by Stephen White | January 17, 2017 | Comments Off on SAM must shift focus to address changing priorities
Changed software market dynamics mean the focus of SAM must respond to altered priorities
The provider lead shift of application business and delivery models to SaaS, in turn leads to a substantial change in software provider / client relationship, becomes stickier and alters the nature of risk.
As we reported last year – the myth that it is impossible to be out of compliance with SaaS needs to be addressed. The role SAM plays becomes even more vital when considering requirements to address cost escalation challenges, whilst also establishing if adoption of a cloud service will be, or is, successful.
In essence the view of SAM’s role must switch from a practice of managing license compliance, to measuring and managing consumption of provisioned services and functions.
- First, in the context of not only SaaS, SAM provides the astute with a vehicle to understand which users or user groups will consume the functions being evaluated in advance of adoption.
- Second, we should consider also that given SaaS providers are prone to withhold functionality for measuring consumption of their solution, it is essential that SAM tools are capable of effectively metering usage, thereby enabling both an actions to understanding of value derived and address any lag in adoption.
- Thirdly, given potential for escalating cost our organization may incur, we should be mindful to identify value extracted through consumption and enable excessive subscriptions and shelfware to be eliminated.
Accordingly, we should see SaaS not as a measure to eliminate need for SAM as a governance function. We should however choose to strategically invest in the SAM function, ensuring the means for managing functional and quantitative usage of each SaaS solution adopted is in place to regulate and report on consumption.
We have kick started 2017 with new SAM research that analyzes these impacts in more depth, including a look at changes in providers approach to auditing. The solution will be a combination of tools, disciplined process, resources to govern the practice and awareness of inherent risks and the governing frameworks put in place to manage them. The question for many remains whether to create mechanisms internally or utilize third party expertise.
Comments or opinions expressed on this blog are those of the individual contributors only, and do not necessarily represent the views of Gartner, Inc. or its management. Readers may copy and redistribute blog postings on other blogs, or otherwise for private, non-commercial or journalistic purposes, with attribution to Gartner. This content may not be used for any other purposes in any other formats or media. The content on this blog is provided on an "as-is" basis. Gartner shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of the content or use of this blog.