Pretzel Logic – Social and Collaborative Business

About this time last year, I threw out a prediction that in 2010 Telcos will get into the Enterprise 2.0 business by bundling social software solutions for the SMB space. In December of 2009, I said:

Telcos will start looking at picking up affordable SaaS Enterprise 2.0 suites. Why? As mindshare starts to get split between Email and Microblogging/Activity streams, telcos and CSPs that offer white label business email hosting for the SMB market will see these as a natural extension. In the SMB market, standalone solutions are key to allow for simple, cheap distribution directly as well as via small reseller partners that don’t want service and customization headaches. E2.0 SaaS offerings meet those criteria. In addition they offer ready plug ins into other popular SMB apps such as SalesForce for those that want integration.

That could mean a huge buyer market outside of the traditional enterprise players who seem to prefer build as opposed to buy scenarios (Salesforce Chatter, TIBCO Tibbr, SharePoint 2010, SAP Constellation, etc).

If I’m somewhat correct, expect the likes of British Telecom, Singtel and Comcast etc jump in. If I’m very right and my commoditization assessment from last year holds true, we’ll see more players such as RackSpace and XO communications start to pay attention as well.

Fast forward to November and it looks like I was on target albeit by the skin of my teeth. Cisco Systems, the makers of Cisco Quad, announced a hosted SMB solution for their existing Telco channel to distribute. Says Murali Sitaram, VP at Cisco who oversees the collaboration business:

"We think our telecom partners over time will have the opportunity to deliver full services using our products." Murali Sitaram, the Cisco vice president in charge of Quad, told me in a recent interview. "So [that can include] cloud-based, or private cloud based or hosted services for our customers, using the range of UC and collaboration components we have."

Where I expected that a telco will have made an acquisition by now, this move by Cisco puts the products in the hands of Telcos to resell. Don’t be surprised if this triggers a few large telcos to acquire social software technology and keep the entire spread. Most of what an SMB requires is basic social software functionality and most likely, that can be attained at a commodity price. Whilst we’ve seen over and over again that larger companies continue to chose the build over buy route (Novell, NetSuite and Epicor for example) when it comes to social software solutions, there is an argument to be made for the IP that’s gone into building scalable and purpose driven experiences by the more mature start ups (relatively speaking).

Looking at 2011….

It’s only November but since Starbucks in the US has already started selling coffee in red and green paper cups (gulp), I’ll take the liberty of penning a 2011 prediction that I’ve already stated to many industry insiders:

Expect Intuit/its’ competitors to make a SaaS-based social software acquisition (such as Yammer, Basecamp or Socialcast) or enter the business organically. Intuit’s core competency in my view is less about its’ ability to sell hosted business process services but it’s close relationship with a gynormous SMB base, thanks in part to its amazing community building efforts. They’re way ahead of the curve that I laid out here over the summer. And tacking on collaboration for an additional $1-$3 a month looks like a slam dunk way to own employee engagement  – a capability that’s an extremely fragmented or even down right neglected system-of-record in the SMB software stack.

Based on what were seeing in the market in our work with large-co buyers that are looking to execute social software enabled business programs, I see a few more industry shifts coming to market that buyers and sellers need to get ready for. But this was worth an open discussion right about now.

Enterprise social software is in for a wild ride in 2011 as large companies enter the market and smaller ones alter their focus to solving known business and process inefficiencies. As a result of this, expect the sell-side to get very very noisy with their marketing.

As someone who cut his teeth in the traditional strategy consulting business, SWAGs (‘strategic wild ass guess’) were common back then. Thankfully (hopefully?) we all get better with age by adding experience and logic to what we expect to see coming down the pike : – )

For research on market moves as you make/validate critical business directional decisions and technology choices, get in touch.

Next week the GigaOM network hosts yet another addition of its clandestine famous Bunker Sessions. This event brings together a select group of industry thought leaders to discuss the business ramifications of a given emerging technology topic. The setting resembles a town hall format, inviting everyone to participate and share experiences. This time around the topic is ‘Future of Work: Crowd sourcing, Cloud Computing and Mobility.

I have the privilege of participating and moderating parts of the half day event. One of my sessions covers how advancements in web connectivity is mediating work and labor access. The second focuses on effects of SaaS and connectivity, particularly in the context of the application layer.

Here is a description of the event from the Bunker Sessions website:

How many times have you worked from a coffee shop or from home? Ten years ago that would have been unimaginable, technically and culturally. The easy access to broadband, mobile computing and cloud based software services is impacting the way we think about building companies. It affects the way we employ people, the meaning of talent and how employees will think about employers. The aim of this session will be to lay a groundwork for debate about the changes coming up.

Every employer institutes some element of a work life balance program as a strategic talent retention weapon or morale booster. Whilst these programs will always have a place as HR charts strategy, we’re at the start of a shift in employee expectations around mobility, workspaces and collaborative tools and technologies. This shift will trigger a change from what’s been considered point programs, to price of entry organizational capabilities that attract and energize the best talent.

Depending on your industry, some of this is happening now whilst some of it is still conceptual. But these new modes of work have business benefits as well – they’re not just a reactionary HR strategy to Gen Y expectations. Regardless of the catalyst, these changes will have an impact on operational design, HR and of course, IT.

The event is sponsored by Accenture and Orange. Speakers and panelists include:

• Fabio Rosati, CEO of Elance
• John Hagel, Chairman, Center for the Edge and Author of “The Power of Pull”
• Vinnie Mirchandani, CEO of Deal Architect Inc. and Author of “The New Polymath”
• Lukas Biewald, CEO of CrowdFlower
• Aaron Levie, CEO of Box.net
• Tim Young, CEO of Socialcast
• Evy Wilkins – Curator of HR & Tech SF and COO of DoYouBuzz
• Mary Hamilton – Global Lead, Workforce Technologies, Accenture Technology Labs

A few-first-come-first-serve (free) tickets are also available and I encourage you to request a pass. Email bunker@gigaom.com to make it happen.

More information on the event in this post on the GigaOM blog. See you there!

Not the IT case, the Business Case – for sales reps, product managers, marketers, support and service teams considering and debating the virtues of a SaaS enabled business platform.

Obviously it won’t make up for an allegedly ill-conceived product and Google Buzz is getting a lot of heat for being excessively social without consent.

That said, whether it’s a mode of operating your business or a way to sell software, THIS is agility.

DAY 1: Google Buzz is Announced (Feb 9th)

———————————————————————————————————-

DAY 2: Ferocious Customer and Media Backlash (Feb 10th)

———————————————————————————————————-

**DAY 5** Immediate Problems Addressed (Feb 13th)

‘nuff said.

p.s if you want the case study on how Google operational-zed this, Nicholas Carlson on Silicon Alley Insider has the lead story.

At the Enterprise 2.0 conference last month, I met with a few interesting companies that I wasn’t familiar with, prior to the event. I thought I was “plugged in”. Clearly, not enough. The next few posts uncover how some of these companies hope to move the needle on Enterprise 2.0 enablement. First up: Supply Chain Management.

McLean, VA based SIM (Supplier Information Mgmt) provider, Rollstream was one of the more impressive but lesser-known-companies (to me) that I had the chance to meet with. If you read this blog often, you’ll get why I instantly liked their business. RollStream fixes specific problems – inefficiencies in the supply chain via Private Supplier Social Networks. Counting well known companies such as Walgreens, Owens & Minor, Johnson & Johnson and Tesco as customers, their SaaS solution services the partner relationship lifecycle for retailers, manufacturers and distributors. Business activity-focused capabilities cover partner on-boarding, compliance, performance management and dispute resolution.

Founder Nick Parnaby and CEO Kristin Muhlner discussed existing bottlenecks and cliffs in the supply chain mgmt process and how Rollstream hopes to open up the lines of communication, add visibility, and remove unnecessary interaction toll gates enforced by decades old SCM and ERP influenced work models. Also, today’s resource heavy supply chain management interaction models force relationship managers to pick specific partners to deal with. RollStream offers social software to reduce manual intervention during on-boarding and to help organizations more easily identify high performing partners in the network.

Re-casting the supplier relationship via Enterprise 2.0 enablement.

RollStream considers its’ primary value to be in the area of efficient partner management. They know their business of course and it’s early pickings, but to me, one of the biggest opportunities to enterprises using such social computing technology is be able to to pry open the gates that lock out supply chain access to core processes such as product management, R&D, marketing, end customer support, etc. And conversely – giving these business units access to knowledgeable supply chain partners as well. That’s where SIM providers can really help.

Why? First, no one knows the true power, limitations and opportunities for each component of a product better than the very folks who build them. Second, component manufacturing is largely a commodity business.  As a supplier, I need to differentiate myself from competitors who are waiting for me to falter or cut me on price. I need to be a strategic partner to be somewhat indispensible. Social Software can open up the lines of interaction beyond R&D, Procurement and Product Development, allowing suppliers to learn, first hand,  any pain felt by the end customer. Or help marketing really understand the deep competencies of each component of the end product. Or provide new insight to R&D on early technology innovation at the component level. And on and on.

That’s purpose built collaboration (a.k.a business case) with dead clear incentives for suppliers to participate (a.k.a adoption) and play a role in the success of an end product in the market place.

There’s sizable opportunity here, however, solutions such as RollStream may not be for everyone. And I suspect that gaining sustainable adoption across hundreds of suppliers for each customer can sometimes be culturally and programmatically daunting.  I’ve seen one too many partner extranets that eventually turned into ghost towns thanks to re-orgs, shifting priorities and erratic shepherding.

All that said, the use of collaborative software in this context can bring massive, measurable business benefit if its treated as a strategic initiative by enterprises. Pulling in a snippet from an older post….

ZDNet blogger and eternal pragmatist, Dennis Howlett says:

In my argument, breakthrough ROI comes from seeing these technology through the lens of collaboration, which in turn implies process and context. I am mindful that huge amounts of value continue to be locked up in supply chains. AMR quoted a number of $3 trillion in 2005. Has that materially changed? Simply being able to communicate across supply chains in a meaningful manner could do wonders to lubricate those rusty wheels.

Have other ideas about how an Enterprise 2.0 design can improve supply chain processes? Chime in.

Outside of security (something the CIO cares deeply about), I can’t tell you how many times business execs I deal with say that are terrified at the prospects of their SaaS based intranets or extranets disappearing during a critical time.

For all the excellent analysis out there about Enterprise 2.0 adoption strategy, reliability is extremely critical to piercing the culture barrier in any sustainable way. Any well thought out adoption plan will fizzle out with a broken promise on system uptime. Folks will go right back to their old ways.  And the naysayers will throw the “i told you so” argument in your face to derail the initiative.

SaaS is extremely promising and I’m a big proponent. And this is not about Yammer who seem to be communicating well about this issue with customers on Twitter.

However, balancing the mission critical nature of your intended business activities with optimal software delivery is critical. SLAs really don’t mean much in the case of mission critical systems. Really, what’s the point of getting a few months of free service in return if it means 1000’s of productive hours lost or worse, lost new business or unhappy customers. And for many smaller, growing businesses, a lawsuit is hardly worth it.

This is the second of a series of posts on my take aways from the Enterprise 2.0 conference in Boston.

My customers and I debate the applicability of SaaS to their operation on a regular basis, using garden variety criteria such as process alignment, cost, ease, integration, security and the like.

A new dynamic hit me after chatting with multiple SaaS providers at the E2.0 conference:

A good number of E2.0 SaaS solutions unfortunately had little to do with the customer. The decision to go SaaS was largely an inward convenience.

The SaaS Foundation

During 2007-2008, many Venture Capitalists bet on the model that Salesforce has proven out, hoping to emulate it in the E2.0 category. Compared to traditional on premise software, SaaS organizations proposed a reduced operational capital outlay thanks to write once, publish everywhere code, low or no-touch sales via online purchase & provisioning, and flattened marketing costs via free-mium models & platform ecosystem distribution (e.g. AppExchange). And so we see this foundation in many E2.0 providers today.

Enterprise 2.0 Market Reality

Now, superimpose this SaaS operational design on some of the current realities in the Enterprise 2.0 space. Note: I’m talking about larger customers.

• Not one vendor with whom I spoke, on-premise or SaaS, was ready to declare wide scale adoption. It’s tough stuff. And it’s clear that it requires expensive headcount to effectively drive awareness and usage, post deployment.
• Annuity pricing seems to be most palatable for the buyer whether its SaaS or On Premise. So if adoption/applicability starts to wane, don’t expect a check next year.
• Integration is not optional. Whether light weight directory integration or deep application level integration, it’s become the price of entry.
• Integration is not enough. You’re still risking contributing to a silo’d organization and that runs counter to the principles of collaborative environments that E2.0 promises. Unless greenfield, what’s needed is deep association with incumbent ERP /ECM driven activity.
• The most striking lesson from last week’s shocking demise of on-demand BI vendor LucidEra (Hat Tip: Dave Rosenberg | cnet) is this: Customers do not necessarily want simple solutions – in fact, they often need ridiculously complex, often personalized systems to effectively drive business acceleration. What they’re really asking for is simplified experiences that mask them from behind-the-scenes voodoo. Many SaaS vendors seemed to confuse these two distinct requirements.

Salesforce had 2 significantly distinct characteristics going for it that led to critical mass. An individual could drop a credit card and start using the service. Enterprise 2.0 on the other hand is predicated on network effects. Second, Salesforce is used as a standalone application in many use cases. But true Enterprise 2.0 enabled transformation without cognizance of other applications? Not very effective for many organizations.

Now, is all of this pertinent only to E2.0 SaaS providers? Nope. On premise providers need to deal with the realities stated above as well. However, from a organizational design perspective, SaaS only offerings are financed and built to do business with very few marketing, consulting and sales resources and with a one size fits all offering.

On-premise solutions on the other hand are funded like old school enterprise software companies and their financials account for head count to be successful. And so, whist they are also facing tight budgets in this economic climate, they may still be better suited to offer internal integration and adoption services. Or a financially attractive VAR/SI offering.

Product Development Motivators

I couldn’t shake off the nagging feeling that many newer SaaS vendors were more excited about the ease of SaaS being a way to reduce their own acid reflux problems. Sure, agile, iterative development is good for the customer as well. But these benefits need to be weighed against the goal of creating silo busting, well adopted, real time enterprises for customers. And that requires labor intensive adoption and clever integration assistance.

Many SaaS vendors (focused on all market segments) also seemed to be clearly seduced by the ease of integration with other cloud solutions, void of relevance to the target customers incumbent technology footprint. Google Apps before SharePoint. Wikis over ECM. More Salesforce, little to no SAP/Oracle. Again, convenient for the provider, not always relevant to a lot of customers.

Closing Thoughts

I’m in no way asserting that SaaS is a bad idea across the board. I absolutely believe that there is a model somewhere out there for cloud and SaaS offerings for large customers, despite recent high profile hiccups from Amazon and Google.

However, SaaS is not an optimal solution for every business problem and every customer. Providers need to look in the mirror and be brutally honest with themselves about the motivations around their SaaS strategy and its relevancy to the customer. I’ve already heard of instances of business changing hands between E2.0 vendors at this early stage in the game, for these very reasons.

Having had led over scores of sizable strategy and technology sourcing engagements, there’s no debate in my mind about one thing: In a bake off, a vendors true motivations become very transparent to smart executives involved in the selection process. Once you get past emergent Enterprise 2.0 embracing and it’s time for the big leagues, this stuff matters.

Bernard Lunn at ReadWriteWeb writes an excellent post (link below), asking “Why Enterprises Don’t like SaaS”. I think it’s because subconsciously Enterprises sense that SaaS purveyors are saving all the fun for themselves.  -)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Who uses cloud computing? Startups do, VCs don’t (venturebeat.com)