Lack of Integration Leads to Silos

When a network works harmoniously and data is able to be shared evenly to the appropriate groups, each group can work in an effective and efficient manner. When integration is not applied however, different groups begin to work independently from each other and they begin to form stovepipe or ‘silo’ environments, which can lead to a disjointed and segmented network. As a result, groups begin to act like separate entities and the concept of rights and privileges as well as network sharing, become misused. Groups also begin to access resources they should not have access to and begin to introduce software and hardware to the network that should not be allowed. These actions destroy continuity and weaken the network as a whole. 

Personal Background 

Several years ago, I was a contractor for a specific branch of the United States military. I worked in a military facility that is one of the most famous locations in the world and is an installation that houses some of the highest members of the United States military. As a result, there were many very high ranking officials, and every group was lead by a very high ranking officer. This was the main source of the issues because nobody in the support groups could outrank these individuals and getting them to conform to the support groups processes was not very successful without a central authoritative body. There were major integration issues that related to accessing network resources, SharePoint style knowledge bases and various applications systems. 

Accessibility to network resources

The lack of integration to network resources affected the various departments in many ways. There were some departments that didn't have access to certain network shares. This was difficult to identify because the lack of privileges had been the standard for so long it was not seen as an error, it was just what the groups were used to. Once corrected, there were many files and records that groups had been missing for years.  This not only affected network shares and files but it also restricted access to file, Web and print servers. The lack of access to these network devices significantly limited what some groups were able to do. In some cases, these groups purchased printers and other devices to accommodate where they felt they were lacking resources. In addition, there were some groups that subscribed to third party products (i.e. electronic fax and proxy servers) that they were supposed to already have access too, if the network had been configured correctly. Conversely, there were some groups that had access to resources and shares that were significantly greater than they should have been allowed. In one case, a help desk and a warehouse, both staffed with lower level contractors, had access to every member of that military branches' personnel records.  When this was realized, it led to a complete network audit and redesign that took over two years to fix.

SharePoint style knowledge bases

Many of the groups within this military branch had a need to share data. Although some of the groups used the software that was mandated by the facility they were currently at, others would change to a knowledge base or wiki that the new senior officer chose. The latter was a very common practice. A top level officer from another base or fort may have had a good experience with a piece of software and as a result they would purchase that tool when they arrived to the new location. In some cases, some groups used a specific type of tool in all locations worldwide. For instance, the finance group may have used a certain unapproved piece of software in all finance offices for that branch all over the world. 

Following processes

The general processes of the military branch were also frequently disregarded. These were basic safeguards and processes that were put in place from the highest levels. The most frequently ignored process was to refrain from charging work or personal cell phones by using the USB port of a workstation. This lead to a very high rate of help desk tickets related to malware transferring from phones to workstations. On one occasion a high ranking official was found charging his phone via USB connection on a file server. The general processes and workflows for issue escalation changed as frequently as the group changed leadership members. Many of them brought processes with them from their former duty station. They not only did not conform to the current installations standards, but they frequently changed the ad hoc rules of the group they were assigned to.

Different applications systems

The machines were a major issue all by themselves. There was no real standardization among the various groups at all when it came to the computers they used. These hosts varied in the version of Standard Operating Environment (SOE) build that was installed on them, if they even had an SOE build. There were countless personal computers located on the network and accessing network data. The applications were not standard whatsoever, there were multiple versions of MS office, Open Office, etc on hosts as well as unapproved software and even cracked software downloaded from torrent sites. The use of personal computers, Macs, non standard builds and third party applications lead to many issues when trying to access internal tools and applications. This lack of integration leads to extremely high levels of alerts and issues.

Conclusion

These integration issues were a shock to me, but as years have gone by and I've been exposed to more corporate networks and I've learned that lack of integration is a common issue. In fact, the larger the corporate network the more likely the lack of integration. The main lesson I learned is the support staff must have the backing of the most senior level management. The support staff would include architects, engineers, developers, administrators and their technicians. Lack of integration is not only common but its effects are far reaching. Since these changes go counter to what the group lead wants these changes are difficult to enforce.