Servicing Fundamentals: Are Vertical Software Products Becoming Obsolete?

Servicing Fundamentals: Are Vertical Software Products Becoming Obsolete?

As mobility and the Internet continue to drive changes in how people interact with technology and each other, businesses are finding that the compelling arguments presented by many cloud service providers are tough to ignore.  Anytime/anywhere/anymode access to business applications and data, focusing on core business issues and outsourcing non-core processes, streamlining and connecting processes to create efficiency and predictability in operations – these are the benefits which “connected” and cloud technology models are delivering.  Cost efficiencies in supporting business operations are also being experienced, as the outsource IT solution often provides fault tolerance, scalability and performance at cost and service levels difficult to achieve with in-house systems and personnel.  The scale economies of the cloud cannot be argued with, and it is this cost-efficient and effective provisioning of fundamental business services to users that is increasingly pressuring vertical software makers to either address the market with more fundamentally useful tools incorporated into their products or risk losing users to generalized and commonly used solutions.

Consider that many accounting solutions today have introduced the ability to connect document files to transactions.  It makes sense, and provides a basic capability for accounting/bookkeeping which is necessary.  On the other hand, what happens to the rest of the documents used in the business – the ones that aren’t associated with a financial transaction?  And, if there isn’t mobile access to the accounting system, how are those attached documents made available to remote users and mobile devices? Another thing to think about is the fact that users now have the ability to interact with various files and applications natively on mobile devices, as opposed to having specialized applications to access limited data sets.  File sharing applications and productivity tools are widely used by these mobile users, as they provide the flexibility to seamlessly access files regardless of device or location.  This fundamental benefit of simple and affordable information access, storage and sharing is proving the value of a generalized approach to enabling users and helps to explain why the operating and file systems were the previous “killer apps” in computing technology.  The question for vertical software developers now is whether or not they can effectively incorporate these popular services into their solution, or if the solution must limit its focus on addressing only the truly unique elements of the business rather than the general or fundamental ones.

A great discussion on the subject is an article on PrismLegal.com where author Ron Friedmann describes his similar question in the context of Box.com increasing use in law office environments and how this impacts the legal software market.

More generally, it should cause us to question the future of legal market specific software. I understand the need for customized software; for example, I am currently involved with developing and deploying legal project management software (Cael LPM™ by Elevate Services). But the market – both customers and vendors – must balance the need to meet legal specific requirements with economics and scale.

Box and other cloud providers can potentially sell millions of seats to thousands of organizations. Contrast that enormous reach, which spreads development cost over so many users, with legal market scale. The large law firm market has no more than 400 organizations and 500,000 seats. The development and service cost per user is much higher. Nonetheless, many companies have prospered creating highly customized software for the legal market. In the age of cloud and economies of scale, however, will those economics still be so favorable?

There will always be a place for vertical and industry-specific solutions of certain types, but there is an increasingly large population of businesses which have adopted generalized solutions to address fundamental business requirements, and users (and solution providers) are recognizing that these essential solutions are meeting the majority of the business requirement without specialization (and additional cost) required.

jmbunnyfeetMake Sense?

J

Read more about Cloud Computing for Small Business: It’s All About 3 Apps

Read about why Lawyer Immunity from Delivering Customer Value is No More

Read about The Line in the Sand: Your RPO (Recovery Point Objective)

Hosting Intuit QuickBooks Desktop Editions Delivers Big Benefits for Small Business

Big Benefits with Hosted QuickBooks

diagram_self_hosting-500_289Everyone, it seems, is adopting outsourced IT and cloud computing models yet one size does not fit all when it comes to serving business – whether it’s the software or infrastructure under discussion. Cloud, mobile and online application models deliver big benefits for small businesses, but it is important to know the options available before investing in something that’s hard to get out of later. Initially, a hosted application model might be the best approach, allowing the business to achieve the mobility and on-demand service they desire but without an investment in SaaS solutions that are much more difficult to change out of or grow with later.

When “QuickBooks” and “cloud” are mentioned in the same sentence, most people are likely to think about the QuickBooks Online Edition, which is Intuit’s version of QuickBooks accounting software that was developed specifically for the web.  But QuickBooks Online isn’t the only QuickBooks “flavor” finding success in the cloud.  QuickBooks desktop editions have made their way into online and hosted deliveries, giving customers the ability to run the business and grow the organization with the software they’ve already invested in, but running the apps in the cloud.

QuickBooks Online lacks the features and functionality present in the desktop product lines, and the range of 3rd party applications which integrate or work in conjunction with QuickBooks desktop is huge and continues to grow.  Developers with SaaS products often find that their target customers prefer the desktop editions of QuickBooks, even though there may be connections to QBO available.  All of these connected software products can be hosted with or connected to hosted QuickBooks, providing businesses with mobile and remote access for all their business applications, not just the web-based ones. *Note: not all QuickBooks hosting companies will also host whatever 3rd party integrations a business needs, so make sure to verify before you buy! What sounds like a great hosting deal now could turn into something you need to change later.  The good thing is, you can change…. unlike with QBO.

The popularity of desktop application hosting continues to grow because users have investments in software, data and business processes. Adding remote access and mobility doesn’t require an entire change of software, but it does introduce new benefits that can have a big positive impact on work quality, productivity and efficiency. QuickBooks hosting models and application hosting in general gives business owners a basis for helping employees balance (or integrate) work and life time and activities, and addresses the issues of data security and mobility by keeping information securely stored on the host.

Better information security, work/life balance, mobility, making the most of your existing investments and creating sustainability in the business so you can grow. These and more are benefits of hosting QuickBooks software for your business.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?

J

 

Is it Cloud or is it Desktop?

Is it Cloud or is it Desktop?

There are a few realities that users of purely SaaS-based solutions are finding, and among them is that most web-based applications don’t readily integrate with the desktop – and the desktop is still where a lot of the real work gets done.  Yes, users are increasingly mobile and are using smartphones and tablets to create and access information via mobile applications and services, yet the PC desktop – whether it’s an actual desktop computer, laptop or full-featured tablet – remains as the workhorse for business.  Even the most popular SaaS applications continue to rely upon the desktop and locally installed applications to get some of the work done (note that many Salesforce.com users still find Excel to be their most effective reporting tool).  In an effort to deliver mobility for those applications traditionally tied to the desktop, software developers have adopted two main approaches: redevelop the application for the web (which usually means bringing functionality down to a lowest-common-denominator approach), or applying a traditional terminal server or virtualized application approach and calling it “cloud”.

desktop-apps

Neither option is awesome for the software maker – the time and cost of development certainly isn’t low, and the realities of hosting conventional desktop or LAN-based applications in shared infrastructure are pretty ugly at best.  What these software makers need is a way to allow businesses to continue to use their software for the desktop and LAN, enabling the user with software license use rights to access that software product and associated data on any of their “desktops”, regardless of where that desktop might be (or what device it is running on).  The model is cloud, but then it’s a desktop model too.

Independent software vendors are more frequently turning to platform providers (PaaS) to help deliver whatever “cloud” approach the company elects, and these ISVs are also feeling the bite of outsourced service fees and growing costs of delivery.  It is not just the direct customer questioning the cost of deploying resources in the cloud – software providers are questioning these costs, too, especially as they attempt to deliver resource-intensive solutions from hosted infrastructure that bills them based on resource utilization.  MyQuickCloud is proving that ISVs and their customers no longer have to bear large infrastructure costs in order to deliver complete user mobility. MyQuickCloud supports IaaS providers and their partner networks, allowing infrastructure-as-a-service offerings to include a simple and fast way to immediately make that infrastructure useful for desktop and application delivery.

The information technology industry has seen a lot of disruption in recent years, with complexity and risk in systems rising as users demand more functional mobile capability and software developers struggle to protect and preserve their assets (users included).  MyQuickCloud jumps right into the middle of it, delivering solutions for business customers, software developers and cloud providers alike, and answering the question of whether it’s cloud or desktop.  The answer is “yes”.

jmbunnyfeetMake Sense?

J

The Line in the Sand: Your RPO (Recovery Point Objective)

The Line in the Sand: Your RPO (Recovery Point Objective)

IMG_0108Businesses and individuals are increasingly more dependent upon the technology supporting their various activities, and the volume and velocity of information moving through these systems is increasing at astonishing rates.  With the growing reliance on information technology and electronic business data, you’d think that more businesses were paying close attention to protecting these assets. I recognize that there is a broad understanding of responsibilities as they pertain to system security, and businesses of all sizes and types are increasing their awareness of the variety of threats facing their systems and are taking steps to address them.  Yet there remains an aspect of business data protection that too few businesses are really zeroing in on, and that is the time and complexity of recovering or restoring business data in the event of an outage or loss – and the absolute line drawn in the sand which says that “here” is the tolerable loss we can experience: no more and no less.

This line in the sand is referred to as the RPO, or Recovery Point Objective. A recovery point objective is part of the business continuity plan (or should be!), and describes the maximum tolerable period of time for which data might be lost from a major IT service incident.  The necessity to establish this time frame – the RPO – exists whether the business is small or large.  In fact, small businesses have data protection needs quite similar to their enterprise counterparts.  In an article in SmallBusinessComputing.com, Kieran Maloney of Quantum Corporation is quoted as saying that “from a data protection standpoint, smaller businesses face challenges that are similar to those of larger enterprises; the amount, and the value, of their data is growing significantly while their budgets are not”.

What doesn’t seem to make sense is that businesses continue to view data backup as a necessary evil rather than a strategic element, and spending considerations for creating and meeting a realistic RPO remain low.  An article in TheStreet.com on the subject quotes Terry Cunningham, president and manager of EVault, saying “When largely preventable data loss conservatively costs businesses hundreds of millions of dollars annually, it is time to rethink your priorities”.  The author also writes that “while 95 percent of US IT decision makers said they have some type of disaster recovery plan in place, only 44 percent have remote, cloud-based recovery capabilities… More than twenty percent of IT organizations that manage between 2-7 TB of data suffered a data loss in the past year – in fact, more than half of this group suffered 2-3 data losses – each with an estimated average cost of 2-5 percent of total company revenues”.

Part of the continuity plan and a consideration in developing an approach which will meet the RPO timeframe should be the implementation of remote cloud based service, yet this has remained a low priority for many business owners.  Reliance upon more traditional data protection approaches, including tape backups and on-premises HDD solutions provides IT managers with a false sense of security and often cannot even reasonably address recovery from data loss due to hardware outages, much less for potentially catastrophic failures including loss of the location.

When considering the RPO – the minimum acceptable point for data recovery (or maximum tolerable point for loss) – businesses must look at their data management and backup strategies in order to address recovery approaches for various types of outages.  There are benefits and drawbacks associated with the different methods of backing up data, and the cost/benefit of employing any solution must factor in to the requirement to meet the stated RPO.  Daily backups may be the standard procedure, but is a potential loss of 24 hours of data acceptable to the business?  On the other hand, what is the potential cost of re-creating the data, if it can even be recreated?  Consider also that the timeframe for data recovery is not the point at which the last backup was completed; it is the point when the last backup was started.  This could result in a loss window greater than the established 24-hour boundary.

Many businesses would suggest that their tolerance for lost data – due to the cost of lost productivity and order activities – is far less than 24 hours, yet solutions employed to reduce the potential data losses often do not fully address the issue in any comprehensive manner.   IT personnel working with separate products to handle incremental data backups, machine recovery (bare metal) and snapshots of disk arrays often have a tough time trying to piece together the various pieces of the puzzle and often simply hope for the best in terms of outcome.

The prudent move is to thoroughly consider the business disaster recovery and continuity plan, and establish the boundaries for tolerable loss.  No business wants to expect to lose valuable data assets, but expecting technology to perform flawlessly is unrealistic, not to mention the unexpected impacts from acts of nature or other forces majeure.  Architecting systems to withstand service outages and having a comprehensive plan for recovering from system outages in a timeframe survivable by the business is the essential element to making a continuity plan worthwhile.  Draw the line in the sand, and then develop the system protection and recovery plan that will help make sure you never have to step over it.

Make Sense?

J

Here are a few data loss statistics for your reading pleasure… Enjoy  🙂

(stats drawn from summary on BostonComputing.net.  They may be a bit dated, but the numbers have only increased since then.) http://www.bostoncomputing.net/consultation/databackup/statistics/

The following statistics were gathered from various sources:

  • 6% of all PCs will suffer an episode of data loss in any given year. Given the number of PCs used in US businesses in 1998, that translates to approximately 4.6 million data loss episodes. At a conservative estimate, data loss cost US businesses $11.8 billion in 1998. (The Cost Of Lost Data, David M. Smith)
  • 30% of all businesses that have a major fire go out of business within a year. 70% fail within five years. (Home Office Computing Magazine)
  • 31% of PC users have lost all of their files due to events beyond their control.
  • 34% of companies fail to test their tape backups, and of those that do, 77% have found tape back-up failures.
  • 60% of companies that lose their data will shut down within 6 months of the disaster.
  • 93% of companies that lost their data center for 10 days or more due to a disaster filed for bankruptcy within one year of the disaster. 50% of businesses that found themselves without data management for this same time period filed for bankruptcy immediately. (National Archives & Records Administration in Washington)
  • American business lost more than $7.6 billion as a result of viruses during first six months of 1999. (Research by Computer Economics)
  • Companies that aren’t able to resume operations within ten days (of a disaster hit) are not likely to survive. (Strategic Research Institute)
  • Every week 140,000 hard drives crash in the United States. (Mozy Online Backup)
  • Simple drive recovery can cost upwards of $7,500 and success is not guaranteed

 

Growing Up: Software buying decisions throughout the business life cycle

Two-TallThere are two certainties in life – death and taxes. While both are unavoidable, at least the taxes issue can be managed. Managing taxes and business finances in general takes detailed information. Considering how most small businesses get their start with business bookkeeping and accounting, it’s no surprise that information gathering becomes one of the most time-consuming and frustrating tasks around tax time. Fixing the problem from the beginning and implementing a system to manage the detailed information the business needs on an ongoing basis is key to avoiding the rush as well as building a business information framework that might span the life of the business entity.  Yet fixing the problem for this year’s tax information gathering is relatively simple compared to figuring out how to format, retain, and continuously collect and compile new data for analysis throughout the life of the business.

In order to understand how to address the problem, it is important to understand the evolution of business accounting. Not how the concepts or practices have evolved, but how technology has (or has not) been applied to certain problems, and where the gaps are.

Starting Up

The first things a new business owner generally does is get a business license, get a computer, and run down to the discount store to buy a copy of QuickBooks or maybe Microsoft Excel. Now, this business owner isn’t necessarily prepared to properly handle the accounting for the business, but he understands that he has to do something. Keeping a check register, at the minimum, lets him know how much money is in the bank. And that’s what it’s all about for the small business person – cash flow and cash availability. But the focus on the checkbook frequently causes the business to postpone implementing deeper, more beneficial processes.

With a focus on the checkbook, the business manages cash by counting payments out and receipts in. But the nature of the payment or the receipt is the true question that must be answered and accounted for. It is surprising how many businesses still keep ledger cards – those manual 3×5’s in a box – where customer and vendor information is kept. It is a simple method, and provides the business a way to keep individual account records. But the fact that this detail information is not part of an integrated system creates a greater potential for lost or inaccurate data. Further, the greater the volume the more difficult and error-prone managing the information becomes.

It is at this point that the business seeks to find a more comprehensive means to manage the additional business data. This is another buying decision the business owner must make, introducing a new system which can handle the additional activities around accounts receivable, accounts payable, inventory and sales orders, etc. The business was already keeping track of products or services, customers and vendors. But here we are at a step where new systems and processes must be introduced. Although a belated effort, this after-the-fact implementation of customer, vendor and item tracking now establishes the means to manage more business activities as part of an integrated system.

The difficulty comes in loading the historic information and learning new systems. Depending on volume, the quality of the manually kept data, etc., it may be determined that historic transaction details are not to be entered. So, the business moves forward with a better system for managing business activities and data, but loses the value of the early transaction detail.

Volume and Growth

The business has implemented an accounting system which helps to keep track of customers, vendors, items, and cash. More detailed processes are introduced as the business requirement grows – offering perhaps more specific information on costs of certain products, or summaries of customer purchases or item sales activity. This data provides a much more informed basis for business decision-making, but also impacts the systems as the volume of data to be managed grows.

Growth may present itself in many ways – growth in the number of products or services offered, growth in the number of transactions processed regularly, growth in the dollar value of transactions, or growth in the number of employees who need access to the system. All of these areas impact the ability of the system to continue to support the business requirements. Quite frequently, a certain “density of data” is reached and the current system is not able to efficiently manipulate and manage the volume. Here again is another buying decision. Can the existing system be expanded to handle the additional volume? Or must a new system yet again be introduced? The business process requirements may not have changed, but the earlier choice of systems may cause a forced change simply due to business volume or number of users.

The frustrations of changing business systems are compounded the further into the business life cycle the change comes. Much of the historic intelligence of the business is derived from the earlier days of operation; data which reflects the stages and activities of the business over time. When a business reaches a point where data volumes force a systems change, a worst-case scenario occurs: The volume of historic data is too great for the current system, and loading it into a new system takes a huge amount of time and effort. Unfortunately, this task often proves too daunting for the company, so again valuable historic detail information is lost and summary information is loaded into the new system.

Operationally Specific Systems

As the business matures – and in order for the business to mature in a healthy manner – specific and detailed information must be captured and analyzed. Systems which take a broad view of the business, offering only general information and process support, frequently do not supply the business with the levels of intelligence truly required. For example, a manufacturing business needs to fully understand and manage the manufacturing processes and materials supply chain to ensure profitability and consistent product quality. A retailer needs to know which products sell in which markets in order to ensure product stock and availability to key customers. And all of this information is time-critical if the business is to make necessary adjustments in time to benefit from them.

This level of detail can only come from a system which incorporates a certain specific orientation towards the operational processes of the business. The fact of selling a product to a customer is an activity which gets recorded, but the additional details of the customer location, pricing levels, purchasing levels, salesman, inventory item, and warehouse location tell the rest of the story. Over time, the business owner can then better understand customer purchasing habits, inventory item turnover, supplier dependencies – a wealth of business intelligence. This data is then used to assist the business owner or management in determining the specific activities or actions necessary to keep the business moving forward and improving performance.

In the end, it is the demonstration of well-defined processes, deep insight into the business operational metrics and financial performance, and the ability to effectively and accurately report on this information that creates a basis for provable business value.

No Best Answer

When looking at the business accounting and finance systems available in the market – particularly considering those which have earned a level of market share – there are visible gaps – big ones. This is clearly reflected in the numbers, where Intuit QuickBooks leads in the small business market, but has no reciprocal in the midrange or enterprise markets. QuickBooks fits into that early space, where the business is just starting out and, maybe, extending into keeping more detailed customer, vendor and item information. MS Excel is also a winner for very small and new businesses, as the spreadsheet is a simple and easy solution to creating an electronic check register. But there comes a point where a business has requirements that extend beyond the ability of the small business software. Sometimes, the mere thought of change is so abhorrent (usually based on a bad initial implementation experience) that the business attempts to use the software far beyond what it was built to handle.

Other application makers offer systems that have a number of small business features, but that also offer more in-depth or complex capabilities to handle the growing business. These systems, too, have a great potential to be outgrown, and can be costly implementations which handle only a portion of the business life cycle.

Larger, module-based systems and frameworks offer a broad range of functionality, integration, and data management capability. They typically address more – and more detailed – business processes, and can scale to very large sizes. But the cost and complexity of these systems is often the barrier, and given that there is no clear seed product (small business version of the big business software), the upgrade path is unclear and problematic. Given the huge gap between the “typical” small business system and the upper-levels in the enterprise applications catalogue – the transition from very small to very large software is not likely to be made in a single step.

Losing intelligence with each step

Each stage of business requirement typically drives to a buying decision. This buying decision is met with angst, as considerations include not only cost, but data conversion vs re-loading, new process or system design and setup, user training, proofing the system (running parallel?) and a host of other issues, not the least of which is the business benefit to be derived.

The emergence of SaaS solutions and multitenant web applications has compounded this issue, as there is a tendency for such solutions to provide only list data and other easily exported data.  Transaction information and details are frequently unavailable for export to another solution, or the data may be exported but not necessarily in a meaningful form.

Small Businesses should be particularly concerned about whether or not the solution will fit the needs of the business for an extended period of time and through a variety of business conditions. The small business should also determine if there is a way to continue use of the solution (or transition from the solution) if the solution or the provider stop meeting the needs of the business. Small business owners are particularly at risk, because the SaaS solutions oriented towards small business users often don’t have the on-premises options that some of their enterprise counterparts offer. And small businesses are the ones who are most likely to need to transition to another solution as the business grows. Further, the small business user often lacks the technical knowledge to manage the conversion effectively, and doesn’t typically employ skilled in-house IT personnel to handle it for them. The result: consulting dollars get spent, just to retain the data the business already has.  http://jcmann.blogspot.com/2009/11/salvaging-business-intelligence.html

If information is power, too many businesses are losing that power when they migrate from one software product to another – they are losing valuable historic information by leaving transaction and other detail data behind when they convert from one system to another.  This should be an area of focus and key discussion point when any change to systems is considered.  After all, the insight and business intelligence gathered over the years was likely instrumental in helping the small business grow up to become a successful big business, and will continue to be important for years to come.

jmbunnyfeetMake Sense?

J

Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due | Accounting and Business Technologies

Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due

or – That was then, but this is now…

It constantly amazes me, seeing the number of conversations, forums, talkbacks, emails, etc. flurrying about the Internet that are focused on finding the way to “win” against Microsoft and Intuit – both companies, in certain circles, being referred to as “big brother”. Well, the 800lb gorillas, anyway.

There are the Linux community members, very appropriately using TCO (total cost of ownership) and security messages to get the attention of the market… you’ve got the Mac devotees who believe that computers can and should have good fashion sense… and then there are the Windows users who use it, but complain nonetheless.

With Intuit, you have a clear market-share leader in SMB accounting. As for the other market segments – it’s anybody’s guess who wins there. It’s arguable.

But what do these two companies have in common? In a word – success.

Let’s face it. Without them, there wouldn’t be a world of computer users representing a potential customer base for new products. Walk with me – let’s talk.

Computers were once quite expensive, unintuitive, and basically unavailable for most businesses. Then PCs emerged, Microsoft hit the market – and Windows opened across the world. (Yes, I realize the timeline here is seriously compressed, and DOS lived for a long time and we liked it).  First, businesses broadly became computer users. Then consumers became computer users. Then everyone became a computer user.   Granted, the guy at home playing “Flight Simulator” was a driving force in getting the mouse and better graphics into mainstream computing. But let’s remember that accounting and finance was among the first primary applications of general computing technology (the BETTER adding machine).

Changes in the accounting industry were also occurring at this point. Professional accounting practices began to move away from business bookkeeping, being a low-margin and labor intensive task. Intuit hit the market with QuickBooks, marketing based on the concept that “if you can write a check, you can do your own books”. While this was in direct opposition to the professional accountants’ belief that businesses need professional assistance with their accounting, it solved the dilemma of doing the books directly. So, many accounting practices at this point actually became focused on selling and supporting accounting software – looking at the technology as both a means to avoid direct bookkeeping as well as introducing additional revenue-earning services for the practice.

Both Microsoft and Intuit recognized a need in the market, and filled those needs quite nicely. They earned their market share largely based on useability and the concept of empowerment. This is what it took to build the size of market we see today. And let’s face it. They did it very well.

Today’s computer user is more savvy – more aware of the options and choices. But choice often seems like complexity. With Microsoft and Intuit being viewed by many as the defacto standards for small businesses, the choice seemed like it was already made and therefore the complexity of making the right purchasing decision was removed. This is not as true today as it once was.

There are other options available. Will they gain the same levels of adoption that their predecessors did? Doubt it. The concept of “one size fits all” isn’t true any more. People want tools that are specific to their requirements. Businesses want their computing platform and applications to do more for them than simply maintain status quo.

But we must always remember how we got here. Kudos to the big guys who built the market for the rest of us. We should revere these companies, and acknowledge the great thing they did – they created potential customers for all of us. Lots of ’em.

via Accounting and Business Technologies | Joanie Mann: Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due.