Forrester recently surveyed nearly 3,000 technology decision-makers worldwide and found that emerging geographies -- Latin America, China, India, Russia -- are heavy adopters of software-as-a-service. [Source: Forrester's Enterprise And SMB Global IT Budgets, Priorities, And Emerging Technology Tracking Survey, Q2 2010.]
Latin America led with the highest rate of SaaS adoption, with 30% of companies reporting SaaS use. Latin America also reported a high percentage of budget going to SaaS at 12.4%. (For comparison, North America, where many SaaS deployment options initially saw traction, showed 25% adoption and represented 7% of overall software budgets.)
Other emerging geographies that reported high adoption included emerging Asian countries (China/Hong Kong/India/Russia). This group reported 21% SaaS usage and 8.9% of software budget going to SaaS. More established Asia Pacific economies (Japan/Australia/New Zealand) reported only 16% SaaS adoption and only 6.5% of software budget going to SaaS.
For more on the data including more details and more insight into additional geographies, look for our upcoming report.
This year’s Boston Enterprise 2.0 Conference highlighted good examples of how companies are tapping into social technologies to empower their employees. For example, Mitre Corporation showed how they have successfully developed a collaboration community using open source technology. The platform they developed enables them to deliver secure access to ideas, discussions and content for employees and guests. Meanwhile, CSC showed how they have driven greater collaboration across 49,000 of their employees in just 18 months, with a strategy focused on connect, communicate and collaborate. (Those of us in the audience even witnessed the in-field promotion of Claire Flanagan, CSC senior manager for knowledge management and enterprise social collaboration, to director – congratulations Claire!)
Among a number of great speakers, JP Rangaswami, CTO & chief scientist at BT Design, opened the conference with a powerful speech that was supported by an innovative approach to real-time animation of content – alas, while the speech was good, the visuals were distracting for many in the room. JP suggested that the age of the locked-down desktop is coming to an end, “enterprises must design for loss of control.” Re-iterating a refrain from George Colony, who suggests “bits want to be free,” JP advised, “if you don’t want it shared, don’t put it on a computer.”
Well, I guess we're going to find out. Earlier this week I met with Andrew Feldman, one of the founders and CEO of SeaMicro -- and he's betting that his Atom-based server can beat traditional Xeon-based systems. According to Andrew, the Atom processor is way more efficient on a per-watt basis than CPUs like the Xeon. Sure, it's not as fast, but it makes up for it by being cheap and power efficient, which lets you put a lot of them to work on tasks like web applications. Basically, SeaMicro puts 512 Atom-based servers into a 10U chassis, which provides virtualized network and storage resources as well as management over all these systems. This is not a big SMP box -- it's literally 512 servers that share common infrastructure.
According to SeaMicro, you would need 1,000 dual-socket quad-core Xeon systems to achieve the same SPECint_rate benchmark as 40 of their systems. If my math is right, that would be 40 * 512 Atom servers=20,480 Atom CPUs, compared with 1,000 Xeons * 2 sockets * 4 cores = 8,000 Xeon cores.
One of the most interesting technical hurdles SeaMicro had to address in building this server is the interconnect for all these processors. Rather than going with PCI-e or another off-the-shelf interconnect, SeaMicro's architecture has more in common with IBM's Blue Gene.
In discussions on cloud computing, I often talk to architects who have been told to create a "cloud strategy." This sounds appropriate enough, but there’s a devil in the details: When the task is "create a Technology X strategy," people often center strategy on the technology. With cloud, they aim to get a good definition of pure cloud and then find places where it makes sense to use it. The result is a technology strategy silo where cloud is placed at the center and usage scenarios are arranged around it. The problem with this is three-fold:
Considering the full business dynamics of any given usage scenario, there is a wide continuum of often strongly competing alternatives to pure cloud (including cloud-like and traditional options).
The rapid pace of market development means that business value equations along this continuum of options will keep changing.
Your business needs integrated strategy for many technologies, not simply a siloed cloud strategy.
In the wake of the Celtics' fourth-quarter collapse that gave Kobe Bryant his fifth ring, I am endeavoring to find positive things to focus on instead of post-game analysis, which brings me to the Enterprise 2.0 Conference. This was my second year attending the event (which is conveniently located 10 minutes from my house), and I must say that my takeaway this year is more positive than my impressions after last year's show. I appreciated the optimism exhibitors and attendees have about the market and the passion they show for the topic - which led to some lively debates. But during my three days at the event, the things that really caught my attention were:
We recently embarked on a Forrester-wide research project to benchmark the use of social technologies across enterprise organizations. Why is this important? Well as you may know, we cover social technologies from a wide range of perspectives — from roles in marketing to IT to technology professionals. We find each of these roles differ in their general "social maturity" and that most companies are experiencing pockets of success, but few, if any, are successfully implementing it across the board. In fact, full maturity in this space could take years, but there are clear differences in how some "ahead of the curve" companies are using social technologies for business results.
Infrastructure and operations professionals have not necessarily focused on how they can leverage social technologies but rather how they might have to support (or not support) these technologies. In some enterprises, the Security and Risk group has determined that IT operations must block access to social networking sites such as Facebook.
We have come across a couple of progressive IT operations groups that are thinking about social as part of a larger help desk strategy. How?
We recently embarked on a Forrester-wide research project to benchmark the use of social technologies across enterprise organizations. Why is this important? Well, as you may know, we cover social technologies from a wide range of perspectives – from roles in marketing to IT to technology professionals. We find that each of these roles differ in their general “social maturity” and that most companies are experiencing pockets of success, but few, if any, are successfully implementing it across the board. In fact, full maturity in this space could take years, but there are clear differences in how some ahead-of-the-curve companies are using social technologies for business results. In fact, at this point it has been clearly established by many people (including us many times over) that social technologies are transformative tools that are changing the way companies do business. So we’re not talking as much about the opportunity social presents, but rather we are trying to determine the current reality of practitioners. It’s also clear that many companies have made tremendous strides in planning and organizing for the use of social technologies. However, the one question we consistently get is: “Where is my organization compared to others in the use of social media?” We want to benchmark these companies to see if we can answer questions like:
How do you define “social maturity,” and why is it important to get there?
Which companies are ahead of the curve in implementing social technologies for both external use (i.e., for customers/consumers) and/or internal use (i.e., for employees/partners)?
What have been the biggest drivers of success?
What are the biggest challenges?
What steps do most organizations need to take, and why?
During the first 8 minutes or so, the presenter makes a number of excellent points about how architects have abdicated their power to act. (He actually calls us cowards.) The rest of the presentation is an amazing example of what happens when architects take the responsibility to make their creations come to life. As with most TED videos, it is well worth the 18 minutes it takes to watch it.
Mike and I had been talking about the role of architecture and how architects respond to their organizational context. For many architects there is a big divide between representation and what Prince-Ramus calls agency – taking action. Too often we create “genius sketches” but accept little accountability for making them real. We expect the organization to embrace them and do the “easy” work of implementation. I’ve got news for you. Creating the architecture – those genius sketches – is the easy part. Getting the organization to embrace them and make them its own is the hard part. Of course we know that; we just don’t act on the knowledge.
By way of example: I occasionally recommend to architects that they need a small team of developers to implement some parts of architecture like an ESB or SOA components. I get the “we’re architects man, we don’t do that” response. Well ... maybe we should. Maybe we should “own the problem” instead of pointing our finger at others
We recently embarked on a Forrester-wide research project to benchmark the use of social technologies across enterprise organizations. Why is this important? Well as you may know, we cover social technologies from a wide range of perspectives — from roles in marketing to IT to technology professionals. We find each of these roles differ in their general “social maturity” and that most companies are experiencing pockets of success, but few, if any, are successfully implementing it across the board. In fact, full maturity in this space could take years, but there are clear differences in how some “ahead of the curve” companies are using social technologies for business results.
There are serious security and risk concerns with social technology but there are also significant business and operational benefits. Security professionals have to determine how they can mitigate these risks to an acceptable level without significantly hampering the business. If you haven’t seen it, Chenxi Wang has written an excellent report on how effective management of social media can alleviate security risks. Check out To Facebook Or Not To Facebook.
There is also some discussion about how security professionals might use social technologies to their own benefit — particularly to leverage the knowledge of other security professionals to combat the growing sophistication of security attacks. If you haven’t seen it, check out John Kindervag’s report SOC 2.0: Virtualizing Security Operations.
Timeline: In my session on the Information Workplace at Forrester's IT EMEA forum in Lisbon last Thursday, I suggested that "Humans have lost the war against information overload. Only analytics can save us now." (Pedantic pop quiz: What obscure German philosopher is the Ur-source for that formulation?) One of the attendees tweeted this quip, and it enjoyed a few minutes of fame on Twitter. Five days later, IBM announced its intention to buy analytics vendor Coremetrics. Is this mere coincidence?
Forrester's web analytics expert Joe Stanhope has smartly dissected the acquisition in his blog. But what does it mean for Information and Knowledge Management professionals? I think it's another indication that IBM isn't just blowing on its marketing vuvuzelas when they talk about helping clients create and manage "exceptional web experiences." (Borrowing a line from Joe, I note that: The deal is subject to standard regulatory approvals in the US and Europe prior to closing.)