Bookmark and Share

Wednesday, 20 January 2010

The Impact of Data Ubiquity

Part 2

This blog post is co-written with Lee Provoost from the social business consulting firm Headshift and started over a bowl of porridge

The end-user of your product doesn't care what kind of data silos are laying underneath your IT system. They just want the information they need to do their work, but very importantly: taking in account the context of the work! Put yourself in the consumer’s shoes, your customer doesn’t talk to you in silos and certainly doesn’t want to be treated in silos. Have you ever called your bank, only to be passed to several different departments? We know already that Interactions aren’t Connected and ultimately we are still running processes as if we are in the industrial age – an assembly line of handoff after handoff.

This is the same as going to a McDonalds and asking for a ‘Happy Meal’ but being told to get a drink from one counter, a sandwich from another, fries from a third and the toy will be sent directly from Mattel – oh and you want a straw, napkins and sauce – there’s self service for that. More of a Meal than Happy! Not quite so fast or convenient food. What happens when the meal then changes, there's a new toy, you add something else to the box - how is the existing process able to cope with changes easily?

We have now identified the impact of data ubiquity:
  1. the corporate IT department being challenged by huge data silos (lock-in) and disparate solutions with complex processes that rely on humans to be the integration layer
  2. the business end-user dealing with too many different and complex applications and not being able to make sense of all the data (filter failure), subsequently not being able to deliver the process
In many businesses the delivery of an end to end business process relies on users accessing multiple software applications that combine to deliver the complete process. The result of this can be disjointed processes, mistakes, slow access to required information, no single customer view and ultimately a dysfunctional customer experience that the business users can’t impact.

So, the goal we're trying to achieve is to provide business end-users Enterprise 2.0 systems with meaningful contextual information in a simple and elegant way – we like to call this fit for purpose!

Mashing it together

As a technologist, the first reaction would be to try to solve this data silo problem. (Let's ignore for a second the old approach to create a monolithic repository, called the black hole, where we dump everything in.) How can we make it more accessible, can we wrap a web services around it, can we apply on a large scale the principles of Service-Oriented Architecture and Model-View-Controller, can we add an open data API interface to it, etc. That will most likely keep us busy for the next coming years. Wake up call: your customers are not going to wait two years till you have your internal issues solved. This approach also often instigates new shadow projects that proclaim to deliver tactical, quick win solutions whilst waiting for the 'nirvana'.

As a business end-user, you're faced with a proliferation of applications. A lot of time and money have been invested in building these, so... why not starting by reusing the useful bits of the existing apps to get immediate value?

This is the approach pioneered by Corizon. An user-centered focus approach, starting with the end users and working down - understanding the process in which they go through to complete a task, be it solve a customer enquiry in the front office or manage work in the back office - referred to as the user process. All too often, technology's answer to a problem is upgrade to the latest version as it has all these new features. The problem with this is that this doesn't necessarily resolve the original problems, complex process, too many applications.

Once the user process is clearly defined, we then (or can in parallel) look at working up - understanding what data & applications we need access to to effectively and efficiently complete the defined user processes. We will now understand the pattern, what gets the most use, by who, how. This firmly puts the cross hairs on which applications to enable for reuse. Unlike traditional data re-use approaches, this approach enables the useful & required bits of applications, but also defines reusable UI and stores these in a library of reusable services.

Now we have two key elements defined, a clear user process and a set of reusable UI services. Corizon's solution then allows you to mashup these to create the optimal interface, be it a standalone UI or consumed as a widget in your Enterprise 2.0 application. Adding new, or removing legacy applications becomes a much less complex task - the UI Services approach allows you to interchange these without affecting the interface.

Good is good enough

At first sight, this approach might sound a bit unconventional, but we'd like to invite you to an excellent post by Peter Evans-Greenwood (@pevansgreenwood) that talks about "The Price of Regret".


Building the big, scalable perfect solution in the first place might be more efficient from an engineering point of view. However, if we make the delivery effort so large that we miss the window of opportunity, then we’ve just killed any chance of helping the business to capitalise on the opportunity. ... Size the solution to match the business opportunity, and accept that there may need to be some rework in the future. Make the potential need for rework clear to the business so that there are no surprises. Don’t use potential rework in the future as a reason to do nothing. Or to force approval of a strategic infrastructure project which will deliver sometime in the distant future, a future which may never come.

One thing we've learned in this consulting business is that most of the times, good is good enough since perfection takes an eternity.

Labels: , , , , ,


Monday, 21 December 2009

Corizon introduction video

We've created a new video that provides an introduction to Corizon enterprise mashups and their use.

Please check it out and let us know what you think.






Labels: , , , , ,


Friday, 11 December 2009

Recognition

It’s always good to be recognized, and Corizon’s inclusion in the top 10 Contact Center Technologies from Call Center Helper magazine is great feedback directly from the market. It is especially significant when you remember how varied and complex the contact center technology industry is.

This provides another piece of tangible evidence of two changes that we’ve been seeing all year:
  • Fixing the desktop has continued to move towards the top the call center priority list as it is becoming recognised as a critical factor in many productivity and customer experience delivery issues
  • Enterprise mashups have jumped from “is that a serious business tool for important operational applications?” to being a recognized approach that is seen as a very effective way to integrate applications for people
It’s also testament to the great job that our partners, consultants and engineers do in creating implementations that make a significant difference to the work of contact center agents.

So, thanks to those who voted for us; for those who didn’t, we have plenty of ideas about how to change that in 2010!

Labels: , , ,


Tuesday, 8 December 2009

IT becoming more important to improve business efficiencies according to McKinsey survey

In a recent global survey of CIO, CTOs as well as non IT executives, McKinsey found that, during the recession, IT has become more important to improving business efficiencies. 39% of those surveyed now see the primary role of IT to improve business efficiency vs 31% a year ago.

This bodes well for software and other IT products focused on improving business processes, making people more efficient and increasing productivity. Furthermore, in 2010, more than 45% of respondents expect to increase IT investment confirming our view that when a short payback and low operating costs can be demonstrated, companies are increasingly interested in investing in new IT projects. Reducing overall management costs of IT itself remains high with 60% of respondents expecting operating expenses to decline or remain steady. Financial services is the most bullish sector with regards to IT investment.

Finally,
non-IT executives continue to say they want to forge a closer partnership with IT in order to improve performance and better manage risks and disruptions that lie ahead.

Labels: , ,


Friday, 4 December 2009

Allowing for the human element

When people must work with business applications and processes, it seems there is continual need to strike a balance between completely rigid process definition (when people become pure input / output devices) and completely ad hoc behaviour (no repeatability, management etc.).

This is one of the themes being taken up in the BPM world at the moment. For example as Jim Sinur recently pointed out:
Today BPM is really into preplanned and rigid process models. While the underlying technologies are agile and explicit rules and processes are being leveraged, process models need to move from fixed to variable behavior. This will probably start with collaboration points in a mostly fixed process, work to loosely bound process snippets to dynamically created and executed flows that are bound by governance constraints. These kind of processes allow for BPM to extend its benefits to a larger group of work activity that is not so predictable. This will likely include collaboration across organizations and into value chains that touch different legal entities.
There is an interesting link to be made to some of the thinking published about how to improve quality and profitability in environments that rely on people interactions –such as customer service. For example Human Sigma looks at the effects of variability in the effectiveness of human customer-interactions

Human Sigma contends that as an organization tries to standardize processes and scripts for management teams to follow, scripting employee behavior does not really enhance the quality of the employee-customer interaction. In fact, it may worsen it by emphasizing the steps to do the job instead of the outcome the process is supposed to produce. [Six] Sigma followers look at the manufacturing world and conclude companies can improve processes and systems because the inputs they use to make things can be kept at predictable and repeatable levels. But human systems in business – such as the employee-customer encounter – do not conform to such predictable rules. Sales and service organizations in particular, with a high degree of direct employee-customer interaction, cannot expect to follow such conforming practices as those in the manufacturing world.
When we think about providing software solutions to support agent-customer interactions, there are therefore a number of important conclusions
  • We need to balance providing “enough” guidance to simplify and safeguard what a user such as an agent is doing, while leaving sufficient freedom for the user to be able to focus on the end goal- solving the customer’s issue - not the steps mandated.
  • The engagement level of the agent with the business has been shown to be key to quality and has a significant effect on the profitability of interactions. The desktop environment provides a very tangible example of how much the organization “cares” about its employees (or doesn’t).
  • Measurement and monitoring are key to understanding and improving the quality of interactions. The more we can do to understand the hard and soft aspects of customer service, the better chance we have of improving service and performance.
In fact this could almost be a manifesto for using enterprise mashups in the contact centre- building high quality desktops with the involvement of the business, guiding activities while providing freedom to act, providing the means to continually adjust!

Labels: , , , , ,


Friday, 27 November 2009

The futility of call centre coaching (or why not every attempt to cure the same symptoms is equal)

The first part of the title isn’t original, but it’s certainly attention grabbing! It comes from an article by Denis Adsit. Apart from its title, I found it interesting because it has implications for the choices that call centre managers have to make when they are looking to improve performance. Anybody wanting to improve call handling time or first call resolution (to take but two common measures) is confronted by a wide range of options - all offering the same results – so it’s not easy to know where to attack.
There’s a fair bit of maths in the article, but the discussion makes the situation clear without worrying about that too much! The point is not that training or coaching are inherently bad, it’s just that they are never ending activities that are constantly diluted by agent turnover:
The conclusion … is that coaching in systems with a broad mix of tenure and even a modest level of turnover will have little effect on the performance of the entire system. To improve the outputs of a system, managers must find an approach to process improvement which lifts the performance of all the agents at the same time, not one at a time.
So, everything else being equal, it’s better to improve processes and systems that affect the whole agent population than to focus on activities that address agent (or presumably customer) problems one at a time. The effectiveness of the desktop is perhaps the prime example of the former. It is a key determinant of how easy / hard it is to get up to speed and perform effectively as an agent. Until recently, the problems of integrating applications for people has meant that everything else has been far from equal in the area of desktop streamlining, and a fear of high risks, costs and slow projects have stood in the way of improvement. This might perhaps explain the variety of other approaches (even if they are “futile”!!) , and indicates the size of the opportunity that exists with modern, pragmatic enterprise mashup technologies

Labels: , , , , ,


Thursday, 12 November 2009

Comment on "Enterprise Mashups in Transition"

Anthony Bradley from Gartner provided some interesting views on how he sees the enterprise mashup market developing this week in his blog posting: Enterprise Mashups in Major Transition.

The transition he has identified is chiefly concerned with a shift in the use cases he is seeing that drive demand. As Anthony says:

Just about everyone, including me was talking about enterprise mashups as a new paradigm for end user computing where business users would rapidly assemble and reassemble applications in a highly dynamic fashion.

And then…

… a shift in the need began. Instead of asking about end user empowerment, clients began inquiring about how to reduce integration costs with mashups. Some organizations were trying to use mashups to clear out their application integration backlog more quickly and at less cost. Others were facing new integration challenges due to mostly unexpected mergers and acquisitions.


This accords with what many of Corizon’s customers and partners are looking to enterprise mashups to provide in the first instance. I would add that this shift does not move the interest in enterprise mashups purely to the IT domain. Fixing integration problems does not only concern IT but also business unit leaders in that they have the potential to greatly impact the efficiency of their teams. In today’s environment, many businesses are looking for way to deliver a step up in people productivity with short and low risks projects: enterprise mashups are perfectly suited to that.

Finally, this type of pragmatic integrations will naturally create a pool of reusable mashable components if done with the right technology. Once created (and paid for) thanks to these projects, these components will make it easier for end users to create their own mashups in a safe way, with the buy in from IT. So the nirvana of end user empowerment is perhaps not as distant as Anthony fears!

Labels: , , , , ,


Tuesday, 20 October 2009

Why are contact centre desktops so broken?

My colleague, Toby Baker has created this guest posting based on his observations from working with Corizon's customers and partners applying enterprise mashups to integration problems in contact centres.

I spend a lot of time in contact centres, analyzing applications in use on the desktop, and see the same challenges and issues again and again. This is my top ten:
  1. Too many applications, each with their own login, UI and screen layout
  2. Applications that time out when they are used, forcing another login
  3. Applications with too many screens, each in a tab, sub-tab or sub-sub-tab
  4. Applications that require way too many clicks to get the job done
  5. Applications that show you the customer name on the first screen, only to not show it on all subsequent screens, forcing the user to write it down on paper
  6. Applications that perform so badly the agent has to become an expert in ad-libbing
  7. Screens where the information is way down below the bottom of the screen, or all the way across to the right
  8. Screens that are so crowded with information, it’s hard to pick out what you need
  9. Screens that are so visually unappealing it makes them hard to use
  10. “Customer Records” that are split across many applications and so require a large amount of copy/alt-tab/paste to see the whole picture
Everyone knows that a unified desktop is a good idea, and fixing the ten problems above is a good thing. So why is it so hard to do? Let’s look at the problem in more detail:

First of all, the applications - why are there so many of them?
  1. Companies merge, acquire and get acquired. Technology stacks don’t get integrated quickly, or at all.
  2. Core CRM applications have huge programmes associated with them to implement front- and back-end CRM processes. It takes years to get round to doing “the other apps” so we end up with original apps as well as a new CRM front end.
  3. To stay ahead of the competition, enterprises launch new products and services before the core applications can really support them, so new applications are built.
  4. Agents build their own applications to help navigate through the complex desktop. These are known as “Shadow IT” or “Guerrilla” applications.
  5. Technology is “improving” all the time. There are new widgets and frameworks and standards and approaches that IT tries to keep up with.
Secondly, why is the data all over the place? Why is the thing that I want buried deep, across multiple screens or a few scrolls away? Why are apps so hard to use?
  1. Databases organize information in a way that works for databases. Customers have orders, addresses, contact details. Orders have statuses, products, dates. Products have prices, catalogue entries. All too often, applications use the structure of the database to drive the structure of the screens. Mostly, users don’t look at information in the same way as computers, and nor do customers when they are asking for it.
  2. The tools used to create applications make it easy to use the data layout to drive the screen layout.
  3. Tabs, tabs, tabs. It seems like the right way to organize information, but demands change, so it rapidly becomes the wrong way to organize information.
  4. It’s sometimes easier to add something to a screen than it is to create a new screen. You then get a crowded screen with loads of unnecessary fields on it.
  5. The people designing the applications understand about data. The people who use the applications understand about the servicing of customers and their products. There is a mis-match here!
  6. The people building applications don’t sit down with call centre advisors enough. If they did, they would not build apps in the way that they do!

Thirdly, why do I have to look in lots of places? Why aren’t the sequences of activities I need to go through - the "user processes" - catered for?
  1. User processes change faster than apps do. Customer service organizations manage sales processes, retention processes, diagnostic and fix processes. They need to learn based on what works and what does not work. They need respond to market conditions, competition, regulations. Importantly, they need to do this without changing systems. Unfortunately, as user processes are all too often wired in to applications (or on paper), this is too hard to do.
  2. Sometimes it’s easier to create a new application than modify an existing one.
  3. “One size fits all” does not work in a customer service organization where you have a variation in process across each user group. Maybe you have retention, inbound, outbound, first line and second line. Maybe you have organized teams based on product specialty. Either way, using traditional development techniques, it’s almost impossible – or very costly – to create applications that are tailored to the needs of each user group.

Any more thoughts? Please leave a comment. Toby will be back with more on addressing these problems in a future blog.

Labels: , , , , ,


Sunday, 11 October 2009

Thoughts on Forrester Business Technology conference: lean times and enterprise mashups

Last week David and I attended the Forrester Business Technology Forum in Chicago. The main theme of the conference was adopting “lean” approaches to IT – which seems a particularly appropriate term for the lean times we find ourselves in.

The lean concept applies across the full range of activities performed by an IT department, but I was particularly struck by the discussion on its use in application development in John Rymer and Dave West's session*. Four key ingredients were seen as essential to lean software:
• Making sure deliverables are “fit for purpose” for the business problem at hand
• A clear focus on hard, measured value
• Simplifying the delivery platform – moving away from overbloated infrastructure stacks if they aren’t needed
• Allowing efficient evolution – avoiding stovepipes without creating undue overhead

Overall, this combination of getting quickly to the right, “just enough” solution and then improving and reusing, while measuring all the time is both powerful, and with the benefit of hindsight obvious! However, it is sobering to remember how far from this approach so many enterprise application development and integration projects are.

Much of “getting to lean” is about methodologies, management techniques and people. However, the right technology for the right problem can provide powerful enablers if chosen appropriately – another key point from the sessions. Discussions at the conference confirmed that - when it comes to integrating applications for people - process based enterprise mashups can provide a key to a leaner approach:
• Encouraging building directly from the desired user requirements under the control of the business and process owners
• Allowing user and process execution to be clearly benchmarked and measured to show improvements
• Pragmatic, light-touch, standards based integration
• A first, “just good enough to make a different solution” in days, followed by iterative improvements and spinning out reusable “building blocks” as a natural by-product

Lean is an important theme. Using enterprise mashups won’t get you there by itself, but it encourages and helps you to work in a lean way – which can’t be a bad thing!

* How can lean software enable you to better serve the business by John Rymer and Dave West, Thursday 8 October 2009, #BTF09

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Thursday, 8 October 2009

The contact centre dilemna

Recent studies have highlighted the current dilemma most companies have with contact centres: they are both critical in maximising customer value and considered poor in meeting customer expectations. A YouGov survey conducted in the UK showed that phone and email were by a significant margin the most likely channels used by customers to contact a company for customer service (75% and 70% respectively). Self service comes third with 43%. At the same time, consumers were unhappy with the quality of service provided: 83% were frustrated with the interaction and 60% of agents agreed with them!

This matters enormously because “on average, 40% of customers who suffer through bad experiences stop doing business with the offending company” according to a recent survey published in the Harvard Business Review by Dave Dougherty and Ajay Murthy from Convergys. They go on to define the same reasons for the frustration as identified in the YouGov survey: lack of knowledge of the agent and incapacity to resolve the query on the first call. With increasing access to relevant information online through the internet and social networks, I expect customers to become more and more demanding of the contact centre agent in the future. With the simpler queries being increasingly resolved thorugh self-serivice, interactions will become more complex and more critical and the cost of failure will increase.

So what stops contact centres providing the right customer interaction? The main reason is the proliferation of applications on the desktop. The Corizon Contact Centre survey of 90 Contact Centre Managers shows that agents have to use on average 5 different applications during a call. It is not uncommon to find more than 20 on each desktop. In such an environment, it is proving very difficult to provide to the agent, cost effectively, the right information at the right time and, crucially, the tools that allow them to resolve the query in a fast and efficient way and stop customers needing to call back.

Fixing this problem has proved very difficult as demonstrated by the generations of legacy applications one can find by walking in a contact centres, from ancient green screen applications to the most recent CRM systems. Resolving this issue cost effectively requires a new approach. This is where process mashups come in. They deliver a step change in agent productivity by providing a dynamic UI that guides the process and gives agents the right information at the right time. Agent desktops can be integrated using a step by step approach, fixing the most broken processes first and delivering immediate improvement. The process mashup approach enables the easy creation of fit for purpose desktops, changing the economics of integrating applications for people by extracting “mashable” components from existing systems to deliver an initial solution in days. Once initial process hotspots have been fixed the business can iteratively work towards delivering the ‘perfect’ application for the contact centre agent that can constantly evolve with the business needs, all within a governed and secure IT infrastructure.

Labels: , , , , ,


Thursday, 17 September 2009

Mashup solution patterns

Enterprise mashups transform the way organisations combine IT applications to make people and processes more effective. However, in common with most new ideas, if they remain an abstract concept, or if people form preconceptions based on isolated examples (such as the ubiquitous map based mashup), then those who stand to benefit most may find it hard to get a feel for their power or relevance. In my experience, the missing link is a set of examples or usage patterns that make these possibilities concrete.

Gartner have taken a step in this direction by setting out “Five Mashup Application Types”:
  1. Personal dashboards – allowing individual users to choose the gadgets they need
  2. Packaged application extension – providing a flexible alternative to application customisation
  3. Location awareness – allowing spatial distribution of data and assets to be visualized and explored
  4. Panoramic awareness – bringing together a single view of an “object” of interest from different sources (such as a customer, competitor or place).
  5. Situational awareness – allowing events and data relevant to a “situation”, to be tracked and responded to.
While these are helpful (and Corizon supports all these categories, most frequently being used in categories 2 and 4) – they don’t go far enough to bring real-life use cases to life. Likewise, the patterns recently set out by Michale Ogrinz offer a great set of possibilities – but almost too many and slanted towards the developer.

Specific examples of how the mashup can be deployed to increase user productivity in the context of known integration and development challenges are required to bring the potential of mashups to life for both the line of business and IT.

As a result we have developed some key deployment patterns that we see again and again. We find that these (1) really help to explain how enterprise mashups deliver fast payback in familiar situations and (2) get over what you can do with a mashup platform that creates streamlined process based applications (vs one that is focused on combining data and creating dashboards and would not be suitable for these patterns).

Here are some examples – let us know what you think and what else can be added:

New web application: Rapidly build and easily change “standalone mashup” that combines enterprise applications and services to deliver new streamlined, process-based application

"Integration without customization" Embed mashups to extend packaged enterprise applications – on premise or SAAS – with new, integrated user activities. Avoids delays, overhead and upgrade problems of customisation.

Extend legacy application UI. Rapid, reusable alternative to trying to change unsupported or end of life applications to support integrated user activities.

Extending interaction management and CTI applications Create interaction based desktops for call centre agents that streamline and simplify customer service processes.

Self service expansion. Expand scope of self service portals for employees, customers and partners with integrated, process-based applications.

Support interactive activities in BPMS solutions: Add streamlined, integrated UI to support and simplify human steps in long running business processes.

Labels: , , , , ,


Thursday, 23 July 2009

Enterprise mashups – kick-starting adoption

Recent blogs from the worlds of enterprise mashups and CRM have reinforced my impression that a lot of people are struggling with the dilemma of how to move to the flexible IT and business architectures they know they need for future success when the investment environment is focused on short term returns.

A posting by Susan Bouchard at Cisco kicked off a discussion that led to Stefan Andreasen from Kapow asking (in respect of mashups)
Companies traditionally only purchase IT products as part of building a dedicated business application with a defined ROI and timeline.
So the big question is how to resolve this?`
It seems identical to the "Long tail economy", selling many low-price items. It makes no economic sense before you start selling a lot, but then it's hugely profitable.
It's the same with mashups, but how do we get over that initial barrier?

Meanwhile, Colin Beasty, blogging on CRM Outsiders wrote
… whenever you add new channels to a CRM process you add complexities, and it seems businesses are struggling with fostering and tying all these new channels into that seamless experience that the customer can pick up on. I think the contact center industry in general is trending towards the delivery of these channels in a more service-oriented approach.
Breaking down the silos has always been and will continue to remain a key driver of industry software and best practices. Web services, standards-based software, and open source seems to be taking the lead in tackling a lot of these issues, but on the flipside the economy isn’t leaving businesses with a whole lot of cash to pursue these interests.
For the short term future, I think businesses remain in a Catch-22 situation: the economy demands that customer retention and experience is a priority…and thus consolidating these channels into a single experience…while lack of revenue and profits doesn’t leave the financial vehicle by which to accomplish these goals

It seems to me that this pair of postings ask questions that a lot of people are thinking about at the moment. They also illustrate the challenge and the opportunity for enterprise mashups. On the one hand, when enterprise mashups are simply seen as addressing long tail “micro-requirements”, many of which need satisfying to justify investment in a mashup infrastructure, the business case “initial barrier” is a real one. On the other hand, there are many requirements for process based integration for end users – such as combining allowing agents to work across multiple channels in the contact centre – that are further up the long tail – slightly more complex, still out of reach economically from traditional SOA and application integration but offering much more substantial payback. The trick is to bring the two together – using mashups to build process-based applications for users one at a time, with each generating payback quickly, and creating lightweight reusable services (“mashables”) as a result. That way the need to minimize cash outlay is achieved, operational improvements are delivered and the organization is left with a flexible, service based approach to build on further.

For some people who have only seen mashups as simple “dashboard” type applications, this requires a broadening of how they think of mashup technology. However, we are seeing that this approach is essential to resolving the dilemma faced by apparently contradictory short and long term pressures.

Labels: , , ,


Wednesday, 1 July 2009

Gartner SOA summit – pragmatism and innovation

I spent a great couple of days last week at the Gartner SOA and Application Development and Integration Summit in London, emerging encouraged by the combination of pragmatism and innovation that I heard discussed.

Inevitably, much discussion centred on the economy and its implications. While technology –as Massimo Pezzini pointed out - might be seen as having helped the problem happen by “providing the infrastructure to enable the financial services sector to get into trouble faster than anyone expected”, I didn’t hear much discussion about what could (or should) be done to prevent that happening again! On the other hand there was lots of debate on how IT can help companies survive and reinvent themselves for the future. The (not surprising) prescription was to focus on strict cost control and alignment of IT projects with clear business cases, while keeping sufficient investment to foster innovation in key areas. In the short term for example, organizations need to use their resources to rapidly adapt sales and marketing patterns in response to changed customer behaviours. Longer term, much discussion centred on anticipated structural changes to industries (especially financial services) requiring better support for complex inter-company relationships and networks.

SOA adoption
The message I took on SOA – from both Paolo Malinverno’s opening keynote and much that followed - is that it has clearly taken root, especially in Europe and N. America. However there also seems no doubt that the recession is having a Darwinian effect, culling the projects without well-defined short term business benefits. Long term strategic business cases for SOA programmes are “out”, pragmatism in the form of prioritizing rapid payback from fixing business problems is “in”. As a result, lots of initiatives that have started bottom up with no focus on business problems (service enablement rather than SOA) risk being cut – one figure floated (and hotly disputed) was that this could kill up to 80% of the projects started thus far!

Enterprise mashups?
Given this background, where are enterprise mashups? Well there was certainly plenty of interest, with David Gootzit from Gartner talking about their having a key role to play as the “face of SOA” and becoming an important way to build composite applications. However, listening to talks and speaking with attendees confirmed to me that while a lot of vendors and users have focused on using enterprise mahups to build simple “dashboard” type single page applications, there is a huge need and interest in using them to address the new integration agenda of business focused pragmatism and innovation. The idea of using the mashup approach to rapidly build process based applications for different user groups and tasks, leveraging a wide range of enterprise IT assets is – to judge from the response we had – just the capability that many organizations need. It seems that there are many cases where business process improvements and flexibility are needed but custom application development is seen as too slow, expensive and hard to maintain, and full blown WS-* and BPM are not appropriate.

Conclusion? SOA isn’t dead, just growing up in a rather more austere environment than the one it was borne into. And enterprise mashups can make a massive contribution, so long as they focus on really changing the economics of building and using business applications.

Labels: , , ,


Thursday, 11 June 2009

Are mashups lipstick on a pig?

One of the debates currently going on is regarding the lifespan and role of mashups (cpettey/Gartner). Are mashups just tactical, throw away applications for short lived micro-requirements that come and go in the business (aka situational requirements) with the associated business case challenges? Are they just good to temporarily paper over a gap while your systems catch up with user requirements? In other words, are enterprise mashups short lived either for the simplest of “applications” or simply as lipstick on a pig as suggested to me recently by the CIO of a very large telco?

One of the great values of enterprise mashups is that they can deliver in very quick time frames by leveraging exiting systems and applications to streamline processes for people. This can be to address a “situational requirement” such as a dashboard, combining RSS feeds for data reporting etc. They can also help mop up legacy applications before retirement i.e. provide lipstick on your old architecture while you deliver the new one. They can prepare for the deployment of packaged application such as CRM or ERP. This provides the value of quickly testing in real time, with real users the required “user process” (i.e. the set of steps a user need to go through to complete a task). This can even be implemented in the look and feel of the enterprise application. Users will then not be disrupted by the deployment of the enterprise app while deployment will be speeded up by “learning” from the tested user process implemented in the mashup. Once the enterprise application catches up, then the mashup can evolve to do less, be retired itself or remain to provide the flexible, process driven UI that would continuously require updating. This will depend on architectural decision.

It is in the flexible delivery of process driven UI that enterprise mashup become a key part of modern architectures and are destined to power solutions that will remain in use for a long time. Why? Because modern architectures need lipstick as much as the old ones! With WOA, SOA or any component based approach, user-centric applications are still required when a business process need surfacing to a user and those end up being built bespoke for each user group. This is because user interfaces are not service enabled, not turned into re-usable components. This is where enterprise mashups play a key part: with the creation of visual, mashable components that can easily and quickly be mashed up into user centric solutions, they provide a “face” to web services and deliver the flexibility and process adaptation required at the user level to deliver flexible architectures from top to bottom.

The answer to the lifespan and role is that enterprise mashups provide real value when they address real process pain point, have a role to play in legacy and modern architectures and can endure for considerable periods of time while the content and function continually evolve.

What do you think? Do you see the same trends?

Labels: , , , , ,


Thursday, 4 June 2009

Enterprise Mashups and Cloud Applications

Corizon’s recent launch of mashup extension packs for Siebel and eBusiness suite has prompted a number of conversations with journalists on the extent to which this value proposition transferred to enterprises adopting SAAS applications. I was surprised by the initial perception that enterprise mashups were required because of the difficulty of deploying applications on premise. Conversely there seem to be preconceptions that the need would be much less with on demand applications.

Enterprise mashup adoption is driven by the need to transform the economics of integrating applications to make people more efficient. The deployment of new applications, whether they are on-premise or in the cloud,increases the requirements for integration. The more new SAAS business applications are adopted, the more such integration will be required. This is exactly the experience reported by GE CIO Gary Reiner: implementation costs for applications:
“...they're largely around interfacing with existing systems, process changes and data cleansing, those three costs exist regardless of whether GE hosts that application or whether the supplier hosts that application.”
As a matter of fact, cloud computing is even more adapted to enterprise mashups. The key reason for this is that they promote the concept of keeping each functional application as vanilla as possible to reduce costs. Why re-invent a CRM package and not just adopt best industry practice? Differentiation is not gained by modifying each application but by integrating them to streamline your desired processes. For example superior end to end customer experience delivery is more likely to be achieved by seamlessly integrating the different applications required to support a particular customer journey (trouble ticketing, service diagnostics etc.) rather than customizing each application. This is where enterprise mashups play a critical role: by providing a quick and non intrusive way to create mashable components from existing applications and easily combining them to mashup a fit for purpose solutions that guide users to complete a task, they are perfectly suited to integrate your cloud with your on premise applications.

We are big proponent of service based applications at Corizon – this is where the company started! We also happen to believe they will be one of the key drivers to accelerate adoption of enterprise mashups. As enterprises adopt SAAS, they will be looking for new approaches to quickly, flexibly and cost effectively integrate their new cloud applications to allow people to do their jobs better. In the same way that enterprise mashups transform the economics of owning on premise enterprise applications, they will transform the economics of integrating cloud applications.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


Sunday, 31 May 2009

Funnel shaped mashups

An interesting conversation on freedom vs control at the desktop in call centres, in conjunction with much recent speculation as to the "shape" of the economic downturn and recovery, made me wonder what “shape” a mashup solution needs to be, and what that would tell us about its design and delivery.
In a situation like a call centre you give the agent a job to do because you want him or her to do two types of things within a call which can appear quite inconsistent. First there is the need to analyse a situation based on “conversational” interactions with the customer and the systems on the desktop. This involves relatively unstructured interactions with the applications and customer, drilling into different information sources and exploring options with the customer. However, as quickly as possibly, a path needs to be chosen. The agent then must switch mode and move into a much more structured, regular approach to ensure no mistakes are made, all details are captured, and frequently that regulatory compliance requirements are met.
So it seems to me that for these types of activities, mashups are funnel shaped! The cone represents the user working in an unstructured, conversational way before moving into the spout and being constrained and guided through a defined process. So, if enterprise mashups are to support this type of interaction, then they need to support both modes of working in a single solution, and to get through the spout as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Taking the analogy further, not all funnels need to be the same shape. In fact many factors can determine the shape of funnel needed. For example
  • experienced agents need to be able to work in a less constrained way compared to rookies, and will find constraints demotivating and frustrating
  • new products are often trialled and launched with very broad cones while the organization learns using highly skilled agents. As the products mature and the agent base grows, processes then need to become more constrained and more “spout heavy”.
  • knowledge management solutions can be used to narrow the cone sooner by reducing the up-front analysis work for service desktops
  • sophisticated propensity-to-buy and segmentation based intelligence can help to move to the spout quicker and optimize outcomes
One thing is clear though, whatever funnel shape you start with, being able to change it and experiment is essential. The shape of the funnel is a key “lever” for call centre managers as they struggle to find the optimum balance between allowing initiative and empowerment and enforcing process repeatability. That’s where the flexibility and control provided by enterprise mashups are invaluable.

Labels: , , ,


Friday, 15 May 2009

Integration without customization for Oracle E-Business Suite

I repeatedly hear from our customers about the challenges they face in creating integrated user experiences around their investments in CRM and ERP applications.  They find themselves constrained by long release cycles, full workstacks and the expense and scarcity of skilled resources.  As a result, users have to carry on “swiveling” between applications on the desktop – bad news for the reputation of the applications and for efficiency, accuracy and costs.

Fixing this problem is a great use case for enterprise mashups, replacing complex customization projects with the much more lightweight and portable mashup process.  We call it “integration without customization”.  A while ago we announced a toolkit to be able to easily embed our mashups in the user workflow of Siebel applications; this week we have followed this up with our “extension pack” for Oracle E-Business Suite.  The pack overcomes the challenge of embedding web UI in the EBS forms UI.  By providing everything an EBS developer would need to be able to get a mashup deployed and launched within the EBS application, it cuts a task that could take many days into hours.   As a result EBS owners can extend and integrate user desktops with minimal cost and effort.

We believe integration without customisation is a killer “mashup pattern”, especially in a economy where the focus is on getting more from existing investments like major enterprise applications.  Through the rest of 2009 we will be working with our customers and partners to understand where else pre-built capabilities of this sort can smooth the process, so let us know where you see the clearest need.

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Wednesday, 8 April 2009

Mashups for productive conversations

To allow users to become as efficient as possible, enterprise mashups need to blend naturally into their work patterns.  It defeats the purpose if it takes multiple mouse clicks to find and launch a mashup and then copy and paste data into it when it’s needed!
 
The contact centre is a great example.  Calls from customers arrive at agent desks via the CTI systems that handle routing and agent management.  Mashups simplify the steps the agents need to go through to service the call – bringing together customer data, marshalling the screens the agents need.   What’s needed to complete the picture is a bridge between the two, bringing CTI functions into the mashup.
 
In that light, it’s great news that Corizon customers now have access to a thin-client CTI solution that delivers a re-usable, easy-to-integrate, web-based UI that is designed (and certified) to form a building block of an enterprise mashup.  Available from Corizon partner and call centre specialist Sabio, the solution has just attained Avaya DevConnect status.
 
This news is doubly significant.  First it’s going to be even easier for organizations relying on CTI to make call centre conversations more productive with mashups.  Second it shows how easy it is for partners such as Sabio to create mashup building blocks – UI services – that bring their expertise to the broader Corizon user community.  Both open up many new possibilities!

Labels: , , , ,


Saturday, 4 April 2009

Free Technical Whitepaper

I have just completed a new whitepaper titled The Case for Enterprise Mashups. The paper discusses current troubles with software development and explains how Enterprise Mashups are in a perfect position to address them. You can download it here.

Labels: ,


Friday, 13 March 2009

Enterprise Mashup as a Capability

Why do we need Enterprise Mashups as a capability of IT? As Dion Hinchcliffe explains in this post, there is a lot unmet software demand due to small projects not being economically viable:
... almost any IT system is going cost in the hundreds of thousands or low millions even to get off the ground. This means that many smaller, niche demands, which statistically, are very likely to be larger than the demand for big IT systems in an organization (The Long Tail), are actually continuing to go dramatically underserved ...
As he further explains, Enterprise Mashups are in a perfect position to enable the business to fulfill this demand. What is not talked about, are the different deployment options of these mashups. Depending on the context of the functionality it delivers and the type of user it delivers it to, the deployment pattern of the mashup should change. For an "ad-hoc" pattern, you might want to deploy the mashup as a gadget on the desktop. For a "project" pattern you will want to deploy it inside a project portal, while for a "process" pattern you will want the mashup to be deployed as an extension to an Enterprise Application.

Choosing the wrong deployment pattern of a Enterprise Mashup could restrict its benefit and in some case dramatically increase the number of applications on the desktop. Especially when deploying an "ad-hoc" pattern where a "process" pattern would have been more appropriate, the user will suddenly need to become aware of what mashup are relevant to which task and where to find it. He or she will have to copy data to and from an Enterprise Application and mashups. The ultimate swivel chair nightmare!

So what does it mean to extend Enterprise Applications with mashup capabilities? It means facilitating the embedding of mashups inside these applications so that the business is able to add functionality to them for their specific "long tail" needs, e.g. extending a CRM application with a Network Diagnostics Mashup for the customer's region to enable the agent to anticipate and analyse possible causes of connectivity problems. By providing this capability the short lived, specific requirements of a business division can become part of the same application that is serving the long term requirements of an entire enterprise. But this time, it can deliver this to a specific user groups and for a specific process only, without requiring changes to the underlying application. This is what we at Corizon call "Integration without Customisation".

Labels: , , , ,