René Girard’s Mimetic Theory for InfraOps

René Girard’s Mimetic Theory for InfraOps

I've done introductory reading on René Girard. I'm no expert on his work, but I see an opportunity to make some relevant observations. They apply to all who participate in what I call InfraOps or cross paths with it.

René Girard’s mimetic theory offers a unique lens to view and resolve perennial issues found in our InfraOps organizations. 

Introduction of Girard’s Mimetic Theory

Mimetic Theory was initially concerned with human desires and conflicts through imitation. Girard's theory posits that our desires are not our own, but are borrowed from others whom we see as models or rivals. Applying this idea to InfraOps reveals the underlying dynamics of imitation that shape industry practices and strategies. For example, when one successful company adopts a public cloud strategy, others often imitate it. They often do this without considering their specific context, potentially leading to bad results.

Girard's insights can help InfraOps professionals. Perhaps we can better understand and manage the imitation dynamics within our organizations. This may lead us to more strategic and effective business practices. Let's explore how imitation can play a critical role in driving progress within InfraOps if done correctly.

Imitation to Kick-Start Progress

Imitation can be a natural kick-start to making progress in InfraOps. The key lies in picking the right models to copy. Unfortunately, many businesses make mistakes here. They copy strategies from companies where infrastructure is peripheral, not central to their business model. For a better approach, multinational companies should look to infrastructure-dense businesses. These businesses are not perfect InfraOps practitioners. But at least they have direct and visible capitalistic pressures on their InfraOps organizations.

These firms include big cloud providers, telecoms, and content delivery networks. For instance, a hyperscaler might have a very good global hardware deployment process. By copying this model, your InfraOps group can achieve similar efficiencies. In these large tech-core businesses, robust and efficient operations are critical. They are directly influenced by market pressures. They have honed their infrastructure playbooks under tough capitalism. This makes them ideal models to initially copy to get you moving. By understanding and copying the strategies of these leaders, your InfraOps framework can evolve and make progress. You, of course, must ensure that your adaptations fit your unique organization and challenges.

Beyond Surface-Level Imitation

Making true and lasting progress in InfraOps requires going beyond mere surface-level imitation. It's essential for you to understand the underlying principles that make a strategy successful in the first place. This involves adapting those strategies to fit the unique goals and challenges of your organization. For example, a company might see the benefits of a rival’s plan to move some IT infrastructure from CAPEX to OPEX. But be careful, if not done well, imitation will get you into trouble. Why did that rival make that change? You can see how imitating a competitor can go either way.

Another aspect of Girard’s theory that I liked describes how rivalry can become a catalyst for making progress and self-improvement.

Rivalry as Catalyst

In Girardian terms, rivalry is not just about competition. It's a strong motivator for self-improvement and invention. You can use this by focusing on how your team can beat the competition. You can do this through better execution and aiming for radical progress, not just copying. This could mean making better processes, protocols, business models and systems. Or, it could mean using new technology.

Stoking rivalry well creates motivation and urgency. However, it's important to manage rivalry to prevent it from becoming destructive competition. Establishing what success is and fostering a culture of mutual respect can help balance this dynamic. This can drive your teams to higher performance and progress. Expert InfraOps is a competitive advantage, treat it as such to beat your rivals.

Avoiding the Scapegoat

I've seen process and systems problems in InfraOps lead to the blaming of individuals and or teams. This is an example of Girard's concept of the scapegoat. This is very commonly the fate of CIOs, but I’ve seen it with others as well. Instead of falling into this trap, it is more productive to identify and address the root causes of failures. When I'm working with a group of stakeholders, something interesting happens. Because I'm acting as a consolidating force, there are no scapegoats to be had. If the project we are collectively executing fails, it's my fault and everyone knows it. This frees people up to do their best work attacking root cause problems and delivering a commonly desired outcome. In this particular case, I'm a person, but a smart system and framework can perform the same function. People and teams are generally not the problem. Bad processes and protocols are the issue. This understanding prevents scapegoating from happening in the first place. This also fosters a more collaborative and accountable culture.

You CAN build better InfraOps systems. The InfraOps approach promises a more positive, cooperative environment. It will boost efficiency and morale. But even if we remove scapegoating, don't rest easy, the roles within InfraOps stakeholders are diverse. This can lead to conflicting goals and create potential for mimetic rivalry, so look out.

Complex Roles and Outcomes

The diversity of roles within InfraOps can lead to conflicting objectives, which Girard would recognize as potential for mimetic rivalry. One of the important jobs of the InfraOps framework is to bring a shared mission to our IT infrastructure organizations. What is the purpose of your IT infrastructure organization? After defining your shared vision, you can acknowledge these interdepartmental and inter-personal conflicts. This can pave the way for better integration and cooperation. For example, a finance business aligned its InfraOps team around a common goal of reducing the time it takes to go from procurement to power-on, on average, globally. This program is a work in progress, but they have reduced their average by ~20% thus far. This is a domino key performance indicator. I think their work on this has improved harmony and efficiency for the InfraOps stakeholders. When everyone can see the utility of working together cross departmentally you decrease the likelihood for the negative mimetic rivalry.

Unity in Problem-Solving

Just as Girard discusses how the persecution of scapegoats can unite groups, tackling shared challenges in InfraOps can also foster unity among teams. The preferable route of unity comes from focusing on common goals. These can be initiatives like improving system reliability or increasing your collective sovereignty. They are shared, rather than individual departmental targets as you have seen in the example above.

This fosters a sense of shared purpose and collaboration, because it is. It's possible to enhance both morale and effectiveness at the same time. We can improve our “common goals” approach by regularly admitting and learning from our mistakes. We make them as a business and we make them as professionals. This will not end.

Acknowledging Faults

In Girard's spirit, admitting where your InfraOps framework falls short can open the door to real progress and invention. This humility allows teams to learn from failures without fear of blame. It encourages a culture comfortable with making radical progress. For instance, many software groups hold regular post mortems on failed projects. This leads to continuous evolution. We would do well to bring this into the "atoms'' side of the technology business.

This creates safety. Safety is crucial for progress and improvement. By practicing humility, we can better see that the biggest obstacles almost always originate from our processes and systems. Our issues are generally not born of external threats or a lack of skill.

Applying Girard’s Theory for InfraOps Excellence

In this article, we've explored how René Girard's mimetic theory can offer insights into the challenges and opportunities in InfraOps. We can improve InfraOps strategies by seeing the value of imitation. Additionally, we can turn rivalry into a catalyst for advancement and avoid scapegoating.

To recap, we've learned:

• Mimetic Theory Application - René Girard's mimetic theory can help InfraOps professionals understand and manage imitation and rivalry within their organizations, leading to more strategic and effective practices.

• Strategic Imitation - Effective progress in InfraOps can be achieved by carefully selecting and adapting successful models from infrastructure-dense businesses to fit the unique needs of an organization.

• Rivalry as a Motivator - Properly managed rivalry can drive self-improvement and innovation, enhancing overall performance in InfraOps.

• Collaboration and Accountability - Addressing systemic issues rather than blaming individuals fosters a collaborative and accountable culture, improving efficiency and morale.

• Making Progress - Regularly acknowledging and learning from mistakes and adapting strategies based on these insights promotes evolution and long-term success in InfraOps.

I encourage you to start by evaluating your current InfraOps practices. Identifying areas to improve. Consider discussing one InfraOps tenet with a small team or try incorporating it into a new project. For those looking to explore this topic further, a good next step is to delve into the InfraOps tenets, some of which we touched on in this piece. This exploration will reinforce the concepts and provide practical insights that you can apply to your own organizational challenges.

By investing a few minutes to think about Girard's theories and its applicability to InfraOps, we open our minds to see the potential for a more resilient, efficient, and cohesive technical operation. This can pave the way for businesses to thrive in our complex technological landscape.

By using these insights, you can create hope and motivation. Let’s make the InfraOps framework a cornerstone of business success in our modern IT organizations.