Nov 22 2009

Rethinking: Cloud & Enterprise Computing

Category: Cloud Computing,Strategy,Supply Chain ManagementSurendra Reddy @ 7:23 pm   Comments (8)

Companies currently spend about 5-6% of their revenues on IT. Many of these companies are now struggling to align their IT to support the business strategy, provide a competitive advantage, and serve as a platform for growth. Exploding number of choices and growing complexity of technology assets making these companies victims of their rapidly obsolescing computing infrastructure. Once these assets offered these companies the competitive advantage and served as barriers to entry but now these IT assets are becoming liability. Supply chain meets the cloud to boost the visibility of collaboration processes with and between third-parties such as suppliers, partners, and customers. If companies fail to deconstruct their IT infrastructure and embrace cloud, somebody will do and make them irrelevant.

CORE AND CONTEXT

The bulk of the economic value of organizations is processed through business and consumer supply chains of products and services across manufacturing and services industries. No matter whether it is retail, healthcare, banking, real estate, manufacturing, insurance, communications or others, there are significant gaps in the point-to-point business processes across business’ operations resulting from underlying Infostructure complexity. These enterprises are trapped with their internal IT (Context) focus and are ignoring the importance of the information and interactions across their supply chains (Core). For many companies this has resulted in loss of profitability and in some cases the elimination of products and services all together.

Professor Hau Lee, well known expert in Supply Chain Management said,

“Companies are great not because they were focused on cost or flexibility or speed but because they have the ability to manage transitions – changing market conditions, evolving technology, different requirements as a product moves through its life cycle. Companies also need to be able to handle one more transition: Crisis Management. Successful companies have been able to grab market share out of crises, which often requires them to work effectively across functional boundaries”.

As the recessionary economic and business climate becomes more challenging for organizations, there are many competing priorities and fewer resources to maintain and manage existing operations. Still, with a once in a generation slowdown, it is also an opportune time to re-evaluate where automation and collaboration of these processes can make significant improvement now and in the upturn. It will not be sufficient to just be internally focused on your segment of the supply chain.

SERVICES IN CLOUD: ARCHITECTURAL TRANSFORMATION

Cloud computing is a new deployment and operational model for making IT management simpler and more responsive to the needs of the dynamic business. Cloud architecture decouples the IT infrastructure from the business services. Cloud computing not only enables rapid innovation, flexibility, and support of core business functions but also enables design, development and delivery of new applications by highly efficient virtualized compute resources that can be rapidly scaled up and down in a flexible yet secure way to deliver a high quality of service.

In the pre-information era, suppliers and manufacturers have market power because they have information about a product or a service that the customer does not and can not have. But, now customer has all the information. Whoever has the information has the power. Power is now shifting to the customer. This means that the supplier, manufacturer will soon cease to be a seller and instead become a buyer for a customer. This is already happening. Peter Drucker put it succinctly in his article, HBR Sep-Oct 1997, “Looking Ahead: Implications of the Present“:

“Increasingly, a winning strategy will require information about events and conditions outside the institution: non-customers, technologies other than those currently used by the company and its present competitors, markets not currently served, and so on. Only with this information can a business decide how to allocate its knowledge resources in order to produce the highest yield. Only with such information can a business also prepare for new changes and challenges arising from sudden shifts in the world economy and in the nature and content of knowledge itself. The development of rigorous methods for gathering and analyzing outside information will increasingly become a major challenge for businesses and for information experts.”

Technology is a critical part of supply chain management because companies need to bring together disparate strands of information to be able to understand and assess situations. They also must have analytical services to be able to quickly and consistently decide on the best course of action. A large number of the larger vendors offer some or all of the pieces needed to support more effective supply chain execution — supply chain management and ERP software for collecting data, data warehouses for staging data, and business intelligence software for creating and managing the reporting, scorecard, and dashboard elements. However, they may not be bringing all of the data together in a way that makes it useful, timely, and actionable. To do so, significant integration and customization are needed, which is very time consuming as well as expensive undertaking. Justifying the long development cycles and huge R&D budgets makes these projects not attractive to the business leaders.

Paul Saffo summarized the state of machines, complexity of tools, and exploding information in his HBR article, “Are You Machine Wise?(HBR, 1997)”

“As our tools become ever more complex and interconnected and more central to the conduct of business, their benefits also become harder to recognize. Furthermore, executives need to know and understand the logic of the work done by machines—and, above all else, the limits beyond which those tools cannot be pushed. Meanwhile, the volume of information continues to expand exponentially, generated by machines conversing with other machines on our behalf. Every business activity leaves behind a wake of information, from data spinning off production-line process controllers to transaction records generated over retail-credit-card networks. And the growing centrality of the Internet for business purposes will only add to the flood.”

CLOUDABILITY OF ERP/SCM SERVICES

It has taken good 10 years for companies to embrace enterprise resource planning and supply chain management. This is primarily due to high implementation and licensing costs of the software. In my view, the adoption of cloud computing services in a supply chain and enterprise resource planning many be faster than the former uptake patterns of on-premise enterprise resource planning software. More and more companies are already collaborating with their suppliers, vendors, and partners using the Internet or VANs. It doesn’t make any economic sense to own and operate their own internal data centers to run these applications.

In the same way that ERP/SCM applications have not been employed to automate 100% of enterprises’ business processes, organizations are likely to use a hybrid approach, public and private cloud services where appropriate. Initially, lower-level cloud-based services such as accessing compute power or storage capacity over the internet (infrastructure as a service) and exploiting platform as a service for use in tactical and emerging applications. Software as a service models will be embraced for standardized application areas such as finance, payroll, logistics, human resources (context) that do not provide organizations with competitive advantage.

These companies may also pursue the concept of “private” cloud computing to create their own “private cloud” datacenters. Individual business units (or partners) then pay the IT department for using industrialized or standardized services in line with agreed charge-back mechanisms. This approach is less threatening than a wholesale move to the public cloud, but should make it easier to plan the gradual migration to cloud services.

enumerated for enterprise adoption of Cloud Computing. Joe Wienman wrote,

“Cloud services are definitely of use for extranet communities…we are seeing it in a variety of areas in AT&T’s businesses. For example, AT&T’s Sterling Commerce unit is a “cloud provider” for supply chain visibility and optimization, and our AT&T Telepresence Solution provides benefits through extranet connectivity, where there is a network effect. And, with networking costs and transaction costs coming down, and enabling technologies such as RFID, sensor networks, electronic product codes, etc., supply chains will continue to benefit from neutral and authoritative cloud services, e.g., chain of custody for tagged pharmaceuticals. And, when two giants are part of the supply chain, e.g., a large retailer and a large consumer packaged goods manufacturer, where should the data reside? If it’s at the retailer, then the manufacturer can access it, but needs to build separate interfaces for other retailers, etc., so the order(n) vs. order(n squared) economics come into play, driving functionality into the cloud.”

CLOUD AND BUSINESS IMPLICATIONS

Economies of Scale: Cloud redefines economies of scale, allowing small companies to enjoy the low unit cost for scaling out their computing infrastructure – traditionally companies with huge data centers only been able to offer rich information to their customers.

Compressed Transaction Costs: Transaction costs along the supply chains are getting lower and they continue to decline sharply. Lower transaction costs are allowing companies to significantly enhance the richness of the information combined with interactivity(soon may be augmented realty), that would have been too costly to capture and process in absence of Cloud like models.

Your Success Depends on Quality of Decisions You Make:A real-time enterprise derives competitive advantage from responding to changing business conditions and opportunities faster than the competition. Often, decision-making depends on computing, e.g., business intelligence, risk analysis, portfolio optimization and so forth. Since an ideal cloud provides effectively unbounded on-demand scalability, for the same cost, a business can accelerate its decision-making. So far, few organizations have figured out how to turn the oceans of data available to them into islands of insight about their best opportunities for growth. Therein lies largely untapped potential for companies to accelerate their growth and separate from the competition (Cloudonomics Law #7).

Create and Stage Rich User Experiences:Using Cloud, enterprise can take advantage of Cloud to reduce the latency of critical business applications (Cloudonomics Law #8).

Availability and Reliability at Fractional Cost: The reliability of a system with n redundant components, each with reliability r, is 1-(1-r)^n. So if the reliability of a single data center is 99 percent, two data centers provide four nines (99.99 percent) and three data centers provide six nines (99.9999 percent). For enterprises to achieve this level of availability, it not only takes huge capital investment, but also drives their operational cost. Instead, enterprises can leverage Cloud to achieve extremely high reliability architecture with only a few data centers (Cloudonomics Law #9).

CLOUD AND BUSINESS CONSEQUENCES

Process Optimizations: Though Y2K provided an opportunity to replace/optimize the old transaction systems with more efficient models, many enterprises have been quick to replace them with standard software – primary goal was Y2K compatibility. Cloud provides a unique opportunity to optimize key enterprise services — business process management, end-to-end visibility of demand-supply patterns, business activity monitoring, business analytics and data warehouse.

Process Standardization: Globalization, supply chain management, and restructuring demand standardization of services with clear interfaces. Standardized services are critical for collaboration, co-ordination, and co-creation with business partners and alliances.

Shared Services: Many enterprises are today utilizing shared services like UPS/FedEx for transportations/Logistics, ADP for payroll processing. Cloud enables these enterprises to explore more opportunities for shared services enabling them to focus more on their core competencies.

Enterprise Messaging Services: Last one decade many standards for information exchange across enterprise applications have evolved like EDIFACT, cXML, Rosettanet etc. Cloud will take these building blocks to the next level by enabling the globally scalable and reliable messaging infrastructure relieving them from expensive VANs used by enterprises today. It makes sense for today’s VAN providers to provide similar services in the cloud at fractional cost.

Integration Services: Even after a decade of huge investments into Enterprise Application Integration services, still integration is the major barrier for enterprises to launch new services. My hope is that Cloud offers a platform to simplify the integration through standardization of service interfaces. Instead of investing into customization and support of these integration services, VAN service providers can offer these integration services, if still required to talk to legacy systems.

Communities of Co-Ops: Cloud enables greater number of cooperating services between the members of a business community (suppliers, partners, customers).

Data Warehouse: ERP, SCM, and CRM process measurement generates an unprecedented flood data. Enterprise value is buried in this data. Most of the enterprises can’t afford to have their own IT infrastructure to make meaning out of this data. Cloud enables enterprises to burst into Data Warehousing services to enrich and contextualize this data.

CONCLUSION

The economic downturn and globalization is changing the way enterprises operate. Changes are becoming increasingly more radical. Enterprises are being broken down into components and reassembled along different lines. The feeling of uncertainty has never been great as it is now. Cloud computing going to play a critical role in simplifying the operations of Supply Chain networks and communities by taking advantage of cost structures and cloudonomics offered by the Cloud. Cloud makes new business solutions possible. This might means new or improved products and services, additional sales channels, more optimal means of procurement, new ways of customer, supplier collaboration, more effective management, and new information services.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I had the good fortune to be in a good place at the right time and to learn from others who willingly shared their experiences. I am most grateful to the many people who have offered me a helping hand, encouragement, and inspiration along the way. I would also like to acknowledge the years of wisdom many of you has shared with me on cloud computing, issues, benefits, and challenges. My sincere appreciation goes to Joe Weinman for his helpful insight and perspectives on Cloudonomics and Supply Chain. He has generously allowed me to use his ideas and spared his valuable time to review this post and provided me his valuable feedback. I have incorporated number of his Cloudonomics laws and some of our email conversations into this article.

TAGS: ,


Oct 24 2009

Views and Experiences: Growth by Innovation or M&A?

Category: Leadership,Strategic Management,StrategySurendra Reddy @ 8:58 am   Comments (0)

John Furrier kicked-off an interesting conversational thread on twitter: Grow through innovation or M&A interesting discussion going on here; re: Cisco vs Juniper – two different visions on growth. Jake Kaldenbaugh, Susie Wee joined me in the discussion. I have summarized my thinking and position on M&A vs Innovation driven growth strategy. My argument is that success in Innovation and M&A driven strategies combined with optimal use of financial engineering is the best guarantee of thriving in good times and bad times. Companies decided to choose only innovation or M&A or financial engineering tend to destroy its value as opposed to creating value. Welcome your comments and wisdom to shape my thinking and practice.

Growth

Growth is a worthy goal. Not very long ago, earnings just more than the cost of the capital was the mantra to measure the growth of the companies. Many companies worked hard to make their assets sweat. But, changing times and changing market conditions drove investor’s thirst for ever higher returns. Then came the next generation technology companies and changed the market expectations. Now, same investors no longer happy with earnings at cost of capital. They are demanding unattainable growth targets. It is practically impossible to meet the rising expectations of shareholders unless companies innovate to create the wealth – that too in a way competition can’t follow you quickly. You can’t buy the innovation “off-the-shelf” through M&As.

In the continuing quest for business growth, many companies are turning to  three compelling sources of growth: Financial Engineering, Innovation and Integration (M&A). Growth through applying financial engineering practices by getting rid of bad companies, “toxic assets”, share buy backs, returning cash to shareholders, and downsizing only lasts for short term and are used for instant cure for slow growth syndrome. Where Innovation is not only about developing new generations of products, services, channels, and customer experience but also conceiving new business processes and models. M&A or Integration enables them increase capacity, improve performance, lower cost structure, and discover new business opportunities.

Susie Wee (@susiewee) wrote,

Organic growth reqs commitment to productization/M&A reqs commitment 2 integration. Each has a place & needs to be “done well”

Growth is no substitute for radical innovation. But “durable growth” is a derivative of radical innovation. Focusing on growth rather than on the challenge of innovation is more likely to destroy wealth. Don’t mistake financial engineering for radical innovation. At the end there will not be any more wealth to unlock. You don’t need leaders to unlock the wealth – instead you need leaders who has fire-in-the-belly to create lightening rods of radical innovation. Innovation and integration, together, allow an enterprise to acquire more customers and deliver more goods and services to market. My argument is that success in all three is the best guarantee of thriving in good times and bad times. If companies choose to go with either one of these strategies and stagnation can doom a business. Successful execution of either of these strategies is not an easy task. It needs discipline and senior management commitment. It strongly depends on companies’ ability to collaborate across organizational boundaries.

Companies that can grow their top-line by giving away value at close to zero profit are spinning their wheels without much of progress. How long they can survive?

Innovation Driven Strategy

Unless companies institutionalize the innovation activism, they are unlikely to meet the challenges: Reinvent itself and re-inventing its industry. Apple is such a great example of an innovation driven company. How many acquisitions Apple made recently? I guess close to none. Is apple creating wealth or unlocking wealth? Apple created huge wealth through radical innovation. My assessment is that Apple was able to re-imagine its deepest sense of what Apple is, what it does, and how it competes. That made them very unique company in the Valley. Customers love their products. They don’t even mind piercing their bodies with tattoos of Apple’s logo. What is driving such a stellar performance of Apple? I bet it is constant, restless, and relentless innovation with new products their customers love without damaging their price position and the brand.

Susie Wee (@susiewee) wrote,

@Furrier @Jakewk @sureddy Driving innovation to product in a company is an art. Requires strategy, opportunity, timing, and luck.

@sureddy Actually I prefer the word “fortune” over “luck”. You can have some impact on your fortune.How important?Very… @Furrier @Jakewk

@sureddy Moving innov to market in BigCo requires many functions-mktg,r&d,GTM,supply chain,ops-to execute in concert. @Furrier @Jakewk

@sureddy Fortune/Luck is when the innovation matches needs/strategic directions in multiple functions at the same time. @Furrier @Jakewk

Many companies fail to create the future not because they fail to predict it but because they fail to imagine it. Companies stuck more often with their heritage and failed to distinguish between the heritage and destiny. As Jake Kaldenbaugh pointed out, in many companies the premium placed on being right is so high that there is virtually no room for imagination or looking for the unconventional wisdom. These days strategies of many companies looks alike or hardly any difference. Outsourcing was another powerful force for the strategy convergence. As companies outsourced more and more made their strategic differentiation narrower and narrower. They are focused for short term and compromising their long term vision.

Jake Kaldenbaugh tweeted his interesting view on Innovation Strategy:

@sureddy @susiewee @furrier Organic is still a funky art in cos. Have hard time doing both product & GTM development.

@sureddy @furrier Successful internal R&D growth strats tend to run in cycles for cos which tells me they may be based on leader ie S. Jobs

@sureddy @furrier @susiewee I think corp incentive systems interfere w/ internal innovation. Y so much reliance on VC & M&A in SV.

Without a radical innovation, companies are devoting a mountain of resources to molehill of differentiation. Unless companies become more adept at innovation, more imaginative minds will capture tomorrow’s wealth. We see this all the time. Companies started in garages tend to break the records of all time. What is driving these small companies to achieve such an outstanding performance or results? Their ability to de-construct and re-construct their business models at the speed of light. When its most effective, radical innovation makes their competition irrelevant. It isn’t about competitive strategy. It is not positioning against competition. But making competition irrelevant. If it is not different, it is not strategic any more.

Cisco and M&A Driven Strategy

Companies like Cisco realized that much of the innovation that will shape the future of their industry is occurring outside of their organization. Cisco viewed hundreds of startups that created every year as potential sources of innovation to be exploited. They adopted totally different strategy. They co-opted the insurgents. They are innovators in one sense realizing that the ultimate value of their acquisitions is not the integration of technology or products but unlocking the huge wealth in the contribution it makes to Cisco’s entrepreneurial energy. In my view, Cisco enabled different level of Innovation through a perfect blend of serendipity, genius, invest commitment, and sheer execution focus. I tend argue that Cisco legitimized, fostered, celebrated, and rewarded the nonlinear innovation. I may be wrong. But, my strong sense is that they created an ecosystem where virtuous mice(startups with great ideas) and wealthy elephant(Cisco with ton of money and passion to harvest these startup ideas) lived happily ever after!

@Jakewk Cisco’s competitive strategy is at odd with engineering and product strategy has been for years – they fill holes not advance tec

Cisco has worked to make acquisitions a routine process, as route as the product development. Kind of open their eyes and ears to look for new innovations part of their strategy. This strategy worked well for Cisco for reasonable amount of time.

Jake Kaldenbaugh replied to Cisco’s M&A vs Innovation strategy:

@Furrier Re: Cisco filling holes v. adv tech: Sometimes systemic integration can be innovation IMHO.

Does this strategy work for long run? Is it sustainable? In my view, I think they also reached the point of inflection. For every strategy there is a decay unless it is constantly refined and reinforced. And I am sure Cisco started to experience this too. It is rather very difficult to scale this strategy for ever. The complexity of trying to manage these different business units soon will overwhelm the advantage of integration. Though M&A helps eliminating the competition vs making their competition irrelevant. Companies that focus on this strategy, soon end up with an unsustainable or strategy decay. What do they do next? Then they go and spin-off or de-mergers or break them into small companies. Or get rid of the bad apples. All these would lead to the circus of financial engineering to unlock the shareholder wealth. Never forget that good companies gone bad are simply companies that for too long denied the strategy decay or trying to over reach their growth without any strategic differentiation.

Conclusion

Don’t mistake financial engineering for radical innovation. At the end there will not be any more wealth to unlock. Companies need radical innovation to create more wealth. Successful innovation needs discipline of innovation, senior management commitment, and depends on companies’ ability to collaborate across organizational boundaries. Innovation and integration, together, allow an enterprise to acquire more customers and deliver more goods and services to market more rapidly making competition irrelevant. My argument is that success in both combined with optimal use of financial engineering is the best guarantee of thriving in good times and bad times. Companies decided to choose only innovation or M&A or financial engineering tend to destroy its value as opposed to creating value.

TAGS: , ,