Cloud Computing: The Road to Disruption

When the subject of cloud computing is raised, there is often a healthy suspicion from IT buyers that cloud is a marketing term which is used as a new way of selling complex, unproven solutions to them. This is not surprising, considering the history of the IT business. There is an alarmingly high incidence of IT projects failing to meet expectations and running massively over budget.

Cloud commentators, myself included, tend to focus on the transformative and disruptive impact of cloud computing. We tend to talk a lot about Apple, Amazon and Google and how they have completely disrupted the media and music industries, using cloud technologies. This makes a lot of sense when engaging with executives from these industries. However, executives in other industries have yet to see a profound disruptive impact caused by cloud computing and few of them truly believe that their industries will be impacted in the same ways as businesses that involve the trading of digital content. This is a huge mistake on their part.

Within most enterprises in mature markets, cloud computing is still at an early stage of adoption. Technology infrastructures within these enterprises are characterized by the increasing use of virtualization and ad hoc public cloud use. This public cloud use is usually driven by business units and not IT departments. For these enterprises, cloud services augment their existing non cloud-based technologies. 

There is increasing evidence to suggest that this is the first stage of cloud computing adoption and that most of these organizations will soon shift sizeable workloads onto cloud platforms. In this phase, cloud use permeates throughout the organization, supported and enabled by IT departments. IT departments may initially seek to block the ad hoc use of cloud services by business units. But, over time, as senior executives become exposed to cloud services that offer them benefits, IT departments are usually forced to find ways of enabling the use of cloud services across the enterprise. As this happens, IT departments typically develop policies and procedures relating to the use of cloud services within the organization. These policies and procedures enable more extensive penetration of cloud services. Extensive use of cloud-based technologies, in many cases, creates more complexity for enterprises as they need to find ways of integrating these technologies with their legacy investments.

The third phase of cloud computing is characterized by cloud-based technology becoming the norm, and business agility being realized. In this phase, cloud technology has worked its way through the organization. It underpins innovation and is used to differentiate one organization from another. It can be termed the innovation phase. For example, in this stage, organizations discover that cloud technologies can automate more processes and engender more self service. A great example is the low cost airline business. Low cost airlines such as Jetstar are constrained by assets in small airports. They have limited space to manage the check-in process. Their business model also drives them to ‘sweat their assets’ as much as possible so they seek to maximize the use of their aircraft by limiting the amount of time that they are idle.  Jetstar aims to be a 100% self service airline as soon as possible and pioneered self service check-in. Self service check-in enables the airline to optimize limited space in smaller airports and hence to maximize the use of its aircraft. It is cloud-based technology that enables this. Cloud-based technology can enable the airline to handle increases and decreases in demand seamlessly. It can eliminate queues. It also allows the airline to provision new products and services such as insurance products or gourmet meals much more easily than would be the case with traditional IT implementations. Progressive organizations across industries are using cloud-based technology to transform the ways they engage with their customers. This is leading to significant innovation.

The fourth phase of adoption is characterized by cloud technology disrupting industries. As mentioned earlier, this has already occurred in the media and music industries. How will it disrupt other industries? It is clear that the agility which cloud computing offers can significantly lower barriers to entry across industries. Legacy infrastructures and inflexible processes paralyze organizations and make them unable to innovate and create new opportunities. Google, Amazon and Apple each show a healthy disrespect for the boundaries between industries. Each one of these companies continues to cause disruption in other industries. Recently, Google entered the credit card market. It can use its brand, scale, customer relationships and agile technology to do this. Some in the financial services industry are aware of this threat and already see Google as a potential competitor. Indeed, the technology used by Google makes it increasingly easy for non financial services firms such as retailers to enter the financial services industry. The financial services industry is ripe for disruption. Expect to see some financial services firms enter the ‘innovation phase’ soon. This will act as a precursor to disruption in that industry. Other industries including healthcare, education, utilities and retail will also be disrupted by technology over the next few years.

In summary, most enterprises are at a phase where cloud computing is being added to their existing technologies. This is the beginning of a process that will inevitably lead to significant disruption in most industries. Executives across industries should take note.

What are Apple's Real Motives?

Apple’s recent victory over Samsung in its long running patent dispute is remarkable. It illustrates how a company that has invented nothing of significance, can position itself as a great innovator that is being undermined and usurped by companies that are ‘slavishly’ copying its products. The surprising thing is that some people actually believe this myth.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking. This is a company that has profited immensely from using technology that was pioneered and invented by others. A false belief has been created among many of Apple's ‘slavish’ followers that it invented touch screen technology, mp3 players and tablets. It did not. Against this background, it is amazing that Apple has the audacity to legally challenge companies which offer consumers choice in these markets.  It focuses on patents that relate to relatively minor features and functions, and that are open to a very large amount of interpretation. Apple’s success has been based on its phenomenal sales and marketing capabilities. Litigation is an additional strategy tool that it is using as a way of dominating the market. If Apple gets its way, and obstructs the shipment of Android products, customer choice and innovation will be stifled and Apple will become a monopoly. Is this what Apple seeks?

There are many organizations and people that have actually invented something. Indeed, the actual inventors of the technology that Apple exploits are not benefitting in the same way as Apple. For example, the producer of the world’s first mass produced mp3 player, Saehan Information Systems (another Korean firm) is hardly known and rarely associated with this technology in the same way as Apple. CERN a great center of innovation, pioneered touch screen technology in the 1970s. Atari produced touch screen devices in the 1980s. Even in the world of smartphones, Apple was not first with touch screen technology. The LG Prada (LG is another Korean firm) was the first touch screen smart phone to be launched. Furthermore, LG has long claimed that the iPhone copied the design of the LG Prada.

In free markets, competition is one of the few ways in which genuine innovation can be encouraged. Surely the courts should be protecting the interests of the consumer from huge and powerful companies like Apple, that make large profits from their products.

Imagine if Baird (the first firm to produce televisions) had managed to slow down the launch of televisions produced by rival firms, or if Benz had managed to slow down the development of the automotive industry, perhaps by suing Ford. Maybe, Tim Berners-Lee will seek to halt the increased use of the World Wide Web without receiving huge payments from companies that exploit his invention.  Note that, unlike Apple, these companies and individuals actually invented a breakthrough technology.

If innovation, competition, technology diffusion and consumer choice are to be encouraged, Apple should not be able to block the shipment of products that enhance existing technology and frequently offer better value for money. Its focus on patents that address relatively minor features and functions obfuscates its real motives.

The fact that some courts have allowed Apple to win shows that some legal jurisdictions are allowing and encouraging anti-competitive behavior. This sets a very dangerous precedent that could stifle innovation and force consumers to pay higher prices for inferior products.

The Incredible Shrinking IT Department

IT departments are set to become smaller. In addition, the role of IT will transform into that of an integrator of services, a driver of innovation and a manager of systems and processes. 

These changes are being driven by the widespread use of cloud computing and the increased prevalence of ‘Bring Your Own Device’ (BYOD).

New cloud computing implementations typically use IT resources much more efficiently and effectively than was the case before. Indeed, this model of computing leads to much greater sharing of IT resources, not just within enterprises, but also among enterprises.

Cloud computing offers greater automation of IT activities, such as service provisioning, updates and upgrades. It also reduces the amount of time required to provision new IT resources dramatically, and engenders self service.

Soon, most employees can be expected to procure and manage the devices that they use at work. This also removes a huge amount of work from IT departments.

For these reasons, demand for IT professionals is unlikely to grow, In fact, IT departments will inevitably become smaller.

By how much will IT departments shrink? Indeed, how will the role of the CIO and the IT department change over time?

It is hard to tell how much IT departments will shrink. However, there is evidence of IT departments shrinking as a proportion of the organization being served. At a recent CIO event in Perth, Australia, Vito Forte, CIO of mining firm Fortescue, explained that his company is currently growing at a very fast rate. But, there are no plans to grow the IT department.  Other CIOs have made similar comments. 

More importantly, the move to cloud computing and BYOD will transform the role of the CIO and IT departments. Traditional IT tasks such as software support, upgrades, and procurement will not be required to the same extent as in on premise IT deployments. Nevertheless, the use of cloud services and BYOD present new challenges. Presently, cloud computing resources are often adopted by business units without any involvement of IT departments. The same applies to BYOD. Some IT departments have resisted these changes and sought to prohibit these activities. This is an unsustainable approach. The IT department of the future will act as a provider of cloud services and an enabler of BYOD. It will focus to a much greater extent on ensuring compliance to company policy and legislation. 

Many analysts argue that IT departments will act as brokers of cloud services to their internal customers. This offers limited business value. As app stores are built up internally, this approach will likely accelerate the reduction in the size of IT departments. It will also inhibit the transformation of the IT function into a role that offers significant business value.

Instead, forward thinking IT departments can be expected to position themselves as service integrators within the organization. In other words, they will focus on procuring and integrating cloud services that can add value to specific business activities. They will then seek to ensure that these services are implemented successfully.  Once implemented, the transformed business function will manage the systems and processes that the new technology underpins.

While managing systems and processes, the new function will drive innovation within the organization by continually introducing new ways of enhancing business processes using the latest services that are provided from the cloud. The forward thinking CIO’s role will, in many cases, change to Chief Innovation Officer.

IT departments that do not embrace the changes taking place around them, will find themselves becoming less relevant to the organization.

In summary, the IT department will inevitably shrink as a proportion of the overall organization that it serves. But, for forward thinking IT departments, the role will change to that of a service integrator, innovator, and manager of systems and processes. Its value to the business can increase substantially.

Battle of the Tablets

In my previous post, I discussed Apple’s ‘walled garden’ approach to its tablet and smartphone ecosystem. I described how Microsoft and Google gain a competitive advantage by licensing their tablet and smartphone operating systems to original device manufacturers (ODMs) such as Samsung, LG, HTC, Lenovo, Dell, HP and Asus.

Indeed, much of Android’s success is related to multiple ODMs working with Google and perceiving Google to be partner and not a competitor. It has been argued that Google’s purchase of Motorola Mobility, will prompt ODMs to work more closely with Microsoft and give Microsoft a better chance of enjoying success in the tablet and smartphone markets with its operating system.

However, in recent weeks, both Microsoft and Google have announced plans to launch their own tablets that run Windows 8 and Android respectively. Why this change of strategy? Well, it can largely be explained by the dominance that Apple currently has in the tablet market. This is a market that Apple has been allowed to define. The term ‘iPad’ is becoming synonymous with tablet in a similar way to Hoover once being synonymous with vacuum cleaners.

Apple currently holds nearly two-thirds of the tablet market. Android has not made the same inroads in the tablet market as it has in the smartphone market. So, Google is trying to galvanize the market in its favor by launching its new Nexus 7 with Asus. There is a widespread view that the ODMs are not doing enough to gain market share for Android in the tablet market.

As for Microsoft, it does not want to be left behind in the tablet market in the same way as it has, so far, in the smartphone market. Its Surface announcement was timed to deflect attention from Google’s announcement. The announcement seemed to be rushed and perhaps made too early. No price points or dates were announced and the operating system that will run on the Surface, Windows 8, has not yet been released. Neither the Surface nor Windows 8 are ready to be sold. It appears that Microsoft is attempting to encourage developers to produce apps for its new environments. It is attempting to create excitement in the application development community. Microsoft executives know that the key to success in both the tablet and smartphone markets is the creation of an ecosystem that includes a large collection of apps. The company wants a library of apps to be available as soon as possible.

So, how will the tablet market evolve. Everybody is moving into hardware. Amazon, Microsoft, Google and Apple will all have their own devices. How will this impact the ODMs. Samsung and HTC have both driven the success of Android in the smartphone market. Will they have a similar role in the tablet market. Are Microsoft and Google launching tablets as a way of gaining share for Android and Windows 8 because ODMs are not doing this successfully? Will they move out of the hardware market and leave hardware to ODMs once they have gained critical mass for their operating environments? Or, is managing the complete user experience critical in the tablet market as argued by Apple?

Apple: A Force Against Innovation?

Apple is considered by many, to be the dominant force in IT.  Indeed, it is often cited as a driving force for much of the innovation in the technology world. But, comparatively few people consider how it is stifling innovation, overcharging customers and has a business model that is unsustainable.

In its 21^st century existence, Apple has consistently shown the ability to launch attractively designed products just as the introduction stage of the product life cycle is about to enter the growth stage. Apple has shown the ability to launch products just as they are ‘crossing the chasm’ and to drive demand in the early growth stage. Apple did not invent digital music players. MP3 players had been around for some time before the launch of the iPod. Similarly it did not invent smartphones or tablets. In hindsight, it timed its product launches superbly.

Apple has also created a proprietary ecosystem around its devices. Customers buy music and video content as well as apps from iTunes. All have been vetted by Apple.  This tethers the customer to Apple’s ecosystem and, in many ways, stifles innovation. No application or media content can reside on an Apple device without Apple’s approval. In such an environment, it is difficult for innovation to flourish beyond boundaries set by Apple. It decides what will be designed and produced for Apple devices.

Android, Google’s operating system, is not a ‘walled garden’. Anyone can develop any app for Android. This is now the leading smartphone operating system and it will continue to increase its market share. In the world’s largest smartphone market, China, the Android model will dominate. Apps need to be customized rapidly for local contexts and in many markets, most notably China, paying for digital assets is not likely to become mainstream. Apple does well in China today, because its products are viewed as status symbols, much like BMWs, among the nouveau riche in the world’s emerging markets. But, ominously, many Apple users in China jailbreak the devices and run Android on them, quite simply because there are more suitable Chinese-oriented apps available in alternative ecosystems. As smartphones become mainstream devices, ecosystems with limited local content and that charge for discrete digital assets will struggle.

Furthermore, ecosystems that offer devices at multiple price points will succeed. There are multiple Android devices available at multiple price points and produced by multiple handset manufacturers. This gives Android and its handset makers a further competitive differentiator. Apple charges a premium on one or two models and arguably does not offer good value for money to customers outside the world’s highest income brackets, whereas in emerging markets, Android is set to rule.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Microsoft was able to benefit from Apple’s walled garden approach. It licensed its operating system and other software products to multiple PC manufacturers. Apple, on the other hand, chose to run Apple software only on Apple products. It seems that Apple is, once again, giving Microsoft a helping hand. Microsoft has been late to the smartphone and tablet party. Many believe that it will struggle to make an impact in the mobile world. Apple’s approach together with Google’s Motorola acquisition, are leading handset manufacturers to seek out additional partners. Will Samsung offer Microsoft phones in addition to its Android devices? Will most handset manufacturers do this as a hedge against over dependence on Google and an additional differentiator against Apple? Have Apple and Google given Microsoft a fighting chance of success in the smartphone and tablet markets?

Apple also uses an ‘old world’ pricing model for access to content. Although the purchased content of Apple customers will increasingly reside in the iCloud, Apple prices content in the same way as DVDs and CDs were priced. Its customers purchase ownership of discrete pieces of content except that they lose some of the ‘old world’ benefits of this pricing model. For example, once a track or an album is purchased from iTunes, it cannot be resold to a second hand record shop or to a friend. It cannot easily be lent to a friend. These benefits are lost in the new model.  Netflix, Spotify and Rhapsody, on the other hand, charge a subscription fee for access to a library of content. Access to such a large library compensates for the loss of certain benefits associated with ownership. In today’s world, the customer doesn’ t really own a piece of content. They can’t touch it or feel it and there are restrictions on what they can do with it. The supplier of content can make enormous savings in terms of production and marketing costs if customers simply access content that is shared with other users, in a cloud. Can’t these savings be passed on to consumers? In Apple’s model, it does not seem to be the case. This is one of the reasons why Apple is so profitable.

In summary, we are likely to see much more innovation in the Android ecosystem and possibly the Microsoft ecosystem, than we will see in Apple’s closed environment. An open approach will allow Android and possibly Microsoft to thrive in new emerging markets. The innovative pricing and delivery of content from the cloud is being driven by Apple’s competitors. In other words, Apple must urgently re-think its strategy or risk finding itself in the same position as it was in in the mid 1990s.

Next Generation Networks Force CSP Transformation

I recently had the opportunity to talk with some Communications Service Providers (CSPs) about the opportunities that high speed networks offer them. All of them agree that high speed networks will drive cloud computing and mobility. Indeed, they will drive huge transformation in all industries.

As I mentioned in earlier posts, these changes in technology will invert the relationship between business and technology. Technology is now driving business rather than business driving technology. Only a few years ago, business sought technology products and services that could increase the efficiency and effectiveness of their processes. For example, DVD rental firms sought technology that could assist them in sourcing DVDs, managing their accounts and so forth. They certainly did not expect organizations such as Apple, Amazon and Google to enter their industry and transform it completely, in a few years. In the entertainment industry, technology has almost completely transformed the industry in a way that would have been unimaginable to most people only a few years ago.

So how is this affecting CSPs? Well, CSPs are playing a key role in industry transformations. It is they that provide the infrastructure to enable cloud computing and mobility. CSPs need to understand how industries are being transformed by technology and work with businesses to enable them to benefit from these changes. This may involve acquiring new skills or it may involve partnering with organizations that offer business transformation skills. It will also involve a transformation in CSP business models.

In mature economies, CSPs are facing profound challenges. Their traditional revenue streams associated with voice services are declining. The prevalence of smartphones and other intelligent mobile devices are, of course, offering opportunities. But, service providers around the globe struggle to monetize mobile data. CSPs are placing increased focus on reducing costs dramatically in order to remain profitable. This is not sustainable. The key challenge faced by CSPs is that the opportunities offered to them by high speed networks and the move to cloud computing, require them to focus, to a greater extent, on customer experience and personalization. For most CSPs in mature markets, this is a huge challenge. They typically work with highly heterogeneous IT environments with a lot of legacy infrastructure. Their historical investments were concentrated on providing the same service to a mass market.

Today’s requirement to focus on personalization and customer experience requires a transformation in the business models of most of today’s CSPs. CSPs typically offer plans with limited flexibility. Plans need to be dynamic and contextual. In other words, they need to be highly personalized and change according to a customer’s circumstances. For example, most people turn off the data roaming feature on their smartphones when they travel to another country. Often, they have previously paid the penalty for failing to turn off the data roaming feature. It is not uncommon for smartphone users to suffer severe bill shock when they receive a bill for over $1,000 after their first trip to another country with their smartphone. Most CSPs do not personalize data roaming plans or seek to offer a positive customer experience when the customer is traveling. If the cost of data roaming was reduced and CSPs were able to use information about their customers’ whereabouts, they could offer a plan specifically for their individual customers when they travel. In most cases, this would increase ARPU for the CSP.

In countries where businesses and consumers have started to use high speed networks, we can get an idea of the kinds of new opportunities that will arise. CSP success in these markets is increasingly dependent on having a focus on applications rather than technology. For example, CSPs might focus on offering a gaming experience, an immersive learning experience, a connected home experience , a video streaming experience or/and a telemedicine experience. Emphasis on speeds alone does not mean a lot to most people. Applications, customer experience, and supporting industry transformations will clearly be where new opportunities lie for CSPs. However, capitalizing on these new opportunities requires a complete business model transformation for most CSPs.

Customer Interaction in the Cloud

The ways in which organizations interact with their customers is undergoing profound change. As with many business activities, this change is being driven by technology.

Only five years ago, organizations were trying hard to integrate voice interactions, web interactions and face to face interactions. They were seeking a single view of the customer as well as ways of enhancing the customer experience and making customer service more efficient.

In a very short period of time, this situation has become a lot more complex. Organizations now engage with customers using social media and multiple devices. The use of apps on smartphones and tablets is becoming a preferred means of engaging with organizations. Self service is becoming the standard approach for initial interaction with an organization.

It is much more convenient to order a taxi, transfer money or book a hire car using an app on a smartphone than it is waiting in a queue either at an organization’s premises or to speak to an agent at a contact center. Indeed, more and more activities that once required the focus of a paid employee can now be resolved in an automated fashion.

Using self service applications also enables organizations to collect customer data much more accurately and efficiently. This data can then, of course, be analyzed to support other business activities, ranging from sales and marketing to product development.

In Asia Pacific, the extent to which newer forms of customer engagement are being adopted varies significantly by industry and by geography. The use of social media for customer engagement is now commonplace in Australia. However, in other parts of the region, the focus remains on preventing the use of social media in the workplace. Nevertheless, the use of apps on smartphones and tablets is now common in all parts of the region that have 3G or 4G.

Ensuring that overall customer experience is improved and that all customer touch points are integrated is the major issue that must be considered by today’s organizations. This is a serious challenge. Few organizations successfully integrate all of their customer touch points.

Cloud computing, can, in many ways, make the provision of services to customers more manageable. Hosting customer interaction applications in the cloud offers massive benefits. In particular, this delivery model allows organizations to manage increases and decreases in demand from their customers. For example, an online retailer experiences seasonal spikes in demand. Hosting commerce applications in the cloud can enable a retailer to take full advantage of large increases in demand. The cloud-based commerce application will typically offer much greater scalability than its on premise equivalent.

Launching new customer services is also much faster and more efficient for organizations that host their key customer interaction applications in the cloud. For example, an airline might launch an app that allows customers to check in remotely and to monitor flight schedules. This type of service can be launched rapidly, using cloud computing applications. Again, sudden increases in demand can be managed more effectively than would be the case with on premise alternatives.

It is becoming standard for organizations to offer multiple customer touch points, including apps on mobile devices, and through social media applications. Certain applications such as voice will remain on premise for now.

Hence, organizations will need to integrate different customer touch points with different delivery models. In other words, hybrid cloud environments will exist over the next few years as the means of supporting multiple customer touch points. The key challenge for organizations is to integrate all of these touch points with both cloud and on premise delivery models. The opportunity for IT vendors centers around software and services that successfully provide this integration.