Many of today's IT professionals got their feet wet with similar server technology, so it comes as no surprise that the technical limitations of early-generation LAN servers helped to foster decentralized departmental management of LANs. In many cases, it didn't take long for people to realize that departmental LAN administration was an inefficient use of resources. Services were usually subject to the whims of the network administrator, who often returned from a three-day LAN management class excited and ready to tackle the long-overdue server OS upgrade just before leaving for vacation. In other cases, it wasn't nearly so good. So pressure built from the top to consolidate these inefficient computing operations, to return LAN administration to the IT professionals. All the analysts advised us that this trend was inevitable as network and server technology improved. Per-user savings of 25 percent or more could be achieved, and reliability and fault-tolerance could be enhanced.

So how come it never happened?

Advantages of ConsolidationIt's tough to argue against the cost efficiencies associated with consolidation. Where once it was impossible to adequately serve 20 users on a $10,000 server, we now routinely serve 10 times that number on a server costing the same amount of money. More important, the consolidationists assert, by bringing the servers back to the glass house, we can liberate business managers from the complexities of managing ever-changing technology--something for which they likely have little training--and allow them to focus their energies on the big picture. Who says there's no progress in this industry?

By shifting server management to a staff greater than one, you reduce dependence on a single individual and improve your ability to provide after-hours support--a responsibility that's a bit more acceptable to a rotating on-call staff of five or six administrators than it is to a single LAN manager. Also, when server downtime affects hundreds of users, it's much easier to justify the incremental costs of fault-tolerant hardware and warm spare parts sitting on the shelf.

Politics Is a Dirty Word"It's all politics." How many times have you heard this? Frankly, I agree that politics drives the day-to-day operation of most organizations, but my interpretation of the phrase may be a bit less cynical than your's. The scholar Harold Lasswell once described politics as "who gets what, when, how." Granted, that process can get a little ugly at times, particularly when individuals let greed get in the way of good judgment. But Lasswell's definition is somewhat less harsh toward those engaging in politics. He simply acknowledges that within any collective human endeavor, somebody needs to make decisions about the allocation of resources. And very few people are totally selfless in pursuit of their fair share.