For many years information technology has been all about standards. Standards were/are the only way to deal with complexity, reducing it down to a small set of complex things that can be managed by a small pool of resources, and reducing problems that inevitably arise from that complexity. Some standards are goodness - HTML5 for example is a great standard which makes life easier for web developers to ensure their product is portable across browsers and devices. However, some standards are bad, such as the "clinging on for dear life" standards that corporate IT departments have over the choices their consumers, employees within their company, make in technology tooling for their jobs.
Let me give you some examples of this, and why it will inevitably fail:
- Corp IT has long mandated the types of applications you will use. Microsoft Office is a great example. The defacto standard for word processing, spreadsheets, presentations. This is great in that it creates one single set of products for them to support. It was good for employees too as they could learn one thing and get proficient at it. That world is changing however - take Zoho, or Google Docs which now offer the ability to do the same thing across the internet, anywhere - the cloud. Two or more people can be in a document, editing it collaboratively. Documents can be shared across company boundaries with suppliers. I know a company about 30MM in revenue, with 250 employees, that runs its ENTIRE BUSINESS on Google Docs. The cost savings alone of removing the need for Office licenses is very significant, but more significant here are the benefits of sharing information in the cloud. The speed at which information can be shared outweighs any loss of features in this new cloud environment (and oh by the way you can download anything back into the Office tooling if you need to do anything fancy).
- Corp IT hoards the email system. Many companies operate their own email infrastructure - a massive repository and growing of employee's email data. Multiple servers, vast disk arrays, and full time administrators required to manage this. A better option is to move email to the cloud. Gmail is one option, and there are others. The benefit of this is obvious - lower cost of ownership, but the most beneficial is the ease at which employees can control their own destiny in terms of access. Gmail is available on a browser at home - no special VPN setup, no clumsy interface that has to be learned, no special setup on handheld devices, which is now the preferred method of email delivery.
- Corp IT mandates devices. How many companies are still using Blackberry's as the main smartphone option? The Blackberry is a fine device, but shouldnt each person have a choice as to what handheld device suits them best? Moving these key systems to the cloud enables this - you can hook a Blackberry up, or an iPhone, or a Samsung Windows phone effortlessly to a cloud based email and document sharing service. These services work on Chrome, IE, Firefox, on Windows or Mac or Linux. Employees can purchase the devices and self serve their setup to the resources they need on the corporate "cloud based" network. At any given point in the day users will shift from one device to another (going to lunch, grab the phone, back in the office, use the desktop, go back home, use the tablet), so ensuring they can seamlessly access the same corporate apps and data from each of these devices, in the same way they access their personal apps and data, is essential.
The fallout of all this is that Corporate IT will not need as many resources, as the core functions of document sharing and collaboration, email and device management will no longer be required. What this does mean however is that Corp IT can allocate MORE of its resources to what ti really needs to do - ensure the company is capturing and effectively delivering information to its employees to use. Take social networking for instance - marketing and PR are driving these functions within companies now, however they lack the project management and process management capabilities that corporate IT has developed over many decades. Applying those skills to these new areas, and acting as custodians of the corporate knowledge is now the primary job of corporate IT - not the mundane management of systems which can be managed better by cloud based operators whose sole job is to do that one thing well.
A word about security - most often the argument against cloud based services is that it now locates this information outside the company firewall, and if we are giving employees choice over devices then we're opening up security holes. I would say this already exists today - how many companies control the flow of information to Twitter from employees desks, or homes, or mobile devices? Some try (blocked - you cannot open this site!) but those efforts will be in vain as employees will always find a way around them (ie. use their phone, use gmail instead of corporate mail, use an ipad on their desk that connects to their phone network). This is analogous to telling a kid to not climb on the roof, or teaching the kid how to best climb on the roof. The latter approach will ensure they dont fall when they inevitably try.
We are seeing, and will continue to see, a shift away from customer maintained services such as email, document collaboration, ERP systems, Commerce systems, calendaring systems - to a cloud approach where these services are external to the organization. CEO's - you should be asking your CIO's what they are planning on doing about this, and their timetable to freeing up the resources of their departments, and the minds of the company's employees, from the maintenance of these systems, to their adoption of the cloud.
Some case studies for you:
Colorado Government taking on Google Apps - saves $2MM per annum
Google Apps vs Microsoft Office 365 - a 2012-2016 timeframe report
No comments:
Post a Comment