Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Dell survey highlights importance of putting users before devices when developing BYOD strategies

The Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) trend has rapidly morphed from a disruptive worry into a strategic, positive initiative for many organizations across the globe, according to results from a new global survey released today.

In fact, significant business benefits often follow when BYOD-adopter companies empower their employees with their preferred devices and work habits, as well as more say in the applications and data access they need to get their jobs done … anytime, from anywhere, the survey shows.
 
What's more, the rapidly improved productivity and enhanced collaboration among employees -- as well as greater communication and better service with customers, suppliers and partners -- are proving to be competitive advantages for companies that do BYOD best.

The survey was recently conducted by Dell Software Group and market researcher Vanson Bourne from nearly 1,500 IT executives around the world. It clearly demonstrates that, while BYOD shows promise, many organizations are struggling with making the most of BYOD. [Disclosure: Quest Software, part of Dell's Software Group, is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]

The majority of survey respondents agree that BYOD strategies deliver benefits -- more than 70 percent said they believe that BYOD can boost employee productivity and customer response time, and 59 percent say they feel their company could be at a competitive disadvantage if they didn't implement BYOD.
It's important that organizations define a program to help manage and protect their corporate information, but also to empower employees to do their jobs better and faster.

And attitudes toward the innovation impact that BYOD has are largely the same among the midsized (between 1,000 and 3,000 employees) and large (more than 3,000 employees) companies surveyed. Roughly half of respondents in both groups say that BYOD has significantly changed the business culture at their organizations.

Yet less than half of the IT leadership respondents -- 44 percent -- say they understand the importance of a user-centric approach to BYOD. And this is where many organizations are missing the boat, according to Dell Software.

"It's important that organizations define a program to help manage and protect their corporate information, but also to empower employees to do their jobs better and faster, or to improve customer satisfaction, or whatever the goal is," says Roger Bjork, Director of Enterprise Mobility Solutions at Dell Software Group. "Companies that do BYOD for a purpose, to help with a broader goal, are seeing better results versus those who simply let BYOD happen. A big part of that is focusing on the user aspect, and not limiting it to a device discussion."

To me these results should remove doubt that embracing desktop virtualization (VDI) and mobile device management are priorities for IT. I also think that BYOD is a catalyst to more general IT transformation and more business-centric emphasis for IT innovation. You could say that BYOD forms a capstone on the rising archway of VDI, web apps, thin clients, terminal services, and other applications delivery advancements overt the past 15 years.

The idea, of course, going back to the very first PCs, is to let the user decide how to work best.

Benefits of putting users first

Indeed, those survey respondents who say they believe the user-centric approach to BYOD is the right one also reported they are able to drive business benefits, satisfy users and gain a competitive edge to a higher degree than survey respondents who don't see the benefit of a user-centric approach. Some 64 percent of respondents say BYOD works well when the specific user needs are understood by IT.

And respondents at companies further along in their BYOD strategy implementations are more likely to agree that the most benefit is derived from programs that put the user first. Understanding individual user needs and the resulting improvements in employee productivity and satisfaction are much more important pillars of a BYOD strategy than simply allowing employees to use the device in their pocket or purse for work, says Bjork.
The survey data definitely shows companies that have well thought-out BYOD strategies have fewer issues and are garnering better results.

"You do a disservice if you make this about what shiny object do employees want to use to connect to email. It's much broader than that," he says. "I think the survey data definitely shows companies that have well thought-out BYOD strategies have fewer issues and are garnering better results."

A one-size fits all approach to BYOD does not work, says Bjork,  IT should manage the spread of BYOD. "You can't just let BYOD happen," he added.

A user-centric approach to BYOD fits with the recent trend for IT to transform into a service-delivery organization that understands not only the goals of the business, but how to support employees to help them achieve these goals, adds Bjork. What's more, as the Millennial Generation enters the workforce with certain digital expectations, user-centric BYOD policies can be leveraged as recruiting tools.

"Let's face it, this is not just a mobile thing. It has a much broader impact," says Bjork. "BYOD is a method, not a result. … You should start by asking 'What is the user trying to accomplish?'"

The bottom line is that IT now needs to support multiple ways of working for a variety of styles and devices that appeal and adjust based on user preferences and innovations.

Additional points

Other noteworthy points that arose from the survey:
  • Survey participants in the U.S. are least likely to stress users over devices when crafting a BYOD strategy, while respondents in Singapore were most likely to do so. Other geographies covered by the survey include the U.K, France, Germany, Italy, Australia, India and the Beijing region of China;
  • Respondents listed more flexible working hours, the ability to foster creativity, speed innovation, boost morale and facilitate teamwork and collaboration as personal gains for employees working with BYOD strategies;
  • Organizations that consider applications as part of a their BYOD strategy are more likely to link and manage devices per user; clearly define roles for their user community in one central database; track and support each user's level of mobility, and deliver applications to users based on their role within the company. Of those with no formal BYOD policy, 27 percent say they can't provide any of these functions;
  • The top five BYOD challenges listed by survey respondents are abuse of policies; theft/loss of mobile devices; lack of control over applications and data on devices; employees leaving the company with insider knowledge; and unauthorized data distribution.
Dell's position on the importance of a user-centric BYOD strategy comes from experience. Carol Fawcett was the CIO of Quest Software, which was recently acquired by Dell, with nearly 4,000 employees in 23 countries. The company focused on giving employees access to the applications and data they needed to get their jobs done, regardless of what device was being used.
The results of this latest BYOD survey reinforce the importance of putting users first in order to develop the most effective policies and turn BYOD into a long-term, sustainable business benefit.


"We found this approach helped us quickly move out of device firefighting mode to be much more strategic, which also enabled us to resolve our biggest BYOD problems, such as security, access
rights and data leakage," says Fawcett. "The results of this latest BYOD survey reinforce the importance of putting users first in order to develop the most effective policies and turn BYOD into a long-term, sustainable business benefit."

As Quest found with its own workers, the better planned the BYOD acceptance, the fewer negative issues and the better the productivity result. I recently spoke with Fawcett at length about the experience.

I think we should also expect that BYOD planning will be done in association with -- and as an accelerant to -- other larger initiatives such as data center consolidation, IT transformation, and applications modernization.

Bjork further suggested that companies that have a policy-based approach to security and access control, and adopt services oriented architectures and data lifecycle management will be in a better position to avail themselves of BYOD faster and at lower risk. VDI and thin-client initiatives also pave the way to BYOD.

(BriefingsDirect contributor Cara Garretson provided editorial assistance and research on this post. She can be reached on LinkedIn.)

You may also be interested in: 

at 11:57 AM 0 comments

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Latest Jitterbit release further eases application and data integration from among modern sources

Data and apps integration provider Jitterbit this week released a new version of its solution, Jitterbit 5, designed to be the glue between on-premise, cloud, social, and mobile data,

Jitterbit focuses on simple yet powerful integration technologies that can be quickly and easily deployed to create integrated processes and data views. We've seen a lot of interest in light-weight, low-coding integration capabilities as more SaaS and cloud services need to be coordinated. This is now becoming even more pertinent to bringing data together from a variety of sources.

Jitterbit 5 aims to raise the level of simplicity even higher with new features that streamline process integration, said the Oakland, CA company. The wizards-based approach allows non-technical users to design integration projects through a graphical, point-and-click interface. I think making more people able to tailor and specify integrations can significantly boost innovation and productivity.
Vendors have been trying to solve the issue of integration of technology for over twenty years.

In enterprise computing today, there are three main sources of data that must come together to help drive the business forward, according to Jitterbit's thinking. First there's corporate data -- which for years has been the cornerstone of technology strategies -- that sits in databases, data warehouses, enterprise applications, etc. and is typically kept safe and sound on-premise, behind the firewall.

Over the past few years, two other sources of data have emerged as critical for businesses that want to optimize their operations and better serve their customers; data stored in cloud services, and data from a pair of new platforms -- social and mobile. And we'll no doubt be seeing ever larger and more specific data emerge from business and consumer activities from these domains.

These newer sources of data can be located anywhere, and the information they provide comes in a wide variety of formats, making it harder than ever to integrate with structured corporate information using traditional integration technologies.

Three pillars

Jitterbit's focus therefore is to help enterprises better achieve integration of data from all these three pillars of modern computing. And the means to do it must appeal to the business analysts who understand best the need to have many types of different data readily available and associated with business processes in near real time.

"Vendors have been trying to solve the issue of integration of technology for over 20 years.
The majority of companies come at it with a technical perspective -- they try to solve the problem for the professional developer," says Andrew Leigh, vice president of products with Jitterbit.

"But the problem of integration isn't just a technical issue; it's a business issue. The people who are best at building, managing, and changing integration are the ones that understand it's really a process. We're putting integration back in the hands of the business analysts who really understand the data and processes to make that integration effective."
The people who are best at building, managing, and changing integration are the ones that understand it's really a process.

While Jitterbit features wizards and other simple tools to let non-technical users quickly build the data connections that the business requires, it's important that they work in partnership with IT to ensure the process is governed correctly, says Leigh, who recently joined Jitterbit from Salesforce.com.

"We've built all the knowledge and best practices that the industry has been building up over the last two decades into our solution; now we're focused on the user experience and hiding complexity," says Leigh.

This latest release also features enhanced connectivity to Salesforce, Microsoft Dynamics and SAP, as well as Twitter and Chatter. The new Instant View and Process Monitor tools provide visibility to the status and results of more complex business process integrations. And Version 5.0 supports large-volume cloud APIs to allow organizations to rapidly synchronize large volumes of data at higher levels of performance.

Jitterbit's approach also fits into the vision of "integration as a service," which seems a natural development of cloud models. I'd like to see more cloud services providers embed such integration services into their offerings. This is especially important for PaaS to go mainstream.

A video describing the new features in Jitterbit 5.0, available now can be found here. A free 30-day trial of the product is available here.

(BriefingsDirect contributor Cara Garretson provided editorial assistance and research on this post. She can be reached on LinkedIn.)

You may also be interested in:
at 12:02 PM 0 comments

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

The other shoe drops: SAP puts ERP on HANA

This guest post comes courtesy of Tony Baer's OnStrategies blog. Tony is senior analyst at Ovum.

By Tony Baer

It was never a question of whether SAP would bring it flagship product, Business Suite to HANA, but when. And when I saw this while parking the car at my physical therapist over the holidays, I should’ve suspected that something was up: SAP at long last was about to announce … this.

From the start, SAP has made clear that its vision for HANA was not a technical curiosity, positioned as some high-end niche product or sideshow. In the long run, SAP was going to take HANA to Broadway.
Baer
SAP product rollouts on HANA have proceeded in logical, deliberate fashion. Start with the lowest hanging fruit, analytics, because that is the sweet spot of the embryonic market for in-memory data platforms. Then work up the food chain, with the CRM introduction in the middle of last year – there’s an implicit value proposition for having a customer database on a real-time system, especially while your call-center reps are on the phone and would like to either soothe, cross-sell, or upsell the prospect. Get some initial customer references with a special purpose transactional product in preparation for taking it to the big time.

There’s no question that in-memory can have real impact, from simplifying deployment to speeding up processes and enabling more real-time agility. Your data integration architecture is much simpler and the amount of data you physically must store is smaller. SAP provides a cute video that shows how HANA cuts through the clutter.

For starters, when data is in memory, you don’t have to denormalize or resort to tricks like sharding or striping of data to enhance access to “hot” data. You also don’t have to create staging servers to perform ETL of you want to load transaction data into a data warehouse. Instead, you submit commands or routines that, thanks to processing speeds that are up to what SAP claims to be 1000x faster than disk, convert the data almost instantly to the form in which you need to consume it. And when you have data in memory, you can now perform more ad hoc analyses. In the case of production and inventory planning (a.k.a., the MRP portion of ERP), you could run simulations when weighing the impact of changing or submitting new customer orders, or judging the impact of changing sourcing strategies when commodity process fluctuate. For beta customer John Deere, they achieved positive ROI based solely on the benefits of implementing it for pricing optimization (SAP has roughly a dozen customers in ramp up for Business Suite on HANA).

Supply chain lag time

It’s not a question of whether you can run ERP in real time. No matter how fast you construct or deconstruct your business planning, there is still a supply chain that introduces its own lag time. Instead, the focus is how to make enterprise planning more flexible, enhanced with built-in analytics.
But how hungry are enterprises for such improvements? To date, SAP has roughly 500 HANA installs, primarily for Business Warehouse (BW) where the in-memory data store was a logical upgrade for analytics, where demand for in-memory is more established. But on the transactional side, it’s a more uphill battle as enterprises are not clamoring to conduct forklift replacements of their ERP systems, not to mention their databases as well. Changing both is no trivial matter, and in fact, changing databases is even rarer because of the specialized knowledge that is required. Swap out your database, and you might as well swap out your DBAs.
There’s no question that in-memory can have real impact, from simplifying deployment to speeding up processes and enabling more real-time agility.

The best precedent is Oracle, which introduced Fusion Applications two years ago. Oracle didn’t necessarily see Fusion as replacement for E-Business Suite, JD Edwards, or PeopleSoft. Instead it viewed Fusion Apps as a gap filler for new opportunities among its installed base or the rare case of greenfield enterprise install. We’d expect no less from SAP.

Yet in the exuberance of rollout day, SAP was speaking of the transformative nature of HANA, claiming it “Reinvents the Real-Time Enterprise.” It’s not the first time that SAP has positioned HANA in such terms.

Yes, HANA is transformative when it comes to how you manage data and run applications, but let’s not get caught down another path to enterprise transformation. We’ve seen that movie before, and few of us want to sit through it again.

This guest post comes courtesy of Tony Baer's OnStrategies blog. Tony is senior analyst at Ovum.

 You may also be interested in:
at 5:34 PM 0 comments

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

The Networked Economy forces new directions for collaboration in business and commerce, says author Zach Tumin

Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes. Read a full transcript or download a copy. Sponsor: Ariba.

New levels of collaboration have emerged from an increasingly networked world, and business leaders and academic researchers alike are now sorting out what the new capabilities mean for both commerce and society at large.

To learn more about how rapid trends in collaboration and business networking are driving new innovation and social interactions, BriefingsDirect invited a Harvard Kennedy School researcher and a chief strategist at global business network provider Ariba to a panel discussion.

We joined up Zach Tumin, Senior Researcher at the Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program at the Harvard Kennedy School, and Tim Minahan, Senior Vice-President of Global Network Strategy and Chief Marketing Officer at Ariba, an SAP company.

Tumin is co-author with William Bratton of 2012’s Collaborate or Perish: Reaching Across Boundaries in a Networked World, published by Random House. Minahan, at Ariba, is exploring how digital communities are redefining and extending new types of business and collaboration for advanced commerce. 

The chat is moderated by Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions. [Disclosure: Ariba is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]

Here are some excerpts:
Gardner: Zach, in your book "Collaborate or Perish," you're exploring collaboration and you show what it can do when it's fully leveraged. And, Tim, at Ariba you've been showing how a more networked economy is producing efficiencies for business and even extending the balance of what we would consider commerce to be. I’d like to start with looking at how these come together.

Tumin: The opportunities for collaboration are expanding even as we speak. The networks around the world are volatile. They're moving fast. The speed of change is coming at managers and executives at a terrific pace. There is an incredible variety of choice, and people are empowered with these great digital devices that we all have in our pockets.
Tumin

That creates a new world, where the possibilities are tremendous for joining forces, whether politically, economically, or socially. Yet it's also a difficult world, where we don't have authority, if we have to go outside of our organizations -- but where we don't have all the power that we need, if we stay within the boundaries of our charters.

So, we're always reaching across boundaries to find people who we can partner with. The key is how we do that. How do we move people to act with us, where we don't have the authority over them? How do we make it pay for people to collaborate?

A lot of change

Minahan: Collaboration certainly is the new business imperative. Companies have leaned out their operations over the past couple of years and they spent the previous 30 years focusing on their internal operations and efficiencies and driving greater performance, and getting greater insights.

Minahan
When they look outside their enterprise today, it's still a mess. Most of the transactions still occur offline or through semi-automated processes. They lack transparency into those processes and efficiency in executing them. As a result, that means lots of paper and lots of people and lots of missed opportunities, whether it's in capitalizing on getting a new product to market or achieving new sales with new potential customers.

What business networks and this new level of collaboration bring is four things. It brings the transparency that’s currently lacking into the process. So you know where your opportunities are. You know where your orders are. You know where your invoices are and what your exposure to payables are.

It brings new levels of efficiencies executing against those processes, much faster than you ever could before through mostly automated process.
It brings new levels of efficiencies executing against those processes, much faster than you ever could before through mostly automated process. It brings new types of collaboration which I am sure we will get into later in this segment.

The last part, which I think is most intriguing, is that it brings new levels of insights. We're no longer making decisions blindly. We no longer need to double order, because we don’t know if that shipment is coming in and we need to stockpile, because we can't let the refinery go down. So it brings new levels of insight to make more informed decisions in real time.

Gardner: Zach, in your book you're basically describing a new workforce, and some companies and organizations are recognizing that and embracing it. What’s driving this? What has happened that is basically redefining the workforce?

It's the demographics

Tumin: It’s in the demographics, Dana. Young people are accustomed to doing things today that were not possible 10 years ago. The digital power in everyone’s pocket or pocket book, the digital wallet in markets, are ready, willing, and able to deal with them and to welcome them. That means that there’s pressure on organizations to integrate and take advantage of the power that individuals have in the marketplace and that come in to their workforce.

Everyone can see what's going on around the world. We're moving to a situation where young people are feeling pretty powerful. They're able to search, find, discover, and become experts all on their own through the use of technologies that 10 years ago weren’t available.

So a lot of the traditional ways of thinking about power, status, and prestige in the workforce are changing as a result, and the organizations that can adapt and adopt these kinds of technologies and turn them to their advantage are the ones that are going to prevail.

Gardner: Tim, with that said, there's this demographic shift, the shift in the mentality of self-started discovery of recognizing that the information you want is out there, and it’s simply a matter of applying your need to the right data and then executing on some action as a result. Your network seems ready-made for that.


The reality of the community is that it is organic. It takes time to grow.
Minahan: The reality of the community is that it is organic. It takes time to grow. At Ariba we have more than 15 years of transactional history, relationship history, and community generated content that we've amassed. In fact, over the past 12 months those, nearly a million connected companies have executed more than $400 billion in purchase, sales, invoice, and payment transactions over the Ariba network.

Aggregate that over 15 years, and you have some great insights beyond just trading efficiencies for those companies participating there. You can deliver insights to them so that they can make more informed decisions, whether that’s in selecting a new trading partner or determining when or how to pay.

Should I take an early-payment discount in order to accelerate or reduce my cost basis? From a sales standpoint, or seller’s standpoint, should I offer an early payment discount in order to accelerate my cash flow? There are actually a host of examples where companies are taking advantage of this today and it’s not just for the large companies. Let me give you two examples.

From the buyer side, there was a company called Plaid Enterprises. Plaid is a company that, if you have daughters like I do who are interested in hobbies and creating crafts, you are very familiar with. They're one of the leading providers for the do-it-yourself crafts that you would get at your craft store.

Like many other manufacturers, they were a mid sized company, but they decided a couple of years ago to offshore their supplies. So they went to the low cost region of China. A few years into it, they realized that labor wages were rising, their quality was declining, and worse than that, it was sometimes taking them five months to get their shipment.

New sources of supply

So they went to the Ariba Network to find new sources of supply. Like many other manufacturers, they thought, "Let’s look in other low cost regions like Vietnam." They certainly found suppliers there, but what they also found were suppliers here in North America.

They went through a bidding process with the suppliers they found there, with the qualifying information on who was doing business with whom and how they performed in the past, and they wound up selecting a supplier that was 30 miles down the road. They wound up getting a 40 percent cost reduction from what they had previously paid in China and their lead times were cut from more than 120 days down to 30.

That’s from the buy side. From the sell side, the inverse is true. I'll use an example of a company called Mediafly. It's a fast growing company that provides mobile marketing services to some of the largest companies in the world, large entertainment companies, large consumer products companies.

They were asked to join the Ariba Network to automate their invoicing and they have gotten some great efficiencies from that. They've gotten transparencies to know when their invoice is paid, but one other thing was really interesting.

Once they were in the networked environment and once they had automated those processes, they were now able to do what we call dynamic discounting. That meant when they want their cash, they can make offers to their customers that they're connected to on the Ariba Network and be able to accelerate their cash.
You have extraordinary volatility on your network and that can rumble all the way through.

So they were able not only to shrink their quote-to-settle cycle by 84 percent, but they gained access to new financing and capital through the Ariba network. So they could go out and hire that new developer to take on that new project and they were even able to defer a next round of funding, because they have greater control over their cash flow.

Gardner: Zach, in listening to Tim, particularly that discovery process, we're really going back to some principles that define being human -- collaboration, word of mouth, sharing information about what you know. It just seems that we have a much greater scale that we can deploy this. How is that fundamentally changing how people are relating in business and society?

Tumin: The scaling means that things can get big in a hurry and they can get fast in a hurry. So you get a lot of volume, things go viral, and you have a velocity of change here. New technologies are introducing themselves to the market. You have extraordinary volatility on your network and that can rumble all the way through, so that you feel it seconds after something halfway around the world has put a glitch in your supply chain. You have enormous variability. You're dealing with many different languages, both computer languages and human languages.

That means that the potential for collaboration really requires coming together in ways that helps people see very quickly why it is that they should work together, rather than go it alone. They may not have a choice, but people are still status quo animals. We're comfortable in the way that we have always done business, and it takes a lot to move us out.

It comes down to people

When crisis hits, it’s not exactly a great time to build those relationships. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill here in United States once said "Make friends before you need them." That’s a good advice. We have great technology and we have great networks, but at the end of day, it’s people that make them work.

People rely on trust, and trust relies on relationships. Technology here is a great enabler but it’s no super bullet. It takes leadership to get people together across these networks and to then be able to scale and take advantage of what all these networks have to offer.

Gardner: Tim, another big trend today of course, is the ability to use all of this data that Zach has been describing, and you are alluding to, about what’s going on within these networks. Now, of course, with this explosive scale, the amount of that data has likewise exploded.

Minahan: We've only begun to scratch surface on this. When you look at the data that goes on in a business commerce network, it’s really three levels. One is the transactional data, the actual transactions that are going on, knowing what commodities are being purchased and so on. Then, there's relationship data, knowing the relationship between a given buyer and seller.

Finally, there's what I would call community data, or community generated data, and that can take the form of performance ratings, so buyers rating suppliers and suppliers rating buyers. Others in the community can use that to help determine who to do business with or to help to detect some risk in their supply chain.

There are also community generated content, like request for proposal (RFP) templates. A lot of our communities members use a "give a template, take a template" type approach in which they are offering RFP templates to other members of the community that work well for them. These can be templates on how to source temp labor or how to source corrugated packaging.

We have dozens and dozens of those. When you aggregate all of this, the last part of the community data is the benchmarking data. It's understanding not just process benchmarking but also spend benchmarking.

One of the reasons we're so excited about getting access to SAP HANA is the ability to offer this information up in real time, at the point of either purchase or sale decision, so that folks can make more informed decisions about who to engage with or what terms to take or how to approach a particular category. That is particularly powerful and something you can’t get in a non-networked model.

Gardner: One of the things I sense, as people grapple with these issues, is a difficulty in deciding where to let creative chaos rein and where to exercise control and where to lock down and exercise traditional IT imperatives around governance, command and control, and systems of records.

Zach, in your book with William Bratton, are there any examples that you can point to that show how some organizations have allowed that creativity of people to extend their habits and behaviors in new ways unfettered and then at the same time retain that all-important IT control?

Tumin: It's a critical question that you’ve raised. We have young people coming into the workforce who are newly empowered. They understand how to do all the things that they need do without waiting online and without waiting for authority. Yet, they're coming into organizations that have strong cultures that have strong command-and-control hierarchies.

There's a clash that’s happening here, and the strong companies are the ones that find the path to embracing the creativity of networked folks within the organization and across their boundaries, while maintaining focus on set of core deliverables that everyone needs to do.

Wells Fargo

There are plenty of terrific examples. I will give you one. At Wells Fargo, for the development of the online capability for the wholesale shop, Steve Ellis was Executive Vice President. He had to take his group offline to develop the capability, but he had two responsibilities. One was to the bank, which had a history of security and trust. That was its brand. That was its reputation. But he was also looking to the online world, to variability, to choice, and to developing exactly the things that customers want.

Steve Ellis found a way of working with his core group of developers to engage customers in the code design of Wells Fargo's online presence for the wholesale side. As a result, they were able to develop systems that were so integrated into the customers over time that they can move very, very quickly, adapt as new developments required, and yet they gave full head to the creativity of the designers, as well as to the customers in coming to these new ways of doing business.

So here's an example of a pretty staid organization, 150 years old with a reputation for trust and security, making its way into the roiling water of the networked world and finding a path through engagement that helped to prevail in the marketplace over a decade.

Minahan: I'd also like to talk about the dynamics going on that are fueling more B2B collaboration. There is certainly the need for more productivity. So that's a constant in business, particularly as we're in tight environments. Many times companies are finding they are tapped out within the enterprise.

Becoming more dependent

Companies are becoming more and more dependent on getting insights and collaborating with folks outside their enterprise.

So policies do need to be put down. Just like many businesses put policies down on their social media, there needs to be policies put down on how we share information and with whom, but the great thing about technology is that it can enforce those controls. It can help to put in checks and balances and give you a full transparency and audit trail, so you know that these policies are being enforced. You know that there are certain parameters around security of data.

You don't have those controls in the offline world. When paper leaves the building, you don't know. But when a transaction is shared or when information is shared over a network, you, as a company, have greater control. You have a greater insight, and the ability to track and trace.
When a transaction is shared or when information is shared over a network, you, as a company, have greater control.

So there is this balancing act going on between opening the kimono, as we talked about in '80s, being able to share more information with your trading partners, but now being able to do it in a controlled environment that is digitized and process-oriented. You have the controls you need to ensure you're protecting your business, while also growing your business.


Gardner: Tim, for the benefit of our audience, help us better understand how Ariba is helping to fuel this issue of safely allowing creativity and new types of collaboration, but at the same time maintaining that the important principles of good business.

Minahan: The problem we solve at Ariba is quite basic, yet one of the biggest impediments to business productivity and performance that still exists. That's around inter-enterprise collaboration or collaboration between businesses.

We talked about the deficits there earlier. Through our cloud-based applications and business network, we eliminate all of the hassles, the papers, the phone calls, and other manual or disjointed activities that companies do each day to do things like find new suppliers, find new business opportunities as a seller, to place or manage orders, to collaborate with customers suppliers and other partners, or to just get paid.

They can connect with known trading partners much more efficiently and then automate the processes and the information flows between each other.
Nearly a million business today are digitally connected through the Ariba Network. They're empowered to discover one another in new ways, getting qualifying information from the community, so that they know who that party is even if they haven’t met them before. It's similar to what you see on eBay. When you want to sell your golf clubs, you know that that buyer has a performance history of doing business with other buyers.

They can connect with known trading partners much more efficiently and then automate the processes and the information flows between each other. Then, they can collaborate in new ways, not only to find one another, but also to get access to preferred financing or new insights into market trends that are going on around particular commodities.

That’s the power of bringing a business network to bear in today’s world. It's this convergence of cloud applications, the ability to access and automate a process. Those that share that process share the underlying infrastructure and a digitally connected community of relevant parties, whether that’s customers, suppliers, potential trading partners, banking partners, or other participants involved in the commerce process

Sharing data

Gardner: When it comes to exposing the data from these processes, assuming we can do it safely, what can we do now that really wasn’t possible five years ago?

Tumin: One of the things that we're seeing around the world is that innovation is taking place at the level of individual apps and individual developers. There's a great example in London. London Transport had a data set and a website that people would use to find out where their trains were, what the schedule was, and what was happening on a day-to-day basis.

As we all know, passengers on mass transit like to know what's happening on a minute-to-minute basis. London Transport decided they would open up their data, and the open data movement is very, very important in that respect. They opened the data and let developers develop some apps for folks. A number of apps developers did and put these things out on the system. The demand was so high that they crashed London Transport, initially.

London Transport took their data and put it into the cloud, where they could handle the scale much more effectively. Within a few days, they had gone from those thousand hits on the website per day to 2.3 million in the cloud.
You need governance and support people, and people to make it work and to trust each other and share information.

The ability to scale is terribly important. The ability to innovate and turn these open data sets over to communities of developers, to make this data available to people the way they want use it, is terribly important. And these kinds of industry-government relations that makes this possible are critical as well.

So across all those dimensions, technology, people, politics, and the platform, the data has to line up. You need governance and support people, and people to make it work and to trust each other and share information. These are the keys to collaboration today.

Gardner: Zach, last word to you. What do we get? What's the payoff, if we can balance this correctly? If we can allow these new wheels of innovation to spin, to scale up, but also apply the right balance, as Tim was describing, for audit trails and access and privilege controls? If we do this right, what's in the offing?

Tumin: I think you can expect four things, Dana. First is that you can expect innovations faster with ideas that work right away for partners. The partners who collaborate deeply and right from the start get their products right without too much error built-in and they can get them to market faster.

Second is that you're going to rinse out the cost of rework, whether it's from carrying needless inventory or handling paper that you don’t have to touch where there is cost involved. You're going to be able to rinse that out.

Third is that you're going to be able to build revenues by dealing with risk. You're going to take advantage of customer insight. You're going to make life better and that's going to be good news for you and the marketplace.

Constant learning

The fourth is that you have an opportunity for constant learning, so that insight moves to practice faster. That’s really important, because the world is changing so fast, you have the volatility, a velocity, a volume, variability, being able to learn and adapt is critical. That means embracing change, setting out the values that you want to lead by, helping people understand them.

Great leaders are great teachers. The opportunity of the networked world is to share that insight and loop it across the network, so that people understand how to improve every day and every way the core business processes that they're responsible for.

Gardner: Allow me to extend a big thanks to our guests, Zach Tumin, Senior Researcher at the Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program at Harvard Kennedy School, and the co-author with William Bratton of Collaborate or Perish: Reaching Across Boundaries in a Networked World, and Tim Minahan, Senior Vice-President of Global Network Strategy and Chief Marketing Officer at Ariba.
Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes. Read a full transcript or download a copy. Sponsor: Ariba.

 You may also be interested in:
at 10:32 AM 0 comments

Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Learn how a telecoms provider takes strides to make applications security pervasive

Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes. Read a full transcript or download a copy. Sponsor: HP.

Welcome to the latest edition of the HP Discover Performance Podcast Series. Our next discussion examines how a major telecommunications provider is tackling security, managing the details and the strategy simultaneously, and extending that value onto their many types of customers.

Here to explore these and other enterprise IT security issues, we're joined by our co-host for this sponsored podcast, Raf Los, who is the Chief Security Evangelist at HP Software.

And we also welcome our special guest, George Turrentine, Senior IT Manager at a large telecoms company, with a focus on IT Security and Compliance. George started out as a network architect and transitioned to a security architect and over the past 12 years, George has focused on application security, studying vulnerabilities in web applications using dynamic analysis, and more recently, using static analysis. George holds certifications in CISSP, CISM, and CRISC.

The discussion is moderated by Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions. [Disclosure: HP is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]

Here are some excerpts:
Gardner: George, many of the organizations that I'm familiar with are very focused on security, sometimes at a laser level. They're very focused on tactics, on individual technologies and products, and looking at specific types of vulnerabilities. But I sense that, sometimes, they might be missing the strategy, the whole greater than the sum of the parts, and that there is lack of integration in some of these aspects, of how to approach security.

I wonder if that’s what you are seeing it, and if that’s an important aspect to keeping a large telecommunications organization robust, when it comes to a security posture.

Turrentine: We definitely are at the time and place where attacks against organizations have changed. It used to be that you would have a very focused attack against an organization by a single individual or a couple of individuals. It would be a brute-force type attack. In this case, we're seeing more and more that applications and infrastructure are being attacked, not brute force, but more subtly.

The fact that somebody that is trying to effect an advanced persistent threat (APT) against a company, means they're not looking to set off any alarms within the organization. They're trying to stay below the radar and stay focused on doing a little bit at a time and breaking it up over a long period of time, so that people don’t necessarily see what’s going on.

Gardner: Raf, how does that jibe with what you are seeing? Is there a new type of awareness that is, as George points out, subtle?

Los: Subtlety is the thing. Nobody wants to be a bull-in-a-china-shop hacker. The reward may be high, but the risk of getting caught and getting busted is also high. The notion that somebody is going to break in and deface your website is childish at best today. As somebody once put it to me, the good hackers are the ones you catch months later; the great ones, you'll never see.

That’s what we're worried about, right. Whatever buzzwords we throw around and use, the reality is that attacks are evolving, attackers are evolving, and they are evolving faster than we are and than we have defenses for.

They are evolving faster than we are and than we have defenses for.
As I've said before, it’s like being out in a dark field chasing fireflies. We tend to be chasing the shiny, blinky thing of the day, rather than doing pragmatic security that is relevant to the company or the organization that you're supporting.

Gardner: One of the things I've seen is that there is a different organization, even a different culture, in managing network security, as opposed to, say, application security, and that often, they're not collaborating as closely as they might. And that offers some cracks between their different defenses.

George, it strikes me that in the telecommunications arena, the service providers are at an advantage, where they've got a strong network history and understanding and they're beginning to extend more applications and services onto that network. Is there something to be said that you're ahead of the curve on this bridging of the cultural divide between network and application?

Turrentine: It used to be that we focused a whole lot on the attack and the perimeter and trying to make sure that nobody got through the crunchy exterior. The problem is that, in the modern network scenario, when you're hosting applications, etc., you've already opened the door for the event to take place, because you've had to open up pathways for users to get into your network, to get to your servers, and to be able to do business with you. So you've opened up these holes.

Primary barrier

Unfortunately, a hole that's opened is an avenue of an attack. So the application now has become the primary barrier for protecting data. A lot of folks haven't necessarily made that transition yet to understanding that application security actually is your front row of attack and defense within an organization.

It means that you have to now move into an area where applications not only can defend themselves, but are also free from vulnerabilities or coding flaws that can easily allow somebody to grab data that they shouldn't have access to.

Gardner: Raf, it sounds as if, for some period of time, the applications folks may have had a little bit of an easy go at it, because the applications were inside a firewall. The network was going to be protected, therefore I didn't have to think about it. Now, as George is pointing out, the applications are exposed. I guess we need to change the way we think about application development and lifecycle.

Los: Dana, having spent some time in extremely large enterprise, starting in like 2001, for a number of years, I can't tell you the amount of times applications’ owners would come back and say, "I don't feel I need to fix this. This isn’t really a big risk, because the application is inside the firewall.”

Raf Los
Even going back that far, though, that was still a cop-out, because at that time, the perimeter was continuing to erode. Today, it's just all about gone. That’s the reality.

So this erosion of perimeter, combined with the fact that nothing is really internal anymore, makes this all difficult. As George already said, applications need not just to be free of bugs, but actually be built to defend themselves in cases where we put them out into an uncertain environment. And we'll call the Internet uncertain on a good day and extremely hostile on every other day.

Turrentine: Not only that, but now developers are developing applications to make them feature rich, because consumers want feature-rich applications. The problem is that those same developers aren't educated and trained in how to produce secure code.

The other thing is that too many organizations have a tendency to look at that big event with a possibility of it taking place. Yet hackers aren’t looking for the big event. They're actually looking for the small backdoor that they can quietly come in and then leverage that access. They leverage the trust between applications and servers within the infrastructure to promote themselves to other boxes and other locations and get to the data.
Little applications

We used to take for granted that it was protected by the perimeter. But now it isn’t, because you have these little applications that most security departments ignore. They don’t test them. They don’t necessarily go through and make sure that they're secure or that they're even tested with either dynamic or static analysis, and you are putting them out there because they are "low risk."

Gardner: Let’s chunk this out a little bit. On one side, we have applications that have been written over any number of years, or even decades, and we need to consider the risks of exposing them, knowing that they're going to get exposed. So is that a developer’s job? How do we make those older apps either sunsetted or low risk in terms of being exposed?

And on the other side, we've got new applications that we need to develop in a different way, with security instantiated into the requirements right from the get-go. How do you guys parse either side of that equation? What should people be considering as they approach these issues?

Turrentine: I'm going to go back to the fact that even though you may put security requirements in at the beginning, in the requirements phase of the SDLC, the fact is that many developers are going to take the low path and the easiest way to get to what is required and not necessarily understand how to get it more secure.

This is where the education system right now has let us down. I started off programming 30 years ago. Back then, there was a very finite area of memory that you could write an application into. You had to write overlays. You had to make sure that you moved data in and out of memory and took care of everything, so that the application could actually run in the space provided. Nowadays, we have bloat. We have RAM bloat. We have systems with 16 to 64 gigabytes of RAM.

Los: Just to run the operating system.

We've gotten careless

Turrentine: Just to run the operating system. And we've gotten careless. We've gotten to where we really don’t care. We don’t have to move things in and out of memory, so we leave it in memory. We do all these other different things, and we put all these features and functionality in there.

The schools, when they used to teach you how to write in very small areas, taught how to optimize the code, how to fix the code, and in many ways, efficiency and optimization gave you security.

Nowadays, we have bloatware. Our developers are going to college, they are being trained, and all they're learning is how to add features and functionality. The grand total of training they get in security is usually a one hour lecture.

You've got people like Joe Jarzombek at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), with a Software Assurance Forum that he has put together. They're trying to get security back into the colleges, so that we can teach developers that are coming up how to develop secure code. If we can actually train them properly and look at the mindset, methodologies, and the architecture to produce secure code, then we would get secure applications and we would have secure data.

Gardner: That’s certainly a good message for the education of newer developers. How about building more of the security architect role into the scrum, into the team that’s in development? Is that another cultural shift that seems to make sense?
It's just a reactive move to the poor quality that’s been put out over the last couple of years of software.

Turrentine: Part of it also is the fact that application security architects, who I view differently than a more global security architect, tend to have a myopic view. They're limited, in many cases, by their education and their knowledge, which we all are.

Face it. We all have those same things. Part of the training that needs to be provided to folks is to think outside the box. If all you're doing is defining the requirements for an application based upon the current knowledge of security of the day, and not trying to think outside the box, then you're already obsolescent, and that's imposed upon that application when it’s actually put into production.

Project into the future

You have to start thinking further of the evolution that’s going on in the way of the attacks, see where it’s going, and then project two years or three years in the future to be able to truly architect what needs to be there for today’s application, before the release.

Gardner: What about legacy applications? We've seen a lot of modernization. We're able to move to newer platforms using virtualization, cutting the total cost when it comes to the support and the platform. Older applications, in many cases, are here to stay for quite a few number of years longer. What do we need to think about, when security is the issue of these apps getting more exposure?

Turrentine: One of the things is that if you have a legacy app, one of the areas that they always try to update, if they're going to update it at all, is to write some sort of application programming interface (API) for it. Then, you just opened the door, because once you have an API interface, if the underlying legacy application hasn’t been securely built, you've just invited everybody to come steal your data.

So in many ways, legacy applications need to be evaluated and protected, either by wrapper application or something else that actually will protect the data and the application that has to run and provide access to it, but not necessarily expose it.

I know over the years everybody has said that we need to be putting out more and more web application firewalls (WAFs). I have always viewed a WAF as nothing more than a band aid, and yet a lot of companies will put a WAF out there and think that after 30 days, they've written the rules, they're done, and they're now secure.
A WAF, unless it is tested and updated on a daily basis, is worthless.

A WAF, unless it is tested and updated on a daily basis, is worthless.

Los: That’s the trick. You just hit a sore spot for me, because I ran into that in a previous life and it stunk really bad. We had a mainframe app that had ported along the way that the enterprise could not live without. They put a web interface on it to make it remotely accessible. If that doesn’t make you want to run your head through a wall, I don’t know what will.

On top of that, I complained loud enough and showed them that I could manipulate everything I wanted to. SQL injection was a brand-new thing in 2004 or something, and it wasn’t. They were like, fine, "WAF, let’s do WAF." I said, "Let me just make sure that we're going to do this while we go fix the problem." No, no, we could either fix the problem or put the WAF in. Remember that’s what the payment card industry (PCI) said back then.

Tactics and strategy

Gardner: So let's get back to this issue of tactics and strategy. Should there be someone who is looking at both of these sides of the equation, the web apps, the legacy, vulnerabilities that are coming increasingly to the floor, as well as looking at that new development? How do we approach this problem?

Turrentine: One of the ways that you approach it is that security should not be an organization unto itself. Security has to have some prophets and some evangelists -- we are getting into religion here -- who go out throughout the organization, train people, get them to think about how security should be, and then provide information back and forth and an interchange between them.

That’s one of the things that I've set up in a couple of different organizations, what I would call a security focal point. They weren’t people in my group. They were people within the organizations that I was to provide services to, or evaluations of.

They would be the ones that I would train and work with to make sure that they were the eyes and ears within the organizations, and I'd then provide them information on how to resolve issues and empower them to be the primary person that would interface with the development teams, application teams, whatever.

If they ran into a problem, they had the opportunity to come back, ask questions, and get educated in a different area. That sort of militia is what we need within organizations.
I've not seen a single security organization that could actually get the headcount they need.

I've not seen a single security organization that could actually get the headcount they need. Yet this way, you're not paying for headcount, which is getting people dotted lined to you, or that is working with you and relying on you. You end up having people who will be able to take the message where you can’t necessarily take it on your own.

Gardner: Raf, in other podcasts that we've done recently we talked about culture, and now we're talking organization. How do we adjust our organization inside of companies, so that security becomes a horizontal factor, rather than group oversight? I think that’s what George was getting at. Is that it becomes inculcated in the organization.

Los: Yeah. I had a brilliant CISO I worked under a number of years back, a gentleman by a name of Dan Conroy. Some of you guys know him. His strategy was to split the security organization essentially uneven, not even close to down the middle, but unevenly into a strategy, governance, and operations.

Strategy and governance became the team that decided what was right, and we were the architects. We were the folks who decided what was the right thing to do, roughly, conceptually how to do it, and who should do it. Then, we made sure that we did regular audits and performed governance activities around it's being done.

Then, the operational part of security was moved back into the technology unit. So the network team had a security component to it, the desktop team had a security component to it, and the server team had security components, but they were all dotted line employees back to the CISO.

Up to date

They didn’t have direct lines of reporting, but they came to our meetings and reported on things that were going on. They reported on issues that were haunting them. They asked for advice. And we made sure that we were up to date on what they were doing. They brought us information, it was bidirectional, and it worked great.

If you're going to try to build a security organization that scales to today’s pace of business, that's the only way to do it, because for everything else, you're going to have to ask for $10 million in budget and 2,000 new headcounts, and none of those is going to be possible.

Gardner: Moving to looking at the future, we talked about some of the chunks with legacy and with new applications. What about some of the requirements for mobile in cloud?

As organizations are being asked to go with hybrid services delivery, even more opportunity for exposure, more exposure both to cloud, but also to a mobile edge, what can we be advising people to consider, both organizationally as well as tactically for these sorts of threats or these sorts of challenges?

Turrentine: Any time you move data outside the organization that owns it, you're running into problems, whether it’s bring your own device (BYOD), or whether it’s cloud, that is a public offering. Private cloud is internal. It's just another way of munging virtualization and calling it something new.

But when you start handling data outside your organization, you need to be able to care for it in a proper way. With mobile, a lot of the current interface IDEs and SDKs, etc., try to handle everything as one size fits all. We need to be sending a message back to the owners of those SDKs that you need to be able to provide secure and protected areas within the device for specific data, so that it can either be encrypted or it can be processed in a different way, hashed, whatever it is.

Then, you also need to be able to properly and cleanly delete it or remove it should something try and attack it or remove it without going through the normal channel called the application.

Secure evolution

I don’t think anybody has a handle on that one yet, but I think that, as we can start working with the organizations and with the owners of the IDEs, we can get to the point where we can have a more secure evolution of mobile OS and be able to protect the data.

Gardner: I am afraid we will have to leave it there. With that, I would like to thank our co-host, Rafal Los, Chief Security Evangelist at HP Software. And I'd also like to thank our supporter for this series, HP Software, and remind our audience to carry on the dialogue with Raf through his personal blog, Following the White Rabbit, as well as through the Discover Performance Group on LinkedIn.

I'd also like to extend a huge thank you to our special guest, George Turrentine, the Senior Manager at a large telecoms company.

You can also gain more insights and information on the best of IT performance management at http://www.hp.com/go/discoverperformance. And you can always access this and other episodes in our HP Discover Performance Podcast Series on iTunes under BriefingsDirect.
at 6:05 PM 0 comments

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Global open-source vendors gain new leg up in selling to US agencies, thanks to favorable Talend ruling

Open-source provider Talend has received a favorable advisory ruling from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency concerning the government's ability to purchase open-source software, opening the way for all software vendors to increase their share of business with US federal agencies.

The CBP has determined that software products comply with the Trade Agreement Act (TAA) when that software is manufactured in what is known as a "designated country," even if the majority of its source code was created in a non-designated country. [Disclosure: Talend is a sponsor of BriefingsDirect podcasts.]
Many software vendors -- whether they are open-source based or not -- will benefit from the ruling.

The US TAA says that government agencies may acquire only products or services produced in certain countries -- known as designated countries. This has sometimes hampered the agencies from acquiring open-source software if some of the code was developed outside of those countries, even when the majority of production took place inside designated countries.

“Country of origin” issues sometimes have been used as a pretext to make a case against the procurement of open-source software. Talend conducts the vast majority of its software production in the U.S., France or Germany, but like many manufacturers, it also seeks talent in countries that can fall outside those considered designated countries

"With this finding, any other company that meets the same criteria can get the same approval," said Yves de Montcheuil, Vice President of Marketing at Talend. "And then government buying can meet the trade agreement status. The process can now be easily repeated."

While governments around the world have been moving to embrace open source for a long time, adoption has been slow and inconsistent in the U.S., though it is steadily growing as more federal agencies revise their guidelines and regulations, and some states pass laws requiring the consideration of open-source options.

Useful guidance

"The Talend Ruling is significant because government users now have useful guidance specifically addressing open source software that is developed and substantially transformed in a designated country, but also includes, or is based upon, source code from a non-designated country," said Fern Lavallee, DLA Piper LLP, counsel to Talend. "The timing of this ruling is right given the Department of Defense’s well publicized attention and commitment to Better Buying Power and DoD’s recent Open Systems Architecture initiative."
 
"This is great news for everyone in the software industry," said Bertrand Diard, co-founder and CEO of Talend. "While the news is significant for Talend and offers an opportunity for us to address needs in the federal space, our belief is that many software vendors -- whether they are open-source based or not -- will benefit from the ruling."
This is great news for everyone in the software industry.

A copy of the advisory ruling can be obtained by emailing press@talend.com.

The U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) is currently and significantly revising the December 2011 draft of the “DoD Open Systems Architecture, Contract Guidebook for Program Managers.” The guidance document, expect by the end of 2012, helps DoD program managers use Open System Architecture principles for National Security Systems.

You may also be interested in:
at 9:05 AM 0 comments
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)