• Launched
• Introduced
• Announced
• Previewed
• Pre-Announced
• Private Beta
• Beta
• Selective ramp up
• Ramp up
• Rolled out
• Limited Availability
• Shipping
• Limited General Availability
• General Availability
• Functionally complete

I go to a lot of software conferences, and read many press releases.  In the last few weeks I have seen and heard all these terms, and a few more that I have forgotten to note.  For all the talk of the move to Apple-like simplicity in enterprise software, trying to figure out when software is real or still in the imagination of its creators is becoming more and more difficult.

It is short, sharp, engaging and easy to read. Put down that Scandinavian crime novel, ignore your travel expense application issues and read this book instead. I’m perhaps reading too much into the title,  but I can’t help wondering if it isn’t a hat tip to the rock band Rage Against the Machine.  If it is, deeply nifty sub-editing coolness.   If not,  it is a lovely  unintended consequence.

The book highlights the accelerating disruption that technology brings to the workplace and to the very definition of work. There is dark side to technology, and the authors have done a nuanced job in exploring this.  It makes a worthwhile change from the technology=progress drum beat.

It was especially good to see a section on the growing gap between wage  and productivity growth.  To see disquiet about median wage stagnation from technology focused researchers is a very fine thing.  There is more than a whiff of valorization in their argument.

Brynjolfsson and McAfee make excellent use of statistics, and this work is no exception. They use numbers to illuminate, and they do it well. The Bill Gates in a bar story is a lovely explanation of mean and median. They explain, but don’t condescend.

As with much of US business academia, the book is centred on the US economy, with fleeting mentions of the rest of world.  I didn’t spot the dreaded phrase “Corporate America”, but it may have been lurking there. In particular the solution section was too US focused. Moaning about  H-1B visas etc… However suggestions 17,18, 19 are spot on.

17. Reduce the large implicit and explicit subsidies to financial services. This sector attracts

a disproportionate number of the best and the brightest minds and technologies, in part

because the government effectively guarantees “too big to fail” institutions.

18. Reform the patent system. Not only does it take years to issue good patents due to the

backlog and shortage of qualified examiners, but too many low-quality patents are

issued, clogging our courts. As a result, patent trolls are chilling innovation rather than

encouraging it.

19. Shorten, rather than lengthen, copyright periods and increase the flexibility of fair use.

Copyright covers too much digital content. Rather than encouraging innovation, as

specified in the Constitution, excessive restrictions like the Sonny Bono Copyright Term

Extension Act inhibit mixing and matching of content and using it creatively in new ways.

There are strong echoes of Larry Lessig in the IP section (as an aside I’d like to get the authors’ views of Lessig’s recent work on political corruption).

More broadly though I’d like to see business school academia and IT research engaging more with the rich research tapestry of sociology and political philosophy, how about more Jessop and Harvey, and Herbert Marcusse needs a serious dust off.  I fancy I heard the very faint clang of  Weber’s iron cage in this work. I’d suggest that Maslow and maybe Hayek can take a rest for a while.

This book is excellent,  but would have been seminal if it had built upon the work of that chap from Trier.

My colleague Alexa Bona and I recently published a note on contracting behaviors and strategies for SaaS HCM.  SaaS and Human Capital Management: Avoid Risky and Expensive Deals (client access).

As SaaS HCM deals come up for renewal,  and procurement gets involved, it is now crystal clear that most HR departments have been contracting for HCM software without IT procurement involvement.  One of our findings is that most of the time, HR departments are rather poor negotiators.  Software vendors have had a field day, and not just on pricing.  Most of  the time HR just signs the boiler plate, and the boiler plate is typically one-sided, like All Blacks v Japan one-sided.

Here is a quote from the note.

SaaS vendors in HCM have successfully spun the myth that they are kinder and fairer than megavendors when it comes to contract negotiations and terms and conditions. This is a fairy tale. The vast majority of SaaS vendors are as avaricious as any ERP vendor, and their contracts are often nearly as complex, with changing product names, gerrymandering scope and vague platitudes, instead of solid SLAs

IT Procurement departments need to step up too.  A 9 month procurement cycle for software that takes 3 months to implement isn’t on.  IT procurement departments have a lot to learn about SaaS. The negotiating techniques that may work with huge ERP deals don’t work for smaller SaaS deals and renewals.

image via nesjumpman under collective commons.

I enjoyed working on this note.  Hopefully it will help HR leaders pause before signing that once in a lifetime special offer SaaS deal.

John had this to say.
SAP’s year over year growth clearly benefitted from the acquisition of Sybase, which was not included in last year’s numbers and SAP’s growth was negatively impacted by changes in foreign currency exchange rates. However, net these two effects, SAP showed solid revenue growth in its core business, indicates the company continues to mend. Overall it is reasonable to assume that SAP has turned the corner and is positioned to deliver software revenue growth that will exceed the overall industry over the next 12 months. However, we believe that over the next few of quarters, growth will be volatile and SAP will face tougher year over year comparisons. Additionally, while revenue growth is returning, it is likely that it is driven by demand from demand from existing customers, building out their existing SAP installations and not likely from the new initiatives SAP has announced over the last few quarters. These initiatives are not likely to bear fruit until 2012 when they may show a meaningful contribution to revenue. Many of these new initiatives, such as SAP’s focus on in-memory computing, HANA, Business ByDesign, mobility, and analytics show great promise, but remain immature.

My thoughts.

This is part of the email I shared with the press once I’d seen the results. I’ll leave the clever stuff like currency and so on to John.

SAP has spent the last 18 months or so building a clearer vision for the company, reengaging with customers and employees, but it has not yet had any significant new product to sell. There is only so much on-premise ERP and Analytics that SAP can upsell to existing customers, and while this business remains solid, it has limits.

SAP’s newer products, in particular, HANA and Business ByDesign aren’t yet delivering a significant financial contribution, and the time is nearing where they need to do so. SAP also hasn’t yet shipped any joint product with Sybase, so deep synergies there aren’t yet evident there either. SAP is spending money on R&D and marketing, in anticipation of success with these offerings.

SAP’s marketing talks of on-premise, on-demand and on-device, but for now on-premise is the still paying the rent.

• The flat subscription revenue is disappointing, given the rapid growth of the SaaS players such as SuccessFactors, Salesforce.com and Workday. SAP has been slow to deliver on its Line of Business SaaS offerings too.
• Mobile in an SAP application context is still a story rather than revenue generating product.

SAP has to do three things in the rest of 2011.
1. Turn HANA and in-memory from a compelling concept into real revenue.
2. Show that it can scale Business ByDesign and deliver its other SaaS efforts.
3. Prove out the value of the Sybase acquisition by shipping joint product that customers buy.

Sapphire in May will be an opportunity to assess whether the stronger vision of 2010 has turned into real product that will generate revenue. SAP has had a vision but now we need to see engineering delivering on it. What we said in Q4 remains valid.

SAP has a bolder strategy than a year ago, and a significantly stronger product pipeline. In 2011, SAP has to show that its new products, HANA, ByDesign, LOB on Demand and mobile can deliver meaningful revenue. SAP’s increased guidance illustrates the improving macro conditions and SAP’s management’s belief that it has an improved product portfolio.
There are now many moving parts in SAP’s strategy, and communicating the on demand, on premise and on device vision in a way that customers can clearly grasp will be vital. For the first time in a while, SAP has some genuine new product opportunity. The true judge of innovation, though, is not whether vendors label products innovative, but how customers do.

We all are thinking on similar lines. I’d like to see some real revenue impact from HANA this year, but my colleagues are perhaps  a tad more cautious. Clients interested in knowing more about HANA should set up a call with Donald.

I’m looking forward to Sapphire in a couple of weeks time.  LOB on-demand is on my mind, as is Gateway, Duet Enterprise, Sustainability, mobile beyond an iPad demo and of course the HCM applications.  I’ll hopefully have a bit more time to catch up with the partner ecosystem too. Clients might want to check out the recent Cool vendors in the SAP ecosystem note. By the way,  I have note coming out shortly on the German SAP HR congress, which is, come to think of it,  relevant beyond just the German market.

photo via cc of Svenwerk. Thanks.

Earlier this year, SAP did a good job at Sapphire in laying out more compelling vision. I expect Teched to be about adding some details to that vision, and I’m looking of evidence of execution: These are the things I’ll be scrutinizing.

1. By Design progress, both in terms of customer adoption and as a platform for SAP to build new on-demand applications.

2. What is “orchestration” exactly?

3. River and the other on-demand efforts. What’s really flowing?

4. Mobile strategy. Apps, ecoystem, costs.  Beyond the hype.

5. SAP and databases.  newDB, Sybase, in-memory etc. Timings.

6. BW and in-memory impact.

7. Gateway, UI, UX and future of SAP portal.

8. NetWeaver 7.3 details

9. MDM, BPM impact on existing customers

10. Impact of “cloud” on Business Suite.

11. Running SAP cheaper. SAP and ecosystem tools that reduce the day to day running costs of SAP.

From a partner perspective, I’m looking for alternative UI work, or UI enhancements, such as RIA, iPad etc.  Making SAP easier to consume is a research theme for me and several colleagues over the next quarter. Also anything that makes SAP cheaper to run.  I’m also very  interested in chatting to users to gauge how they see SAP’s plans and execution. 

If you want to catch up at Teched, drop me an email, or tweet me at @vendorprisey

Gartner clients may wish to read our note on the state of NetWeaver. SAP NetWeaver: The past, present and future.

Many organizations are unsure what NetWeaver is, or what it will become. What SAP has delivered differs significantly from the original vision. Rather than the enterprisewide middleware platform SAP envisioned, it’s best-suited to deploy SAP applications and integrate SAP applications and processes.

Looking through my blog archive, I’ve often disagreed with Carr, but rather than just base my view on this latest book via headlines and what others wrote, I decided to buy the book and read it to make up my own mind.

I found it to be an excellent read. Well researched, tight prose, and an eclectic mix of scientific, philosophical and social material.  I was on a cycling holiday when I read it. My blackberry had given up the ghost, and the only computer I had with me was the bike computer.

I began the book expecting  to disagree with Carr. I make my living out of researching technology so I figured that I would join the queue of other tech folks dissing his “dystopian” views.  By about a third of the way through I found myself agreeing with him.  He spends part of a chapter discussing Joe Weizenbaum, who should be more famous and read than he is.  More than any Computer Scientist, Weizenbaum challenges the notion that technological progress is good for humanity. Carr echoes many of Weizenbaum’s concerns, in a more accessible form.

In reading the book, I’m reminded of two other writers, Alain de Botton, who is my favourite modern non-fiction writer.

He says much the same as Carr, but more lyrically. 

I felt keenly the painful psychological adjustments required by life in modernity: the need to juggle a respect for the potential offered by science with an awareness of how perplexingly limited and narrowly framed might be its benefits. I felt the temptation of hoping that all activities would acquire the excitement and rigours of engineering while recognising the absurdity of those who, overly impressed by technological achievement, lose sight of how doggedly we will always be pursed by baser forms of error and absurdity.

quoted from the Sorrows and Pleasures of Work.

 his recent post is also on the money.

One of the more embarrassing and self-indulgent challenges of our time is the task of relearning how to concentrate. The past decade has seen an unparalleled assault on our capacity to fix our minds steadily on anything. To sit still and think, without succumbing to an anxious reach for a machine, has become almost impossible.

The obsession with current events is relentless. We are made to feel that at any point, somewhere on the globe, something may occur to sweep away old certainties—something that, if we failed to learn about it instantaneously, could leave us wholly unable to comprehend ourselves or our fellows. We are continuously challenged to discover new works of culture—and, in the process, we don’t allow any one of them to assume a weight in our minds. We leave a movie theater vowing to reconsider our lives in the light of a film’s values. Yet by the following evening, our experience is well on the way to dissolution, like so much of what once impressed us: the ruins of Ephesus, the view from Mount Sinai, the feelings after finishing Tolstoy’s Death of Ivan Ilyich…

The need to diet, which we know so well in relation to food, and which runs so contrary to our natural impulses, should be brought to bear on what we now have to relearn in relation to knowledge, people, and ideas. Our minds, no less than our bodies, require periods of fasting.

The second is GM Hopkins. I’ll leave you with a verse from the Habit of Perfection.

Elected Silence, sing to me
And beat upon my whorlèd ear,
Pipe me to pastures still and be
The music that I care to hear.

I’m glad I took the time to read Carr’s book without distraction.  I need to find more time to savour the joys of quiet reading and thinking.  As De Botton says “To sit still and think, without succumbing to an anxious reach for a machine.”

It has given Steve Jobs a sales force that he didn’t know he had. It seems without really planning for it, the iPad has become the must have enterprise device.

But what I’ve not yet seen is the must have enterprise application on the iPad. Yes, I’ve seen some neat repurposed reports and simple entry screens  but I’ve not yet seen an application that makes me sit up and say wow, that is a new and fundamentally better process enabled by the device.  So far the innovation is all about Apple.

If the iPad  means that enterprise software companies build executive dashboards and actually get executives engaging with the software, then fine, okay, that is an improvement from where we are today, but it misses the big opportunity.

Just  fixing the executive user experience has a whiff of the Potemkin about it. It would be a whole lot better if the iPad helped to prompt a rethink of how everyone interacts with enterprise software. Today the iPad merely illustrates the chasm between the typical enterprise software user experience and delightful design.

How do you define "innovation"?

Scott Berkun: I strongly recommend people use this word as little as possible. It’s mostly a distraction. Many great ideas and breakthroughs were achieved without people worrying if they were innovative enough or not. They simply chose to try and solve a problem they or their customers cared about. And then later on, after the hard work was done, they were called "innovators." It’s a good word to let other people say about you, rather than use it in reference to yourself.

His book, The Myths of Innovation is a sharp, if short read. This quote encourages me to re-read it.

I had my eyes opened today.

photo via oneeighteen cc licence. Great nautical photos.

I had a demo from a Norwegian HR vendor who focuses on shipping and other maritime stuff.  I started off thinking that you could do it with a horizontal HR system with strong configuration capabilities but the more I watched, the more I realized that some niches run deep.

How do you run a payroll on a ship? With no connection back to land? How do you handle the competency requirements and scheduling to meet the myriad of shipping laws? Can the second mate on a vessel of size x work as a first mate on a vessel of size b?  A citizen of the Philippines is working on a Panamanian flag vessel for a Norwegian oil company?  What happens if he transfers to a different vessel?  Which training courses are running in the next port of call? How do you sync the offshore and the onshore payroll.  Rum rations?

If you own a fleet of ships, you may want to chat to these Norwegians.