You’ve invested in the tools. You’ve hired the talent. You’ve even started adopting DevOps principles for your network operations. So why are your network changes still crawling through endless handoffs while your software teams ship multiple times per day?
The answer isn’t technical. It’s organizational, and it’s costing you more than you realize.
An Inconvenient Truth About Network Organizations
While software organizations discovered years ago that functional silos kill velocity, most network teams are still organized like it’s 2010. NetOps here, NetEng there and Architecture somewhere else. Security is in its own kingdom. DNS is hiding in a corner. Each team is optimized for its function, not for delivering value to customers.
The result? Your “automation” projects become integration nightmares. Your network changes require a dozen approvals and three different teams. Your mean time to recovery looks embarrassing compared to cloud-native companies. And your best people are burning out trying to coordinate across organizational boundaries that shouldn’t exist.
This isn’t just inefficiency; it’s a strategic disadvantage. Companies such as AWS, Cloudflare and Twilio aren’t winning because they have better tools. They’re winning because they organize their network teams like the software systems they build — for flow, not function.
Applying the Team Topologies Solution for Networks
The path forward is a fundamental reorganization of your network teams using the proven Team Topologies framework from Matthew Skelton and Manuel Pais. This approach has transformed software delivery across industries by defining four team types optimized for fast flow of value. Here’s what it might look like for your network organization:
Stream-Aligned Teams become your primary delivery mechanism. Instead of functional teams that hand work back and forth, you create end-to-end service teams: a cloud connectivity service team, a security network services team, an edge/CDN service team. Each owns its entire value stream from customer request to production deployment. No handoffs. No dependencies. No excuses.
Platform Teams provide the automation and tooling that enable stream-aligned teams to operate autonomously. Your network automation platform team, observability platform team and API orchestration platform team become internal product companies, treating the stream-aligned teams as their customers. They succeed when other teams can self-serve.
Enabling Teams temporarily embed with stream-aligned teams to build capabilities, not create dependencies. Your network automation coaching team helps others adopt infrastructure as code. Your security consulting team teaches secure-by-design principles. Then they move on, leaving teams more capable than before.
Complicated-Subsystem Teams handle the deep technical complexity that would overwhelm stream-aligned teams. Your BGP routing protocol team, network hardware/firmware team and advanced security algorithms team provide specialized expertise without becoming bottlenecks.
The Imperative of Conway’s Law
Here’s what most CIOs miss: Conway’s Law isn’t a suggestion; it’s physics. Your network architecture will mirror your communication structure, whether you plan it or not. If your teams are organized in functional silos, your network will be a collection of integrated subsystems with fragile interfaces and brittle dependencies.
But flip this dynamic — the “Inverse Conway Maneuver” — and you can intentionally design team structures that produce the network architecture you want. Service-oriented teams naturally build service-oriented networks. Teams organized for flow naturally build systems optimized for flow.
This isn’t theory. This is how advanced network organizations already operate. They’ve moved from functional teams to service teams, applying DevOps principles to NetOps. They treat network infrastructure with the same rigor as software: version control for configurations, continuous integration for changes, automated testing for policies and observability as code.
Brutal Questions You Must Answer
As you evaluate your current state, ask yourself the hard questions:
Given our skills, constraints and business goals, which team structure will help us deliver network changes faster and safer? How many handoffs does a typical network change require? Where are the boundaries in our network system, and how do our teams align with those boundaries?
Most importantly: How much longer can we afford to operate like a traditional IT department while our competitors operate like technology companies?
Implementation Reality
The transformation won’t happen overnight, and it shouldn’t. Start by identifying your current value streams: The actual flow of work that delivers value to customers. Map your existing teams to the four topology types. You’ll quickly see the gaps and overlaps that are killing your velocity.
But here’s the crucial part: This isn’t about drawing new org charts. It’s about developing new habits of interaction and collaboration. The most successful transformations focus on capabilities first, structures second. What new patterns of decision-making, knowledge sharing and coordination do your teams need to develop?
The metrics that matter are flow metrics:
-
Reduced lead time for network changes.
-
Decreased handoffs per change.
-
Improved mean time to recovery.
-
Higher deployment frequency.
When these improve, you know you’re building the organization your business needs.
Competitive Reality
The uncomfortable truth is that advanced networking organizations solved this problem years ago. While you’re debating whether to adopt infrastructure as code, they’re deploying network changes multiple times per day with higher reliability than your monthly maintenance windows.
The gap isn’t closing. It’s widening. It’s not just operational — it’s existential. In a world where network agility directly correlates to business agility, organizational debt becomes technical debt, which becomes business risk.
The Choice Before You
You have two options: evolve your network organization to match the demands of modern infrastructure, or watch your competitors pull further ahead while your teams burn out trying to deliver 2025 expectations with 2010 organizational structures.
The tools, techniques and proven patterns exist. The question is whether you have the organizational courage to implement them.
Your network’s intelligence isn’t just about automation and observability. It’s about organizing the humans who build, deploy and operate that network for maximum flow of value. Everything else is just tooling.
The foundations are clear. The choice is yours.
Speak Your Mind