Service integration (SI) is already one of the IT buzzwords of 2013; you might also hear service integration and management (SIAM) which brings in an IT service management (ITSM) perspective. However, just because it is one the most talked about ideas in the IT industry does not mean it is understood.
For now let’s just say that if you could take your E2E IT operations and the complex multi-supplier environment in which it sits and give that pain to someone else to manage while you concentrate on what you do best, on your customers and their needs, then why wouldn’t you? This, in essence, is what pure-play SI is (Stephen – at Forrester we are also speaking to clients about internally operated SI).
Sounds attractive, doesn’t it? The good news is that it can be. The bad news is that my experience to date has shown SI implementation can be a painful experience if those involved are not prepared.
Planning for service integration
The transition to an SI model is a lot easier if time is invested upfront to:
Housekeeping key areas of the IT environment
Engaging a potential SI provider earlier to work with the organization – to help organize and plan for transition readiness.
Media and IT professionals are buzzing about BYOD thanks to the increasing adoption of personal mobile devices being used for work in China. To delve deeper into BYOD usage in Chinese enterprises, Forrester conducted a brief survey of 28 senior IT professionals who attended a BYOD seminar organized by online media company ZOL, a subsidiary of CBSi, in Beijing. I found the results interesting, and believe the feedback reveals important Chinese BYOD trends and enterprise views on the BYOD phenomenon:
The focus is still on BYOD rather than BYOT. The proliferation of mobile devices is changing the BYOD landscape in China. More companies are allowing their employees to bring their own mobile devices, not just for cost savings, but also for productivity and anytime, anywhere work. However, only a few companies realized the trend of bring-your-own-technology, including software and mobile apps, with just 8 respondents allowing self-purchased software on PCs and mobile devices. This finding supported our observation that many Chinese organizations are still playing on the BYOD field rather than BYOT. In fact, in my conversations with SMEs, I’ve found they seldom realize it is necessary to manage applications on these devices used for business, or they simply do not want to manage them. Some SMEs also don’t buy the necessary business applications for their employees and adopt a “don’t-ask, don't-tell” policy on employee's use of pirated software.
Yesterday, BMC Software announced that has signed a definitive agreement to be acquired by a private investor group led by Bain Capital and Golden Gate Capital together with GIC Special Investments Pte Ltd (“GIC”) and Insight Venture Partners (collectively, the “Investor Group”).
Under the terms of the agreement, affiliates of the Investor Group will acquire all outstanding BMC common stock for $46.25 per share in cash, or approximately $6.9 billion.
This is one of the largest M&A operations in a long time. Significantly, it has been prepared for quite some time, which culminated in a restructuring a month ago, by which the five product groups operating under BMC Software became one. Instead of having several categories reporting their gains (or losses) we have now one happy family where the gain of one member balances the loss of another. We have also a unique opportunity to have these former product lines working together for a better integration of BMC Software solutions with a corollary prospect of having more R&D investments in previously “weak” categories. Being free of the short term mandatory “good results to satisfy the street” will also participate in building a better BMC Software.
Although fourth quarter results were below the Street expectation by a hair (-$.06 per share and -.04% in Revenue), BMC Software bookings grew 14% from a year ago, with an encouraging result for ESM which was up 9% from a year ago.
Over the past ten years, BMC Software has made its mark on the IT Management Software (ITMS) market, and is today only second to CA Technologies. From what we can see, the privatization of BMC Software provides an opportunity to invest into the future of ITMS and to become a serious contender for first place in the years to come.
Dell just picked up Enstratius for an undisclosed amount today, making the cloud management vendor the latest well-known cloud controller to get snapped up by a big infrastructure or OS vendor. Dell will add Enstratius cloud management capabilities to its existing management suite for converged and cloudy infrastructure, which includes element manager and configuration automator Active System Manager (ASM, the re-named assets acquired with Gale Technologies in November), Quest Foglight performance monitoring, and (maybe) what’s still around from Scalent and DynamicOps.
This is a good move for Dell, but it doesn’t exactly clarify where all these management capabilities will fall out. The current ASM product seems to be a combo of code from the original Scalent acquisition upgraded with the GaleForce product; regardless of what’s in it, though, what it does is discover, configure and deploy physical and virtual converged infrastructure components. A private cloud automation platform, basically. Like all private cloud management stacks, it does rapid template-based provisioning and workflow orchestration. But it doesn’t provision apps or provision to public or open-source cloud stacks. That’s where Enstratius comes in.
As a follow up to his presentation at the 2013 itSMF Norway conference, Stuart Rance of HP has kindly donated some practical advice for those struggling with availability.
Many IT organizations define availability for IT services using a percentage (e.g. 99.999% or “five 9s”) without any clear understanding of what the number means, or how it could be measured. This often leads to dissatisfaction, with IT reporting that they have met their goals even though the customer is not satisfied.
A simple calculation of availability is based on agreed service time (AST), and downtime (DT).
If AST is 100 hours and downtime is 2 hours then availability would be
Customers are interested in their ability to use IT Services to support business processes. Availability reports will only be meaningful if they describe things the customer cares about, for example the ability to send and receive emails, or to withdraw cash from ATMs.
Number and duration of outages
A service that should be available for 100 hours and has 98% availability has 2 hours downtime. This could be a single 2 hour incident, or many shorter incidents. The relative impact of a single long incident or many shorter incidents is different for different business processes. For example, a billing run that has to be restarted and takes 2 days to complete will be seriously impacted by each outage, but the outage duration may not be important. A web-based shopping site may not be impacted by a 2 minute outage, but after 2 hours the loss of customers could be significant. Table 1 shows some examples of how an SLA might be documented to show this varying impact.
I promised a second blog based on the English-language presentations at the itSMF Norway annual conference but then I had a better idea … rather than just giving you the something akin to Twitter highlights I decided to be cheeky and ask a couple of the presenters to write blogs based on their presentations. Smart or lazy, I think it is better for you the reader.
Here is the first from Paul Wilkinson of GamingWorks – no stranger to writing blogs for my Forrester blog roll. The second is by Stuart Rance of HP and this will appear soon. Paul’s topic?
“How to improve the Return On Value (ROV) of an IT service management training initiative”
To quote Paul: “Hardly an innovative, exciting, sexy subject when everybody wants to hear about cloud, BYOD, social media, and all that new stuff.” BUT Paul was asked to present the same session he delivered in 2012 given that it was one of the top 3 well-received the previous year. I personally thoroughly enjoyed it – Paul is good at making you believe that there is “a better way” when it comes to changing the way we think about IT service delivery.
What were Paul’s key messages?
What was so important? Why should you read on? What should YOU now do differently?
Paul set the scene nicely. In his words (with a little editing by yours truly):
I’ve written a number of blogs about IT service management (ITSM) and IT service delivery many of which have expressed opinions based on observations and conversations rather than “facts.” A new Forrester report by my colleague Eveline Oehrlich has some facts to substantiate what we already knew even if we chose to ignore it.
This is one of those pictures that really is worth a thousand words. In fact all three of these figures make it easy for me to cut short the commentary.
It’s interesting to see the geographical differences but, despite these, we still see a consistent gap or gulf between “How IT thinks it is doing” and “How customers think IT is doing.” Funny how our metrics aren’t a sea of red – in fact our metrics dashboard is often a sea of green.
“But that’s just perceptions” I hear you cry, “We still do a fantastic job in enabling business activities with cutting-edge IT.” But could we do better? Please read on …
Results from Forrester's Q2 2012 Forrsights Workforce Employee Survey show that more than two-thirds of North American and European information workers who use a computer for work an hour or more per day personally choose the smartphones or tablets they use for work, and 46% of information workers personally choose work laptops that are not on the company-approved device list. To address the increasingly complex mobile device landscape, many companies are deploying bring-your-own-device (BYOD) programs to support devices including smartphones, tablets, laptops or desktops. Successfully planning and implementing a BYOD program requires infrastructure and operations (I&O) executives to address the following four key issues.
1. Build Relationships Outside IT
Implementing a successful BYOD program requires cross-functional collaboration across many IT and business groups in the organization. The I&O team should take the lead in BYOD program development. However, I&O executives must collaborate with security and governance, sourcing and vendor management, application development, and enterprise architecture professionals to determine the correct strategy and tool set. It is also critical to include line-of-business executives, as well as legal and finance professionals, to develop corporate BYOD program policies and procedures.
2. Create A Shared, Multi-Year Vision
Proactively working with decision-makers to identify the potential ROI and impacts on corporate business processes enables the I&O team to create a consistent, shared vision of the overall goals and desired outcomes of implementing a BYOD program. This shared vision of the cross-organizational effects of the BYOD program ensures that line-of-business decision-makers and stakeholders understand what investments they must make to support the program.
BlackBerry CEO Thorsten Heins made news this week with his claim that tablets will be dead in five years. “Tablets themselves are not a good business model,” he claimed in an interview.
As Techcrunch wittily responded: “BlackBerry CEO Thorsten Heins Says Tablets “Not A Good Business Model,” Evidently Forgetting About iPad.” As I recently blogged, Apple’s iPad is the growth engine of its entire business so far in 2013, growing 65% year over year. Meanwhile, shipments of Android tablets have found their footing, particularly for Samsung, ASUS, and Amazon, growing in shipments so far this year.
So tablets certainly represent a thriving business model today. More importantly, the tablet will grow into a must-have computing device for much of the world by 2017.
The penetration of tablets into the consciousness of information workers, IT professionals, business people, and consumers only continues to grow. Much as with smartphones, tablets are increasingly taken for granted as a device one will have in one’s life.
Take, for example, information workers: We surveyed 9,766 global information workers about their preferences for which operating system they would like to use on their (next) work tablet. We also gave them an out: “I don’t plan to use a tablet for work.”