The Forrester Blog For Information & Knowledge Management Professionals

Portals

November 19, 2008

Enterprise Mashups Need Complexity To Create Value

Gilyehuda By Gil Yehuda
Those who drink the Web 2.0 Kool-aid live in a idealistic world where we can mentally connect a great idea to a great implementation of that idea. We live on faith that the great implementation will come, since there are plenty of smart people out there who will eventually figure out how to make value out of technology building blocks. Sometimes our faith is tested when the killer-app does not show up for a long time. But evidence can restore our faith.

When I first saw mashups, I thought they were pretty cool. The canonical examples of this technology were all about the placement of data points onto a map. With mashups you can visualize where Fortune 100’s top companies to work for are located, and you can find a mailbox nearby. It’s certainly nice to use once in a while, and maybe worth bookmarking. But will this alone transform a business? Likely not.

Sharing location information via an online travels social network, like Brightkite, FireEagle, Bluenity, Dopplr, or TripIt, is also pretty cool. Using the integration hooks into Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn, I can begin to share location information with those I trust. I can post where I am located now, and where I plan to be in the near future. I believe there could be value in this activity, but it’s not yet transforming the way I use information into business results.

But I am now beginning to see how these services combine to build a useful application. The “aha” moment for me was when I stopped looking for one mashup, or one sharing app, and saw how companies can combine multiple streams to create value out of data. What if you take a map mashup, a calendar mashup, a travel micro-share feed, an events feed, and dataset from a CRM system containing the names of locations of my customers? I trust that smart people can take these and create value. Why? Am I drinking the Kool-aid? No – I see signals that indicate this is happening.

Look at the new LinkedIn application widgets that mash-in LinkedIn data. My TripIt tool reminds me of a future trip to London, and tells me that I have a few LinkedIn contacts there. Based on information in my LinkedIn profile, LinkedIn tells me about relevant upcoming events. I found an interesting event in London. Will my contact attend that event? What if they’ll be traveling to Boston when I’m in London. Doh! So close.

But I see the outline of a new pattern. Whereas each data mashup is interesting, the right combination can transform my work behavior. There’s a who, what, when, and where, that all have to intersect onto a map and onto a calendar.

I recently met Sanjay Vakil of LuckyCal, who understands this pattern well. He is connecting the dots to create transformative value out of data streams. His product has some growing up to do before it is ready for enterprise rollout. But his product today combines a mapping mashup (telling me which of my contacts are where I am going to be), with a calendar mashup (matching when contacts of mine will be near me), and with an events stream (telling me what other events are taking place there at that time). Hey, that's the pattern: a set of data streams intersecting to create valuable information out of available information – but onto multiple mashup surfaces.

Suddenly the neurons start to fire. We need more than a single stream of data pins on a map to get our attention. As the LuckyCal product matures, it can become the paradigm for an enterprise mashup - triangulation. If it adds the data streams that matter most to me, (e.g. my CRM data), along with other streams and network information, it results in new information. The triangulation of these data sets means that I could predict whom I meet and what to do when I plan my trips. Moreover, my manager would be able see where the team’s travelers are now, and where they will be in the near future. My sales manager could see which of us will be traveling nearby other clients, and she may want take advantage of the proximity opportunities. Travel still happens, but we can get more value out of each trip. Enterprises like to hear that.

So, if you combine two mashups and couple of data feeds, you can create transformative value from readily available information. I had faith this could be created, but now that I see signals that others are implementing solutions like this. I have renewed faith in the relevance of mashups to enterprise computing. It's just more complex than splashing a data set onto a map. That's OK, enterprises are used to leveraging complexity to create value. And mashups can be the building blocks to enable their success.

September 15, 2008

Meet One-On-One With Forrester Analysts At Our Business & Technology Leadership Forum 2008

Consistently rated as one of the most popular features of Forrester Events, one-on-one meetings give you the opportunity to discuss the unique technology issues facing your organization with Forrester analysts. Business & Technology Leadership Forum attendees may schedule up to two 20-minute one-on-one meetings with the Forrester analysts of their choice, depending on availability. Registered attendees will be able to schedule one-on-one meetings starting on Monday September 15, 2008. Book early!

B

William Band
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Customer relationship management applications, customer experience management, stakeholder alignment, enterprise CRM
See all »

Matthew Brown
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Marketing and advertising, enterprise portals, intranets and extranets, information and knowledge management
See all »

Peter Burris
Research coverage for Technology Product Management & Marketing professionals

Enterprise marketing platforms, marketing automation, high-tech, application development
See all »

Back to top »

C

Bobby Cameron
Research coverage for CIOs

IT governance, risk, and compliance; the marketing of IT; serving the business; security and risk
See all »

Marc Cecere
Research coverage for CIOs

Designing IT organizations, changing the culture of an IT organization, IT strategic planning
See all »

Patrick M. Connaughton
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Supply chain management services, supply chain management applications, enterprise mobility, RFID
See all »

Alex Cullen
Research coverage for CIOs

IT organization; IT strategy, planning, and governance; organizational design and change management, IT management
See all »

Back to top »

E

Boris Evelson
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Information and knowledge management, business intelligence, OLAP, data warehousing
See all »

Back to top »

G

Chip Gliedman
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Customer relationship management, help desk/service desk, customer service and support, packaged applications
See all »

Back to top »

H

Paul D. Hamerman
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

ERP, human capital management, financial management, business performance solutions
See all »

Brian W. Hill
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

eDiscovery, archiving, records and retention management, enterprise content management (ECM)
See all »

Bradford J. Holmes
Research coverage for Vendor Strategy professionals

Tech marketing tools and best practices; government, high-tech, tech marketing strategies
See all »

Back to top »

K

Rob Karel
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Information and knowledge management, integration technologies, metadata management, extract
See all »

Rob Koplowitz
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Information Workplace, collaboration strategy, collaborative platforms, SharePoint
See all »

Back to top »

L

George Lawrie
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Retail information technology; consumer goods supply chain; pricing, promotions, and revenue optimization; collaborative processes such as trade promotions management and sales; and operations planning
See all »

Sharyn Leaver
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Packaged applications, business process management, ERP, application strategy and selection
See all »

Craig Le Clair
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

ECM, BPM, output management, document processing services
See all »

Back to top »

M

Pete Marston
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Customer relationship management, sales force management, software-as-a-service, outsourcing
See all »

Kyle McNabb
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Information and knowledge management, document imaging, eForms and information capture, enterprise content management
See all »

Thomas Mendel, Ph.D.
Research coverage for Vendor Strategy professionals

Product portfolio strategies, mobile services, business service management, data center management
See all »

Connie Moore
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Information and knowledge management, business process optimization, IT organization, enterprise content management
See all »

Back to top »

O

Leslie Owens
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Information and knowledge management, taxonomy and classification, enterprise search platforms, text mining and analytics
See all »

Back to top »

P

Natalie L. Petouhoff, Ph.D.
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Customer service and support, customer experience, customer experience management, business strategy for customer experience
See all »

Lisa Pierce
Research coverage for IT Infrastructure & Operations professionals

Voice services, telecommunications services by region, remote access infrastructure, networking
See all »

Tom Pohlmann
Research coverage for CIOs

Business models, high-tech, corporate strategy, tech sector economics, product and solutions strategies
See all »

Stephen Powers
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Information and knowledge management, digital asset management, enterprise content management, Web content management
See all »

Back to top »

R

Stefan Ried, Ph.D.
Research coverage for Vendor Strategy professionals

Enterprise architecture, Service-oriented architecture, application platforms and programming strategy; application development
See all »

Back to top »

S

Ted Schadler
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Real-time collaboration tools (instant messaging, presence, document sharing, etc.), cloud-based collaboration and email, mobile collaboration tools and applications, virtual worlds for the enterprise
See all »

Claire Schooley
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

eLearning, information and knowledge management, videoconferencing, Web conferencing, enterprise collaboration, new workforce, retiring workforce
See all »

Back to top »

T

Scott Tiazkun
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Financial management; governance, risk, and compliance; financial management applications; security and risk
See all »

Zach Thomas
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Human resources management applications, compensation, recruitment strategies, packaged applications
See all »

Back to top »

W

Tim Walters, Ph.D.
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Web content management, enterprise content management, digital asset management, information and knowledge management
See all »

R "Ray" Wang
Research coverage for Business Process & Applications professionals

Enterprise apps and ERP, software contract negotiations, software partnerships and ecosystems, customer data integration
See all »

Doug Washburn
Research coverage for IT Infrastructure & Operations professionals

Green IT, IT organization, IT infrastructure and operations, IT management
See all »

Back to top »

Y

Gil Yehuda
Research coverage for Information & Knowledge Management professionals

Enterprise Web 2.0 and Social Computing; collaboration strategy, tools, and culture; virtual communities of practice; virtual team collaboration
See all »

Back to top »

March 21, 2008

Competitive Business Intelligence, Harnessed Through Collaboration And CEP, Harvested Across The Cloud

Jameskobielus_3By James Kobielus

Sometimes ideas for blog posts flow out of everyday conversations with colleagues. I want to thank Leslie Owens and Matt Brown for stimulating the following thought train.

The external competitive environment is the cloud where opportunities and threats hang, sometimes latent, sometimes looming. So it only makes sense that enterprises will outsource more of the competitive surveillance to the cloud of external resources, such as analyst firms, third-party market intelligence subscription feeds, social networking, Web 2.0, etc.

Of course, enterprises realize they don't dare outsource the competitive intelligence function entirely. That explains why they maintain research staff, tools, portals, and informational resources in-house. Mostly, these competitive intelligence teams monitor the prevailing market conditions that impact on their companies' core businesses. But, to a great degree, they also serve as an early-warning system helping their organization respond to specific breaking events -- i.e., the "disrupters" -- that threaten to capsize the corporate boat.

Recognizing this perennial "disrupter pre-emption" requirement, enterprises are concerned with best practices for setting up event-driven competitive intelligence operations. These best practices should help them survey the external horizon more comprehensively and proactively. Best practices should also help them foster, harness, and harvest internal collaboration among competitive-intelligence subject matter experts.

Essentially, competitive intelligence operations of this sort practice CEP in the following senses that I described in a previous post:

  • Each event may be quite complex in its own right, standing for a linked set of data updates, application state transitions, and process status changes (NEW NOTE: a "disrupter" is any extremely complex, perhaps way too vague, but still undeniably important "event" -- disrupters aren't "tagged" as such -- and they may not be easily identified before, during, or after the fact -- maybe, hey Leslie, on-the-fly social tagging is the best way to approach this squishiness).
  • Each event-reliant decision agent (e.g., end user) may access, interact with, and/or consume events through a complex interface (dashboards, analytics, semantic layer, etc.), across multiple devices (desktop, laptop, Blackberry, etc.) and have a complex event-enriched streaming  "experience" (NEW NOTE: competitive intelligence groups make use of the full range of portals, e-mail, IM, search engines, social networking, wikis, blogs, podcasts, workflow, alerts/notifications, etc.).
  • Each event-reliant decision agent may be a complex creature in its own right with its own complex, convoluted, squishy decision-making methodology -- i.e., an individual human being with their own habits and cognitive/psychological dispositions; or a group making decisions collectively and collaboratively through workflow, or social networking; or a half-human/half-automated workflow behaving in the herky-jerky manner one would expect from a split-personality decision agent; or a completely automated orchestration of applications triggered by rules engines, etc.) (NEW NOTE: competitive intelligence teams are very human teaming environments, at heart -- everybody is a "sentinel" on the "lookout" for critical events while others are "sleeping" or attending to something else).

Tying in another observation from that earlier post, I expect that CEP for I&KM (i.e., real-time, event-triggered, under-deadline, continuously-refreshing dashboard-sharing collaboration applications) will play a key role in event-driven competitive intelligence everywhere. CEP, hence BI, will be used to beef up organizations' in-house competitive intelligence/surveillance function, supplementing (hopefully not replacing) the outsourced competitive intelligence/surveillance they get from analyst firms such as Forrester.

In such an environment, the self-service, in-house research portal's the chief presentation layer, and BI operates as an intelligence source and/or target accessible via the portal, with real-time/near-real-time data integration approaches (e.g., ESP, CDC, MOM, trickle-feed ETL, etc.) providing the low-latency plumbing to deliver those feeds to the DW/BI/portal/preso front-end.

The BI vendors are laying the foundation for this emerging best practice. If you look at what vendors such as Business Objects are doing, they're making more external, commercial, competitive intelligence feeds accessible, via partnerships with content aggregators/publishers, from their platforms (e.g., http://www.businessobjects.com/news/press_release.asp?id=20070521_006524). They're also providing text mining/analytics-integrated tools (e.g., http://www.businessobjects.com/news/press_release.asp?id=20070924_006494) for searching across internal and external, unstructured/semi-structured data sources. And they're expanding the social networking and other collaborative features, and mashup offerings, for bringing together real-time feeds of internal/external data/events (e.g., http://www.businessobjects.com/news/press_release.asp?id=20080313_00001).

Business Objects is a bit ahead of the industry curve on all these things. But it's clear that, as market leader, they've laid down the chief challenge for all BI vendors, to make their offerings more pervasive in competitive intelligence use cases, and also to harvest the informational resources of the Web 2.0 cloud to the max.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Search this blog