You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Business' category.
Why do I need to think about assessing the IT capabilities of an acquisition?
So you just acquired a company as part of your growth, diversification, or some other strategy. The new company along with its LOB (line of business) expertise comes with an entire IT infrastructure that was thus far responsible for supporting the acquired company’s information needs only. While a great deal of due diligence goes into understanding the viability of the business and its value the same level of rigor is typically not applied to evaluating its IT infrastructure and support staff. In order for the two companies to work together well it is important to understand the capabilities of the two IT infrastructures and how to best integrate or not integrate them. If a detailed and careful plan is not put together to understand the capabilities and assets of the new acquisition you risk inheriting a vulnerability that can spread throughout the larger organization or risk stifling a capability that really should be promoted to the larger organization.
Why you need an independent perspective?
Sometimes companies use their own internal staff to assess the target or recent acquisition. The problem with this approach is that these assessments can be tainted by hidden agendas, lack of impartiality, and departmental politics. Entrenched interests can also slant information one way or the other as it passes up and down various departmental hierarchies. I was part of a software company which wanted to acquire another software company with similar technology. Our own internal research and development department was tasked with the assessment of the company’s technology. Quite understandably the leaders in the R&D group thought it was inferior to what was developed in-house even though that was far from the reality. The key decision makers involved in the deal, including the CEO and the board of directors, were getting conflicting accounts of the reality and did not know whose version of truth to trust. This is where an independent perspective from external consultants can come in handy. They often face less resistance when digging around and are able to see beyond the personal bias and the “ugly baby” syndrome. A fresh perspective can also help see the forest from the trees which can sometimes be missed by the people who are working on the trees on daily basis. I came across another post acquisition assessment where the management was told that acquired company’s technology and custom developed software was topnotch. Upon further investigation we discovered that the most of the custom software was developed in a little known RAD development environment and less than a handful of people in the company knew how to maintain it. While this creates tremendous job security for some it creates a significant risk for the company. In another situation credit card numbers and all other consumer related information was stored in a database unencrypted! Stories like these are all too common and point to the need for an independent perspective.
Is it too late to do an assessment after the deal has been signed?
During my days as a consultant I have primarily come across two types of assessments: pre-acquisition and post-acquisition. Pre-acquisition assessments are important where IT infrastructure is a primary part of the value of the business being acquired (software companies, online businesses, etc.). The focus of a pre-acquisition IT due diligence assessment is primarily on ensuring that the IT assets are as good as they have been portrayed, that they are capable of supporting the business objectives associated with the acquisition, and that there are no hidden risks that will require significant expense to remedy after the buyer takes ownership. For example can a wildly successful but local online service be introduced in a new geographic region with a new language, currency, tax and privacy laws, etc? Post-acquisition assessments are important when the prime value of the acquisition is derived from the LOB (e.g. selling insurance policies, financial management, etc.). The focus of this type of assessment is typically ensuring that IT infrastructure is solid enough to continue to support the business; there are no vulnerabilities that can jeopardize the combined entity, finding areas of excellence to propagate, finding redundancies, and figuring out an integration plan. It is always good to get an outside assessment done before the deal is inked however, if that doesn’t happen it is still very important to at least get the post-acquisition assessment and planning done.
What kind of acquisitions can benefit from an assessment?
These days even small companies whose business does not directly intersect with information technology rely on some sort of back-office IT infrastructure to run their day to day operations. A back-office infrastructure may contain email servers, phone/fax servers, internet gateways, website servers, database servers, LOB applications, etc. A front-office infrastructure may contain client facing applications, online portals, CRM applications, LOB applications, etc. As the number of servers and employees grow the need for proper management and use of sound practices to manage them become more important. If access to IT infrastructure such as LOB applications, databases, email, website, etc. is essential to the daily operations of your business it is vital to ensure that proper assessment of the potential risks is done and the IT assets are managed properly.
What are some of the key aspects that should be examined during an assessment?
Start with creating an overall blueprint of the IT assets and how they interact with each. You would be surprised to learn how often such a fundamental document does not exist. Look at the hardware/software redundancy needs to provide the needed uptime to the business. Determine what disaster recovery plans exist, when they were last tested, and what kind of situations they can handle. Examine the security risks and ensure that the security practices match or exceed the required level of protection warrant by the business. Does the infrastructure have the capacity meet or exceed the demands placed by the peak loads and growth in the business? Examine the hosting environment for security, redundant power, redundant internet, redundant cooling, proper fire suppression, etc. Ensure that hardware and software assets are not so old that they are longer supported and can’t be upgraded. Is the technology stack compatible with the umbrella company’s technology stack? Are they any strange or esoteric practices or standards that could introduce risk? And never forget to identify practices, technology, and people (centers of excellence) that can benefit the entire organization and should be propagated to the entire company.
Reviewing security policies and procedures is another key aspect of the assessment. The risks associated with a weak security structure are obvious and too numerous to describe here. You need to not only think about electronic and online security (firewalls, virus and spam filters, internet intrusion attacks, etc.) but also about physical security. Most companies tend to neglect one or the other and sometimes both. In today’s environment the physical as well the data security should be considered a top priority for any IT assessment. The risks are high no matter what business it is, including legal consequences and public embarrassment. At a fortune 500 company where I once had the privilege to work became a victim when half the office noticed that there computers were running slower than usual. Upon further examination it was discovered that each computer was missing half the memory chips that they had. Someone had simply walked in after hours before the lock-down, removed memory, and walked away. At another client site we discovered that they have neatly documented their security policies and key passwords but the passwords for all the accounts were exactly the same!
Depending on the industry you work in you may also have to worry about compliance and regulatory issues. For health care industry you have to worry about HIPAA compliance. All personal information and medical records have to be protected according to the guidelines of the HIPAA act. All publicly traded companies have to be in compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley act (SOX). Even though the SOX act never mentions the word software the audit trails and record keeping required by the act ensures sizeable investment in IT infrastructure and processes to manage it. There are various other acts and standards like the Patriot act, DOD 5015.2, SEC regulations, ISO standards (9000, 15489), etc. that may apply based on the industry and business practices. Sometimes the process may be even more confusing and harder when acquiring companies in different countries or different states where the local laws are not the same. All of this means that you must ensure that your new acquisition does not expose you to compliance issues that you didn’t have to worry about before.
How do we plan for the joint future?
Now that you have good handle on what you just acquired you need to plan how you are going to move forward. You need to think about cost saving opportunities by consolidating sites, hardware, and other resources. You need to think about standardization of software, hardware, and operational practices. You will have to decide how want to handle common branding and identification issues such as email domain names, website, central call-in numbers, etc. You will need to examine what support contracts and license agreements exist and how they need to be modified as part of the larger organization. The integration with the umbrella organization needs to phased in and timing needs to be planned carefully to minimize impact to the business. A combined successful and seamless existence doesn’t happen on its own it needs to be planned and carefully executed. If your company is planning to grow through acquisitions you may want to create a process for assessing and integrating new acquisitions based on your current experience.
If the business you are acquiring is being carved out of a larger parent company, you also need to plan for a migration plan off of the services that the parent company is offering during the transition period. There are further complications if you intend for your new acquisition to be platform company to which you will add other newly-acquired companies over time.
First a confession is in order – I’m not a big fan of cell phone cameras. In the corporate world, they are sometimes banned or considered a nuisance. In talking around the water cooler, cell phone cameras are terrific for documenting car accidents, especially when you aren’t at fault. However an exciting use for cell phone cameras has emerged from Europe – augmented reality. If you are unfamiliar with the concept of augmented reality, think of the Terminator movies. When the robot looks at a person, scene or object, there is a set of facts or augmented information presented as a layer on top of the picture.
For fighter pilots, the heads up display while looking forward out of the canopy is another good example of augmented reality.
The idea that you can point your cell phone camera at the scene in front of you and immediately through a “reality” browser see overlays of information about shops, restaurants and other facts is exciting and potentially game-changing for tourism, advertising, and mobile browsing in general. Using the location-based services for cell phones, especially smartphones with built in GPS features, the software creates a “layer” of information on top of the picture. In fact, the company, sprxmobile, driving this capability has a product called Layar that enables real time digital information on top of reality through the camera of a cell phone. Their web site lists 87 available layers in many verticals including real estate, healthcare, transportation, tourism, entertainment, weather, schools and universities, and local search and directory services. Today, the new software is limited to the Android operating system used in Google-oriented cell phones, but hopefully the idea will grab mainstream attention and move to other major smartphone operating systems.
Clearly, adding this reality layer service to browsers has broad applications beyond cell phones, however there are immediate applications for mobile users that come to mind. Standing in front of a house for sale, pointing the camera at the home and seeing the price, number of bedrooms, etc. would be great. Even better would be the ability to compare augmented information from a snapshot of a home up the street. The application could capture the location based information from the cell phone with the picture and enhance the search experience. Think about the impact of digital photography to grab GPS coordinates for adding information automatically or posting location information to Flickr, for example.
Augmented reality may be the “killer” application for smartphones beyond the obvious contact and calendar management. The ability to add the value of layers of actionable information to where you are immediately located could revolutionize personal computing as well. The ease of adding this type of service to a browser demonstrates the power of both web services and mash-ups. My hope would be that it doesn’t simply add more advertising to our world, but ease traveling, shopping, navigating universities and large sporting venues and bring us actionable information in real time. It is an exciting technology that needs to be nurtured and adopted for mainstream cell phones.

Twitter has just released a new useful guide covering the basics, best practices and case studies for using Twitter for business.
They are trying to stress that Twitter should be viewed as a tool for building relationships rather than a tool for broadcasting announcements, PR, etc. in their words:
“Instead of approaching Twitter as a place to broadcast information about your company, think of it as a place to build relationships.”
It is still a great vehicle to get coupons, deals and specials out, but the long term value will come for said relationships.
Another interesting subject they address is measuring the value of Twitter. 2 things are important in this regard:
- Twitter ( as other social media activities) links should be tagged and reported in web analytics tools using special tags embeded in the tiny URLs so they could be seamlessly rolled up along with all other measured media
- As an engagement tool, it brings to focus the tracking and value placed on brand engagement as part of the value of the web activities and interactions. Think about the value that can be assigned to a user reading branded messages several times a day.
For more information about best practices in using Twitter for business see our previous post on the subject: bulding the collaborative enterprise.
Up until few years ago most companies were satisfied with creating websites that were largely static. A website designer would organize largely pre-existing content into a collection of content buckets, slick graphics, and flash presentations and a website developer would bring the website into existence. New content would be added when either the old one became obsolete or new products or services were created. This model is essentially one step above the electronic brochure style websites of yesteryear, when companies essentially copied their existing paper brochures to web and called it a website.
In today’s environment of social networking, blogs, and collaboration, static content is not only passé it prevents companies from driving advantage from their internal and external user bases and communities of experts. Fresh and timely content helps drive new traffic to the website and is an effective marketing tool. Unfortunately, most companies do not realize the need for fresh and rapidly evolving content on their website and the role it can play in engaging their customers and prospects. Even companies whose products and services remain largely stable overtime need to think about their websites differently. It is not just a one way medium to push static content outwards, it is in fact one of the most cost-effective mechanisms to engage customers and prospects and turn them into a long-term asset. If you believe that the nature of your business is such that you don’t need to think about using your website to engage your customers and prospects, chances are you haven’t fully explored the possibilities. It may take some effort to figure out creative and effective mechanisms to drive advantage from your ability to create fresh and meaningful content and interactions with your customers and prospects, but the rewards are well worth it. From local doctor’s offices to insurance companies to Fortune 500 companies, all can benefit from large, loyal, and engaged communities of customers and prospects.
However, most likely your existing static content-based website can’t support the type of content and interactions needed to support what we just discussed. If your website infrastructure still relies on IT staff to update the content chances are you won’t be able to morph your website into a hub of fresh and dynamic content that attracts new and repeat visits. The business users or the content creators must be able to update the content easily and as frequently as needed.
Of course, you would want some sort of approval workflow and a content publishing process to manage rapidly changing content. Fortunately there is a category of software that is designed to do just that. Web content management systems (WCMs) such as Drupal, Joomla, Microsoft SharePoint, DotNetNuke, etc., are designed to give business users and content creators control over the ability to update content easily and frequently. In most cases, users can manipulate the content by logging into the administrative version of the website and updating the content in a WYSIWYG environment. Content creation and updates can be brought under customized workflows and approval chains which are quite important in a fast moving environment. WCM systems also boost many other capabilities like:
- Content Categorization
- Document Management
- Delegation
- Audit Trails
- Content Creator Grouping
- Content Templates
- Discussion Forums
- Blogs
- Reviews and Ratings
- Etc.
Discussion forums and blogs can be used to create vibrant user and expert communities that revolve around your products and services and continuously create new content that keeps customers and prospects coming back to your site. These tools not only provide a mechanism for external parties to contribute new content but also provide a mechanism for them to communicate directly with you about what is important to them. Insights gleaned from such content can be quite valuable in creating new products and services or improving the existing ones.
Now that we’ve talked about the virtues of fresh content and using your website as a two way medium, you are probably wondering if you would be able to afford it. A little known secret about good WCMs is how cost effective they can be. Creating a custom website from scratch can be a very onerous and expansive proposition. However, most well respected WCMs offer out-of-box templates and web components that actually make is much faster and cheaper to build a website if you take advantage of their off-the-shelf goodies. If you are considering investing in an upgrade of your website – even if you are NOT (consider the cost of lost opportunity) investing any money in your website — it would behoove you to look at the benefits of upgrading your website using a WCM system.

It was interesting to visit the Web 2.0 conference last week and see the progress and trends compared to my last year impressions.
Here are some of my thoughts:
- SharePoint is the de-facto standard for Enterprise 2.0 While other vendors have compelling products and features, a CIO that is looking for an internal, comprehensive, secure and maintainable solution has almost only one choice (unless you are on an IBM stack..). Other tools focus on providing point solutions, hosted environments, plugging current SharePoint holes and extending functionality. Microsoft had the biggest and most impressive presence and were heavily promoting the next version SharePoint 2010 that will be launched in the SharePoint conference in October. (Some preliminary details here).
- The field has definitely matured over the last year. There are more case studies and research about usage, benefits and trends although most companies are not sharing explicit ROI numbers. Some vendors have disappeared while others are growing and establishing themselves at a level where they may be considered long term players and safe for the enterprise.
- The experts are still frustrated with the slow rate of adoption and the seeming growing gap between the prevalence of social tools and technologies used by marketing and sales to communicate externally Vs. they almost complete absence internally. The rapid adoption of tools like Facebook and Twitter for customer communication not just in retail but in Healthcare and other industries creates glaring discrepancies where the same companies have no tools internally and sometimes even block their own marketing teams from external use of these tools under some outdated IT policy.
-
IT is still not part of the discussion. That is unfortunate because as Steve Wylie, the conference director expressed in a guest post at ZDNET last week, large scale adoptions will not happen without IT.
“While we could argue that this is a very new market and that businesses take time to change, I also believe that Enterprise 2.0 will be challenged by large-scale adoption until corporate IT is fully on board. Early adoption has been largely driven by business users and department-level managers. They had a problem to solve and were fed up waiting for IT to provide the solutions they needed. They took matters into their own hands by finding workable, web-based solutions and even celebrated this new found freedom from IT. With a few exceptions, IT took a reactive posture to Enterprise 2.0 and viewed it as a threat to be managed, secured and even blocked in some cases.”
- Tactical view. One of the most frequently asked questions was “what is the best way to get started?”. The pretty universal answer for vendors and corporate users was to approach it in a tactical manner and find a specific business problem you can solve using collaboration tools. Be it an HR portal to boost morale, tools to help virtual project teams work more efficiently, sales best practices portal or any of many other ideas. Define a narrow business case and implement. So far, trying to approach this in a strategic manner makes finding ROI a herculean task and as noted above, puts IT on the defensive. I hope that this trend will start to change as these tactical solutions rarely provide long term sustainable benefits.
- Rise of the Community Manager. The most active forum was the one where the newly created function – community managers shared their challenges and tricks for getting people to take part in the social activity. First, It is great to see that many leading organizations have realized the importance of such a task although many had it as a secondary responsibility they volunteered to do rather than a full time position. Creating and maintaining a vibrant and active internal community requires skill, passion and process and the focus should rightfully be as much on that as on the tools that enable the community.
Additional impressions:
We’ve all dealt with requirements that were written by well-meaning, but
technology-confused procurement departments, or business users who believe that people still use the Mosaic Browser (my first graphical browser!). Few authors of quasi-technical requirements put much thought to the actual cost of implementing a modern, rich, dynamic web application on decade-old technology.
A purposely over-the-top hypothetical quote :
The application must support Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0+, Netscape 4+ at a minimum graphical resolution of 800×600 pixels.
While you may at first chuckle at this obvious bit of anachronism, think back to the last system requirements you spec’ed out for a web application.
What browsers did you ask to support? Were you shocked when the development team told you you couldn’t have that cool AJAX drop-down because your browsers didn’t support it? Were you suprised when compromises had to be made to the look and feel, or flow of the application? How many users really use those old browsers, anyway? How many of your users do?
“They shoot browsers, don’t they?” — Jeremy Keith
Don’t know the answer? Don’t worry, it’s pretty common. A lot of businesses make requests for web-based applications without first doing internal due diligence to understand their target market. Sure, you can build a web application that settles for the lowest common denominator — but why sacrifice when you might not have to?
Understanding your users’ browsing platform should be one of the first steps to building requirements for projects that involve a significant IT spend on web application development, whether it be enhancements to existing applications, or greenfield development.
Here’s 4 reasons why skipping this important step of due diligence will cost you more money, or users, or attention:
- You’ll Be Too Conservative. Fearing that you’ll lose the 0.5% of users who may be on Internet Explorer 5.0, you’ll insist (against your CTO’s recommendation) that all users are important, and if it means sacrificing a few bells and whistles, so be it.
- You’ll Be Too Boring. You’ve heard about rich internet applications, Web 2.0, AJAX? If you’re trying to support these new technologies on browsers that are 5+ years old, forget it.
- You’ll Spend Too Much. The 80/20 rule will be in full effect when you realize late in the development cycle that no one tested with Netscape 7.2. “But it’s in the requirements document!” cries the project sponsor. Frantic testing will unveil the fact that half the functionality is broken or visually skewed. You fire the designer, and the project goes into a death march to the lowest common denominator.
- You’ll Be Unhappy with the Final Product. You’re building the web application to replace your mainframe claims processing system. Or your billing system. Or your financial forecasting package. And the final, boring mess will look exactly like what you had on your old green-screen system, except it’s different. Users are complaining that it’s not easy to use, and your CFO is now revisiting your ROI projections. Projects aren’t supposed to end like this… are they?
Fortunately, judicious use of web analytics and good old fashioned business analysis can provide you with concrete data to build a solid foundation of business cases and technical requirements. The chart below illustrates browser market share over the past 9 months:

Source: StatCounter Global Stats, April 2009
You can see that the bulk of market share goes to a very small percentage of very modern and powerful browsers. How can this information help you? In Part 2 of this series, we’ll explore how up-front legwork in web application development can lead to a happy outcome for all.
Businesses that start implementing KPIs at a departmental level, without an enterprise wide effort to define a balanced set of key performance indicators, can unwittingly push their businesses into a no-win situation, as in these real-world scenarios:
- Customer Call Centers (often ahead of the curve as far as setting metrics) are tracking and incentivizing their call center agents to keep their call times short. Call center agents, in an effort to shave seconds off of each call, omit the crucial step of searching for a customer before entering a new one while logging interactions. Result: Duplicate customer records, which may even be pushed to other systems, creating pain throughout multiple departments.
- In the push to meet monthly sales quotas, hyper-discounting behavior becomes the norm among the sales team. If the pricebook is complex and no one can get a true read on profitability, inappropriate discounting may be approved when management doesn’t have access to the right information to make an informed approval decision.
- Some businesses steer only by financial performance measures, but these are lagging indicators, and can seldom, in and of themselves, provide the required agility to succeed in rapidly changing situations.
The key, of course, is to strive for balance when implementing KPIs:
- Balance between leading (forward-looking) and lagging (backward-looking) indicators.
- Balance across stakeholder perspectives. The Balanced Scorecard as a starting point works well to achieve balance across core stakeholder viewpoints of financial, customer, process, and learning/growth.
- Balance across levels in your business hierarchy. Kaplan and Norton expanded on the balanced scorecard approach to help businesses drive metrics down through their organizations via strategy maps.
- Balancing speed metrics with quality metrics

Image courtesy of memory-alpha.org
The alternative to a balanced approach at the outset is usually a technology desparation move, such as manually cobbling together some key reports, manually trying to scrub out duplicate data, implementing undesirable or even temporary customizations to packaged programs. There’s usually at least one person in the IT department who’s enough of a Star Trek fan to want to reprogram that no-win scenario, just like the young James Kirk did with the Kobayashi Maru.
One of the strongest and most misguided arguments expressed online and in many companies we speak with about Enterprise 2.0 is that it is not strategic.
That this collection of tools, technologies and ideas is not yet mature enough, lacks proven ROI, introduces a myriad of security and governance issues and even if successful is not a priority in today’s soft economy. It is too often delegated to IT managers to experiment with and report back in a few years.
Here’s where the difference is: Enterprise 2.0 is not a technology. It represents first and foremost a new way of thinking, interacting and communicating that includes attitude and cultural changes, empowered by IT. Is there anything more strategic than that and more important to a business future success?
It is arguably the biggest opportunity for IT driven cultural change facing organizations since the introduction of PC networks more than 2 decades ago.
One of the C suite most important tasks is to shape an organizational culture that will make their company innovative, competitive, efficient and successful not just now but in the future. Embracing Enterprise 2.0 now and guiding their employees through this transitional period should be one of their top priorities.
While in a few cases adoption started from the bottom up, a change of this magnitude usually needs to come from the top accompanied by the matching set of values and actions that prove the seriousness and commitment to change.
It requires leadership that is able to see that transparency and increased visibility into activities throughout the company will finally enable them to know what is really happening and will create a culture of trust. That openness and exchange of ideas will lead to innovation and efficiency. That collaboration will enable a diverse workforce to work together in emergent ways while being physically and geographically dispersed.
In short, it requires vision that will set a future path and will ask managers to overcome the obstacles in the way. The type of vision CEO’s need to provide and not delegate to IT managers.
The challenge and opportunity is that not many chief executives have realized yet that embracing Enterprise 2.0 is a strategic imperative and are focusing the discussion around short term ROI.
Dion Hinchcliffe at ZDNET provides a comprehensive review of the evidence and opinions regarding ROI and adoption challenges, and adds his own interesting model of collaboration cause and effect chains that while clearly provide benefits, make them harder to pinpoint and measure.

He also concludes that
“… an accumulating body of knowledge is pointing to potentially dramatic business returns with Enterprise 2.0. If these continue to be borne out, it will affect the competitive and financial positions of the companies that are proactive and therefore their long-term marketplace success“
And wonders what it will take to break the current status quo?
His colleague Dennis Howlett on the other end thinks the ROI is still years off and concludes
“As always, the secret to long term success depends on management’s ability to maintain a sustained commitment and all that goes with it. The difficulty today is that same management is wondering where the next sale comes from or how cash will be generated.”
The good news is that Enterprise 2.0 does not require large capital expenditures but mostly thorough organizational commitment. There has rarely been an opportunity for businesses to gain so much competitive edge by investing so little.
As in many cultural revolutions, by the time Enterprise 2.0 related changes start translating into business differentiators, organizations that have not made the transition will look as outdated as an organization resisting getting these useless PC boxes or adopting email.
In the first part of this series we discussed the definition of cloud computing and its various flavors. The second part focused on the offerings from three major players: Microsoft, Amazon, and Google. The third and final part discusses the issues and concerns related to the cloud as well as possible future directions.
A company may someday decide to bring the application in-house due to data security or cost related concerns. An ideal solution would allow creation of a “private in-house cloud” just like some product/ASP companies allow option of running a licensed version in-house or as a hosted service. A major rewrite of existing applications in order to run in a cloud is probably also a non-starter for most organizations. Monitoring and diagnosing applications in the cloud is a concern. Developers must be enabled to diagnose and debug in the cloud and not just in a simulation on a local desktop. Anyone who has spent enough time in the trenches coding and supporting complex applications knows that trying to diagnose complex intermittent problems in a production environment by debugging on a simulated environment on a desktop is going to be an uphill battle to say the least. A credible and sophisticated mechanism is needed to support complex applications running in the cloud. The data and meta-data ownership and security may also give companies dealing with sensitive information a pause. The laws and technology are still playing catch-up when it comes to some thorny issues around data collection, distribution rights, liability, etc.
If cloud computing is to truly fulfill its promise the technology has to evolve and the major players have to ensure that a cloud can be treated like a commodity and allow applications to move seamlessly between the clouds, without requiring a major overhaul of the code. At least some of the major players in cloud computing today don’t have a good history of allowing cross-vendor compatibility and are unlikely to jump on this bandwagon anytime soon. They will likely fight any efforts or trends to commoditize cloud computing. However, based on the history of other platform paradigm shifts they would be fighting against the market forces and the desires of their clients. Similar situations in the past have created opportunities for other vendors and startups to offer solutions that bypass the entrenched interests and offer what the market is looking for. It is not too hard to imagine an offering or a service that can abstract away the actual cloud running the application.
New design patterns and techniques may also emerge to make the transition from one cloud vendor to another easier. Not too long ago this role was played by design patterns like the DAO (data access object) and various OR (object relational) layers to reduce the database vendor lock-in. A similar trend could evolve in the cloud based applications.
All of the above is not meant to condemn cloud computing as an immature technology not ready for the prime time. The discussion above is meant to arm the organization with potential pitfalls of a leading edge technology that can still be a great asset under the right circumstances. Even today’s offerings fit the classic definition of a disruptive technology. Any organization that is creating a new application or over hauling an existing one must seriously consider architecting the application for the cloud. The benefits of instant scalability and “pay for only what you use” are too significant to ignore, especially for small to mid size companies. Not having to tie up your cash in servers and infrastructure alone warrants a serious consideration. Also not having to worry about setting up a data center that can handle the load in case your application goes viral is liberating to say the least. Any application with seasonal demand can also greatly benefit. If you are an online retailer the load on your website probably surges to several times it average volume during the holiday shopping season. Having to buy servers to handle the holiday season load which then remains idle during rest of the year can tie up your capital unnecessarily when it could have been used to grow the business. Cloud computing in its current maturity may not make sense to pursue for every enterprise. However, you should get a solid understanding of what cloud computing has to offer and adjust the way you approach IT today. This will position you to more cost effectively capitalize on what it has to offer today and tomorrow.




