Archive for the 'Enterprise Solutions' Category
06-27-2008
Who is in Charge Here? (From IT toolbox)
Customers In Charge
We all talk about “the customer is always right” and “the client is the boss,” but how often to we let technology choices force us into an opposite mode of behavior? In a clever book called “Why CRM Doesn’t Work,” Frederick Newell writes that Customer Relationship Management (CRM) failed to help companies meet expectations and achieve profitability. He suggests that Customer Management of Relationships (CMR) is the next logical step.
Technology in its Place
Mr. Newell explains that technology has a place in “CMR”, but it’s not the most important element. Instead, our relationships with our customers should dictate the right technological applications. He explains how to use two-way communication tools, like e-mail and web applications, to establish customer dialogues, but he warns that once we obtain customer data, we should use it only for relationship-building and only with the customer’s permission.
Has Technology Tied our Hands?
How often do you encounter technology “solutions” that seem to anger our customers? Have you ever been upset by how a company’s technology has treated you as a customer?
Additional Resources:
On the user-side, John Stevenson writes thought provoking blog entry about how “We All Hate our CRM.” Shouldn’t the technology make the users happy and have less work? Even further; besides employees, is the CRM ease of use issue being felt by customers (forcing relationships to be managed by business rules authored within the CRM, and not necesarily the way the customer wants their relationship to be managed)?
Paul Nussbaum is VP of Marketing for AMC Technology, a company that has been integrating Telephony and CRM applications since 1995.
Answers:
Paul, an interesting contribution.
Management of Customer Relationships is the original goal of the CRM system. The problem is that it is all too frequently assumed that the CRM system will resolve all the customer related problems faced. The corporation wanted the panacea, but did not do all the work necessary to reach nirvana.
1) a CRM on its own does not improve the quality of the customer data retained by the company. Garbage in is still garbage out.
2) A CRM is useless without an associated Business Intelligence component to identify the most effective marketing strategy.
3) The communications tools used need to be embedded into corporate systems. Dialogues for much of the customer communications should be driven by either the customer them-self or the demographic group that they fall into. I assisted a UK telecoms company to reduce customer churn through the use of such intelligence.
As an IT leader, but I am a strong proponent of systems providing a capability to allow business to work more effectively. Business must be in control and not have its hands tied by the use of technology. IT should be a facilitator for improvement of business results.
If you hate your CRM, then it is either not been correctly implemented or the business is not leveraging it correctly.
I am happy to connect and can be contacted at my email or on LinkedIn.
By Peter B. Giblett.
Posted by webmaster in Answers, Enterprise Solutions | No Comments »
06-15-2008
Challenges in SOA Projects (Fom IT Toolbox http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/)
For any SOA initiative to be successful the following two objectives need to be met:
- Improvement in Business Agility (not technical agility).
- Increased reuse in the enterprise through services and also through utilizing existing investments that have already been made.
Achieving the above two is the goal and success indicator for any SOA implementation. There are various challenges in this. The challenges in SOA can be classified in two parts:
Technical Challenges in SOA
These challenges are easier to mitigate. At a basic level every SOA based implementation (no matter on which vendor’s stack it is based on) needs to ensure at a technical level the following:
- A clearly defined mechanism exists for service defintion.
- A registry/repository for services (and its metadata) exists along with a well defined lookup/search mechanism.
- An ESB into which the implementations can plug in and out, and which supports a multiple calling semantics.
- A well defined service orchestration mechanism.
- A well defined mechanism for managing service lifecycle.
- A well defined service invocation mechanism is present.
SOA projects are either:
- Strategic in nature, where we implement a completely new architecture in the enterprise, or
- Tactical in nature and implement a new business service in the enterprise based on an in place SOA reference architecture.
Having an SOA reference architecture in the enterprise mitigates most of the technical risks.
Non Technical Challenges in SOA
Non technical challenges of SOA comprise of project management and business related challenges of SOA. Some of them are:
- Business Modeling: This task needs deep understanding of the domain. The task involves modeling the business of an organization in terms of business processes, mapping these processes in terms of business services, mapping these services to IT assets.
- QA of an SOA initiative is difficult because in most cases heterogeneous applications/platforms are involved and message based testing needs to be performed in most cases.
- Generally an SOA project involves various sections of the enterprise. As a result of these interdependencies, program management is complex
Answers:
| Mike Kavis writes |
The biggest issue from my experience with SOA is culture change on both the business and technical side. You can have the best technical implementation and governance in place, but if people resist the change and the technology it really won’t matter. The second biggest issue I see is that there must be a compelling business case behind your SOA initiative or it will go no where.
Varun Dube writes:
Mike, I see a sense in what you are saying. SOA is not just about creating assets. Its about reusing those assets across the organisation. I have seen similar resistance to change in the places where I was consulting on SOA. People treat applications as IPs and simply prefer work in silos. Its more related to insecurity rather than anything else. This is probably one of the biggest hurdles to rollout SOA. Probably a good topic to write a post on my blog :-)
| puneet.sachdev writes |
Yes, I would agree with you. A compelling business scenario is definitely needed before any initiative..otherwise why are we doing it?
What is seen is that even in cases where the basics are right (e.g business case being there etc.), the IT organization faces problems in various things like project management, estimation, analysis & design etc. of an SOA project. For example: the estimation models that work for traditional projects do not necessarily work in an SOA project.
Graham Cox writes:
‘modeling the business of an organization in terms of business processes, (then) mapping these processes in terms of business services.
Not ideal. The services should be modeled first (and in a non-process way )and only then the processes modeled. If you don’t do it this way , you cannot achieve optimal ‘business agility’ for business change involve re-organizing business services and their expression in software where appropriate first and foremost.
After all it is SOA, not POA!
puneet.sachdev writes
This is where it gets confusing, atleast for me.
If you start with the services, then how do you decide what is the right granularity level of them. The granularity level needs to be correct for the services to be reused. I have seen many implementations where there are large number of services with very little reuse happening.
Looking at the business processes first can help you decide this.
Peter B. Giblett writes:
In my opinion the biggest challenge is often the business side of the equation.
In today’s world IT is seen as needing to deliver a contribution to improving business results. Part of this, irrespective of the type of technology platform, is understanding the business processes involved and deploying in relation to their demands. This will be underpinned by the business model, including a deep understanding of specific domain issues.
As with any change program there must be a compelling business case, that will demonstrate a rapid return on the investments made, supported by senior management within the organisation. You are right that managing the change program is complex, but it must also include business sponsorship and involvement at the right level.
Usually such projects do have an enterprise-wide impact on the corporation, and hence close scrutiny.
Posted by webmaster in Answers, Enterprise Solutions, IT Architecture | No Comments »
06-09-2008
How important is database independence in an ERP solution?
Is database independence desirable in ERP solutions?
If so, what are the technical or financial implications of such a choice. Especially when the pilot project would be scaled up through a separate contract in future.
Clarification added:
My summary of the answers given by experts:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd6vkw8k_77z6dvf6gt (Too long to fit here, sorry!)
The question has been reopened to allow the experts to comment on the summary and to point out any errors, should they wish to do so.
Many thanks to all those who answered!
By Sunil Bajpai
Peter’s Answer:
Database independence certainly is desirable. You should assess what is best for your organisation. However it is important to note that choice of database is not always possible e.g. if you select Microsoft Dynamics then SQL Server it is! Same with Oracle!
At the end of the day it is the business process that must be satisfied by the solution adopted - and this needs to be front and centre during the whole of the product selection phase.
There will be both technical and financial implications to each of the choices you make. If you go for a pilot please ensure that the only costs you pay will be those associated with non-selection of that product. e.g if you pilot product A then determine that product A operated satisfactorily then license costs are simply scaled up to meet the full implementation and that you do not pay twice.
Posted by webmaster in Answers, Technology, Business Development, Enterprise Solutions | No Comments »
06-09-2008
Which is the best ERP path to take?
We’re an industrial distribution company growing into more sub assembly and engineer to order work. Is a traditional distribution based ERP system with a service/manufacturing package the best solution for us going forward? Or is it easier for a manufacturing-centered package to also do normal distribution functions?
Peter’s answer:
There is no easy answer to this question. Much will depend on your business philosophy IT architecture, so I will not answer by naming a specific product, because that will be against my principles.
Before recommending any specific product I would have to understand much about the business processes and current systems used at the corporation. You should firstly identify the business requirements that need to be met.
There are plenty of solutions available and I cannot stress how important it is to select the right solution. In part you will need perform a due diligence check to ensure that you are satisfied with the longevity of any solution selected. Taking the opinions of a few LinkedIners is not sufficient for a sustainable solution.
The majority of solutions will not fit 100% of your requirements and it will be necessary to consider the amount of data integration that will be required.
There is no such thing as a One-Size-Fits-All solution here and I will strongly disagree with anyone who suggest otherwise. Also articles like the requestfill answer suggested do not understand the needs of YOUR business. Informative they may be, a solution they are NOT.
Andrew, as I said in the beginning there is no easy answer to this question. You will need to perform the appropriate analysis and carry-out a full RFI/RFP process to ensure the vendors can live upto your requirements. It is YOUR business future that depends on this.
I personally have much experience with ERP implementations and know you have much analysis yet to perform before identifying the solution that you purchase. Good Luck.
Clarification added:
Andrew,
I thought it essential to add a clarification. In my original answer I said “Much will depend on your business philosophy IT architecture”. I should have added that the most important element to the selection process is identifying and mapping your business processes, both as they exist today, and as you would like to see them. This should be completed before you start investigating solution providers.
As this question is located in the “Enterprise Software” section of Answers then you are looking at a solution that will be used across the organisation.
I will disagree with anyone that answers this question with a suggestion for a specific software solution - if fact I would say that they have only given such an answer because they have an axe to grind.
Any IT professional MUST start by understanding and analysing the business problem before leaping in to offer solutions.
Questions like whether to adopt a “manufacturing-centered” or a “service” type solution will be answered by the process analysis that should be performed.
I have led solutions with implementation costs ranging between $1 million to over $100 million. The biggest challenge in all of these solutions is knowing the intended processes to be followed, get this wrong and your organisation will be cursing the solution adopted with 5 years, get it right and you will be the hero.
Posted by webmaster in Uncategorized, Answers, Enterprise Solutions | No Comments »
05-05-2008
What does the term “Business Intelligence” mean to you? Is there such a thing as “Application Intelligence” and if so, what does that mean to you?
Business Intelligence can be such a broad term and Application Intelligence as a term can be construed as somewhat ambiguous. However, I think Application Intelligence can drive business decision-making, so does that mean Application Intelligence is actually Business Intelligence?
Peter’s Answer:
This is a question that can definitely open a can-of-worms.
I will disagree with Tim Tymchyshyn - there very definitely is business intelligence - some businesses simply fail to leverage BI correctly.
Having worked for the last 20 years to provide businesses with the capability to improve their business performance through the application of Business intelligence I could respond with enough to fill a book on this question.
Theo is right “Business Intelligence is the term around the supporting framework to make better business decisions through the provision of information from various sources”. but that is only the starting point. Business intelligence leverages data from corporate applications in order to answer specific questions about the performance of the corporation and ultimately its position in the marketplace.
I have been responsible for more than 40 BI projects over the last 20 years. Many start with Tim’s question, or more correctly “Is there any intelligence we can use to grow our organisation?” My role has been to guide the corporation to realise the the investment they have made in their data.
On one project I assisted financial analysts within British Airways to switch from a situation where they spent 95% of the month processing data to a situation where systems automatically generate results and the analyst spends their time analysing various aspects of business performance.
I have given some thought about your term Application Intelligence and do not believe it has any relevance in the context you have stated it. Yes there are some very smart applications available in the world, including many BI applications (e.g. predictive analysis, balanced scorecard, and operation business intelligence). It could be argued that an intelligent application is a business application that will provide the ability to support decision making by providing meaningful information and delivering improvements in performance.
Posted by webmaster in Answers, Technology, Business Intelligence, Enterprise Solutions | No Comments »
05-03-2008
Why people prefer Salesforce.com over Siebel On-Demand CRM and Vice Versa?
Salesforce.com and Siebel are the two leading on-demand CRM solutions. I am interested in knowing why people/users/sales people prefer Salesforce.com over Siebel On-Demand. Any experiences you want to share are welcome.
By Vikram Deo
The thing here is mainly customer focus.
While Salesforce, through it’s SaaS approach, targeted SME which could/would not afford to build a physical infracstructure to support a CRM, Siebel always focused in large enterprises, which not only could afford the IT but also where particularly concerned with data ownership.
That lead to two niches:
- Salesforce: when you want no IT infrastructure, a lightly or non custumized CRM, don’t care when data is not local;
- Siebel: IT ok, highly customized CRM, the data is MINE!
Siebel tried then to enter the SME market with their On-Demand offering, but the assumptions above still applied, which is why SalesForce still beats Siebel On-Demand by a large margin.
Other details helped. Being used to customers which were higly knowledgeable, usually with extensive IT departments, Siebel has a softer approach to marketing than SalesForce. Try signing up on SalesForce: within two days, tops, you’ll be contacted by someone… speaking your native language. That’s powerfull!!!
Anyhow, just for your reference (and I say this as the owner of a Siebel focused development SME), Gartner points Microsoft Dynamics and SalesForce as possible leaders of the CRM market in 2009.
Salesforce.com continues build an amazingly high standard for customer dependability with strong user adoption,a prerequisite of the subscription-based Software-as-a-Service model.
Other reason why customer prefer salesforce is because its provides a “good vertical knowledge” and targets mid market segment.
Customers understand the concept of CRM but wants a vendor that can provide guidance for how it can be implemented to fit specific business requirements, this is where salesforce makes its way.
Midmarket segment always a difficult customer segment for many players however Salesforce.com has build a strong capability over this segment.
Architectures are changing and thus web players like Salesforce.com will need to deliver a richer client interface in future. The requirement of a constant internet connection is a considerable disadvantage for the requirement of mobile sales forces.
Clarification added:
Give are some brief takes on your Question.
Can you tell in brief about strengths/weaknesses of Siebel CRM On Demand vis-Ã -vis Salesforce?
Salesforce:
Strengths
o First mover advantage – Seen as Leaders and dynamic marketers
o A big user base - Salesforce.com claims to have 560000 subscribers across companies of varying sizes
o Salesforce is easy to learn and use, and it can be up and running in weeks or days
o Easily customizable
Weakness
o While the Saas model is strong, it’s a common belief that Saas is not exclusive future of the software world. For many years to come, the predominant delivery of software is likely to be the traditional methods and Salesforce is missing out on companies which prefers to buy software and deploy it
o Requirement of a constant internet connection is a negative for web based playes like salesforce
Siebel CRM:
Strengths
o Part of Oracle, it can certainly mine its current customer base
o Offers both hosted and premise products
Weakness:
o Siebel Systems has been a laggard in software-as-a-service CRM area
o Siebel has only 28,000 subscribers in larger organizations for its hosted CRM products
o Siebel lacks customization for basic configuration and simple modifications
What kind of problems you have faced while using Siebel CRM On Demand or Salesforce CRM tool?
Salesforce.com puts the burden and some of the risk of customization and assimilation on the customer
When it comes to customization, which one of the two is a better CRM application? Brief examples would be of help
Siebel seems to be focusing on offering a variety of pre-designed, pre-configured industry-specific versions of their solution; whereas, Salesforce.com focuses on making the horizontal CRM solution exceedingly effortless to configure and customize so that it can be made to meet any of their customers’ specific needs
If a given choice of choosing one among them, which one would you choose and the reasons
This is a very broad question. The like or dislike will depend on so many factors. There’s no right or wrong, either approach can be the “best” approach for a given company, but if I were to choose one, salesforce will be my pick.
Hope this will be useful. Do not forget to rate the answer if you have found this helpful.
Peter’s Answer:
There are some good answers here, in particular Manish Somani which has a good summary of strengths and weaknesses.
There is one aspect missing from that appraisal though - Siebel allows the use of data warehouse technology to classify clients according to market characteristics - this is one of the more advanced features that marketing people will more often use than other users. This is a very powerful feature.
Respectfully I will have to disagree about imminent delivery of Oracle Fusion. I see little indication that Oracle fusion will happen on-schedule - but please Oracle prove me wrong.
Posted by webmaster in Answers, Technology, Business Change, Enterprise Solutions | No Comments »