1. www.handels.gu.se
Johan Magnusson
Centre for Business Solutions
School of Business, Economics and Law
University of Gothenburg
Market: Enterprise Systems
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
2. www.handels.gu.se
Agenda
After this lecture, the student will be able to:
1. Evaluate some of the drivers for changes in the ES market
2. Explain technological changes and their effects on the design of ESs
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
3. www.handels.gu.se
Learning Points: Current crisis
• Even though the IT Budget has been
slashed with 10% in many
companies, business has not been
affected
• CIOs have not sufficiently
communicated the cost of cost-cuts
• Application management is lagging
• IT Governance has received
increased attention
• Now is the time to plan for growth!
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
4. www.handels.gu.se
Historical development: Recap
• Material Requirement Planning Systems
• Material Resource Planning Systems
• Enterprise Resource Planning Systems
• Enterprise Application Integration
• Service Oriented Architecture
• Software as a Service
6. www.handels.gu.se
Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)
• ”The Client/Server of the 21st century”
• Architectural guidelines for micro-integrations
• Used as guidelines for most new applications
• Applications are broken down into services
• Strong focus on ”re-use” as a measure of
success
• Modular, distributable, clearly defined,
interchangeable and shareable
• High risk of initial failures without clearly defined
governance
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
Abrahms, G, & Schulte, R.W. 2008. Service-Oriented Architecture and guide to SOA
research. Gartner group.
7. www.handels.gu.se
Services
Software as a Service
• Natural effect of SOA
• Software delivered as loosely coupled
services
• 10% of ERPs were SaaS-based 2009
(IDC, 2007)
• 40% of SMEs have moved to SaaS by
2011 (Gartner Group, 2008)
• Business models under construction
• Muddy waters between Application
Service Provider (ASP) and SaaS have
now turned into Cloud Computing…
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
ERP2002
Services
ERP2010
8. www.handels.gu.se
Examples from ERP and CRM
• Ataio, Netsuite, 24SevenOffice, Fortnox &
Salesforce
• Business models built on high level of
standardization
• Low maintenance costs and ease of
use/access
• Issues concerning agility and ownership
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
9. www.handels.gu.se
ERP Vendor strategies
• How do we relate to the new market?
• Leaders
– Building directly on new platform
– No legacy to take into account
– Quick adoption of new model
– Ex: Fortnox, 24/7 office, Ataio
• Laggers
– Re-configuring old versions
– Re-packaging of instance
– Slow adoption, milking previous market
– Ex: SAP, Microsoft, Oracle
• Brokers
– Taking over the customer-relationship
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
10. www.handels.gu.se
Incumbents and Challengers
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
Magnusson etl. 2012. “Incumbents and Challengers: Conflicting institutional logics in SaaS
ERP vendors business models. Journal of Service Science and Management, 5:2.
11. www.handels.gu.se
Cloud Computing
• The use of disparate resources to
secure computational needs
• Elastic, off-premise sourcing
• Remember Watson…
• Federated ERP
• SaaS, IaaS and PaaS
• Issues concerning QoS (Quality of
Service), accountability and
responsibility
• ”I’m still confused, but on a higher
level…”
• Market bled €3B 2009-2011
• Paradigm shift
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
12. www.handels.gu.se
Research in Progress: The emergence of ERP App Stores
• From: To:
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
Partner SMErp CustomerSMErp Partner Customer
Magnusson and Nilsson. (fortcoming). “The ERP App Store: A cradle of Conflicting interests
in platform ecosystems“
0
1
2
3
4
5
Price
Revenue
Market
Responsibility
OwnershipControl
Accreditation
Platform
Scope
SMErp
Partner
13. www.handels.gu.se2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
Growth
Profitability
New
Customers
Additional
sales
Decreased
cost
Increased
revenue
Increased
brand
awareness
Lower barriers
for
procurement
Externalizatio
n of
development
Courtage
• Full scope
• Medium price
• Full responsibility
• Small scope
• Low price
• Medium
responsibility
• Medium scope
• Medium price
• Low responsibility
• Small scope
• Low price
• Low responsibility
Strategic choice for ERP App Stores
14. www.handels.gu.se
Software Ecosystems
• Multi-sourcing in the wake of SOA and
SaaS
• Strive for agility
• IT Relationship models are
unsophisticated, partnerships built on
opportunism
• Are your current vendors right for your
ecosystem?
• Evaluation of vendors
– Open source
– Web and consumerization
– SaaS
– SOA Governance and Strategies
– Master Data Management (MDM)
– Business Process Outsourcing (BPO)
– Sourcing innovation
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
Genovese, Y. ete al. 2007. Evaluating Global-Class Software Ecosystems. Gartner Group |
Genovese, Y. 2007. Evaluating IBM, Microsoft, Oracle and SAP strategies in software
megatrends. Gartner Group
15. www.handels.gu.se
Business Impacts of SOA and SaaS
• Agility & Alignment: Quick response to changes in
business processes
• Vendors and Customers have different intentions
– Vendors: Keep the customer close: Increase
dependence
– Customers: Keep the vendor at a distance:
Decrease dependence
• Vendors have used different approaches so far
• Customers have not yet seen the true possibilities
of SaaS
• 3rd party suppliers are closest to the customer
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
16. www.handels.gu.se
Consumerization and ERP
• Consumerization is regarded as the most
influential mega-trend during the coming
decade
• Standardization and commoditization are
powerful drivers
• 50% of all Global 2000 companies have
deployed consumerized IT
• Web 2.0 and Social Computing comes with a
collection of new risks
• Transparency and Crowdsourcing
• How will this effect ERP?
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
17. www.handels.gu.se
Contrasts: Process vs Emergence
• IF (erp IS process-based)
• AND (erp IS focused on de-crease in
lead-times)
• AND (erp IS based on standardized
processes)
• THEN (ERP is NOT agile)
• Enterprise 2.0 vs Enterprise 1.0
• Emergent design requires individualistic
processes, fully re-configurable
• Learning and experimentation as
standard
• McAffee, 2005; Hedberg &
Jönsson, 1987
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
18. www.handels.gu.se
Web 2.0 and Enterprise 2.0
• W2.0 is the Read/Write Web
• High degree of dialogue and
transparency
• Companies need to adress the
change in access and exposure
• Impacts will ripple throughout the
entire enterprise
• First step will be passive market
intelligence
2013-08-29Centrum för Affärssystem
Austin, T. 2009. Pattern based strategy and E2.0. Gartner Symposium, Cannes.
20. www.handels.gu.se
Analytics go Social
• Social Network Analysis
• Enterprise Internet Reputation Management
• Sentiment and Prediction analysis
• Prediction Markets
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
21. www.handels.gu.se
Food for Thought: Prediction Markets
• Economic theory during the 1980’s
• Iowa Electronic Market and the
Hollywood Stock Exchange
• Will price reflect average belief?
• Wisdom of Crowds and Wikinomics
• HP, Google, GE, Dell, Pfizer…
• Could we predict our revenues?
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
22. www.handels.gu.se
Regulation
• Three forms of isomorphism
(DiMaggio & Powell, 1983)
– Coercive (Regulation)
– Mimetic (Imitation)
– Normative (Norms)
• Regulations give rise to new
demands
• Continued regulative changes give
rise to agility
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
23. www.handels.gu.se
Recapitulation
After this lecture, the student will be able to:
1. Evaluate some of the drivers for changes
in the ES market
2. Explain technological changes and their
effects on the design of ESs
2013-08-29Centre for Business Solutions
Editor's Notes
Radargroup, CS 20/3 2009
T. 2009
Sourcing and distribution: Guardian Check you PM, Threadless,Support:Ducatics, Caterpillar, Barnes & Noble, IkeaInnovation: Starbucks, Ideastorm, NineSigmaMarket intelligence: Netflix, Goldcorp, Decision marketsPrecence: Crash the Suporbowl, Fiesta, HR: Bestbuy
Prediction markets were developed during the 1980s, and put into application by researchers at Iowa University during the 1990’s. Through building prediction markets for the presidential elections they showed that the price will beat Gallup in all cases.This was then further developed by the Hollywood stock exchange, into the field of predicting revenues on particular productions. The underlying notion is that the price of stock in the electronic market will be a relevant reflection of the “truth”, and this would solve the difficulties with expert groups and Gallups as means for predicting production needs, future revenue et cetera. General Electric and HP have both tried it as an internal means for assessing how much of a particular product they would need to produce, and Google has run tests internally. During the early 2000’s, the development of Wikipedia and what Surowiecki (2004) termed the “Wisdom of Crowds” show that multitude will always outperform expertice when it comes to predictions.