Applying Critical Thinking in Solving Cloud Computing Problem

Introduction

The issue at hand involves three parties, the cloud Solutions Company which configures and resells the services provided and owned by AWS Company. The third party is the clients, and so far the only one has complained about the issue. Green Machine Marketing company is the single client has detected the error, they are claiming that they have been receiving an error message in their systems. The two companies are serving other clients, but so far they have not complained about any issue (Zavadskas & Turskis, 2011). As the network provider, the first thing to do is to troubleshoot all other systems to confirm whether other clients have been affected by the same problem.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

After troubleshooting all the systems, the network provider should write a report about what they have observed in the systems, the report should also include the time the client registered the complaint to customer care, the last time the system was reconfigured and the identity of the person who reconfigured the system in this case, Jim Black,. As the person involved, it is essential to collect all the facts and record everything in the report book. The problem seems to have been caused by only one party, but that may not be the case if all the aspects are explored deeply (Zhang et al., 2014).

Explanation of the Issue

The network provider receives a mail from the customer care by the name Jessica Lopez indicating that she had received a call from one of the clients who claim that they have started receiving error messages they do not even understands. After looking into the issue, the network provider has realized that the former employee of the cloud solutions company by the name Jim Black had misconfigured the systems (Zavadskas & Turskis, 2011). His configurations have commanded the operations to provide extra cloud-based services which are not required by the service provider.

Since the role of cloud Solutions Company is to configure and resell the services, they are the ones responsible for the mess since the issue resulted from misconfiguration of the system by one of their employees one year ago. By misconfiguring the methods, the client by the name Green Machine Marketing is being provided the services they do not require and they are paying the primary service provider which is AWS Company thousands of dollars per month for the past one year for these services which they do not require (Zhang et al., 2014).

If the truth about the matter is found out, cloud solutions which are the network provider's company will be charged, and they will have to repay all the amount which had been paid by the client to the primary service provider which is AWS. At the moment, the client has called twice to inquire about the status of the issue. According to the network provider, the process of resolving the issue will require a system shutdown of 30 minutes. This will trigger a penalty based on the current agreement with the client. If the problem is not resolved, it will mean that complains from the client will not have been addressed yet it is the work of the service provider to resolve those issues. There is a dilemma involving many options, and each option has consequences. Therefore, critical thinking is required to make the most appropriate choice (Savery, 2015).

Analysis of the Information

After collecting all the essential data, it is import to analyze the information which has been obtained so that you can understand what has transpired over the past one year. A thorough research about the company which has been involved in this case; cloud solutions should be done to determine whether it had experienced the same issue in the past and how the issue had been resolved (Savery, 2015).

As the network provider, it is essential to understand all the losses which have resulted from the issue to all the parties. It is also essential to assess the nature of the complaint from the service provider including the consequences of that error message appearing on the systems of the client. It is also essential to get to understand the reason why the error message has not been appearing for the past one year yet the wrong configurations had been running the system during that period. After analyzing all these data, it is advisable that you present it to the supervisor so that he/she may provide the way forward (Patel, Taghavi, Bakhtiyari, & JuNior, 2013)

Consideration of Alternative Viewpoints and Conclusions

Part of the work of the network provider is to configure, repair and maintain the systems. If they are having not been part of the team that configured the systems one year ago, it is their responsibility to monitor and ensure that all the systems are running with the correct configurations. If the client realizes that they had been paying for the services they do not require, they will have to demand a refund hence the issue should be kept a secret. From the findings of the study, after the systems had been configured a year ago, the client paid more for services without question (Zhang et al., 2014). This, therefore, indicates that if the system is configured correctly, the client will be paid a certain amount for 30 minutes downtime.

They way about on this issue involves the analysis and comparison of the cost of reporting the problem and paying for both 30 minutes downtime and refunding amount they client had been overcharged for the past one year. The other option is to shut down the system and claim that there was a system failure instead of talking about the misconfiguration and pay only for the downtime (Zhang & Wei, 2013).

From an expert point of view, it is essential to look into all the aspects including the consequences of implementing each option. In this case, it is better to shut down the systems and blame in on regular system failures. This will cost the company a certain amount; that is for downtime which is much less (Zhang & Wei, 2013)s damaging than revealing the secret which will result in damaging of the reputation of the company, paying for system downtime and refunding the client all the extra amount they have been paying for the past one year. The reconfiguration may flag the primary service provider (AWS) since they will start receiving less monthly income. It is up to the service provider to come up with a different explanation which may be based on a system upgrade. Cloud solutions will have to claim that due to the system upgrade they are planning to make, the cost of services may reduce hence after configuring the systems correctly; all the parties will accept changes without question (Zavadskas & Turskis, 2011).

Conclusions and Recommendations

From the explanations, analysis of information and consideration of the different point of views, it can be concluded that the three companies involved in the issue are not vigilant. Most of their employees are not doing their work as required. (AWS) Should have started looking into the matter the moment they began receiving extra payment from the client. The client, in this case, Green Machine Marketing should have enquired about the increase in the cost of services. Cloud solutions on the other side failed to detect the error yet are responsible for configuration and maintenance of the systems (Savery, 2015). Ignorance from the three companies has resulted in this mess but majorly on the side of the cloud solutions company whose employee caused the problem.

To avoid such a problem in the future, cloud solutions should come up with proper configuration method where more than one person will confirm whether the right configurations are in place. This will ensure that the right arrangements have been set on the systems (Zhang & Wei, 2013). The configurations should be checked regularly so that if there is a problem, it will be corrected in time to avoid a situation where the company will have to repay a lot of money because they had failed to detect the error in time.

Cloud solutions should also have a backup system which has got the correct configurations similar to the primary system so that in case there is an issue which may require a shutdown, a backup system will be available. This will eliminate the cost charged by the client when the system fails for a certain period. The company should also make policies which could favor them when such cases arise (Patel, Taghavi, Bakhtiyari, & JuNior, 2013). 30 minutes shutdown should not attract a penalty, at least one hour would be considerable. Former employees should also be liable for their actions even after they have retired or fired; this will ensure that all employees are working keenly to avoid mistakes which may cost the company a lot of money.

References

Patel, A., Taghavi, M., Bakhtiyari, K., &JuNior, J. C. (2013). An intrusion detection and prevention system in cloud computing: A systematic review. Journal of network and computer applications, 36(1), 25-41.

Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows, 9, 5-15.

Zavadskas, E. K., &Turskis, Z. (2011). Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods in economics: an overview. Technological and economic development of economy, 17(2), 397-427.

Zhang, J., Renganarayana, L., Zhang, X., Ge, N., Bala, V., Xu, T., & Zhou, Y. (2014). Encore: Exploiting system environment and correlation information for misconfiguration detection. ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News, 42(1), 687-700.

Zhang, N., & Wei, G. (2013). Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem based on hesitant fuzzy set. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 37(7), 4938-4947.