Microsoft is officially launching the commercial operations of its cloud offerings in China today. It’s been only nine months since Steve Ballmer, the former CEO of Microsoft, made the announcement in Shanghai that Windows Azure — now renamed Microsoft Azure — would be available for preview in the Chinese market.
I call that Episode I of the China Cloud War. In the report that I published at the time, “PaaS Market Dynamics in China, 2012 To 2017”, I made three predictions — predictions that are now being fulfilled. More global players are joining the war; customers have gotten familiar with cloud concepts and are planning hybrid cloud implementations for their businesses; and traditional IT service providers have started to transform themselves into cloud service providers.
I talked with Microsoft and Citrix last week, and I strongly believe that Episode I has ended and Episode II has just begun. In the battle for partner ecosystems and real customer business, here are the three major plots that enterprise architects and CIOs in China should watch unfold:
The thrree kingdoms will fight with the gloves off. In my blog post last year, I described three kingdoms of global vendors in Chinese cloud market: Microsoft, Amazon, and vendors behind open source technology like OpenStack and CloudStack.
Microsoft is leading the market as the first company in China to provide unified solutions for public cloud, private cloud, and hybrid cloud across infrastructure (IaaS) and middleware (PaaS). This builds on its deep understanding of enterprise requirements, its massive developer base, and the ease of use on the Windows platform.
I’m seeing many signs of an evolving role and recognition for enterprise architecture. This is changing how we ourselves see the practice of EA.
For example, one of the more frequent inquiries I get from EA leaders is around customer experience and the customer lifecycle - where our clients want to know how EA should help translate business customer experience goals into architecture. Our inquiries around mobile are less around the technology and more around shaping an enterprise digital strategy. The questions we get around Big Data have shifted from technology towards how gain better insights on a company’s markets.
‘Engagement’ is the underlying theme of this evolution. Companies need to build Systems of Engagement - and EAs are at the front-lines of decisions. But also, EAs are stepping up their engagement with their business leaders to provide the value their busness needs.
It hit me the other day when I was speaking with a call center operator about my reservation. She was funny, smart, well informed and flew around her app. with the quickness of the chipmunk. She is the new breed of worker. Not the production worker that performs repetitive tasks, like data entry and responding to the same dumb information requests, anxious to get you off the phone to meet a call duration metric. No, our relentless offshoring, automation, and customer self-service is slowly eliminating this type of worker.
We hear numbers like this consistently, and this from a Workforce Planning VP at a major Major Telecommunications company,
“Today 70% of our inquiries are handled by self service (IVR, Web, or mobile) with only 30% that ever get to our call center. But these calls that get through are really hard. The customer has researched the problem on line and is ready to have a deep conversation. So unfortunately, even though the call volumes are way down, the number of agents we need has not decreased due to how complex these calls are. "
What does this mean for enterprises? High performance will be achieved supporting these workers with advanced information management and solutions like Dynamic Case Management that give them freedom to make decisions and advance the customer experience.
We will shortly publish a wave on DCM. Look for some new European solutions like BeInformed (Netherlands), Whitestein (Germany), and ISIS (Austria) to gain ground on PegaSystems, IBM, EMC, Appian and others from the traditional BPM market.
The entire cloud ecosystem in China is undergoing significant change. End users are getting more serious about adopting cloud solutions and ISVs are working with telecom carriers and partners to deliver mission-critical business applications in the cloud. My latest report, “Brief: Major Players Are Targeting The Chinese Cloud Market For Core Business Apps,” summarizes the overall trends of cloud adoption in China, looks at each vendor’s solution, and provides high-level suggestions. Specifically, I discuss:
General trends in SaaS adoption in China. Timing is very critical for market penetration. The survey results I share in this report show a dramatic increase in decision-maker interest in cloud-based offerings. This is probably the last chance for companies that want significant market share, but do not yet have it, to enter the Chinese SaaS market.
All of the major multinational vendors are moving. Global players have been closely watching the cloud market in China for years, and in 2013 they have made strategic moves. SAP, Oracle, Microsoft, and Infor have adopted different strategies in China based on the strengths and capabilities of their core product and solution offerings, technology stack, and partners. The report will tell you how each of these companies is working to address the Chinese market.
Local market leader practices. Large multinational vendors are not the only ones with skin in the game. Major local players in enterprise management software, such as Yonyou and Kingdee, are also working hard and have achieved significant progress in this space. The report will tell you what advantages their global peers need to have and which shortcomings they need to improve upon.
Over the last 12 years, I've seen – and helped drive – a lot of change in the BPM market. First, I watched BPM move from a heavy focus on integration to a greater focus on collaboration and social interaction. And then, BPM expanded from highly structured and ‘automate-able’ processes to address unstructured, more dynamic business processes. It is safe to say that over the last decade, demand for BPM was driven by key characteristics of the "Information Age" - a relentless drive towards improving the flow and sharing of information across people and systems.
Now, the most compelling business cases powering fresh demand for BPM focus on characteristics of the new age we are moving into - what Forrester calls the "Age Of The Customer." If you look closely at most of today’s BPM initiatives, they tend to hide behind an imaginary firewall that separates what external customers experience and what internal business operations feel they need to be efficient. In this new age, business leaders are waking up to the realization that they can no longer divorce process improvement from the people and systems that touch customers, partners, and customer-facing employees.
Coming back from the SAS Industry Analyst Event left me with one big question - Are we taking into account the recommendations or insights provided through analysis and see if they actually produced positive or negative results?
It's a big question for data governance that I'm not hearing discussed around the table. We often emphsize how data is supplied, but how it performs in it's consumed state is fogotten.
When leading business intelligence and analytics teams I always pushed to create reports and analysis that ultimately incented action. What you know should influence behavior and decisions, even if the influence was to say, "Don't change, keep up the good work!" This should be a fundamental function of data govenance. We need to care not only that the data is in the right form factor but also review what the data tells us/or how we interpret the data and did it make us better?
I've talked about the closed-loop from a master data management perspective - what you learn about customers will alter and enrich the customer master. The connection to data governance is pretty clear in this case. However, we shouldn't stop at raw data and master definitions. Our attention needs to include the data business users receive and if it is trusted and accurate. This goes back to the fact that how the business defines data is more than what exists in a database or application. Data is a total, a percentage, an index. This derived data is what the business expects to govern - and if derived data isn't supporting business objectives, that has to be incorporated into the data governance discussion.