In 2016, when I wrote about IT/OT convergence
as one of the key mantras in Smart
Manufacturing, my opinion was that IT/OT
convergence was not only a technical issue, but an
organizational one. In essence, this idea of convergence
is not just about connecting two networks,
but creating an organization where responsibilities
are unified. At the very least, IT and operations
managers (CIO and COO) need to have partly
common and overlapping goals and targets, which
force them to work cooperatively. At the time, I
noted that this convergence was not something
that could happen quickly with no pain, but that
it was a journey that needed to be started as soon
as possible since it’s one of the founding pillars of
Smart Manufacturing.
After six years, my personal view is that things
have not changed much and that the journey
remains a long one. Following are my current
thoughts about where industry is at on this journey
and what remains to be accomplished.
Mature technologies
IT and OT networks are now quite easy to connect
safely, allowing data to be shared between the two
worlds. Most of the new devices installed at the
automation level are ready to communicate with
the outside world using at least one of the widely
used communication protocols. Many gateways
are also available on the market to translate OTspecific
communication protocols to ones the IT
network can understand and vice versa. In spaces
where older PLC-based or electromechanical
automation technologies are still running, several
tools exist to collect and transfer useful data.
Cybersecurity remains a critical attention point,
and it always will be. While protection mechanisms
will continuously become more sophisticated, the
attack techniques will also continue to evolve
and render those protection systems inadequate.
We’ve learned how to live with this in the business
world and accepted that there will never be
100% protection. Personal precautions, training,
and processes need to be in place to ensure this,
but the fact that the risk is not zero is not stopping
any adoption of new technologies or systems. The
same will be true in the OT world.
IT/OT relations have improved
IT is progressively more involved in OT projects,
including plant digitization projects involving technologies
such as MES, MOM, IIoT, and OEE.
Sometimes an IT representative is just part of
the working group, other times they’re part of
the steering committee, and sometimes they’re
leading the initiative. In many countries, incentives
exist for Industry 4.0 initiatives, and one
of the criteria to obtain these incentives is to
connect production machines and ERP. Especially
in smaller and less-organized companies,
such incentives have helped make collaboration
between IT and OT be viewed as having high economic
value, while forcing the two departments to
work together.
A common culture
is still to come
If technology and organizations have improved in
the last six years, I cannot say the same for the
culture. What I thought was missing—common
goals and common understanding of the reciprocal
needs—often times remain missing. In many
companies, the IT/OT relationship is still difficult
and conflictual. Goals are different, language is
different, methodologies are different, project
approach is different, cost perception is different,
and budgets are different. Sometimes IT drives
and sometime OT drives, and it’s not unusual to
hear one complain about the other, of the lack in
understanding their real needs (typically OT vs.
IT) or of the lack in understanding and considering
the new technology opportunities (typically IT vs.
OT). What surprises me most about this is that, in
many companies, these issues still have not been
effectively addressed.
As a result, system integrators are frequently
required to act as marriage consultants, facilitating
dialogue and helping the two parties understand
each other and reach agreement on reciprocal
needs. It’s not an easy role to play and it requires
understanding, as well as specific competencies and skills, that are typical of both roles. It sometimes
requires integrators to act more as change
facilitators than as implementation engineers.
This can be problematic as it requires negotiation
abilities and attitudes that are not typically part of
the integration engineering skillset. But it all can
be fascinating, too—when it works—because it
enables integrators to be the enabler of a powerful
transformation that generates enormous value.
