Raymond Bordogna

The Cloud Scoop from Fedscoop

Ray Bordogna — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:26:45 +0000

In this article, eWeek provides a good summary of a Fedscoop cloud computing panel event. Below, are some of the “soundbytes” accompanied by my commentary.

According to the experts, some benefits of Cloud Computing are:

1. “lower capital expenses “

2. “it’s scalable”

3. “it’s real”

4. “it’s a high-performance option for most agencies”

Certainly #1 and #2 are valid. #3 depends on the particular cloud services (e.g., SaaS, PaaS or IaaS) and industry. There is definitely hype in some vendor offerings. I’ve already offered a laundry list of cloud computing benefits.

Critical considerations for cloud computing:

1. “is not cost, it’s flexibility”

2. “Microsoft refers to that flexibility as agility”

With regards to #1, this sounds similar to an open source movement’s battle cry. Cost definitely needs to be part of the migration equation. Flexibility alone isn’t enough justification unless the costs of each solution are near equal. Of course, I do agree that one needs to evaluate the total cost (knowledge transition costs, existing systems data migration, personnel costs associated with the migration, etc…) associated with the migration in the analysis.

With regards to #2, I’ve already commented on the distinction between flexibility and agility.

Where to start in the Cloud:	My Commentary:
1. All new applications	Definitely. Any new investment should be considered a candidate for the cloud
2. Software license expiration	Absolutely. You are probably paying for more asset than you actually use. And, the vendor might already have a cloud-based service offering.
3. Collaboration apps	Certainly. Collaboration apps, such as email, are a commodity and should be jettisoned from the control of corporate IT.
4. HR	Probably. Like commodity apps, HR is a common function across enterprises. Although some HR functions (e.g., talent management) and associated software automation and analysis could be considered strategic and thus not easily replicated using existing commercial SaaS.
5. Dev and Test	Yes and Yes. Although one needs to consider potential performance implications as some development is computationally intensive (i.e., need excellent bandwidth) as well as computation prowess.

Where not to start in the Cloud:

§ ERP

§ Transaction processing

Yes, agreed on both categories. And, obviously I would add any data-sensitive application. The primary reason for this is that cloud-based assets don’t have the same legal protection standards that on-premise, enterprise owned and maintained systems do.

Cloud Pain Points:

§ Integration of compute, network and storage infrastructure

§ The issue of VM (virtual machine) sprawl

§ Need for more and better management tools; security

§ Federation of the cloud

Yes, integration of cloud-to-cloud and cloud-to-on-premise systems is indeed a challenge. As is the overall management and governance of such a federated system.

Cloud Computing Characteristics: Flexible or Agile?

Ray Bordogna — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:36:26 +0000

In promoting the benefits of cloud computing, it seems that some confuse “flexible” with “agile.” They are indeed distinct adjectives. Referring to Ms. Merriam:

Flexible:

§ capable of being flexed : pliant

§ yielding to influence: tractable 3

§ characterized by a ready capability to adapt to new, different requirements (elastic)

Synonyms: adaptable, adjustable, alterable, changeable, elastic, fluid, malleable, modifiable, variable

Agile:

§ marked by ready ability to move with quick easy grace

Synonyms: graceful

Fortunately, the cloud computing paradigm enables a business to be both flexible and agile:

§ Flexible: a cloud computing architecture is infinitely and dynamically scalable offering a perfect match between IT investment and workload.

§ Agile: a cloud computing architecture enables a business to invest and realize the benefits of IT assets in near real-time (i.e., assuming the relevant SaaS model exists)

Neiman Marcus’ Fashion Faux-pas

Ray Bordogna — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:51:03 +0000

I’ve always promoted the notion that a Management Consultant (and her IT cousin, the Enterprise Architect) needs a bit of style, a soupçon of panache, a dash of elegance in both presentation and deliverables.

Further, I often fashion (i.e, build) a management consulting team after the Neiman Marcus brand – an uber-luxurious (i.e., only the best and brightest), boutique (i.e., small team) marketing the most desirable wares (i.e., superior, precise, data-driven insights and recommendation) and exhibiting a passionate drive (i.e., always self-educating) for creating a life-changing shopping experience for each and every customer (i.e., singular focus on the corporate customer).

But to my consternation, today’s WSJ illustrates my model making a colossal strategic blunder. Neiman is heading downstream!?

A downstream branding strategy might work in the short term but rarely succeeds in the long term. It’s difficult to turn the oars around and head back upstream.

I’d be curious to explore “Need It Now’s” lifetime value of a customer analysis.

As the WSJ article indicates, “if the lower-cost goods cast a taint on the place, the Neiman elite might start to shop at the nearby standalone boutiques of European luxury brands instead.”

“Needless Markup” might be true, but “Never Markdown” is an undeniable truth.