During the internet bubble of 2000, many of us predicted E-delivery of business content would reach a 40% to 50% adoption within a few years. Here we are now almost 15 years later and it still hovers around 20%. How can this still be true in 2014? Enterprises want print to become a secondary channel because it's less expensive. They form committees to ensure output from core systems is consistent, compliant, and adds to the customer experience. Stymied by low adoption rates — except in specific demographics, such as online brokerage and banking — many enterprises have lost enthusiasm for aggressively prioritizing digital adoption. And it's hard to blame them.
Unfortunately, we are the problem. We do not link paper usage with carbon contribution, don't trust our institutions, or are just are afraid of missing a payment unless the bill lands in the mailbox. Despite the plethora of smart devices, pervasive video, and social media that allow us to interact easily with customer service agents, pass information digitally, and complete business transactions on-the-run, we still hold on to paper delivery. I discuss the reasons for this here and what firms can do about it.
Tomorrow, Apple will reportedly unveil its wearable device, widely dubbed "iWatch" (though we don't yet know for certain what Apple will actually call the device). I'll be at the event in person along with a number of Forrester analysts. In advance of the event, my colleague James McQuivey and I have released two new reports -- one targeted at CMOs and one targeted at I&O professionals -- to preview what we think this release will mean.
We've been thinking about the ramifications for several months, though we held the report until right before the event. I've been writing about wearables for well over a year, and back in February I authored a column for ComputerWorld in which I laid out what we would hope to see in the perfect smartwatch. Some of the elements of a perfect smartwatch I emphasized then were:
I had the good fortune of moderating a panel on the state of digital business at the Chief Digital Officer Global Forum in Singapore yesterday morning. The event showcased a who’s who of digital business leadership in the region, including my panelists Veena Ramesh of Johnson & Johnson, Jerry Blanton of Citi, and Veronique Meffert of Great Eastern Life.
Organizational issues are the greatest hurdle. There was not a single dissenting voice on the fact that organizational challenges represent the biggest impediment to digital business progress. The greatest organizational challenges are functional silos, business unit resistance, a lack of clear guidance from the CEO, rigid backward-looking mindsets, and a shortage of the skills needed to drive change. One approach — shared by Rahul Welde of Unilever — is to drive “digital experimentation funds” and “foundries” to drive co-creation innovation.
Media command centers are becoming critical marketing assets. Both representatives from Unilever and Philips spoke of the critical role that media command centers now play in their marketing campaigns. In the case of Philips, I was surprised to learn that its social media command center in Singapore employs 200 people — and that it is planning for expansion!
By all accounts, we’re approaching a new order of integration between technology and medicine. Real-time medical diagnostic data obtained from our mobile phones will soon be integrated directly into our electronic medical records where clinicians can use the data to make more-accurate (and potentially dynamic) treatment plans. Hospital staff can communicate and react to changing patient conditions faster and with less disruption to the patient experience than ever before, thanks to increasingly integrated mobile messaging systems and other mobile applications (for both the patients and clinical staff).
Applying big data analytics to PHI promises to improve patient outcomes and lead to more efficient —and less costly — patient care. It’s hard not to feel a level of excitement as this convergence of healthcare, mobile technology, and big data progresses at an accelerated rate. However, with all of this new patient data being collected by insurance payers, medical providers, and third-party services, healthcare employee endpoints have become an especially vulnerable source of data loss.
■Healthcare records are five times as likely to be lost due to device theft/loss.¹ If you’re a CISO at a healthcare organization, endpoint data security must be a top priority in order to close this faucet of sensitive data. Consequences will increasingly be more than just a mere slap on the wrist with fines, as consumers fight back.
Today Salesforce.com offered a formal update on its Salesforce Wear offering (which I wrote about at its release here). Salesforce Wear is a set of developer tools and reference applications that allows enterprises to create applications for an array of wearable devices and link them to Salesforce1, a cloud based platform that connects customers with apps and devices.
Salesforce’s entry into the wearables space has been both bold and well-timed. Salesforce Wear constitutes a first mover in the wearables platform space; while Android Wear offers a platform, it only reaches Android Wear based devices – unlike Salesforce Wear, which operates across a wide array of wearable devices. While it’s early to market, it’s not too early: Enterprises in a wide array of verticals are leveraging wearables worn by employees or by customers to redesign their processes and customer experiences, as I have written.
The traditional RFP-driven vendor selection process is heavyweight and often has undesirable outcomes:
The RFP process it time- and resource-consuming. Forrester estimates that CRM vendor selection projects take six to 12 months to complete. The effort involved to compile detailed requirements often produces something resembling a programming specification rather than a concise statement of business process needs.
Outcomes are often undesirable. The more onerous the RFP process, the more likely it is that some of the more viable candidate vendors will opt out after determining sales considerations costs and reading the tea leaves of the competitive situation. When this occurs, mediocre or unqualified vendors may be the only ones left to choose from.
Failure to differentiate among mature products or identify innovators. RFPs only include requirements that buyers can envision now and generally look quite similar to capabilities that vendors can deliver in current releases rather than more visionary features that don't exist in many products today.
Vendors gain the upper hand. Vendors often have much more experience with RFPs than the buyer. A cagey vendor will look to circumvent the formal process by influencing executive decision-makers informally or disrupting the process if it is not going its way. Slick sales presentations and RFP responses often gloss over product weaknesses.
In a recent report on next-generation services, I give several examples of how tech services firms are reinventing their operating models and value propositions to provide a new path to digital transformation to their clients. Interestingly, many such initiatives are coming either from very large service providers like Accenture or from small specialists like VMob, Bluefin Solutions, or Point of Origin. Small service providers’ next-gen service value proposition is starting to catch the interest of large clients too. A few weeks ago, VMob announced a major deal with McDonald’s in Japan wherein the company will leverage the VMob solution for its 3,200 restaurants in Japan.
The next-generation services report highlights the key tenets of these new digital transformation offerings. In this customer-controlled, digital world, successful tech services companies will bridge the gap between technology and business outcomes for their clients. In other words, it is not just about implementing a new technology solution anymore. It is about helping clients harvest the power of digital technologies and achieve specific business outcomes like growing revenues, reducing operating costs, or mitigating risks. This is where next-generation service providers like VMob, Bluefin, and Point of Origin get it. As leaders in the new services world, their approach is fundamentally different from the traditional tech service providers, as they:
There are a few well-engineered products out of Stuttgart, Germany — Mercedes-Benz, an oft-visited tourist stop, is one. Another good Stuttgart product: SoftPro’s E-signature solution. Its strengths lie in its use of biometrics for image verification, particularly the SignAlyze product, a signature verification tool used extensively by German banks. SoftPro has a strong global presence outside of the US and solid banking accounts, all delivered with the kind of engineering foundation you would expect. The acquisition will help Kofax a lot, as it is virtually unknown in the US, with marketing and strategy behind the market leaders, and it has been slow to enter the trending SaaS market. In addition, SoftPro’s shortfalls in selected areas compared to the broader field, such as workflow and analytics, can be quickly plugged with the Kofax Total Agility BPM platform.
All in all, the SoftPro acquisition enhances Kofax’s competitive position in the smart process application category. E-signature also adds to Kofax’s portfolio for capture, process automation, analytics, and mobility to address key requirements for the rapidly growing need to automate and digitize document-centric applications. Kofax talks a lot about the first mile, but now can have deeper conversations about that last mile — where something needs to be signed.
A group of us just published an analysis of VMworld (Breaking Down VMworld), and I thought I’d take this opportunity to add some additional color to the analysis. The report is an excellent synthesis of our analysis, the work of a talented team of collaborators with my two cents thrown in as well, but I wanted to emphasize a few additional impressions, primarily around storage, converged infrastructure, and the overall tone of the show.
First, storage. If they ever need a new name for the show, they might consider “StorageWorld” – it seemed to me that just about every other booth on the show floor was about storage. Cloud storage, flash storage, hybrid storage, cheap storage, smart storage, object storage … you get the picture.[i] Reading about the hyper-growth of storage and the criticality of storage management to the overall operation of a virtualized environment does not drive the concept home in quite the same way as seeing 1000s of show attendees thronging the booths of the storage vendors, large and small, for days on end. Another leading indicator, IMHO, was the “edge of the show” booths, the cheaper booths on the edge of the floor, where smaller startups congregate, which was also well populated with new and small storage vendors – there is certainly no shortage of ambition and vision in the storage technology pipeline for the next few years.
Practice makes perfect. In daily life, if someone has proven experience and a good reputation in specific area for relatively long time, we would normally consider them to be trustworthy. For example, if Amazon Web Services claimed that it was a trusted public cloud service provider — if not the most trusted provider — not many professionals in the US would argue against that.
However, this does not necessarily hold true in China; cloud service providers need to receive an official authorization from the government that certifies them as a provider of trusted cloud services (TRUCS). I recently attended the International Mobile and Internet Conference, where I got an update on TRUCS.
TRUCS is an official recognition of standards compliance and quality. TRUCS is issued by the trusted cloud servicesworking group of the China Academy of Telecommunications Research of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. The working group defined the basic principles in June 2013; earlier this year, it finalized the evaluation standards in the form of a cloud service agreement reference framework.