Skip to content

Understanding SRE and Ensono SRE

Introduction

Site Reliability Engineering (SRE) is an approach to designing and operating software systems that applies software engineering principles to IT operations.

The purpose of SRE is to create reliable, scalable and maintainable services by combining software engineering, automation and operational practices.

The term SRE is often associated with the model created by Google, where dedicated SRE teams operate large-scale internal products alongside the engineering teams that build them.

Ensono SRE applies the same reliability principles but operates within a fundamentally different environment.

Ensono SRE is an application managed service function that takes operational ownership of platforms delivered by project teams for external clients. This means the team operates across many different organisations, technology stacks and delivery models.

The principles of SRE remain the same. The challenges, responsibilities and constraints are different.

Understanding this distinction is important because applying assumptions from a traditional product-company SRE model directly to a managed service environment does not reflect the realities of operating diverse client platforms.

What is SRE?

Overview

SRE is a discipline focused on improving the reliability of software systems through engineering practices.

Traditional operations teams often rely heavily on manual processes, operational knowledge and reactive support. SRE introduces software engineering approaches to reduce manual effort, improve consistency and create systems that are easier to operate.

An SRE team typically focuses on:

  • Reliability.
  • Availability.
  • Performance.
  • Scalability.
  • Automation.
  • Observability.
  • Incident response.
  • Operational improvement.

The objective is to create services that can be operated reliably at scale while allowing engineering teams to continue delivering change.

Core SRE Principles

Reliability as an Engineering Concern

SRE treats reliability as something that must be designed into a system.

Reliability is influenced by decisions made throughout the lifecycle, including:

  • Architecture.
  • Infrastructure.
  • Application design.
  • Deployment processes.
  • Monitoring.
  • Testing.
  • Operational procedures.

Reliability cannot be added effectively at the end of a project.

Service Level Objectives

Service Level Objectives (SLOs) define measurable reliability targets for a service.

Examples include:

  • Availability targets.
  • Latency expectations.
  • Error rate thresholds.

SLOs create a shared understanding of what reliability means and provide a way to measure whether a service is operating successfully.

Error Budgets

Error budgets represent the acceptable level of failure within a service.

They allow teams to balance reliability and change. If a service is operating within its reliability targets, teams can continue delivering improvements. If reliability decreases beyond acceptable levels, effort shifts towards improving stability.

Automation and Reducing Toil

A core objective of SRE is reducing repetitive manual operational work.

Examples include:

  • Automated deployments.
  • Infrastructure automation.
  • Automated monitoring.
  • Self-service tooling.
  • Automated recovery processes.

Automation allows engineers to focus on improving systems rather than repeatedly performing the same operational tasks.

Observability

Reliable systems require visibility into how they behave.

SRE relies on:

  • Metrics.
  • Logs.
  • Traces.
  • Dashboards.
  • Alerts.

Without effective observability, engineers cannot quickly understand failures or make informed operational decisions.

Incident Management and Continuous Improvement

SRE recognises that failures will occur.

The goal is to respond effectively, restore service quickly and learn from failures.

This includes:

  • Structured incident response.
  • Clear ownership.
  • Root cause analysis.
  • Remediation activities.
  • Prevention of repeat issues.

The Traditional Google SRE Model

The Google SRE model was created to support Google's own products and platforms.

Google SRE teams operate within the same organisation as the engineering teams that build the services they support.

This creates a model based on shared ownership.

Single Organisation Ownership

Google controls the full lifecycle of its services.

Engineering teams:

  • Design the systems.
  • Build the applications.
  • Make architectural decisions.
  • Own the operational outcomes.

SRE works alongside these teams to improve reliability and operational maturity.

Early SRE Engagement

SRE is involved before services reach production.

This allows SRE to influence:

  • Architecture decisions.
  • Scalability.
  • Monitoring.
  • Operational requirements.
  • Reliability targets.

Production readiness is built into the service from the beginning.

Controlled Technology Environment

Google operates a highly controlled technical ecosystem.

While Google operates many services, it controls the platforms, tooling and engineering standards used across them.

This enables:

  • Shared tooling.
  • Common operational practices.
  • Reusable automation.
  • Easier knowledge transfer.

Shared Engineering Responsibility

Google's model expects application engineers to understand and participate in operational ownership.

SRE does not receive completed applications and simply take responsibility for them.

Reliability is a shared responsibility throughout the development lifecycle.

The Ensono SRE Model

Ensono SRE operates as an application managed service.

The team does not build a single product. Instead, it assumes operational responsibility for platforms delivered by project teams to external clients.

The typical lifecycle is:

Proposal
    |
Discovery
    |
Sale
    |
Delivery
    |
SRE Assessment
    |
Handover to SRE
    |
Delivery Team Rolls Off
    |
SRE Operates the Platform

This creates a different set of operational considerations.

Supporting Multiple Client Platforms

Ensono SRE operates across many independent environments.

Each platform may have differences in:

  • Cloud provider.
  • Infrastructure.
  • Programming languages.
  • Application architecture.
  • Deployment processes.
  • Monitoring platforms.
  • Security requirements.
  • Operational processes.

This diversity is a natural consequence of operating a managed service.

Inheriting Existing Platforms

Unlike Google SRE, Ensono SRE often becomes involved after significant platform decisions have already been made.

By the time SRE receives a service:

  • Architecture may already be defined.
  • Technology choices may already be fixed.
  • Delivery timelines may already be committed.
  • Development teams may be preparing to leave.

This limits the ability of SRE to influence foundational decisions.

Operating Within Contractual Boundaries

Ensono SRE operates under contractual agreements.

The service provided must align with:

  • Scope of work.
  • Service levels.
  • Support hours.
  • Communication standards.
  • Client responsibilities.
  • Operational processes.

The contract becomes a key part of defining how reliability is delivered.

Working Across Organisational Boundaries

Ensono SRE frequently works with:

  • Client development teams.
  • Client operations teams.
  • Business stakeholders.
  • Delivery teams.
  • Third-party suppliers.

Effective operation depends on strong collaboration and clear communication across these groups.

Key Differences Between Google SRE and Ensono SRE

Area Google SRE Ensono SRE
Primary purpose Operate internal products Operate client platforms
Ownership model Single organisation Multiple organisations
Platform lifecycle Built and operated by the same organisation Built by delivery teams and transitioned to SRE
SRE involvement Early in design and development Often introduced later in lifecycle
Technology environment Highly controlled Diverse client environments
Standardisation ability High Limited by client requirements
Reliability accountability Shared with engineering teams Defined through operational agreements
Communication model Internal collaboration Multi-party communication
Service commitments Internal objectives Contractual obligations
Operational maturity Designed into platforms Can vary significantly between platforms

Challenges of the Ensono SRE Model

Technical Diversity

The largest operational difference is the variety of platforms supported.

Engineers may need to work across:

  • Multiple cloud providers.
  • Different infrastructure platforms.
  • Different observability solutions.
  • Different programming languages.
  • Different deployment models.

This makes knowledge management, training and automation more challenging.

Cognitive Load and Context Switching

A diverse estate creates additional cognitive load for engineers.

Engineers must understand different:

  • Architectures.
  • Toolsets.
  • Operational processes.
  • Failure scenarios.
  • Client expectations.

Frequent movement between platforms creates significant context switching.

An engineer may support one platform using one technology stack and then move to another platform with completely different tooling and operational practices.

This increases the mental effort required to investigate issues and make operational decisions.

Reduced Standardisation

Traditional SRE organisations can often enforce common tooling and practices.

Ensono SRE must balance standardisation with client requirements.

Complete standardisation is unrealistic because platforms are inherited from different delivery projects and client environments.

The challenge is creating common operational standards while accepting necessary technical variation.

Production Readiness Variability

Traditional SRE models usually influence reliability from the beginning of development.

Ensono SRE may receive platforms where operational considerations were not fully addressed during delivery.

Common gaps include:

  • Limited observability.
  • Incomplete monitoring.
  • Untested disaster recovery.
  • Missing documentation.
  • Weak operational processes.

This creates additional remediation work during transition into managed service.

Communication Complexity

Communication is more complex when operating across organisational boundaries.

SRE depends on receiving timely information about:

  • Releases.
  • Platform changes.
  • Incidents.
  • Business events.
  • Operational risks.

Without clear communication standards, operational accountability becomes difficult.

Contractual Accountability

Ensono SRE must deliver against agreed service commitments.

This requires clear definition of:

  • Scope.
  • Responsibilities.
  • SLAs.
  • Support models.
  • Client obligations.

Ambiguous expectations create operational risk for both SRE and the client.

Applying SRE Principles Within Ensono

The difference between Google SRE and Ensono SRE does not change the importance of SRE principles.

The goal remains the same:

Operate reliable systems that provide value to users.

However, the approach must be adapted to a managed service environment.

This means focusing on:

  • Standardising where Ensono has influence.
  • Creating consistent operational processes.
  • Engaging earlier with delivery teams.
  • Defining clear production readiness expectations.
  • Establishing strong contracts and communication models.
  • Building reusable operational patterns.
  • Reducing unnecessary variation across services.

The challenge is not applying SRE principles. The challenge is applying them across a broader and less controlled environment.

Summary

Google SRE and Ensono SRE share the same objective: improving reliability through engineering practices.

The difference is the environment in which that objective is achieved.

Google SRE operates within a controlled product ecosystem where engineering teams and SRE teams share ownership from the beginning.

Ensono SRE operates across a portfolio of client platforms where services are inherited, technologies vary and operational responsibilities are defined through managed service agreements.

This creates additional challenges around standardisation, communication, production readiness, knowledge transfer and operational accountability.

The success of Ensono SRE depends on recognising these differences and adapting SRE principles to work effectively within a managed service model.