Skip to main content

Bridging the Gap Between Executives and Individual Practitioners

Leo Vasiliou
Catchpoint

You could argue that, until the pandemic, and the resulting shift to hybrid working, delivering flawless customer experiences and improving employee productivity were mutually exclusive activities. Evidence from Catchpoint's recently published Site Reliability Engineering (SRE) industry report suggests this is changing. 


According to the report, Elite performing organizations (according to DORA maturity metrics) emphasize customer experience reliability without ignoring the importance of employee experience reliability. In fact, Elite performing organizations were found to be 260% more likely to substantially focus on Customer Experience reliability versus Low-performing organizations. SREs are at the center of this intensified reliability drive, charged with improving the reliability of services and solving infrastructure and operational problems. In outlining the challenges they face in successfully implementing reliability initiatives, talent hiring was the most prominent, alongside lack of end-to-end visibility and complexity of architecture. However, a running theme behind the findings was the misalignment between practitioners and management.

The Stark Dichotomy Between Individual Practitioners and Executives

In multiple critical areas, the report revealed a gulf in the point of view between Individual Practitioners (ICs) and Executives. To illustrate, consider one of the report's researched topics: Tool sprawl. The question: "How large of a problem is tool sprawl for your company?" Note the difference in responses below. 


While both groups had a net "Not at all" or "Minor" response to whether tool sprawl is a problem, the delta between the personas is noticeable. In the example below, respondents were asked to rate the value received from Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations (AIOps). 


Going left to right in each of the two categories, note how the skew of the general trend goes in completely different directions. A question remains whether the 45.4% who are unsure would have made this gulf in opinion even wider. The polarity between management and ICs was obvious in other situations as well. When asked which personas preferred Google Workspace to Microsoft 365, the only respondents to prefer Google Workspace were Individual Practitioners. 


The same trend occurred in relation to communication and collaboration within organizations, a core DevOps culture asset. The data showed that respondents communicate and collaborate markedly less with sales and marketing teams, followed closely by executives and customer support. Only 24.9% said they collaborated with executives often.

Why Do ICs and Executives Disagree So Broadly?

This question was raised by Google's Steve McGhee, who contributed to the SRE Report. "One interpretation," he says, "is that Execs are looking at the bigger picture, and ICs are focusing on a smaller portion, missing the context. That's certainly the traditional (Taylorist) model employed at many Enterprises today, but we can do better. By providing transparency, context, and rationale around budgets, revenue and loss, teams can better understand trade-offs made "above them" instead of simply throwing POs up to management to see what sticks."

Bridging the Gap

Executives and ICs need to find new opportunities to communicate and collaborate, reevaluate feedback loops, align to define shared goals and objectives, and drive accountability for data-driven decisions versus making them based on authority or funding alone. But what do these new, better, or more agile conversations look like in practice? 

1. Focus on capabilities Individual capabilities are the gateway to positive business outcomes. With business leaders' drive to show business value on one end and ICs' fixation on "speeds and feeds" at the other end of the spectrum, focusing on what individual capabilities are required and why is vital. Questions like "How do we ensure we can guarantee user experiences are not disrupted when we change a component in our application or Internet stack?" will go a long way towards achieving alignment. 

2. Ensure a blameless environment Consider improving your culture by implementing an "agile conversation" approach to overcome cognitive bias and fear. One finding from the report was that enterprises operating with a "just culture" are 500% more likely to be Elite performing organizations. So, when reevaluating communication and feedback loops, ensure a just culture of openness, sincerity, and transparency. 

3. Remove bias Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. It's easy for personas within organizations to defend their perspective, especially when stark differences of opinion exist. As you evaluate feedback loops and find new ways of communicating, avoid letting personal bias get in the way.

What Does the Future Hold?

Evidence suggests that hybrid work policies make the communication and collaboration necessary to produce reliable, resilient systems even harder to fulfil. When asked what facet of work life had been affected the most by sustained work-from-home policies, 44.7% of respondents said "Relationship building" was much or somewhat worse. Despite that, nearly 50% of respondents claimed that innovation velocity was "about the same" and productivity was 31.3% net "better" since working from home. Is maintaining this level of innovation sustainable in an environment where Executives and ICs disagree so broadly or when building relationships is harder to do? Time will tell.

Leo Vasiliou is Director of Product Marketing at Catchpoint

Hot Topics

The Latest

Payment system failures are putting $44.4 billion in US retail and hospitality sales at risk each year, underscoring how quickly disruption can derail day-to-day trading, according to research conducted by Dynatrace ... The findings show that payment failures are no longer isolated incidents, but part of a recurring operational challenge that disrupts service, damages customer trust, and negatively impacts revenue ...

For years, the success of DevOps has been measured by how much manual work teams can automate ... I believe that in 2026, the definition of DevOps success is going to expand significantly. The era of automation is giving way to the era of intelligent delivery, in which AI doesn't just accelerate pipelines, it understands them. With open observability connecting signals end-to-end across those tools, teams can build closed-loop systems that don't just move faster, but learn, adapt, and take action autonomously with confidence ...

The conversation around AI in the enterprise has officially shifted from "if" to "how fast." But according to the State of Network Operations 2026 report from Broadcom, most organizations are unknowingly building their AI strategies on sand. The data is clear: CIOs and network teams are putting the cart before the horse. AI cannot improve what the network cannot see, predict issues without historical context, automate processes that aren't standardized, or recommend fixes when the underlying telemetry is incomplete. If AI is the brain, then network observability is the nervous system that makes intelligent action possible ...

SolarWinds data shows that one in three DBAs are contemplating leaving their positions — a striking indicator of workforce pressure in this role. This is likely due to the technical and interpersonal frustrations plaguing today's DBAs. Hybrid IT environments provide widespread organizational benefits but also present growing complexity. Simultaneously, AI presents a paradox of benefits and pain points ...

Over the last year, we've seen enterprises stop treating AI as “special projects.” It is no longer confined to pilots or side experiments. AI is now embedded in production, shaping decisions, powering new business models, and changing how employees and customers experience work every day. So, the debate of "should we adopt AI" is settled. The real question is how quickly and how deeply it can be applied ...

Bridging the Gap Between Executives and Individual Practitioners

Leo Vasiliou
Catchpoint

You could argue that, until the pandemic, and the resulting shift to hybrid working, delivering flawless customer experiences and improving employee productivity were mutually exclusive activities. Evidence from Catchpoint's recently published Site Reliability Engineering (SRE) industry report suggests this is changing. 


According to the report, Elite performing organizations (according to DORA maturity metrics) emphasize customer experience reliability without ignoring the importance of employee experience reliability. In fact, Elite performing organizations were found to be 260% more likely to substantially focus on Customer Experience reliability versus Low-performing organizations. SREs are at the center of this intensified reliability drive, charged with improving the reliability of services and solving infrastructure and operational problems. In outlining the challenges they face in successfully implementing reliability initiatives, talent hiring was the most prominent, alongside lack of end-to-end visibility and complexity of architecture. However, a running theme behind the findings was the misalignment between practitioners and management.

The Stark Dichotomy Between Individual Practitioners and Executives

In multiple critical areas, the report revealed a gulf in the point of view between Individual Practitioners (ICs) and Executives. To illustrate, consider one of the report's researched topics: Tool sprawl. The question: "How large of a problem is tool sprawl for your company?" Note the difference in responses below. 


While both groups had a net "Not at all" or "Minor" response to whether tool sprawl is a problem, the delta between the personas is noticeable. In the example below, respondents were asked to rate the value received from Artificial Intelligence for IT Operations (AIOps). 


Going left to right in each of the two categories, note how the skew of the general trend goes in completely different directions. A question remains whether the 45.4% who are unsure would have made this gulf in opinion even wider. The polarity between management and ICs was obvious in other situations as well. When asked which personas preferred Google Workspace to Microsoft 365, the only respondents to prefer Google Workspace were Individual Practitioners. 


The same trend occurred in relation to communication and collaboration within organizations, a core DevOps culture asset. The data showed that respondents communicate and collaborate markedly less with sales and marketing teams, followed closely by executives and customer support. Only 24.9% said they collaborated with executives often.

Why Do ICs and Executives Disagree So Broadly?

This question was raised by Google's Steve McGhee, who contributed to the SRE Report. "One interpretation," he says, "is that Execs are looking at the bigger picture, and ICs are focusing on a smaller portion, missing the context. That's certainly the traditional (Taylorist) model employed at many Enterprises today, but we can do better. By providing transparency, context, and rationale around budgets, revenue and loss, teams can better understand trade-offs made "above them" instead of simply throwing POs up to management to see what sticks."

Bridging the Gap

Executives and ICs need to find new opportunities to communicate and collaborate, reevaluate feedback loops, align to define shared goals and objectives, and drive accountability for data-driven decisions versus making them based on authority or funding alone. But what do these new, better, or more agile conversations look like in practice? 

1. Focus on capabilities Individual capabilities are the gateway to positive business outcomes. With business leaders' drive to show business value on one end and ICs' fixation on "speeds and feeds" at the other end of the spectrum, focusing on what individual capabilities are required and why is vital. Questions like "How do we ensure we can guarantee user experiences are not disrupted when we change a component in our application or Internet stack?" will go a long way towards achieving alignment. 

2. Ensure a blameless environment Consider improving your culture by implementing an "agile conversation" approach to overcome cognitive bias and fear. One finding from the report was that enterprises operating with a "just culture" are 500% more likely to be Elite performing organizations. So, when reevaluating communication and feedback loops, ensure a just culture of openness, sincerity, and transparency. 

3. Remove bias Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms or supports one's prior beliefs or values. It's easy for personas within organizations to defend their perspective, especially when stark differences of opinion exist. As you evaluate feedback loops and find new ways of communicating, avoid letting personal bias get in the way.

What Does the Future Hold?

Evidence suggests that hybrid work policies make the communication and collaboration necessary to produce reliable, resilient systems even harder to fulfil. When asked what facet of work life had been affected the most by sustained work-from-home policies, 44.7% of respondents said "Relationship building" was much or somewhat worse. Despite that, nearly 50% of respondents claimed that innovation velocity was "about the same" and productivity was 31.3% net "better" since working from home. Is maintaining this level of innovation sustainable in an environment where Executives and ICs disagree so broadly or when building relationships is harder to do? Time will tell.

Leo Vasiliou is Director of Product Marketing at Catchpoint

Hot Topics

The Latest

Payment system failures are putting $44.4 billion in US retail and hospitality sales at risk each year, underscoring how quickly disruption can derail day-to-day trading, according to research conducted by Dynatrace ... The findings show that payment failures are no longer isolated incidents, but part of a recurring operational challenge that disrupts service, damages customer trust, and negatively impacts revenue ...

For years, the success of DevOps has been measured by how much manual work teams can automate ... I believe that in 2026, the definition of DevOps success is going to expand significantly. The era of automation is giving way to the era of intelligent delivery, in which AI doesn't just accelerate pipelines, it understands them. With open observability connecting signals end-to-end across those tools, teams can build closed-loop systems that don't just move faster, but learn, adapt, and take action autonomously with confidence ...

The conversation around AI in the enterprise has officially shifted from "if" to "how fast." But according to the State of Network Operations 2026 report from Broadcom, most organizations are unknowingly building their AI strategies on sand. The data is clear: CIOs and network teams are putting the cart before the horse. AI cannot improve what the network cannot see, predict issues without historical context, automate processes that aren't standardized, or recommend fixes when the underlying telemetry is incomplete. If AI is the brain, then network observability is the nervous system that makes intelligent action possible ...

SolarWinds data shows that one in three DBAs are contemplating leaving their positions — a striking indicator of workforce pressure in this role. This is likely due to the technical and interpersonal frustrations plaguing today's DBAs. Hybrid IT environments provide widespread organizational benefits but also present growing complexity. Simultaneously, AI presents a paradox of benefits and pain points ...

Over the last year, we've seen enterprises stop treating AI as “special projects.” It is no longer confined to pilots or side experiments. AI is now embedded in production, shaping decisions, powering new business models, and changing how employees and customers experience work every day. So, the debate of "should we adopt AI" is settled. The real question is how quickly and how deeply it can be applied ...