Client Insights, Senior Consultant
Center for Applied Insights
are bad to do by committee, creating a work of art, cooking dinner, closing a
baseball game – and sometimes committees are a necessity. Security and risk
committees are an essential part of any enterprise’s security and risk
management infrastructure. They are a sign of a mature organization. By
promoting collaboration across the enterprise and making security and the associated
risk discussions an integral part of senior leadership’s responsibilities, the
enterprise can be better protected. Yet, even though the benefits are clear,
not enough enterprises have one.
released last week by the Carnegie Mellon CyLab, looking at privacy and
security governance in the Forbes Global 2000, reported that boards and senior leadership
still are not exercising appropriate governance over the privacy and security
of their digital assets. The study stated that there is still a significant gap
in understanding around the fact that security, privacy and IT risk are all a
part of enterprise risk management.
The study did
note one encouraging sign – that more and more enterprises have
cross-functional privacy/security committees – 70% of 2012 respondents versus
17% in 2008. These committees can act as a bridge to boards and senior leadership
and elevate the discussion around security and risk, potentially closing the
findings line up very nicely with what we recently uncovered as part of our 2012
CISO Assessment. Overall, only
49% of the total sample reported that they had a security or risk committee.
When we delved deeper, 68% of the most mature group of organizations,
Influencers, had a security/risk committee. In comparison, only 26% of the
least confident and mature group, Responders, had one.
interesting was, regardless of the organization’s overall security maturity
level, if they had a security or risk committee they shared similar
characteristics. In general, leaders of the committees tended to be Senior IT
Executives (28%), CISOs (24%) or Senior Business Executives (22%). These
committees met on a fairly regular basis, with 48% meeting quarterly and 27%
security and risk committees also took a comprehensive, enterprise-wide
approach with both business and IT representation. From the business side, the
most represented functions included Compliance (80%), Legal (65%), Business
Executives (64%), Business Operations (64%), and Finance (59%). From the IT
side, IT Executives (91%), IT Operations (72%), Network Operations (60%), and Data
Governance (51%) were all a part of a majority of the committees.
part of the CISO Assessment we looked at the primary objectives of the
security/risk committees. Looking at the chart below we can see that, based on
their top two choices, most committees were primarily focused on developing
enterprise security strategy and developing action plans and recommendations.
So should committees only be focused on strategic policy and governance issues?
Is there more they could be doing?
At IBM, our
risk management team meets quarterly with a top advisory committee, including
senior vice presidents of all the business units, who report directly to the
CEO. These include the leaders of many functional areas including finance,
marketing, technology and others. Each of these executives must understand the
security risks to his or her unit and what controls are in place. Together,
they shape and decide strategy. Security, after all, is intimately tied not
only to their units, but to the future of the enterprise.
all this information, I think that enterprises are using security and risk
committees more and more and they are adopting best practices around the leaders,
members, operations, and goals of those committees. To make the next step:
- Make sure your committee has both technical and business leadership representation and make sure it is connected to the highest levels of the enterprise and the board. The committee can be the gateway between the enterprise and the board with respect to information risk management.
- Ensure your committee is broad and diverse. Compliance, legal, finance and IT operations representation is expected. Reach further, make sure business unit leaders are involved so new products and services are created in a secure fashion. Include human resources to help with employee education initiatives.
- Set up a way to measure the progress of the committee. Using targeted metrics can help focus not only the committee, but the entire security organization for the enterprise. It will provide something to work towards and make it easier to communicate with the board.
Modified by Ellen Cornillon email@example.com
This week, at the annual National Retail Federation conference, “customer experience” is a hot topic. Whether they’re doing anything about it or not, retailers instinctively know experience impacts loyalty, and loyalty keeps customers buying. Forrester Research analyst Harley Manning has long argued it’s the only thing that matters. His premise: “The only source of competitive advantage is the one that can survive technology-fueled disruption: an obsession with customer experience.”
While there’s a lot of truth in Manning’s assertion, I have a corollary – one reinforced by the research we’ve done recently at the IBM Center for Applied Insights
: The only way to provide a superior customer experience is with technology-fueled delivery. In other words, fight fire with fire.
Take showrooming, for example. Mobile phones have clearly disrupted the traditional shopping experience. And some retailers are still wringing their hands about sales lost from shoppers checking competitors’ prices and assortments via smart phones while in their stores. Meanwhile, other retailers are finding ways to capitalize on all those devices in shoppers’ hands – through real-time analysis of in-store shopping behavior
and merging real and virtual experiences
What will the next retail disruptor be? Will Square and Paypal do away with POS terminals? How will retailers re-imagine the cross- and up-sell process when checkout counters and wrap-stand displays disappear?
Will cognitive systems like Watson
sell products and field customer service questions? What about augmented reality? Wearable technology? Rather than view emerging innovations as threats, smart retailers will see these as opportunities to improve the customer’s shopping experience.
Although Manning might consider IT “table stakes,” I disagree. Obviously, there’s a certain technology bar retailers must meet to stay relevant, but IT – executed well – can still be a differentiator when it comes to the retail customer experience. Admittedly, I’m a bit biased (given where I work). But my opinions are backed by a fair amount of evidence too.
IBM’s annual State of Marketing study
– involving more than 500 organizations across 15 industries – showed companies that effectively integrate technology to influence the customer experience are outperforming financially. These leading companies are experiencing 3.4 times the net income growth – and 1.8 times the gross profit growth – of their peers. The study outlines a suite of differentiators that set these leading companies apart, but two fundamental IT capabilities stood out to me.
First, these leaders have tackled the tough job of integrating all their channels. Unlike many of their peers, they’re equipped to deliver a consistent omni-channel experience. This behind-the-scenes plumbing allows them to accomplish the second feat – adjusting those customer experiences as they happen, often based on cloud-enabled data analytics (Listen to IBM Distinguished Engineer Frank DeGilio discuss how cloud is changing the customer experience
Through integration and contextual insights, these leaders are building the muscle mass they need to tackle technology-fueled disruption. As new possibilities emerge – even when disguised as threats – leading companies will be ready to turn the tables, using technology to reinvent the customer experience.
Modified by Ellen Cornillon firstname.lastname@example.org
Senior Consultant, IBM Center for Applied Insights
In a world of increasing and varying information security threats, academic initiatives focused on cybersecurity are proliferating - yet, there is still the danger of falling short in addressing the long-term threat. To avoid becoming too focused on near-term issues, programs must be more collaborative across their own institutions, with industry, government, and among the global academic community. Only by working in concert can we meet today’s demand while educating the next generation to create a more secure future.
There have been a lot of recent reports, blog posts and news articles discussing the cybersecurity skills gap. It has been an ongoing issue for a while, and will continue into the future. We wanted to tackle this problem, not from the demand side, but from the supply side. So, the IBM Center for Applied Insights and IBM’s Cyber Security Innovation team selected 15 academic programs in 6 different countries from the over 200 institutions we monitor and work with. We conducted interviews with faculty members, department chairs and others. This week, we released a synthesis of those interviews in our latest security insights paper, “Cybersecurity education for the next generation: Advancing a collaborative approach” .
Through our interviews it was confirmed that cybersecurity is top of mind for students, educators, industry and government. Industry and government are currently facing a significant skills gap and this is causing the programs we interviewed see extremely high demand for their students, both undergraduate and graduate.
But, not all is rosy with the increased demand and attention. Programs are expected to provide more of everything – courses, graduates, opportunities, research – which has caused programs to face a number of organizational and technology challenges. Stained programs are addressing these challenges in different ways, taking different approaches to cybersecurity education, but still sharing similar common principles.
The trends, challenges, issues and differing perspectives cannot be fully addressed by each academic program on its own; cybersecurity is a global problem and should have global solutions. A set of leading practices promoting a longer-term and more collaborative approach is needed. We identified three general areas that the leading programs we talked to excelled at, all dealing with collaboration and connection.
1. Collaborate within your own institution – Cybersecurity programs should embed security practices and principles in computer science and engineering courses and take a holistic technical approach. They should work with other disciplines and schools in the university (e.g., business, law, ethics, medicine, policy). They should offer diverse education options for students and professionals (graduate, undergraduate, professional development, etc.).
2. Co-evolve with industry and government – Academic programs should have deep ties with industry and government – partnering and collaborating on research, curriculum development, and opportunities for students. A hands-on, practical, approach is also extremely important. Laboratory work, projects, special-interest groups, and internships should all be cultivated.
3. Connect across the global academic community – A number of the programs we talked with discussed the need for building a “science of security” to anticipate security problems and a cross-discipline lingua franca among scientists, engineers and policy makers. Fundamental concepts and common vocabulary can only be developed with participation of the entire global cybersecurity community.
To read more about leading cybersecurity education practices, case studies, and IBM’s recommendations, download our report . The paper is part of our ongoing security insights series which includes the 2012 IBM CISO Assessment and the Security Essentials for CIOs series.
Modified by Ellen Cornillon email@example.com
Senior Consultant, IBM Center for Applied Insights
Sometimes time and space conspire to create an opportunity that you weren’t expecting. That was the case for me last week. Near where I live, the University of Rhode Island (URI) hosted their third Cybersecurity Symposium on education and workforce development. Speakers included the entire Rhode Island Congressional delegation, the director of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, the CIO for the U.S. Department of Defense and a number of industry practitioners, including IBM’s VP for Cyber Security Innovation Marisa Viveros. Marisa was the co-author of the paper that we recently published on leading practices for cybersecurity education.
The symposium was open to the public and students, had over 400 attendees, and flew at a fairly high level. There were some excellent takeaways and parallels to IBM’s recent research with respect to cybersecurity skills and education. The Congressional delegation, which included Sen. Whitehouse, Sen. Reed, Rep. Langevin and Rep. Cicilline, each emphasized different areas of the cybersecurity challenge. This included improving public awareness, the national security implications of the rapidly changing cyber threat, the difficulties with law enforcement, and the need to protect our privacy, civil rights and liberties.
Lieutenant General Flynn of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (and URI alum) was a very engaging speaker and talked about the “invisible war” that is currently being waged in cyberspace. He highlighted the profound transition U.S. security is currently going through – caused by population, economic and technology shifts – which require new ways of thinking. To fight this invisible war, he said that for every person currently working in cybersecurity today, we need a staggering twenty-eight more. He also repeatedly talked about the generational issues involved in cybersecurity and that real rules and discipline have yet to emerge on the international stage. He advocated something akin to the “law of the sea”, but for the cyber domain.
The business and industry panel included speakers from Google, IBM, Dell SecureWorks, CVS and Fidelity Investments and was much more open and conversational. They all brought their perspectives – whether providing information security or managing it for their organizations. There was a lot of discussion about how to break into the field of cybersecurity, what skills to have, what courses to take, and career paths. Stephan Somogyi, from Google, talked about the need to educate everyone on digital hygiene and focusing education on the basics of computer science. He said that you have to have a passion for security, it is a calling. If you have that, you can come from any field. Jeff Shilling, from Dell, talked about the incredible need for security technicians, those with hands-on skills. He has enough security managers, what he needs are those that can do the work (he agreed with Lt. Gen. Flynn’s assessment).
A lot of the themes from the day echoed what we recommended through our research. Local and national collaboration was evident with the diversity of speakers and the support from the entire university, the Congressional delegation, the military and industry. The importance of awareness was highlighted over and over. URI is working on innovative ways to provide hands-on experience for students through a low-cost Open Cyber Challenge Platform they are developing. The need for improving non-technical cybersecurity academic programs for business and policy leaders was highlighted in a new study from the Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policy.
This was a very valuable event, and I hope that it continues on an annual basis. Even though it was to raise local awareness and promote URI and its computer science program, it could stand to have increased global participation in the next iteration – which was one of our key findings.
For a summary of our recent research check out and share the Prezi presentation below:
Client Insights, Consultant
IBM Center for Applied Insights
The CAI team have spent some time recently musing on the meaning of “thought leadership” – how do you define it and what makes good thought leadership. These may seem like obvious questions but, in my experience, as the amount of content multiplies (web commentary, blogs, social media, and so on), many people are unclear about what is distinctive about thought leadership. Our discussion highlighted some interesting points.
Firstly, there is a hazy line between thought leadership and marketing material. Thought leadership uses fact-based research to analyze a topical client issue and uses this to propose client action. Marketing material, on the other hand, uses assertion to argue the case for a supplier’s products and services. Both have their place. A potential customer would expect to find detail of products and services when accessing suppliers’ websites and point-of-view documents can provide a persuasive case to buy. Effective thought leadership, though, can offer something a little different. It can entice a potential client in, change their perspective on an issue, and increase their levels of trust and confidence in their supplier. It is for this reason that thought leadership features so prominently on the websites of all major IT systems & service providers.
So what makes effective thought leadership? I recently carried out a scan of a number of IT providers websites and the quality varies hugely. The best included several thought provoking articles which were easily accessible, thoroughly researched, and well presented. They made a compelling case for actions which clearly aligned closely with the strategic direction of the supplier. The worst were short opinion pieces which demonstrated a poor appreciation of market dynamics. In determining what makes effective thought leadership I use four categories (borrowing considerably from the analysis carried out by source for consulting.com):
Credible research: This means sufficient depth and breadth of data collection (perhaps using a customer survey) plus analysis which has rigour, yet can be understood by the reader.
Client appeal: It must draw the client in – to pick up the report/article and to carry on reading. To do this it must tackle an issue of immediate client interest and be written from the clients’ point of view, offering practical recommendations and demonstrating outcomes.
Distinctive: It must say something new, different which makes a difference (i.e. it qualifies as newsworthy).
Effective messaging: It must draw the reader almost subliminally to a set of messages which are aligned to the suppliers’ agenda. It this is done too obviously, the research and analysis loses credibility.
These are important things to remember as we work on crafting our own thought leadership. Our discussion then moved on to the characteristics of effective thought leaders – suggested role models ranged from the journalist & populariser of concepts Malcolm Gladwell to the UK-based wit Stephen Fry, with 4 million Twitter followers. Perhaps we can explore this subject on another post.
Consultant, IBM Center for Applied Insights
A couple of weeks ago I wrote a blog post discussing our
recent paper that links Leading Marketers with financial outperformance. In our study, these Leading Marketers had 40%
higher revenue growth and twice the
gross profit growth. Naturally, the next
question you’d ask is “how do I become a leading marketer?” And that’s exactly what I’m going to talk
about over my next few posts.
To kick things off, we found that Leading Marketers engage
with their customers across a variety of channels. These leading marketers are more likely to
have integrated inbound, outbound and offline marketing programs in some or all
channels. They are more likely to use
interaction optimization technology in all of their channels. And they are also more likely to adjust
offers in real-time across all channels.
In short, they create a “System of Engagement” that allows them to
engage each customer as an individual, across multiple channels.
So if leading marketers are creating a system of engagement
to deliver targeted messaging across channels, what specific tactics are they
using? To answer that, we looked closer
at mobile and social channels.
Essentially, a number of tactics within these channels can
be considered “table stakes.” Everybody
has a mobile version of their website and delivers mobile e-mails. Everybody has a social networking page on a
site like Facebook and most engage in micro-blogging (Twitter). But there are some specific, innovative
tactics where we saw differences between leading marketers and others.
When it comes to mobile, we found that leading marketers
were more likely to use mobile messaging campaigns, location based targeting,
and mobile-specific ads. For social,
leading marketers were more likely to develop apps for 3rd party
networking sites (Facebook), leverage social/local group buying (Groupon), and
participate in location-based games (Foursquare). All of this means that leading marketers are
faster to begin leveraging emerging/trending technologies to see if they can
enhance the system of engagement. Some
of these tactics may or may not prove to be effective in the long run, but the
leading marketers get there first… not unlike the adage “fail fast, fail
often”. By being at the forefront with
these tactics, they stand to benefit when they come across something that’s
It’s also interesting to note that location-based tactics
saw greater use by leading marketers in both mobile and social. When you think about a system of engagement
that strives to deliver targeted, personalized, relevant offers in real-time,
it makes perfect sense that location-data is a key component to enhancing that
There are a number of ideas you can take away from our data,
but there’s one over-riding principle that I think is worth taking to
heart: Innovation. Leading marketers aren’t afraid of trying out
new channel engagement technologies or tactics.
They get there first and they find out what works. They don’t worry about whether a channel is completely
mature… they jump in and get their hands dirty.
This enables them to be proactive with their customers, rather than
I’ll be back next time to talk about the barriers that
prevent many organizations from becoming Leading Marketers. As always, please feel free to reach out to
me with any questions. And, if you haven’t read it yet, take a look at our
executive report, How Leading Marketers Outperform: Effective Engagement and Intelligent Investment.
Today, I’m going to take a different approach to, hopefully, give you a glimpse into how mobile money can change users’ experiences. This is an imaginative piece (all characters are fictitious) where I’ll try to highlight the concerns, joys and satisfaction of a mobile money user from the hinterlands of India in the year 2015. It highlights the importance of an effective and trained agent network, importance of sufficient face-time for new customers, interoperability issues, and benefits of mobile money for a typical user.
Today, I woke up late at 5 am, startled to already be a half hour behind schedule. My mobile phone in hand, I kept checking the time and rushed to get ready. I can’t afford to lose half a day’s wage, US$6, if I report late to work even by half an hour.
At work, Sultan, one of my best friends, asked me for a loan of US$15 which he needed to pay the school fees of his daughter. I checked my Airtel mobile money wallet balance and instantly transferred the amount to his mobile money wallet. For a nominal fee of 10 cents, it was worthwhile to help a friend.
Thinking back, I remember the last time I loaned Sultan US$10. I had to walk down 2 Kms to the nearest branch of State Bank of India to transfer money to his account. That was when we met Harpreet, the sales agent of BharatiAirtel mobile money services at the bank. He introduced us to the new mobile money services. Until then, I had a basic feature phone and could not understand much of technology or features of mobile money in the first go. Harpreet was patient; he explained the service, its features, its tie up with banks, charges and benefits for us for about 30 minutes. I was particularly wary of the notion of holding money in mobile – how secure could it be? What if I lose my phone/SIM or someone else makes use of PIN delivered to me? Harpreet demonstrated everything and explained it in detail to clear our apprehensions. This convinced both of us, me and Sultan, to subscribe to the service on our Airtel SIMs. He even gave us the contact details of two local agents in our locality who can help us cash-in and cash-out, as required.
The first few days in using this service were difficult. I forgot some of the steps of using various services; user interface of the application was not so convenient, etc. I remember approaching the local agent and was so relieved to see that he could help. He was very well trained and he helped me from time to time in using the services more efficiently. One challenge I faced in the beginning was that the agent used to run out of cash. This was a major let down for me and I had to walk a Km to get cash from another agent. Over the last two months, though, I feel the service has improved a lot.
Since then, I have been using this service quite frequently. I have used it to make recharges on my cell phone, make and receive money transfers to/from my friends, send money to my family, check bank account balance, withdraw and deposit cash at the agent and even pay my electricity bill. The list keeps on getting longer! Here again, the agent is proactive enough to let me know of the new services and discounts offered by the service providers.
For me, it’s a hand to mouth situation, given my meagre salary. I work in New Delhi but my family lives in a distant village in Orissa, more than 1000Kms from my place. With this service, I can transfer money to them on a real time basis and with minimal charges. Earlier, I used to transfer money through post office or hand it over to someone who would be travelling to my place. It took a few days for the money to arrive and I was charged about thrice as much. I am quite happy that this service enables me to send money to my family as and when they need it.
One challenge I faced initially, while transferring money to my family, was that my family was using the mobile services of Vodafone and Airtel was not allowing money transfers to non-Airtel subscribers. Sending remittance to my family constitutes 80% of my transactions and this was a major handicap for me. Either, I had to take the services of Vodafone or my family had to take the services of Airtel. Due to this, I was not able to transfer money to them for a couple of weeks. I consulted some of my friends and they advised a workaround solution they had been using. However, I was not convinced and instead, asked my family to take Airtel connection.
I have genuinely recommended this service to my fellow workers at the construction site and taken four of them to Harpreet to sign up for the services. For this, Harpreet gave me bonus talktime on my cell phone. It is a nice incentive for sharing my experience.
I finally got free from my work at 7 pm this evening and received my daily salary. I transferred the entire amount to my family since the monthly rent was due on their house.
Though it is tough for me to survive in this salary and work condition, mobile money has surely made the journey a bit simpler and convenient.
I look forward to your comments and observations. Please click “Add a Comment” below or “More Actions” to share this with others.
Modified by Ellen Cornillon firstname.lastname@example.org
I've had the priviledge of working with IBM's Security Systems and Services teams over the past two years looking at the evolution of security leadership and what security leaders, like the CISO, are going to need to look like in the future. We’ve also looked at leading practices in cybersecurity education and we’ve identified essential security practices for CIOs based on our experiences at IBM.
Have a strategic vision… ensure global consistency in policy… engage in lots of communication with business leaders… speak business value and understand risk… minimize the impact of security to the business… be on the bleeding edge of enterprise and consumer technology...
A set of challenges also emerged from the interviews we conducted. Although we targeted more mature security leaders, they are still struggling in three areas.
How do I best manage a broad set of concerns from a diverse set of business stakeholders? Security leaders that are engaged with the business have to deal with a number of security fears from the C-Suite. The CEO might be most worried about losing customer trust because of a breach, the CFO might worry about the financial impact of recovery, COOs might focus on the impact of operational downtime. Good security leaders are able to balance, manage and allay all of these concerns.
How do I improve mobile security policy and management – not just deploy the latest technology? It’s no surprise that mobile security is top of mind. It was identified as a top technology concern in last year’s Assessment and continues to be at the forefront. Most are enabling secure mobile deployments in their organizations, but fewer have achieved comprehensive policies or strategies for personally owned devices.
How do I translate security metrics into the language of the business to help guide strategy? Technical and business metrics need to be used for more than just budget discussions and technology prioritization, they need to be deeply integrated into the decision making process of the business. To get to that point, security metrics must be translated into things the business will understand, like financial impact.
To learn more and download the full report and other materials visit the IBM Center for Applied Insights and join us in an open discussion about the future for information security leadership.
Client Insights, Consultant
IBM Center for Applied Insights
Not many people empathize with financial markets firms these days. Yet, they are facing a one-two punch of increasingly onerous regulation combined with increased competition (a result of more demanding customers, technological change, globalization and the downturn in the global economy).
Industry experts estimate that 15-20% of the market share for wholesale and investment banking will be reshuffled in the next few years. To survive let alone thrive, financial markets firms must adapt – by changing the way that they operate.
Working with Broadridge Financial Solutions we looked into how financial markets firms are responding to this demanding environment – and specifically the changes they are making to their operating models – that is how they organize their resources, business processes, systems, information assets, etc.
The research highlighted a leading group – who excelled at both compliance and innovation. This group had five key things they were thinking and doing differently than the rest:
- Thinking marketplace first, “factory” efficiencies second
- Designing operations around client interactions, not vice versa
- Cultivating agility – and an ability to see what others don’t
- Building and use scale, but not always in expected ways
- Partnering to extend their capabilities – and their thinking
These firms have a different perspective on operations and how it contributes to the business. The distinctions between front, middle and back office are becoming less distinct. As a UK-based Chief Operations Officer at a Universal Bank observed: “We must make sure changes enhance the whole process - It’s no good having a Rolls-Royce in the front and a Mini in the back.”
The leaders are looking at how operations can positively contribute to the business – through consolidation and greater efficiency of course, but also through creating the flexibility to scale resources and adapt to market conditions, facilitating faster product development and enabling innovation.
The leaders are also more open to working with external partners – and see the positive value to be gained through collaboration, for example accessing the technology and resources of an external partner. Leaders outsource more of their business processes, in particular, traditional areas like back-office accounting, settlement and clearance and reporting systems.
Success in these areas will likely encourage leaders to forge ahead into sourcing more complex functions such as reconciliations, data management, tax reporting and corporate actions. But what they outsource is perhaps of less interest than how they outsource. The leaders outsource with a business objective in mind, seeking to get the best from their partner, whereas those lagging tend to see the potential benefits in a more limited way – focusing on cutting costs of the back office.
And importantly, the study points to these differences in attitude feeding into improved results. Those who recognize how operations can contribute to the business and see collaboration as a way of improving business outcomes are rewarded with improved customer satisfaction, faster product introduction, improved regulatory compliance and improved access to information.
So what are the implications, for firms operating in financial markets as well as those in other industries who are trying to optimize the contribution of their back offices? For financial markets firms - focus on achieving agility, scalability and customer centricity, with the potential help of external partners. Many of those currently lagging are planning to evolve their operating model over the next three years. However, there is no time to delay, as the leading firms are forging ahead, and gaining market share as a result.
For those in other industries seeking to optimize their back office operations, this study also provides valuable insights. The financial markets industry is an extreme case where technological change, globalization, market turmoil, low switching costs and significant regulatory change have come together accelerating required operating model change. But the drivers are similar in many other industries – and we are observing a transformation in approaches to outsourcing – focusing more on sharing expertise and delivering business value rather than simply efficiency savings. Increasingly, the winners, across all industries, will be those who exploit these new capabilities to the full.
Client Insights, Senior Consultant
Center for Applied Insights
Platform as a service (PaaS) is at a critical stage in its life cycle – with promising business benefits offset by lingering reservations. PaaS promises increased flexibility, lower costs and higher quality IT services, while maintaining control over data and applications. It sits squarely between infrastructure as a service and software as a service, and could prove to be the most transformational of the three main types of cloud computing.
The IBM Center for Applied Insights wanted to explore attitudes around PaaS in order to identify leading practices in PaaS adoption and provide recommendations on how to exploit its potential. We interviewed over 1,500 IT decision makers in 18 countries and a wide range of industries so we could better understand their motivations, experiences and concerns relating to PaaS. This week, we released the results of our exploration in our latest paper “Exploring the frontiers of cloud computing – Insights from platform as a service pioneers”.
The report goes into more detail on the benefits and challenges surrounding PaaS, how to overcome the challenges and what an enterprise can do to start, or continue, their PaaS journey. For a view from cloud pioneers CLD Partners, check out their post on IBM’s Thoughts on Cloud
blog. For more information about IBM’s SmartCloud Application Services launch and the study check out a recent article by ZDNet.