Archive for the ‘Vendor Selection’ Category

Order Gleevec Online Cheap

Published on May 25, 2010 by R "Ray" Wang

Today's Evaluation Frameworks Miss The Point

Business leaders seek clarity in understanding which technology solutions drive the most business value.  Today's frameworks often focus on a combination of:


  • Features Order gleevec online cheap, - ability to execute, current offering, product depth, etc

  • Direction - vision, strategy, corporate leadership, etc.


Unfortunately, the intersection of features and direction only addresses potential.  Clients continue to express how potential alone no longer provides enough justification in vendor selection or understanding the overall adoption strategy. Kopen goedkope iressa, Next Gen Evaluation Frameworks Must Start With Business Value

Business leaders seek returns on investment.  IT leaders strive to reduce cost of delivery.  ROI alone may not answer the question as business value needs to be expressed and compared.  Business impact remains the goal in building out new frameworks.  In addition, the cost of technologies must be factored.   As a result, New Mexico NM N.Mex., New York NY N.Y., key questions in vendor selection often include:


  • Will this product provide an ROI?

  • Where will the organization realize a business impact?

  • How do various solutions compare in delivering business value?


Organizations Must Balance Business Impact And Cost Of Technology Delivery

Based on conversations with 113 end user clients and vendors, there appears to be a market demand in building out a new framework that compares how (see Figure 1):


  • Business impact extends across the value chain, ordering gleevec. φτηνές φαρμακείο gleevec, Business impact extends into 3 levels of maturity from internal to external (i.e. department, goedkope capecitabine apotheek, Buy cheap zometa online, cross enterprise, and business value chain).  The greater the penetration of the solution, acheter epogen, North Carolina NC N.C., the greater the business value.

  • Cost of technology delivery measures against percentage of revenue. Both scaling and return on investment reduce the cost of delivery.  Reference data provided via customer references and case studies will provide key data points by industry, buy epogen online cheap, Billige evista Apotheke, size, and geo.

Figure 1, cheap casodex online. Extent Of Business Impact And Cost Of Technology Delivery Drive Business Value

The Bottom Line - It's Time To Apply The New Model

Evaluation frameworks of the future must begin the process of identifying the key criteria required for end users to be successful with both their business and IT stakeholders.  A confluence of disruptive business models, rapid adoption and obsolescence of technologies, and demand for business value data drive the need for this new model.   Expect next gen business and technology leaders, research firms, and technology consultants to start today, order gleevec online cheap. Rabatt kaufen zometa,

Pilot's Log (Behind The Scenes)

On the buy side, I've spoken with over 100 end user customers who remain frustrated with the existing evaluation models.  They are ready to embrace models that measure business value.  On the sell side, Mississippi MS Miss., Ordering zometa online, I was meeting with SAP a few weeks back to discuss their new industry strategy, which they launched at SAPPHIRE.  When talking about what customers really need, order casodex online, Buy evista online legally, we rekindled this concept of business value and IT value.  In fact SAP is aiming their new industry strategy at providing a healthy balance between the two.  Conversations with other vendors, hint that this concept will soon catch on.   Look for some new evaluation frameworks to emerge from Altimeter this year as we build against these core principles.


Your POV.

Ready to put this model to work in evaluations?  Do you think analyst firms should conduct research using this framework?  You can post or send on to rwang0 at gmail dot com or r at softwaresinsider dot org and we’ll keep your anonymity, Louisiana LA. Casodex en ligne afin, Please let us know if you need help with your apps strategy efforts.  Here’s how we can help:


  • Evaluating tech projects for business value

  • Assessing apps strategies (e.g. single instance, ordering gleevec online legally, Louisiana LA, two-tier ERP, upgrade, Koop korting capecitabine, Order iressa online, custom dev, packaged deployments”

  • Designing end to end processes and systems

  • Comparing SaaS/Cloud integration strategies

  • Assisting with legacy ERP migration

  • Planning upgrades and migration

  • Performing vendor selection

  • Providing contract negotiations and software licensing support


Copyright © 2010 R Wang and Insider Associates, gleevec cheap, Köpa billiga zometa, LLC. All rights reserved.

Similar posts: Buy cheap arimidex online. Buy iressa. Order arimidex. Cheap iressa overnight delivery. Billig kaufen casodex.
Trackbacks from: Order gleevec online cheap. Order gleevec online cheap. Order gleevec online cheap. Billiga gleevec apotek. παραγγείλετε online gleevec.

RSS feed for comments on this post. — TrackBack URL

Personal Log: Altimeter Group – Helping Organizations Bridge The Technology Obsolescence Gap

Published on August 27, 2009 by R "Ray" Wang

Altimeter Group Logo

Emerging Technologies Alter The Approach To Enterprise Strategies... The proliferation of and access to emerging technologies by the business user challenges organizations to rethink their enterprise technology strategy.  Consumer technologies have proven to be not only more innovative and collaborative, but also quite accessible and equally reliable when compared to existing enterprise tools.  The result - IT departments no longer reign supreme in determining technology strategy and adoption.  In fact, business leaders and individuals increasingly play a greater, if not decisive, role in driving the selection and cultural adoption of technology.  Consequently, enterprise strategies must be crafted to manage disparate systems, technologies, and deployment options across the organization. ... But The Rate of Technology Obsolescence Outpaces The Pace Of Technology Adoption Organizations face massive levels of change across challenging macro-economic conditions, emerging workplace dynamics, new business models, and slow pace of technology adoption.  Unfortunately, they must respond to these changes while being saddled with the burdens of last century's technology.  Without actionable application strategies in the transition to social enterprise apps, many organizations face obsolescence.  How do we get from where we are today to where we want to be? Enterprise Strategies Must Begin With The End In Mind To take a Coveyism, its important to define the objectives before you begin.  As the enterprise strategist at Altimeter I'll be assisting our clients with:
  • Adopting technology strategies driven by business need;
  • Building dynamic user experiences;
  • Crafting strategies to transform business processes;
  • Delivering a connected community; and
  • Eliminating burdensome cost structures to fund innovation
These advisory projects will include but not be limited to:
  • Technology strategy reviews
  • Vendor selection
  • Independent verification and validation (IV&V)
  • Vendor management strategies
Succeed With A Holistic Approach Beyond Just Enterprise Strategy As I assist our clients with these enterprise strategies, its important to think of these in the context of a holistic approach (see Figure 1).  Your organization's overall strategy should also address the challenges and success strategies in leadership, customer, and innovation required for success.  I'll be joined by 3 other partners including our founding partner, Charlene Li, who will focus on the culture and structures required to guide these emerging technologies in the organization.  Deb Schultz, a pioneer in bringing innovation concepts to life, will be leading our labs program at "The Hangar". Meanwhile, my former Forrester colleague, Jeremiah Owyang will be focusing on customer strategy of emerging technologies.
Figure 1. Altimeter Group's Four Practice Areas
Join The Altimeter Open House Webinar On The Future of Business Find out more about how the Altimeter Group can serve as your resource at our upcoming Open House Webinar.  Details below: Date:                           Thursday, September 10th, 2009 Time:                          10 am Pacific Time (GMT - 8:00) Registration link:     https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/725944010
Related blog posts:
Your POV What are your top concerns about your enterprise strategy?  Will you have the tools to get from today's enterprise technologies to an emerging world of Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0 business solutions.  Let us know what you think.  Post your comment here or reach me direct at r at altimetergroup dot com or r at softwareinsider dot org. Copyright © 2009 R Wang. All rights reserved.

RSS feed for comments on this post. — TrackBack URL

Tuesday’s Tip: How To Properly Align Team Incentives In Software Contract Negotiations

Published on August 4, 2009 by R "Ray" Wang
In the first step of the original seven simple steps to successfully negotiate software contracts, the key is to have the right team in place.  To refresh everyone's memory from the March 8th, 2004 post the details for Step 1 are:
Step 1: Ensure that the right team is in place
  • Inputs:  Organizational chart and agreement on key roles.
  • Action items: Determine the key roles needed to conduct the negotiation. Business teams include the COO, Division VP’s .  Technology leaders include the CIO, enterprise architecture . Vendor management teams include the procurement experts, legal team, etc.
  • Deliverables: Responsibilities list for each role.
Having the right team in place is important.  However, dozens of readers point out the dire need to not only align incentives but improve transparency.   Some examples include views such as:
  • CIO's. "While the CIO needs to set the technology direction, we often find two types of CIO's - the buyer and the implementer.  Buyer CIO's get wined and dined during the process, hob nob at events, get all the attention and perks, then leave for another company to do the same thing.  Implementer CIO's get stuck with making the stuff all work, cost overruns, and 100's of tradeoffs in promised capabilities and all the blame for failure." - VP of Business Applications, Fortune 100 Company.
  • Procurement/vendor management teams. "The only thing that our Procurement VP and her staff seem to care about is the discount % and total savings.  Despite our need for a product that costs the same, we see her team favor the products that show her the most savings.  Its no wonder why vendors keep jacking up prices to create win-wins for companies like ours where procurement teams have considerable influence." - CIO, EMEA based Financial Services Firm
  • Line of business execs. "Often the business side of the house fails to consider the indirect and hidden costs of ownership.  Some solutions are sexier but cost 3 to 5 times more to integrate, maintain, and staff up for.  These guys forget that we pick up the tab when it fails to work well with other systems" - Enterprise Architect,  North American Transportation Company
The bottom line - all incentives in the contract negotiations strategy must align with product adoption strategy Prior to any contract negotiations, the right team should also take the time to align incentives to the overall business drivers.  Form must follow function and how the solution will be used should be paramount.  Four key criteria:
  1. Define success criteria. Start by determining what success criteria will be utilized.  Some metrics include implementation times, return on investment, savings in total account value (TAV), etc.
  2. Create transparency in objectives. Team members should lay out their incentives and how performance in their management by objectives (MBO's) will be impacted by different scenarios.
  3. Realign incentives for maximum alignment.  Once the objectives have been determined, the team should come back with incentives that reflect performance in short, medium, and long term goals .
  4. Codify and communicate metrics.  Final metrics and incentives should be made public to all team members and performance objectively tracked by an independent committee.
Your POV. Got additional suggestions and best practices?  Ready for the big maintenance renewal seasons in Q4? If you need assistance with your SAP, Oracle, Infor, Lawson, Microsoft Dynamics, or other enterprise software contract, send me a private mail.  We can assist with a contract negotiations strategy that aligns with your apps adoption strategy.   Please post your comments here or send me a private email to rwang0 at gmail dot com or r at softwareinsider dot org. Copyright © 2009 R Wang. All rights reserved.

RSS feed for comments on this post. — TrackBack URL

Tuesday’s Tip: 3 Approaches To Return Shelfware

Published on July 21, 2009 by R "Ray" Wang
Declining demand and diminishing output increase the pressure for enterprises to reduce their software license maintenance costs.  As part of a larger enterprise apps strategy, shelfware reduction provides an area for significant cost savings.   However, shelfware reduction is often hard to achieve because many vendors impose:
  • Enterprise wide agreements. These "all you can eat" agreements incentivize customers to buy more than they need at a "good" discount.  Yet, the end result is the payment of maintenance on non deployed apps (a.k.a. shelfware").
  • Repricing clauses. Many contracts contain language that impose list price recalculations when users choose to return their licenses to the vendor.
  • Bundled contracts. Contractual language often prevents clients from unbundling their software as needed.  In addition, vendors have initiated focused programs to bundle licenses.
The bottom line - apply three shelfware maintenance fee reduction techniques Craft a win-win strategy based on your product adoption requirements and overall contract negotiations strategy.  Three proven techniques in order of improving win-win  shelfware reduction scenarios:
  • Return unused licenses. Vendors agree to take back licenses and proportionately reduce maintenance costs.  Customers lose future rights to those licenses.
  • Park unused licenses. Vendors agree to hold unsued licenses and not charge maintenance.  Customers still have rights to the licenses and will pay for maintenance when licenses are deployed
  • Apply credit to purchase of new licenses. Vendors agree to assign a value to shelfware.  Credit on used licenses will be applied to future purchses.  Customers lose rights to the original software but gain rights to new software and functionality.
Your POV. Having issues with returning shelf ware?  Which approach have you tried?  Ready to share with us your experiences to date?  If you need help with your SAP, Oracle, Infor, Lawson, Microsoft Dynamics, or other enterprise software contract, send me a private mail and we can assist with a contract negotiations strategy that aligns with your apps adoption strategy.   You can post here or send me a private email to rwang0 at gmail dot com. Copyright © 2009 R Wang. All rights reserved.

RSS feed for comments on this post. — TrackBack URL

Tuesday’s Tip: Do Not Bundle Your Support and Maintenance Contracts!

Published on July 7, 2009 by R "Ray" Wang
In the past 2 weeks, emails from 31 software insider readers highlight a growing and concerning trend with support and maintenance contracts.  Vendors concerns about support and maintenance contract retentions has led to new initiatives to consolidate contracts.  At first glance, this may appear to be proactive and beneficial to customers.  In fact, common rationale provided by the vendor sales reps seem benevolent:
  • Reduce the time and headaches of managing multiple contracts
  • Update existing contract provisions
  • Identify areas of non-compliance.
Keep in mind sales reps have been trained to push these new programs. The bottom line - users should keep their guards up when vendor sales reps suggest bundling While the above rationale make sense, bundling often create an all or nothing situation.  Basically, it eliminates your options to go with another vendor throughout the 5 phases of the software ownership life cycle (i.e. selection, implementation, utilization, maintenance, and retirement).  Convenience of one contract will be offset by 3 scenarios why you should never bundle your support and maintenance contracts:
  • Lump sum payment. Moving to one support and maintenance contract often means that the annual fees will be paid all at once.  If push comes to shove, customers can mitigate this by asking for partial payments or more regular payment plans.
  • Third party maintenance. Customers seeking to move off of their vendor delivered support and maintenance will find themselves unable to segment out specific products and solutions.  Individual contracts by products preserve the option to cancel as needed.  In very rare cases, customers have carved out the maintenance for significantly older releases
  • Replacement strategies. Leaving contracts separate allows for easy replacement of applications.  This strategy makes most sense when customers have become a vendor's customers by acquisition.  Leaving contracts separate enables the option to switch solutions, move to a SaaS option, or create more leverage in deals with the vendor.
Be aware of these new efforts to suggest consolidation of contracts.  There are very few benefits.  Should this be suggested to you, do not hesitate to reach out for advice on strategies to mitigate risk! Your POV. In the Enterprise Software Licensee Bill of Rights V2, new rights address this issue.   But for now, have you experienced such vendor tactics?  Did you manage to segment out your contracts?  Do you need assistance with your apps strategy and contract negotiations strategy?  Please post here or send me a private email to rwang0 at gmail dot com. Copyright © 2009 R Wang. All rights reserved.

RSS feed for comments on this post. — TrackBack URL

Tuesday’s Tip: Now’s The Time To Consider SaaS Software Escrows

Published on June 2, 2009 by R "Ray" Wang
With 2009 rapidly becoming the "Year of SaaS" and the tipping point for Cloud Computing, it's hard not to notice the growing number of SaaS start ups (along with the legacy application vendors rushing to provide an "On-Demand", but not really multi-tenant deployment option).  My snarky SaaS bigotry aside, we can expect hybrid deployment options to be here to stay.  As with the early days of on-premise packaged apps, we have to ask the question, "What to do about the risk in working with fly-by-night SaaS vendors who might not be around in 2011?"  In fact, this was an interesting part of the panel disucssion at the "Honeymoon and Divorce: Changing SaaS Providers" session at Interop with Jerry Smith (CTO of Symphony Services) , Michael Topalovich, (CTO of Delivered Innovation), and Rick Nucci (CTO of Boomi). SaaS escrows provide a key safety net for the SaaS users End users often demand software escrows in the on-premise world when they are concerned about vendor viability, takeover threats, and other related breaches to performance or service level agreements. Software escrows vendors serve as the trusted third party independent organization which holds a copy of the software code.  This often includes user data, source code, documentation and any application executables.  For SaaS escrows, expect a few unique distinctions such as:
  • More frequent intervals of version updates, almost similar to live data backups.
  • Hot backups that the end user can immediately and legally swap to the escrow version without business disruption
  • Requirements for SaaS vendors to provide detailed software configuration management and data management
The bottom line - SaaS code is rented so protect yourself With no access to the code or application when a SaaS vendor goes bankrupt or fails to meet performance requirements, now's the time to ask your SaaS provider if they provide a SaaS software escrow.  This should be included in all criteria during SaaS vendor selection.  Those who provide SaaS escrow deliver an additional benefit - peace of mind that data will be doubly backed up both by the vendor and the software escrow company.
Companies providing SaaS Escrow Services Here's a list of a few vendors in the market.  They have not been rated or reference checked so caveat emptor.  If you provide SaaS escrow services and weren't listed, feel free to add a comment to the post.
For more about how to shape your apps strategy to include SaaS, read the Forrester Report found here. Your POV Have you worried about whether your SaaS vendor will be around in 2011?  Did you successfully enter into a SaaS Escrow agreement?  Considering a SaaS Escrow?  Send me a private email to rwang0 at gmail dot com.  Posts are preferred!   Thanks and looking forward to your POV! Copyright © 2009 R Wang. All rights reserved.

RSS feed for comments on this post. — TrackBack URL

Research Summary: The Forrester WaveTM: Order Management Hubs, Q4 2008 – Sterling Commerce, Oracle, SAP, and Epicor Emerge As Leading Solutions That Support The Delivery Of A Perfect Order

Published on December 17, 2008 by R "Ray" Wang
FORWARD AND COMMENTARY In the second update to the industry's only business process-focused assessment of its kind, we evaluated eight leading order management hubs in a 152-criteria evaluation. The Forrester Wave provided head to head comparison of which order management hub solution would best support the 20 steps in a perfect order.  Importantly, the end to end business process included four major sub processes: Opportunity to Order Capture, Order Capture to Order Fulfillment, Order Fulfillment to order Completion, and Order Completion to Cash. These demo-based product evaluations were conducted from April 2008 to August 2008 and interviewed eight vendor and 40 user companies including: Amdocs, Epicor Software, Infor, Manhattan Associates, Microsoft, Oracle (E-Business Suite and Siebel), SAP, and Sterling Commerce.  Unlike other analyst evaluations, the Forrester Wave contains no "magic" and provides end users with both transparency of the scoring process and flexibility to personalize weightings to best meet an end user's scenario.  The tool is accessible via an XL spreadsheet. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS Introduction Perfect orders drive a direct correlation to positive stakeholder satisfaction scores. Despite the benefits, success in consistently delivering a perfect order eludes many enterprises because existing systems lack the process and functional flexibility to deftly move orders across the end-to-end order management cycle. With pressure on enterprises to seek new ways to create market differentiation, order management hubs rise to prominence because:
  • Process-centric views trump yesterday's functional fiefdoms.
  • Standardized best practices provide little value in today's constant world of change.
Research Findings We found that Sterling Commerce and Oracle E-Business Suite led the pack among the Leaders who delivered technologies that support the perfect order. Meanwhile, Oracle Siebel, SAP, and Epicor Software earned their Leader designation because of their strong support for end-to-end order management processes and forward-looking product strategies. Microsoft, Amdocs, and Manhattan Associates placed in the Strong Performer category for their specialization in targeted markets. The solutions evaluated represent eight of the top 10 to be considered in shortlist discussions for order management hubs customers seeking to achieve a perfect order: (See Figure 1.) Figure 1: The Forrester WaveTM: Order Management Hubs, Q4 '08 Main Graphic for OMH Wave Q4, 2008

Source: Forrester Research, Inc.

Report Links Click on the link for the in-depth details and scores related to the 152 criteria used in this Forrester report: The Forrester WaveTM: Order Management Hubs, Q4 2008.  For media courtesy requests, please send me an email to rwang@forrester.com Your POV. Would love your feedback on the report.  You can post here or send me a private email to rwang0@gmail.com. Copyright © 2008 R Wang. All rights reserved.

RSS feed for comments on this post. — TrackBack URL

Tuesday’s Tip: Vendor Selection – Deciphering Vendor Provided Customer References

Published on November 4, 2008 by R "Ray" Wang
As competition intensifies for new license deals and users are under pressure to be cautious with new spending, all parties should expect increasing pressure for quality customer references.  Customers seeking references should focus on the following areas of relevance:
  • Industry - expect to get down to the micro vertical level
  • Market size - focus on number of employees and revenues
  • Geographical - address local as well as global requirements
  • Role - consider individuals in similar roles or account for different roles for a different perspective
Its customary for the vendor to provide their reference lists.  Keep in mind, many of these references are receiving monetary and non-monetary favors for their time.  For vendor supplied references, customers should ask seven key questions to gauge the motive and incentives of these references:
  1. Did your organization conduct an open vendor selection process?
  2. If you were not representing this vendor, which product would your organization have purchased?
  3. Is your organization part of a vendor specific reference program?
  4. Are you earning points or credits for other vendor related services such as training, conference passes, professional services, etc.?
  5. Does your organization receive prioritized functionality requests?
  6. Who is your executive sponsor?  Is that person available to regular customers?
  7. Have you received travel compensation for today's activities?
The bottom line. As an industry analyst, we often encounter vendor references that are genuine.  However, from time to time, we have had to deal with vendor provided customer references who have vested and biased interests.  In one MDM related example, 3 out of 5 of the vendor's references did not conduct an open vendor selection process.  2 out of 5 vendors told us that the product was working well even though we had received inquiries to the contrary from other parts of their organization.  It pays to do your due diligence. Make sure you understand what incentives and motivations are driving the reference to spend time talking with you. Your POV. Have you had a great vendor reference only to find out that the reference had stretched the truth? Feel free to share with me your experience.  You can post here or send me a private email to rwang0@gmail.com. Copyright © 2008 R Wang. All rights reserved.

RSS feed for comments on this post.