IT management – Cooper Mann Consulting

August 1, 2017

Centralize and Secure Business Applications and Data

laptop drawing The portable computer is an essential business tool for day’s mobile workforce, having the power and portability to meet the demands of executives and professionals working away from the office. While executives and mobile professionals get the applications and data they need to keep productivity high, carrying business data on devices outside the network introduces significant business risk.

There are studies which estimate that as much as 80% of the data a small business owns (data like customer files, contracts, product information and financial data) is copied to or stored on portable computers. When valuable business data is lost or stolen, the business can be exposed to a variety of problems – loss of revenue being just one. Losing track of business data can create legal issues, too. Customer privacy may be compromised, sensitive information could be exposed, or confidential plans might be made public if a business doesn’t take the right steps to secure its data.

It isn’t just the possibility of loss or theft which increases risk when data is copied to portable computers – the increased vulnerability of the information sits with the likelihood that the user will access unsecured networks, launch non-corporate applications, access private email accounts and perform other non-business related tasks with the computer because they have more access than with a fully secured corporate in-office desktop. User behavior is often what puts corporate data and assets at risk, regardless of the policies that might define correct and acceptable procedures. It is very easy for workers to unknowingly lose and leak data, and when the data is present on the portable computer it gets even easier.

A 2014 study commissioned by Cisco Systems found that employees around the world continue to engage in “risky” behaviors that put business and personal information at risk:

The majority (70%) of surveyed IT pros believe that as many as half of their data loss incidents are due to authorized program installations
44% of employees share work devices with others without supervision
39% of IT professionals have dealt with employees trying to access unauthorized parts of the company’s network
Almost half of the employees admitted to copying data between work and personal computers when working from home
18% (up to 25% in some regions) of employees shared passwords with their co-workers

Companies must not only protect their data for their financial well-being, but must recognize their legal obligation to protect much of the information, as well. The risk extends beyond the walls of the enterprise, to vendors and customers and consumers whose information may be stored in the company data. Additionally, portable computers exposed to malware and virus attacks are likely to pass the bad code to other systems they come in contact with, introducing not just risk for the recipient but liability for the infected laptop owner.

Where mobile computing brings huge advantages to today’s business, owners would do well to consider the benefits of enabling mobility through the use of server-based and hosted computing models. Rather than installing software and copying data to PCs and mobile devices, workers should be able to access a central system where the applications actually run. IT management is more efficient and security is easier to enforce when applications and resources are contained exclusively within the corporate boundary, even if they are accessible from without.

Virtual desktop and remote application solutions offer features that address a variety of potential risk factors as well as enabling improved management and security of IT assets. Centralizing and securing applications and data resources at the server allows businesses to deliver the mobility and functionality users need while enabling the information security and management the business demands. This is a foundation upon which remote desktop and remote application technologies were built, allowing users to have the real-time access to applications and data with full functionality and desktop modality, but without the requirement to install, manage and secure applications and data on the individual devices.

Make Sense?

October 20, 2015September 25, 2018

QuickBooks Online is Pretty Cool

Doesn’t Simplify Overall IT Requirement for SMBs

Intuit is doing some pretty cool things with the QuickBooks Online product. I really like the fact that there are mobile apps available, the product can auto-send reports, form templates can be imported from Word, and there’s a desktop application available to replace pure browser-based access. There are those who might believe that I’m a QBO hater, but I’m not. I am evangelist for cloud computing, mobility and cloud service… I just don’t necessarily believe that only one flavor of “cloud” applies to everyone. QuickBooks Online is some good stuff – but is it really making things simpler?

What QuickBooks Online does better than QuickBooks desktop, really, is provide a cloud-based accounting solution for small businesses for an affordable price. QuickBooks Online was built as a SaaS solution, so web-based access and a subscription service model are part of the package. On the other hand, QuickBooks desktop editions were designed to not simply function for the user, but to deliver the user experience expected from software running on the given OS/platform (e.g., Windows or Mac). When QuickBooks is running on Windows, it behaves like a Windows application and uses standard Windows conventions. Same deal with QuickBooks on Mac. It’s … Apple-y. Whether on Windows or Mac, QB desktop editions are considered to be the workhorses that really help get things done.

What some folks don’t know is that QuickBooks desktop editions can be hosted in the cloud so that they also have the benefit of anytime, anywhere accessibility and managed service. Businesses can have their QuickBooks desktop applications hosted and managed by a cloud service providers, and can access the applications and the data via the Internet just as QuickBooks Online users are able. The oft’ forgotten additional aspect of cloud hosting is that the other business applications may also be hosted by the service provider, turning the entire business IT environment into a managed, anytime/anywhere resource.

When I look at outsourced IT and how businesses might benefit from subscription and SaaS solutions, I tend to view things more holistically rather than pursuing one application or functional area at a time. The reason is that the business is an ecosystem of users, processes and capabilities. Altering one part of the ecosystem will, without doubt, impact the others. Note that, in many businesses, the accounting and finance systems are integrated with line of business applications and operational processes. At minimum, there are likely to be connections or dependencies upon certain standard productivity tools for reporting and such, potentially generating lots of data.

Consider the QuickBooks Online capability of allowing form templates to be imported in .docx format. Those templates had to be developed somewhere, and it was probably in MS Word on guess where? You got it… the desktop. How is that local non-QBO data being managed, and how accessible is that part of the system? Having accounting in the cloud is cool, but may also create separation in data silos and breaks in processes when it is removed so completely from the rest of the business information systems environment. This introduces a layer of complexity for the business, where making sure all the information assets of the company are protected and recoverable isn’t as easy as doing a complete backup and archiving offsite, especially when the data is in a variety of formats and it doesn’t all exist on your PCs or servers.

Addressing the compartmentalization of business data becomes a potentially bigger issue when connecting two or more SaaS solutions via API. Granted, this type of “extension” to the financial system helps businesses apply the right tool for the job, and ensures that workers are interacting with the information they need and not the entire financial system. Yet small business owners generally lack the technical sophistication required to understand where and how to fully preserve and protect even a single business data silo much less multiple silos. The ease of connecting systems to each other in the cloud often overshadows the complexity of creating a single data management strategy for the business. And another item to remember is to disconnect those SaaS services which are no longer in use, as they represent an ongoing potential threat to the security of your data as long as they are accessing it without the data owner’s watchful monitoring.

The moral of this story is that I believe businesses that approach their information technology needs with a holistic view will have greater success than those who focus only on particular processes or functional requirements. I think QuickBooks Online is pretty cool (especially now that there’s a desktop app!), and I (and a few million others) think QuickBooks desktop editions are pretty good, too…. They’re just different pieces of software that do things differently – each carrying different risks and rewards. The point is that neither solution stands alone in the business operation, so each should be viewed in the context of the overall business information management strategy in order to see whether they’re properly selected, placed, and managed. Trying to make things simpler doesn’t always actually make things simpler. Welcome to the cloud.

Joanie Mann Bunny Feet Make Sense?

February 17, 2015

Confusing Value Propositions: Cloud Platforms and Hosted Applications

When a service provider is in the business of selling computing resources – like bandwidth, processors and memory, and disk storage – it makes a lot of sense to also leverage the value of software products and systems which drive consumption of computing resources. In short, they market and sell software that runs on the platform in order to get folks to buy the platform, no different from selling desktop and server software in order to sell the hardware to run it. It’s just that these days the hardware and networking components are often referred to as the “platform” or maybe “the cloud”.

Let’s face it… cloud computing platforms are just no fun if there’s nothing to run on them, and a hard drive has little value when there isn’t anything stored on it. Once there is something there – an application, data… something – then the part has actual value in terms of driving revenue. This is the difficulty and the basis for confusing value propositions when it comes to offering and delivering services in the form of a hosting platform. Once again: platforms are just no fun if there’s nothing to run on them. Is the value is really about the applications, not the platform? Or is the value in the platform, because it’s necessary for running the applications?

The truth is that both are essential parts of the entire “solution”, and the value of how the solution is packaged and offered is purely up to the purchaser to determine in terms of applicability to the business. When it comes to hosted application offerings for businesses, there isn’t a single one-size-fits-all approach that will work. Sometimes people want to purchase from different vendors and put their own solutions together, and sometimes folks want turnkey delivery of whatever they need. Even channel partners and value-added resellers are finding that, with diminishing margins and aggressive competition prevalent in the market, removing the time-consuming aspects of solution delivery becomes paramount to achieving some level of profitability on the work.

What this means is that providers are looking for ways to increase the overall value and usability of their solutions, and when it comes to platform services there are only two directions to look: automation to support self-service, and application software delivery to drive consumption and usage on the hosting platform.

So now we’re back to the applications again. There’s no way to avoid them, but there’s no great way for platform companies to engage with them, either. Working with business application software is sometimes complicated, often annoying, and can be exceptionally time-consuming and resource intensive. And there are few licensing models which make it really easy for hosts and ISVs (Independent Software Vendors) to work together. Then, of course, there is the desire for exclusivity on one side or the other.

Software companies don’t generally want to select a single platform provider for their software for a very simple reason: they don’t want to limit their potential user base. Now that Windows platform is available just about anywhere – on local computers, on mobile devices, from platform and infrastructure hosting providers – how does the ISV make a decision on a single delivery channel or model or provider?

Some lean towards working with hosting providers to create branded, point-deliveries of the application. Too often, however, this approach removes the ability for customers to benefit from other applications or integrations, eliminating some of the value of the solution and certainly curtailing benefits for integrating partners of the ISV.

Host it themselves? The last thing most software developers want is to be responsible for hosting and maintaining some other guys’ software products; they have enough to worry about with their own offerings. If the solution is standalone, maybe this approach works. But there are few solutions made for the desktop which don’t have some strange integration point with MS Office apps, Adobe reader, Internet browsers or other things prevalent on the user desktop.

There isn’t any proven or easy path for software developers, IT suppliers or small business customers looking to create mobility and managed subscription service around desktop and server applications, and there is likely never going to be a single story line that all will follow. This is among the reasons for the popularity of the “hybrid” cloud approach and growing importance of managed application hosting and ISV-authorized delivery models. Yet even key providers in those areas have a tough time really communicating what they do in a way that is meaningful to the buyer. Are they selling a platform, applications, or both? Folks in the industry know the jargon and how to use it, and are often skilled at adjusting their language in order to obfuscate or confuse certain sticky issues regarding software licensing in the cloud and other similar aspects of hosting. It’s no wonder that many customers remain confused as to what, exactly, they’re being asked to buy, and where the lines of flexibility and responsibility are drawn.

The applications justify the platform, and there are possibly multiple platform approaches to delivering the app. It is a confusing situation for business buyers of IT as well as for their resellers and suppliers, and the increasing number of options for how businesses approach purchasing and using information technology makes it unlikely that the process will become as simple as some suggest.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?

June 24, 2014November 29, 2017

Justifying the IT Budget: the Cost of Not Spending

“Competitive and ever-increasingly sophisticated in the marketplace”[1] describes a company positioned for long term business survival. Complacency takes the business nowhere but into irrelevance-land, which I think we can all agree is not where most business owners wish to end up… it makes selling the company slightly more challenging. Even in markets which were once firmly held to be localized are now open to new – and new kinds of – competitors, due in most part to advancements the development of information technology (IT) as well as how it is applied. These days, competition is globally facilitated rather than locally, and it’s becoming the standard approach. Welcome to the cloud.

New paradigms in IT capability and use are spawning huge shifts in what were broadly recognized normal or traditional business approaches. This realization has created the need for businesses to radically change their view of IT investment and the value of IT within the organization and operation. Yet IT is rarely an area which gains a strategic focus for investment within most businesses, and is frequently considered to be like a pencil or a particular chair… something the business needs but which has little impact on the company’s ability to compete better. Au Contraire, Mon Frère: Information technology is at the heart of business competitiveness, but justifying the desired investment is the great challenge. Maybe it’s because the focus is always on the great benefits to be achieved with the spend, rather than looking realistically at the impact of not doing it well or at all. Especially with information technology, there is a large potential cost to be paid for not spending adequately.

While business operations are sustained through IT involvement, economic pressures continue to weigh down business interest in funding IT operations. (which is weird, as there is a lot of evidence that the good bet is on those who do just the opposite). This regular spending reduction and cost control plan has good intentions of reducing the overall cost of business operations. The unfortunate reality is that operations are less efficiently sustained and are even more frequently unable to create or manage any level of growth. Reducing all IT spending is only useful when profitability is also improved and quality is maintained, unless it is an effort to simply stay afloat as revenues decline (and it’s recognized that quality will decline as well). But reducing costs does not help the business seeking to remain competitive in a rapidly changing marketplace, and pulling the pins out of the department primarily responsible for at least keeping things currently in operation operating serves only to chip away at the once-solid foundation. It’s a real problem, this difficulty with increasing interest and justifying increased funding for business information technology. And it all stems from the inability of organizations to clearly and with tangible benefit cost justify the investment.

It is this justification – demonstrating IT investment as a strategic asset presenting an advantage over competitors and positioning the business for future success – which requires effort and analysis to fully describe. Information technology is not a set of servers and software, and it is not websites and portals. It’s not click thru rates or SEO scores. Well, it’s all of that, but it is none of that. There is so much to consider and incorporate, and there are many degrees of success which might be experienced along the way. Information technology is a fundamental requirement in each and every business, and dependency upon it is increasing at a startlingly rapid pace, yet we still can’t quite figure out how to put it all on paper with provable numbers.

It might be easier to forecast in little departmental or functional pieces, but that doesn’t provide a total picture of the enterprise. And it’s often really difficult to quantify the impact of not doing something, or doing it only OK rather than really well. When this data does present itself, it often comes too late and in the form of a comparison to the competition, revealing where the business just didn’t meet the mark as compared to others in the same space.

It all boils down to businesses coming to the realization that information technology investment must be made on a continuing basis. The justification for IT funding must be made, and that justification must necessarily be balanced against the potential implications and impacts of not implementing. This is the only formula which can ultimately describe the value of IT investment in the business.

Make Sense?

Read the entire article on LinkedIn

https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140624161243-633314-justifying-the-it-budget-the-cost-of-not-spending

[1] A model for investment justification in information

technology projects: A. Gunasekaran et al. / International Journal of Information Management 21 (2001) 349–364

May 6, 2014May 6, 2014

Easy deployment in the cloud: What about users and applications?

Businesses are migrating their systems to the cloud, it’s true. Organizations of every size and type are taking advantage of the cost savings and flexibility introduced with cloud deployments and hosting services. Rather than focusing efforts on procuring, installing and maintaining servers and applications in-house, IT departments are moving workloads offsite to cloud providers and hosted platforms. The tools are readily available to help these IT workers configure and light up VMs in hosted infrastructure, and certain platform licenses and other elements are made accessible to customers. But there’s something missing in the toolsets provided by platform hosting companies – a certain something that ultimately determines how useful (or not) the hosting platform service is when IT is ready to deploy users and applications in the environment.

Conceptually, hosting services are supposed to provide a centralized management and administrative capability for an organization. While this is true in the context that most of the system and resources are assembled inside the datacenter, proximity alone doesn’t make things easier to manage. In fact, some virtualization and delivery models can exacerbate issues that IT at least had a known way of dealing with when it was in-house.

Consider that, even in hosted and virtualized infrastructure, everything that needed to be done to build the in-house network still has to be done – only now it involves the on-premises computers (sometimes with client software still requiring installation and management), the local LAN, the Internet, the datacenter facility and network, and computers and software in the datacenter. Most of the complexity may reside in the datacenter with the hosted systems, but even that scenario isn’t necessarily plug-n-play. IT must still bring up the servers, and then the fun begins. Fun, in this case, means setting up policies and permissions, users, and applications. The unfortunate thing is that there are few tools being made available which directly and specifically address this requirement for customers in hosted infrastructure. Hosted customers are still burdened with the requirement to not only establish and manage their permissions and user accounts – they also have to still install, update and maintain application software in the environment.

Most IT teams recognize that installing an application once is way better than having to install it a bunch of times, so there is a tendency to lean towards hosting models where a single (or few) machines service desktop and application sessions for lots of users. Reducing the number of actual application installations, this approach (such as with terminal services) can make software implementations go a bit easier than if the app had to be installed across a lot of machines. On the other hand, there is a fine art to implementing some applications in terminal server environments, and not all apps behave well in the delivery model. Many engineering hours have been spent trying to get user apps working on terminal servers – sometimes much more time than if the application were simply installed to multiple PCs. On an ongoing basis, technicians fight with applications and broken functionality, wishing the entire time that they could bypass the terminal services issue and get back to working with individual machines and app installs. At least they knew the apps would work.

Companies determining that a VDI or DaaS solution would more directly mirror the individualized PC approach quickly find that managing and maintain the working user environment, including the variety of applications and functionality demanded by entry-level and power users alike, is just as complicated and time-consuming as it was when they were managing individual user PCs. And, lacking quality software distribution and lifecycle management tools in the platform, find that template-based VM imaging doesn’t go far enough in terms of easing the burdens of installing, updating and maintaining applications on a user machine, whether it’s the local PC or a managed VM.

The truth about many cloud solution offerings and hosting platforms is that they are often oriented towards the enterprise customer and IT department, expecting that the customer has the skills and capability required to do the right things in deploying the hosted solution for the company. Leaving all of the time-consuming aspects of service management and delivery to the customer – the parts of the delivery which address the actual users, desktops and applications – simply shifts the location of work for IT, but not necessarily the nature of the work. They’re still going to spend a bunch of time not just setting up groups and users and applications; they’re going to spend a bunch of time managing and maintaining them, just like they always have.

There should be smart solutions to these problems – tools which could be made available to customers having a desire to deploy their operations in hosted infrastructure and that deliver the automation and ease of management which enables IT to realize gains through process efficiencies at all levels of the deployment. The heavy lifting isn’t buried in the building of a server. The heavy lifting – the grunt detail work that nobody really wants to deal with – exists around groups, users and applications. Get some truly useful automation tools in those areas, and hosting becomes even more viable and beneficial for value added resellers, IT departments, and their users.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?

September 18, 2013

CIO, CFO, IT and Procuring the Cloud | buildingUp.biz

CIO, CFO, IT and Procuring the Cloud

For as long as there has been high technology use in business, there has been a struggle between the enterprise CFO and CIO for the power to make IT purchase decisions. It isn’t rocket science… the reasons for the challenge are fairly straightforward. The CFO wants to know what the expected return on the investment will be. The CIO, on the other hand, recognizes that there is rarely a straight line to be drawn between IT expenditures and near-term positive business outcomes. Sometimes it takes a while to fully realize the benefits of an IT project… and sometimes it’s necessary to spend the money just to maintain status quo.

While there may be indicators that the CFO’s influence in the enterprise is extending into areas where the CIO traditionally ruled (due – at least in part – to SaaS and the Cloud) there are also indicators that the role of the CIO is evolving rather than losing relevance.

A survey performed in 2011 by Gartner and Financial Executives International revealed a number of interesting results which indicated that the balance of IT procurement power was shifting within the enterprise. 344 senior financial executives were surveyed, and they revealed that:

in 45% of organizations, the CFO makes or leads IT investment strategy
about 75% of surveyed CFOs said they have little confidence in their own IT departments

A CFO.com article on the subject also mentioned a KPMG study from April 2011, in which it was reported that “73% of CFOs identified IT as the greatest risk to finance meeting its objectives”.

With the emergence of “cloud” computing solutions and the plethora of application and service options now available to businesses, some businesses have concluded that “the CFO is better equipped for the cloud world”. The belief is that the CFO is more attuned to the processes of vendor management and contract term and condition negotiations, which are primary areas of focus when looking to obtain outsourced IT and application services. The process of comparing pricing and service level agreements is more of a business process than a technology process, placing it squarely in the realm of the CFO.

The real issue here isn’t a struggle for power and influence; it’s a change in business priorities fueled by changes in technology and service models. IT and the role of the CIO must focus on innovation and improvement of processes and profitability through efficiencies gained with technology, not on defragging hard drives and running software updates. Brocade.com discusses this evolution of roles and focus with enterprise CIOs and CFOs in the release entitled The CIO Is Dead. Long Live the CIO. The Cloud Redefines the Role of the CIO

“ … the CIO role will evolve and policy enforcement, technology evangelism and mediation between business units and their services providers will become the key responsibilities for the CIO by 2020…. And rather than being replaced by the CFO in this shift in IT provisioning, two-thirds of respondents predicted that the roles of COO and CIO will merge as technology continues to become more operationally vital. http://newsroom.brocade.com/press-releases/the-cio-is-dead-long-live-the-cio-the-cloud-rede-nasdaq-brcd-977455

Who understands better than the internal IT department the time-consuming and frustrating nature of maintaining user environments and applications? Who in the organization has the technical understanding, coupled with a direct business understanding, sufficient to explore new ways of approaching various process or workflow problems? I think most business IT managers would agree that addressing issues that have a potential to radically improve the way a business operates is much more challenging and interesting than selecting the right make and model of server.

via CIO, CFO, IT and Procuring the Cloud | buildingUp.biz.