History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as
farce, according to Karl Marx. Issoftware as a servicea tragi-comic
re-run of the application service provider (ASP) model - a lovely
idea that didn't work in practice?
The history of IT could be seen as one long class struggle. The
workers - led by their departmental heads - struggle to get their
hands on the means of production, to which IT limits access. Their
latest weapon in this conflict - software as a (web) service -
could allow them to bypass IT. But is it a force for good?
We have been here before. Back in the days of the
mainframe, staff revolted against the computer managers, who
became arrogant and territorial. The new SaaS model is much like
the old mainframe computing set-up, where everything - data
storage, processing, software provisioning - was handled centrally,
and users accessed their computer services through a dumb terminal
wired to the mainframe.
These days they can get any service they like through a PC
(acting as a terminal) wired to the internet. Just as workers
revolted against the mainframe when they found they could create
their own Lans, they could now bypass the CIO once again - by
buying SaaS.
Big questions
But history has already repeated itself. This has distinct
echoes of the 1990s, when ASPs promised much the same thing - but
didn't deliver. There are two big questions, then. Will SaaS work
better than ASP? And, far more importantly, how will this affect
the political power of the CIO or IT director?
"SaaS is nothing new, and doesn't appeal. Neither do web
services. It's the control issue that worries me," says one
Socitm member, who
didn't want to be named.
David Bradshaw, IDC's software and server research manager,
damns SaaS with faint praise, saying there's nothing more nebulous
than a new offering that's "in the
cloud".
"This is the successor to the ASP market, and that really
confused people. I'm not sure people want to return to the old ASP
model. The ASP providers didn't have the technology to support
their offering very well."
More mature
There seems to be a consensus among analysts that SaaS doesn't
have to be like the ASP market. For a start, the infrastructure is
more mature, says Bob Tarzey, services director at Quocirca. "It
might be over-simplistic to suggest that SaaS is just the warmed-up
corpse of ASP," he says.
"The bandwidth, security and datacentre facilities available to
SaaS vendors provide a much better infrastructure, and there's
better understanding and support built into the products and
commercials by platform vendors."
Deployments are better too, he adds. The concept of
virtualisation makes creating multiple tenancy more achievable. So
SaaS is more likely to work than ASP, but could still be a disaster
- for different reasons.
If SaaS became easy to buy, it could be seen by ambitious
end-users as a way of bypassing the IT department. Worse still, if
that strategy works, the board might realise that, as with ASP,
SaaS could be regarded as a utility. And if IT is a utility, who
needs a CIO or IT director?
Even strategic a applications, such as CRM, ERP and accounting
software, could be ordered through SaaS, predicts Quocirca's
Tarzey. That means trouble for the CIO if they don't work - and
trouble if they do. In which case, it would be time for the CIO to
fight a rearguard action, he says. "Departments can make
independent SaaS choice, but bypassing IT completely may be a big
mistake." Tarzey offers one form of defence: "Unauthorised
applications can be blocked."
Technically feasible
This reflects the new set-up for SaaS, says Bradshaw. "The IT
infrastructure wasn't proven then, but it is more tangible now. ECS
is more technically feasible because the bandwidth is there to
support it, and the computing architecture is there. Licensing
isn't an issue either."
Where the ASP market went wrong was that providers wanted to
license the software, says Bradshaw. "These days the software
industry is more behind the move. The software provider owns the
software, and a service provider is often their channel partner."
So a more workable model has evolved.
In times of economic flux and uncertainty, do people really want
a slightly nebulous-sounding offering such as "in the cloud" SaaS?
Yes, says Bradshaw. "It is definitely a better prospect in
worsening economic times."
In-the-cloud SaaS (or software as a web service) could cut the
cost of software significantly, admits
Jos Creese, head of IT at Hampshire County Council. Given the
constraints on public spending, surely that gives him more power,
doesn't it?
But Creese is not convinced. "It's not business-critical given
everything else going on," he says, "and the evidence of
significant benefits and savings is weak. The offering is not
compelling."
Better alternatives
Besides, he says, there are better alternatives already.
"Outsourcing does it for you anyway and if you insource, it creates
complexities."
The other threat posed by software as a service is
discontinuity. "Networks are still a potential weak link and a
risk," says Creese.
So is this one of those great ideas that stays permanently at
the concept stage? "I actually do think it will happen in due
course," he adds.
But most Socitm managers Computer Weekly spoke to seem to think
there are other priorities. The imperative in most organisations is
not the delivery of software - that's pretty much in place already.
What is more important is to reuse and redesign service processes.
This, in turn, requires the IT department to think differently
about the structure of services processes. "Service oriented
architecture is a slightly higher priority and more practical, for
now," says Creese.
Great advantage
As early adopters of SaaS know, it has one great advantage - it
takes some of the responsibility away from the CIO or head of IT.
On the other hand, it has one terrible side-effect - it takes some
of the responsibility away from the CIO or head of IT.
It is the departmental computing/PC Lan revolution all over
again, warns
Carl Bate, who as CTO makes all the technology buying decisions
for Capgemini.
"When individual business units are not catered for, they can go
their own way," he says. "They can easily go the SaaS route." In a
way, this can be good because it means software is paid for as an
operational expense, he says, which can mean the money isn't coming
from the CIO's budget.
A recent study by Gartner research vice-president Ben Pring
showed that 75% of all SaaS is bought by business unit manages,
rather than IT managers. Pring urges CIOs to get involved in the
decision-making, pointing out: "It's happening in your organisation
anyway, whether you like it or not."
More profitable
Software as a service may be great because it is easy to deploy.
But great for whom? The people who sell it find it a more
profitable sale because one size fits all. End-users might enjoy a
brief honeymoon period of easy deployment.
But this underplays the role of IT as a differentiator. If the
board realises that software is a web service that can be ordered
along with all the other office equipment, surely that undermines
the CIO's position. Companies don't appoint an office equipment
director, so why would they need an IT director?
The business pros (cost savings, flexibility) and cons
(integration, lack of differentiation and a need for further
investigation) are well plotted and argued elsewhere.
The politics of software as a web service do merit further
discussion, and SOCITM president Richard Steel is probably best
qualified to advise on this issue. "I think we need to be cautious
and see SaaS in the context of all else that's radically changing,"
he says.
Dangerous consequences
The blurring of distinction between web and other IT could have
dangerous consequences, he warns, and CIOs must be wary that the
perception of IT is changing with the way it is delivered.
"The web is an integral part of IT operations, not just an
end-user service delivery channel," says Steel. "With access
determined by identity and authorisation, rather than
compartmentalised networks, that changes the approach to evaluation
and benchmarking."
So SaaS is something you should keep a handle on, but not get
too involved in, because there's not much credit to be earned. IT
directors like Hampshire County Council's Creese would never say
never to the idea of a software as a service - but not today,
thank-you.