Skip to main content

Outages Aren't the Enemy, Complacency Is

Derek Ashmore
Asperitas

For years, platform engineers have lived in a constant state of firefighting. Pager alerts, late night war rooms, emergency patches. These have been the rituals of teams charged with "keeping the lights on." But today, reliability isn't a side effect of hard work, it's a discipline built through smart feedback loops, intelligent automation, and a mindset shift.

Three practices, chaos testing, incident retrospectives, and AIOps-driven monitoring, are transforming platform teams from reactive responders into proactive builders of resilient, self-healing systems. The evolution is not just technical; it's cultural. The modern platform engineer isn't just maintaining infrastructure. They're product owners designing for reliability, observability, and continuous improvement.

Why Smart Engineers Cause Chaos Before It Strikes

Chaos testing may sound counterintuitive. Why would anyone intentionally disrupt their own systems? Because failure is inevitable and learning to manage it under controlled conditions is far better than discovering it during a 2 a.m. Outage.

Chaos testing is the art of engineering failure safely. It means deliberately injecting faults into systems, shutting down servers, throttling APIs, or corrupting data streams, to observe how they respond. The goal isn't to cause damage but to expose weak dependencies and validate recovery processes.

When done right, chaos testing replaces surprise with confidence. It forces teams to understand not just what fails, but how the system behaves when it does. More importantly, it reveals the unknown dependencies and brittle configurations that no dashboard ever shows.

Consider a global payments company that used chaos testing to simulate network latency in its transaction systems. Engineers discovered that one obscure caching service had become a single point of failure, one that had escaped every code review. Within weeks, they refactored the service, added redundancy, and turned a potential outage trigger into a model of reliability.

Chaos testing reframes reliability as a creative act. It encourages engineers to think like system designers, not firefighters. By building failure into the process, teams gain the confidence to move faster, deploy more often, and trust their systems to recover automatically. In the world of platform engineering, predictability is the new stability.

Stop Asking Who Broke It and Start Asking What You Learned

If chaos testing is about finding weaknesses before they break, incident retrospectives are about turning real failures into lasting lessons. Every outage, every service disruption, every escalation carries within it the DNA of improvement, if the organization knows how to look.

Traditional postmortems too often devolve into blame sessions. But in a high-performing platform team, incident retrospectives are blameless, structured, and deeply analytical. They don't ask "Who broke it?" They ask "What signals did we miss?" and "How can we make sure the platform heals itself next time?"

The power of a retrospective lies in converting a moment of failure into institutional knowledge. It's where teams map the timeline of detection, analyze decision delays, and uncover observability gaps. Over time, these insights evolve into design principles and automation strategies that make the platform smarter and more self-aware.

Take the example of a leading SaaS provider that experienced a severe outage caused by a misconfigured service dependency. Instead of reprimanding individuals, the platform team launched a retrospective that uncovered not just the misconfiguration but also the absence of validation checks in their deployment pipeline. Within a month, they built automated pre-deployment checks that prevented similar incidents and reduced deployment related outages by 60%.

Retrospectives don't just fix what's broken; they change how teams think. They create a culture where every incident strengthens the platform. Over time, engineers stop bracing for failure and start engineering for recovery. This shift from fear to foresight is what separates reactive teams from resilient ones.

When AI Becomes the First Responder

Monitoring used to be simple: set thresholds, wait for alerts, and hope you catch problems early. But in complex, distributed platforms, static thresholds no longer work. The signals are too noisy, and the failures are too subtle. That's where AIOps, artificial intelligence for IT operations, changes everything.

AIOps driven monitoring turns data into foresight. By correlating logs, traces, and metrics across multiple systems, machine learning models can detect patterns that humans miss. Instead of telling engineers something broke, AIOps predicts something is about to break.

Imagine an e-commerce platform noticing gradual increases in checkout latency across multiple regions. Traditional monitoring might not flag it until customers start abandoning carts. AIOps, however, recognizes the anomaly early, correlates it with a slow memory leak in a microservice, and triggers an automated remediation. Restarting the service or scaling resources before any user notices.

This shift from reactive alerts to proactive prevention frees engineers from endless alert fatigue. Instead of chasing dashboards, they can focus on designing systems that heal themselves. Over time, the platform becomes not just monitored but intelligent. A system that senses, learns, and adapts.

One financial institution used AIOps to analyze patterns across its infrastructure and discovered recurring performance degradations tied to end-of-month processing. By automating predictive scaling, it reduced downtime during peak loads by 90%. What was once firefighting became foresight.

Reliability Is the New User Experience

These practices, chaos testing, retrospectives, and AIOps, are powerful, but their true value comes when platform engineers stop thinking of themselves as tool providers and start thinking like product owners. The product isn't the platform itself; it's the reliability, speed, and trust it delivers to developers and customers.

This shift demands visibility, feedback loops, and metrics that matter. Instead of measuring tickets closed or alerts handled, platform teams measure uptime, mean time to recovery, and developer satisfaction. They treat every deployment, every incident, every automation as part of a living product that must evolve.

A technology company in the streaming industry exemplified this transformation. Its platform team used to be overwhelmed with outages and performance complaints. By introducing chaos testing and AIOps monitoring, they not only reduced incident frequency but also began publishing internal reliability dashboards for developers. Within a year, the team's role had changed from reactive support to proactive enablement. Engineers no longer waited for help, they trusted the platform.

When platform engineers act as product owners, reliability becomes part of the user experience. Systems become self-healing, and the business gains a competitive edge in uptime, velocity, and customer confidence.

The End of Firefighting

The evolution of platform engineering is not about eliminating failure, it's about mastering it. Chaos testing teaches how systems fail. Incident retrospectives teach how teams learn. AIOps-driven monitoring teaches how to see trouble before it starts. Together, they create a feedback driven ecosystem where reliability is designed in, not patched on.

The measure of success isn't just fewer outages. It's engineers spending more time improving systems than fixing them. It's mean time to detect trending down, mean time to recover shrinking, and trust between developers and platform teams growing stronger with every iteration.

When that happens, firefighting gives way to foresight. Platform teams stop chasing stability and start building it. They stop reacting to failure and start owning reliability as a product. And that's when they become what every modern organization needs most: the architects of resilience.

Derek Ashmore is Agentic AI Enablement Principal at Asperitas

The Latest

Ask most IT leaders about their biggest concern with AI and you'll hear the same answer: hallucinations ... Today, however, the conversation has shifted ... As organizations move beyond chatbots and experiments, they are increasingly deploying AI agents that perform multi-step tasks. These systems retrieve documents, query databases, call APIs, generate reports, write code, and make recommendations. The issue is not whether the model can reason. The issue is whether the organization can see, verify, and govern the decisions being made along the way ...

While organizations want to take control of their telemetry, building telemetry pipelines from scratch can be a very daunting, complicated task, even when leveraging open-source standards like OpenTelemetry. It requires specialized knowledge across distributed systems, data engineering, and security. This fragmented approach across systems causes higher operational costs; it puts a strain on resources and reduces efficiency as teams have to work with different interfaces and processes ...

For decades, enterprise networks were designed around a simple assumption: work happened inside the office. Applications lived in centralized data centers, employees connected through internal infrastructure, and security focused on protecting the perimeter that surrounded everything ... But the way organizations operate today bears little resemblance to that environment. Cloud platforms host critical applications, employees connect from homes and airports as often as they do from offices, and partners collaborate through shared systems that exist far beyond corporate walls. In short, the corporate network no longer resembles the environment it was designed to protect ...

As an analyst who researches how IT organizations design, build, and operate their networks, I find that network data is a constant source of pain. Network teams struggle with data quality, fragmentation, authority, access, and trust. And these issues undermine everything they try to do. Here are the numbers: Only 45% of network teams are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth, which documents the intent of their network ...

The 2026 Global Data Center Survey from Uptime Institute reveals an industry navigating workforce constraints, escalating outage expenses, even as rising costs remain the top concern for management teams ...

The next observability gap may not be in the code. It may be under the rack. That sounds strange until you think about how AI incidents actually feel in the middle of an investigation ... The application dashboard may be accurate. It may also be stopping at the wrong boundary. AI systems depend on software, but they also depend on a dense physical stack: racks, power paths, thermal margin, maintenance activity and, in many environments, liquid cooling. Those physical dependencies can change slowly before they look like a software incident ...

Certificate expiration is the rare outage you can see coming. Every TLS certificate carries the date it stops working, so the moment it will begin breaking connections is knowable in advance. That's what makes an expired certificate such a frustrating way to lose a service. What's changing now is how often that date comes around ...

Enterprises operate different combinations of workloads across cloud, hybrid and multicloud environments. For business-critical workloads, teams need to consider monitoring and observability early so they can detect health issues, investigate failures, and understand operational impact. Organizations place workloads on cloud platforms based on a combination of technical requirements, economics, existing dependencies, organizational standards, and business priorities. Their monitoring priorities therefore depend on what they operate and where those systems run. Those priorities will not look the same for every organization ...

Top-performing businesses prioritize data-driven decision making, enabling leaders to move from intuition and gut feel towards evidence-based judgment. But that judgment is only sound when the data underpinning decisions is accurate. With incident management, data accuracy is particularly important. Long-term revenue, customer trust, and operational stability depend on high-quality data that enables teams to quickly identify and address the root cause of major incidents. Against this backdrop, governance becomes a critical endeavor to ensure the right data drives the right action ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 26, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses network compliance ... 

Outages Aren't the Enemy, Complacency Is

Derek Ashmore
Asperitas

For years, platform engineers have lived in a constant state of firefighting. Pager alerts, late night war rooms, emergency patches. These have been the rituals of teams charged with "keeping the lights on." But today, reliability isn't a side effect of hard work, it's a discipline built through smart feedback loops, intelligent automation, and a mindset shift.

Three practices, chaos testing, incident retrospectives, and AIOps-driven monitoring, are transforming platform teams from reactive responders into proactive builders of resilient, self-healing systems. The evolution is not just technical; it's cultural. The modern platform engineer isn't just maintaining infrastructure. They're product owners designing for reliability, observability, and continuous improvement.

Why Smart Engineers Cause Chaos Before It Strikes

Chaos testing may sound counterintuitive. Why would anyone intentionally disrupt their own systems? Because failure is inevitable and learning to manage it under controlled conditions is far better than discovering it during a 2 a.m. Outage.

Chaos testing is the art of engineering failure safely. It means deliberately injecting faults into systems, shutting down servers, throttling APIs, or corrupting data streams, to observe how they respond. The goal isn't to cause damage but to expose weak dependencies and validate recovery processes.

When done right, chaos testing replaces surprise with confidence. It forces teams to understand not just what fails, but how the system behaves when it does. More importantly, it reveals the unknown dependencies and brittle configurations that no dashboard ever shows.

Consider a global payments company that used chaos testing to simulate network latency in its transaction systems. Engineers discovered that one obscure caching service had become a single point of failure, one that had escaped every code review. Within weeks, they refactored the service, added redundancy, and turned a potential outage trigger into a model of reliability.

Chaos testing reframes reliability as a creative act. It encourages engineers to think like system designers, not firefighters. By building failure into the process, teams gain the confidence to move faster, deploy more often, and trust their systems to recover automatically. In the world of platform engineering, predictability is the new stability.

Stop Asking Who Broke It and Start Asking What You Learned

If chaos testing is about finding weaknesses before they break, incident retrospectives are about turning real failures into lasting lessons. Every outage, every service disruption, every escalation carries within it the DNA of improvement, if the organization knows how to look.

Traditional postmortems too often devolve into blame sessions. But in a high-performing platform team, incident retrospectives are blameless, structured, and deeply analytical. They don't ask "Who broke it?" They ask "What signals did we miss?" and "How can we make sure the platform heals itself next time?"

The power of a retrospective lies in converting a moment of failure into institutional knowledge. It's where teams map the timeline of detection, analyze decision delays, and uncover observability gaps. Over time, these insights evolve into design principles and automation strategies that make the platform smarter and more self-aware.

Take the example of a leading SaaS provider that experienced a severe outage caused by a misconfigured service dependency. Instead of reprimanding individuals, the platform team launched a retrospective that uncovered not just the misconfiguration but also the absence of validation checks in their deployment pipeline. Within a month, they built automated pre-deployment checks that prevented similar incidents and reduced deployment related outages by 60%.

Retrospectives don't just fix what's broken; they change how teams think. They create a culture where every incident strengthens the platform. Over time, engineers stop bracing for failure and start engineering for recovery. This shift from fear to foresight is what separates reactive teams from resilient ones.

When AI Becomes the First Responder

Monitoring used to be simple: set thresholds, wait for alerts, and hope you catch problems early. But in complex, distributed platforms, static thresholds no longer work. The signals are too noisy, and the failures are too subtle. That's where AIOps, artificial intelligence for IT operations, changes everything.

AIOps driven monitoring turns data into foresight. By correlating logs, traces, and metrics across multiple systems, machine learning models can detect patterns that humans miss. Instead of telling engineers something broke, AIOps predicts something is about to break.

Imagine an e-commerce platform noticing gradual increases in checkout latency across multiple regions. Traditional monitoring might not flag it until customers start abandoning carts. AIOps, however, recognizes the anomaly early, correlates it with a slow memory leak in a microservice, and triggers an automated remediation. Restarting the service or scaling resources before any user notices.

This shift from reactive alerts to proactive prevention frees engineers from endless alert fatigue. Instead of chasing dashboards, they can focus on designing systems that heal themselves. Over time, the platform becomes not just monitored but intelligent. A system that senses, learns, and adapts.

One financial institution used AIOps to analyze patterns across its infrastructure and discovered recurring performance degradations tied to end-of-month processing. By automating predictive scaling, it reduced downtime during peak loads by 90%. What was once firefighting became foresight.

Reliability Is the New User Experience

These practices, chaos testing, retrospectives, and AIOps, are powerful, but their true value comes when platform engineers stop thinking of themselves as tool providers and start thinking like product owners. The product isn't the platform itself; it's the reliability, speed, and trust it delivers to developers and customers.

This shift demands visibility, feedback loops, and metrics that matter. Instead of measuring tickets closed or alerts handled, platform teams measure uptime, mean time to recovery, and developer satisfaction. They treat every deployment, every incident, every automation as part of a living product that must evolve.

A technology company in the streaming industry exemplified this transformation. Its platform team used to be overwhelmed with outages and performance complaints. By introducing chaos testing and AIOps monitoring, they not only reduced incident frequency but also began publishing internal reliability dashboards for developers. Within a year, the team's role had changed from reactive support to proactive enablement. Engineers no longer waited for help, they trusted the platform.

When platform engineers act as product owners, reliability becomes part of the user experience. Systems become self-healing, and the business gains a competitive edge in uptime, velocity, and customer confidence.

The End of Firefighting

The evolution of platform engineering is not about eliminating failure, it's about mastering it. Chaos testing teaches how systems fail. Incident retrospectives teach how teams learn. AIOps-driven monitoring teaches how to see trouble before it starts. Together, they create a feedback driven ecosystem where reliability is designed in, not patched on.

The measure of success isn't just fewer outages. It's engineers spending more time improving systems than fixing them. It's mean time to detect trending down, mean time to recover shrinking, and trust between developers and platform teams growing stronger with every iteration.

When that happens, firefighting gives way to foresight. Platform teams stop chasing stability and start building it. They stop reacting to failure and start owning reliability as a product. And that's when they become what every modern organization needs most: the architects of resilience.

Derek Ashmore is Agentic AI Enablement Principal at Asperitas

The Latest

Ask most IT leaders about their biggest concern with AI and you'll hear the same answer: hallucinations ... Today, however, the conversation has shifted ... As organizations move beyond chatbots and experiments, they are increasingly deploying AI agents that perform multi-step tasks. These systems retrieve documents, query databases, call APIs, generate reports, write code, and make recommendations. The issue is not whether the model can reason. The issue is whether the organization can see, verify, and govern the decisions being made along the way ...

While organizations want to take control of their telemetry, building telemetry pipelines from scratch can be a very daunting, complicated task, even when leveraging open-source standards like OpenTelemetry. It requires specialized knowledge across distributed systems, data engineering, and security. This fragmented approach across systems causes higher operational costs; it puts a strain on resources and reduces efficiency as teams have to work with different interfaces and processes ...

For decades, enterprise networks were designed around a simple assumption: work happened inside the office. Applications lived in centralized data centers, employees connected through internal infrastructure, and security focused on protecting the perimeter that surrounded everything ... But the way organizations operate today bears little resemblance to that environment. Cloud platforms host critical applications, employees connect from homes and airports as often as they do from offices, and partners collaborate through shared systems that exist far beyond corporate walls. In short, the corporate network no longer resembles the environment it was designed to protect ...

As an analyst who researches how IT organizations design, build, and operate their networks, I find that network data is a constant source of pain. Network teams struggle with data quality, fragmentation, authority, access, and trust. And these issues undermine everything they try to do. Here are the numbers: Only 45% of network teams are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth, which documents the intent of their network ...

The 2026 Global Data Center Survey from Uptime Institute reveals an industry navigating workforce constraints, escalating outage expenses, even as rising costs remain the top concern for management teams ...

The next observability gap may not be in the code. It may be under the rack. That sounds strange until you think about how AI incidents actually feel in the middle of an investigation ... The application dashboard may be accurate. It may also be stopping at the wrong boundary. AI systems depend on software, but they also depend on a dense physical stack: racks, power paths, thermal margin, maintenance activity and, in many environments, liquid cooling. Those physical dependencies can change slowly before they look like a software incident ...

Certificate expiration is the rare outage you can see coming. Every TLS certificate carries the date it stops working, so the moment it will begin breaking connections is knowable in advance. That's what makes an expired certificate such a frustrating way to lose a service. What's changing now is how often that date comes around ...

Enterprises operate different combinations of workloads across cloud, hybrid and multicloud environments. For business-critical workloads, teams need to consider monitoring and observability early so they can detect health issues, investigate failures, and understand operational impact. Organizations place workloads on cloud platforms based on a combination of technical requirements, economics, existing dependencies, organizational standards, and business priorities. Their monitoring priorities therefore depend on what they operate and where those systems run. Those priorities will not look the same for every organization ...

Top-performing businesses prioritize data-driven decision making, enabling leaders to move from intuition and gut feel towards evidence-based judgment. But that judgment is only sound when the data underpinning decisions is accurate. With incident management, data accuracy is particularly important. Long-term revenue, customer trust, and operational stability depend on high-quality data that enables teams to quickly identify and address the root cause of major incidents. Against this backdrop, governance becomes a critical endeavor to ensure the right data drives the right action ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 26, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses network compliance ...