put applications into service, developers are under and withstand considerable pressure.

It’s no surprise, then, that when organizations were asked about the reasons for complaints from their developer teams, 49% indicated that developers had to multitask in a limited amount of time. After a year where responsiveness to unforeseen events has been the norm, it’s arguably inevitable and understandable that developer teams are behind on their current projects. However, this is a problem of management and resources, which must be remedied so that companies continue to operate.

The importance of setting specific goals

If organizations fail to maximize the potential of their developers, there is concern that progress will be slowed down and companies will find themselves left behind by their competitors. Interestingly, despite the importance of developer contribution to the smooth running of the business, 40% of respondents struggle to set clear and measurable goals for developer teams.

Obviously, equipping developer teams with the right technology tools is a priority for DevOps success, but making sure they clearly understand the long-term goals and strategy of the business is just as important. to ensure this success. Teams can then identify and solve the problems they face, and ensure that the skills and talents of developers are put to use in a way that pays off over time.

The path to follow

Solving these issues and reducing the pressure on developers requires equipping teams with the communications tools, guidance, and technology they need to get there. This means that they must be freed from the constraints linked to technological heritage which is sometimes not suited to their mission, and no longer expect them to adapt immediately to new technologies. By taking the time to communicate transparently with developers, by trying to accurately estimate their contribution to the company, by taking into account the obstacles that stand in their way, leaders will undoubtedly help teams to be more efficient and effective. more efficient.

This is all the more important as the value of developers to the business is undoubtedly on the rise. As proof, we have seen a 20% increase in their workforce in 2020. If CIOs can recognize and reward their vital work, it is imperative that they support them in the times to come, starting by communicating more effectively to ensure that they are working towards the same objectives, in collaboration with the IT team at large. The pressures associated with digital transformation will certainly not go away, but taking action like these will help ensure that the obstacles ahead are more surmountable.



Source link

Salesforce : avec Bret Taylor, Marc Benioff prépare sa succession



Promoted to co-CEO, Bret Taylor is leading the next chapter of Salesforce with Marc Benioff. Their watchwords: « trust, customer success, innovation ».

Salesforce announced it this week. Forty-year-old Bret Taylor is now co-chief executive officer (co-CEO) of the multinational cloud-based CRM.

Also appointed Vice-President of the Board of Directors (Vice-Chair), Bret Taylor will work in tandem with Marc Benioff, who co-founded the company in 1999.

« Together, Bret and I will take Salesforce to the next chapter, while maintaining our common values: trust, customer success, innovation and equality for all », said Marc Benioff in a press release. The leader reflects on his succession.

Bret Taylor would be a prime contender.

Salesforce, after Facebook and Google

Bret Taylor is one of the profiles most sought after by companies in Silicon Valley.

He was most recently president and chief operating officer (COO) of Salesforce, after having been its chief product officer (CPO). He joined the American firm in the summer of 2016 after the acquisition of Quip, a collaborative platform he co-founded.

Prior to founding Quip, he served as Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of Facebook, which acquired his company FriendFeed in 2009. A software engineer by training (Stanford University), Bret Taylor began his career at Google, where he was co-creator of Google Maps.

At Salesforce, he highlights growth stocks, including the buyout finalized in July 2021 of Slack for $ 27.7 billion by the firm.

Salesforce reported revenue of $ 6.86 billion for its third quarter ended Oct. 31 on Tuesday. Its revenues have thus increased by 27% year-on-year.

(photo credit: Cite Conference on VisualHunt.com)



Source link

Salesforce : avec Bret Taylor, Marc Benioff prépare sa succession



Promoted to co-CEO, Bret Taylor is leading the next chapter of Salesforce with Marc Benioff. Their watchwords: « trust, customer success, innovation ».

Salesforce announced it this week. Forty-year-old Bret Taylor is now co-chief executive officer (co-CEO) of the multinational cloud-based CRM.

Also appointed Vice-President of the Board of Directors (Vice-Chair), Bret Taylor will work in tandem with Marc Benioff, who co-founded the company in 1999.

« Together, Bret and I will take Salesforce to the next chapter, while maintaining our common values: trust, customer success, innovation and equality for all », said Marc Benioff in a press release. The leader reflects on his succession.

Bret Taylor would be a prime contender.

Salesforce, after Facebook and Google

Bret Taylor is one of the profiles most sought after by companies in Silicon Valley.

He was most recently president and chief operating officer (COO) of Salesforce, after having been its chief product officer (CPO). He joined the American firm in the summer of 2016 after the acquisition of Quip, a collaborative platform he co-founded.

Prior to founding Quip, he served as Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of Facebook, which acquired his company FriendFeed in 2009. A software engineer by training (Stanford University), Bret Taylor began his career at Google, where he was co-creator of Google Maps.

At Salesforce, he highlights growth stocks, including the buyout finalized in July 2021 of Slack for $ 27.7 billion by the firm.

Salesforce reported revenue of $ 6.86 billion for its third quarter ended Oct. 31 on Tuesday. Its revenues have thus increased by 27% year-on-year.

(photo credit: Cite Conference on VisualHunt.com)



Source link

Géolocalisation en entreprise : un suivi proportionné ?



Used in the professional context, smartphones and vehicles can be geolocated by the employer. What do employees think in France?

Are your terminals used in the professional context geolocated by your employer? 25% of the 567 professionals surveyed in France for GetApp replied in the affirmative.

The devices most often equipped with a tracker implemented by the employer would be:

– personal telephones used at work (cited by 26% of the panel)
– personal vehicles (18%)
– professional vehicles (16%)

Tablets or personal PC / Mac computers and professional smartphones follow (14% respectively). In addition, companies are investing more in employee monitoring solutions in the era of hybrid work (remote and face-to-face).

What are the safeguards?

The control of working time is one of the arguments most often mentioned (26%) when it comes to the motivations behind this monitoring. Team safety and protection issues (25%), analysis of journeys for reimbursement of professional expenses (24%) and productivity measurement (18%) come next.

What about turning off tracking? A majority of the employees concerned (53%) indicate that they can deactivate this option themselves. In addition, one in two geolocated employees say they have access to all the geolocation data collected and their history.

They are even more likely (53%) to say that they have not changed their work habits since their employer resorted, officially and within a legal framework, to monitoring.

Finally, among the managers questioned, the greatest number of them (42%) consider that they are not exceeding their rights in this area. « If the employer’s power of control is a counterpart inherent in the employment contract, the courts have recalled that this power cannot be exercised excessively », explains Denis Jacopini, legal expert in computer science. “The employer must therefore always justify that the measures implemented are strictly proportionate to the objective pursued and do not unduly infringe respect for the rights and freedoms of employees, particularly the right to respect for their private life.  »

(photo credit © rawpixel via pexels)



Source link

Géolocalisation en entreprise : un suivi proportionné ?



Used in the professional context, smartphones and vehicles can be geolocated by the employer. What do employees think in France?

Are your terminals used in the professional context geolocated by your employer? 25% of the 567 professionals surveyed in France for GetApp replied in the affirmative.

The devices most often equipped with a tracker implemented by the employer would be:

– personal telephones used at work (cited by 26% of the panel)
– personal vehicles (18%)
– professional vehicles (16%)

Tablets or personal PC / Mac computers and professional smartphones follow (14% respectively). In addition, companies are investing more in employee monitoring solutions in the era of hybrid work (remote and face-to-face).

What are the safeguards?

The control of working time is one of the arguments most often mentioned (26%) when it comes to the motivations behind this monitoring. Team safety and protection issues (25%), analysis of journeys for reimbursement of professional expenses (24%) and productivity measurement (18%) come next.

What about turning off tracking? A majority of the employees concerned (53%) indicate that they can deactivate this option themselves. In addition, one in two geolocated employees say they have access to all the geolocation data collected and their history.

They are even more likely (53%) to say that they have not changed their work habits since their employer resorted, officially and within a legal framework, to monitoring.

Finally, among the managers questioned, the greatest number of them (42%) consider that they are not exceeding their rights in this area. « If the employer’s power of control is a counterpart inherent in the employment contract, the courts have recalled that this power cannot be exercised excessively », explains Denis Jacopini, legal expert in computer science. “The employer must therefore always justify that the measures implemented are strictly proportionate to the objective pursued and do not unduly infringe respect for the rights and freedoms of employees, particularly the right to respect for their private life.  »

(photo credit © rawpixel via pexels)



Source link

Géolocalisation en entreprise : un suivi proportionné ?



Used in the professional context, smartphones and vehicles can be geolocated by the employer. What do employees think in France?

Are your terminals used in the professional context geolocated by your employer? 25% of the 567 professionals surveyed in France for GetApp replied in the affirmative.

The devices most often equipped with a tracker implemented by the employer would be:

– personal telephones used at work (cited by 26% of the panel)
– personal vehicles (18%)
– professional vehicles (16%)

Tablets or personal PC / Mac computers and professional smartphones follow (14% respectively). In addition, companies are investing more in employee monitoring solutions in the era of hybrid work (remote and face-to-face).

What are the safeguards?

The control of working time is one of the arguments most often mentioned (26%) when it comes to the motivations behind this monitoring. Team safety and protection issues (25%), analysis of journeys for reimbursement of professional expenses (24%) and productivity measurement (18%) come next.

What about turning off tracking? A majority of the employees concerned (53%) indicate that they can deactivate this option themselves. In addition, one in two geolocated employees say they have access to all the geolocation data collected and their history.

They are even more likely (53%) to say that they have not changed their work habits since their employer resorted, officially and within a legal framework, to monitoring.

Finally, among the managers questioned, the greatest number of them (42%) consider that they are not exceeding their rights in this area. « If the employer’s power of control is a counterpart inherent in the employment contract, the courts have recalled that this power cannot be exercised excessively », explains Denis Jacopini, legal expert in computer science. “The employer must therefore always justify that the measures implemented are strictly proportionate to the objective pursued and do not unduly infringe respect for the rights and freedoms of employees, particularly the right to respect for their private life.  »

(photo credit © rawpixel via pexels)



Source link

Géolocalisation en entreprise : un suivi proportionné ?



Used in the professional context, smartphones and vehicles can be geolocated by the employer. What do employees think in France?

Are your terminals used in the professional context geolocated by your employer? 25% of the 567 professionals surveyed in France for GetApp replied in the affirmative.

The devices most often equipped with a tracker implemented by the employer would be:

– personal telephones used at work (cited by 26% of the panel)
– personal vehicles (18%)
– professional vehicles (16%)

Tablets or personal PC / Mac computers and professional smartphones follow (14% respectively). In addition, companies are investing more in employee monitoring solutions in the era of hybrid work (remote and face-to-face).

What are the safeguards?

The control of working time is one of the arguments most often mentioned (26%) when it comes to the motivations behind this monitoring. Team safety and protection issues (25%), analysis of journeys for reimbursement of professional expenses (24%) and productivity measurement (18%) come next.

What about turning off tracking? A majority of the employees concerned (53%) indicate that they can deactivate this option themselves. In addition, one in two geolocated employees say they have access to all the geolocation data collected and their history.

They are even more likely (53%) to say that they have not changed their work habits since their employer resorted, officially and within a legal framework, to monitoring.

Finally, among the managers questioned, the greatest number of them (42%) consider that they are not exceeding their rights in this area. « If the employer’s power of control is a counterpart inherent in the employment contract, the courts have recalled that this power cannot be exercised excessively », explains Denis Jacopini, legal expert in computer science. “The employer must therefore always justify that the measures implemented are strictly proportionate to the objective pursued and do not unduly infringe respect for the rights and freedoms of employees, particularly the right to respect for their private life.  »

(photo credit © rawpixel via pexels)



Source link

Arm-NVIDIA : de la Chine aux USA, les barrières se dressent



In the United States, there is a new obstacle facing the Arm-NVIDIA merger project. What other barriers have been raised around the world?

Clouds are gathering over the Arm-NVIDIA merger project. The most recent: a complaint of the FTC. The American agency – which can be compared to our DGCCRF – targets SoftBank, the current owner of Arm. Broadly speaking, it uses an argument that has already been put forward by other authorities from which NVIDIA must obtain the green light.

Overall, the FTC * is concerned that the merged entity has the ability and interest to restrict competition in the semiconductor market. His fears relate in particular to ADAS (driving assistance systems), DPUs (« specialized » processors) and CPUs for the datacenter.

Another concern is that NVIDIA will gain access to “sensitive information” about its competing Arm customers. And that it direct, accordingly, the R&D of the new group.

The European Commission shares this doubt. While wondering among other things, in the same spirit, if licensees might be reluctant to continue sharing this « sensitive information ». On site, an investigation was launched in early September. At the end of October, it went into an in-depth phase. Brussels has until March 15, 2022 to decide.

The United Kingdom also in the second phase

The UK – where Arm’s headquarters is located – is also investigating.
In September 2020, shortly after the announcement of the deal, Hermann Hauser, co-founder of Arm, arrested Boris Johnson. He invited the Prime Minister to obtain various commitments from NVIDIA:

– Guaranteed job retention for Arm employees in the UK (with a reference to the job cuts NVIDIA orchestrated following its acquisition of Icera in 2011)

– Assurance of not being granted « preferential treatment »

– Non-submission to the trade restrictions imposed by the American OFAC (« It will no longer be Downing Street, but the White House which will decide to whom Arm has the right to sell. »)

The CMA (« local DGCCRF ») published, during the summer, a report dependent on this merger project. Competition, innovation, quality, price… Everything goes there, in many segments of the semiconductor market. With one observation: there is an alternative offer with RISC-V and MIPS at the head of the gondola, but it is not yet at par and in practice, switching is complex.

The British authority also fears a « conglomerate effect ». That would manifest itself in a reduction in interoperability between the components that the new entity would provide. The NCSC (equivalent of our ANSSI) has also identified risks. They affect both the ability to operate defense systems based on Arms and a potential reduction in product security due to a lower interest in innovating.

Mid-November, London has given its blank check to the CMA to initiate, as it recommended, the second phase of its investigation. This period may extend over a maximum of 32 weeks.

Arm China: a subsidiary in rebellion

China also has a right to oversee the transaction, given Arm’s activity there. Particularly hectic activity. Originally, there is a joint venture that SoftBank had formed in transferor 51% of the Chinese subsidiary of Arm to a public-private group of local investors.

This entity remains in place, always with an exclusivity on the distribution of Arm’s intellectual property in China. But she doesn’t hide more his desire for independence. Its emblems: on the one hand, Power Core, a brand under which it intends to develop its own offers. And on the other, his boss, who Arm had fired in June 2020, but who, in fact, keep control with the support of certain shareholders.

In the context of its current commercial relations with Washington, Beijing may fear that Arms will pass under the NVIDIA flag. The company would then be subject to US law. And possibly export restrictions to China, where it has a lot of customers.

China had already ended another project in the semiconductor industry. After almost two years, Qualcomm had given up on getting its hands on NXP. The transaction could have amounted to $ 47 billion. For Arm-NVIDIA, we could reach $ 40 billion.

* In the United States, getting the green light is all the more difficult as the FTC has evolved into a majority Democratic composition. And that its president pay particular attention to the effects of vertical mergers (involving companies not directly competing). So much so that she officially called on her peers not to rely on good valuation practices in force, because « too focused on the benefits » of such operations.

Illustrative photo © Arm Holdings



Source link

Arm-NVIDIA : de la Chine aux USA, les barrières se dressent



In the United States, there is a new obstacle facing the Arm-NVIDIA merger project. What other barriers have been raised around the world?

Clouds are gathering over the Arm-NVIDIA merger project. The most recent: a complaint of the FTC. The American agency – which can be compared to our DGCCRF – targets SoftBank, the current owner of Arm. Broadly speaking, it uses an argument that has already been put forward by other authorities from which NVIDIA must obtain the green light.

Overall, the FTC * is concerned that the merged entity has the ability and interest to restrict competition in the semiconductor market. His fears relate in particular to ADAS (driving assistance systems), DPUs (« specialized » processors) and CPUs for the datacenter.

Another concern is that NVIDIA will gain access to “sensitive information” about its competing Arm customers. And that it direct, accordingly, the R&D of the new group.

The European Commission shares this doubt. While wondering among other things, in the same spirit, if licensees might be reluctant to continue sharing this « sensitive information ». On site, an investigation was launched in early September. At the end of October, it went into an in-depth phase. Brussels has until March 15, 2022 to decide.

The United Kingdom also in the second phase

The UK – where Arm’s headquarters is located – is also investigating.
In September 2020, shortly after the announcement of the deal, Hermann Hauser, co-founder of Arm, arrested Boris Johnson. He invited the Prime Minister to obtain various commitments from NVIDIA:

– Guaranteed job retention for Arm employees in the UK (with a reference to the job cuts NVIDIA orchestrated following its acquisition of Icera in 2011)

– Assurance of not being granted « preferential treatment »

– Non-submission to the trade restrictions imposed by the American OFAC (« It will no longer be Downing Street, but the White House which will decide to whom Arm has the right to sell. »)

The CMA (« local DGCCRF ») published, during the summer, a report dependent on this merger project. Competition, innovation, quality, price… Everything goes there, in many segments of the semiconductor market. With one observation: there is an alternative offer with RISC-V and MIPS at the head of the gondola, but it is not yet at par and in practice, switching is complex.

The British authority also fears a « conglomerate effect ». That would manifest itself in a reduction in interoperability between the components that the new entity would provide. The NCSC (equivalent of our ANSSI) has also identified risks. They affect both the ability to operate defense systems based on Arms and a potential reduction in product security due to a lower interest in innovating.

Mid-November, London has given its blank check to the CMA to initiate, as it recommended, the second phase of its investigation. This period may extend over a maximum of 32 weeks.

Arm China: a subsidiary in rebellion

China also has a right to oversee the transaction, given Arm’s activity there. Particularly hectic activity. Originally, there is a joint venture that SoftBank had formed in transferor 51% of the Chinese subsidiary of Arm to a public-private group of local investors.

This entity remains in place, always with an exclusivity on the distribution of Arm’s intellectual property in China. But she doesn’t hide more his desire for independence. Its emblems: on the one hand, Power Core, a brand under which it intends to develop its own offers. And on the other, his boss, who Arm had fired in June 2020, but who, in fact, keep control with the support of certain shareholders.

In the context of its current commercial relations with Washington, Beijing may fear that Arms will pass under the NVIDIA flag. The company would then be subject to US law. And possibly export restrictions to China, where it has a lot of customers.

China had already ended another project in the semiconductor industry. After almost two years, Qualcomm had given up on getting its hands on NXP. The transaction could have amounted to $ 47 billion. For Arm-NVIDIA, we could reach $ 40 billion.

* In the United States, getting the green light is all the more difficult as the FTC has evolved into a majority Democratic composition. And that its president pay particular attention to the effects of vertical mergers (involving companies not directly competing). So much so that she officially called on her peers not to rely on good valuation practices in force, because « too focused on the benefits » of such operations.

Illustrative photo © Arm Holdings



Source link