Comments on: Beware Of The Side Effects of Software-As-A-Service

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:51:53 +0000

Interesting insight, Todd. The SaaS industry lives by working *with* IT departments, and I think the more feedback, the better. SaaS companies are able to evolve and adapt and I think we’re going to reach a happy medium in the very near future between SaaS vendors and IT departments.

By: Fabien Tiburce

Fabien Tiburce — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:18:00 +0000

Todd, Asking the IT department what they think of Software-as-a-Service is akin to asking the Detroit auto-makers what they think of public transportation. Your points remain valid. SaaS is not a silver bullet but SaaS does alleviate a lot of problems that have plagued large organizations for some time. How can you pilot a new idea using your IT department when they are so overworked, the can barely keep up with the existing demand? IT departments are not going away, SaaS vendors or not. It’s just that the need for IT is evolving from that to an “implementor” to that of an “integrator”. If a company does due diligence and chooses their SaaS vendors wisely, I really believe you get the best of both worlds: speed to market, value to the business and yes integration with existing systems.

By: Todd Michaud

Todd Michaud — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 14:16:27 +0000

Alex and Kevin,
Thank you for the comments. Please don’t get me wrong, I truly believe that SaaS model, if done correctly, is the correct option in many situations.

There are certain applications that can operate more independently than others where this type of solution will work better. My biggest point is that the “IT is a barrier” argument is not the one that you want to use when choosing a SaaS solution over something else.

Most of the time that I am forced to push back on a project is because of the amount of integration that is needed or wanted with existing systems. In most cases, there is no “Active Directory” for corporate data. This means that data either be duplicated in these new systems, or integrations be built. Either option is not fun, and both have maintenance impacts.

It tends to go something like this:

We outsourced this great new text message-based marketing solution to an industry leader. It is great! Can it be integrated with our email database? And while you are at it, how about tying it into our CRM solution? It would be nice if the field team could see the text messages so they could be prepared? Can we match up the text message with our Business Intelligence to see if they are really impacting sales (and so on, and so on).

Very few things that start simple, end simple. =)

By: Kevin Ertell

Kevin Ertell — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 13:52:40 +0000

Nice post, Todd. While I understand your point, I’m not sure it’s fair to lump all SaaS models under the same umbrella. Some require more integration that others. The world is changing incredibly quickly, and keeping up with those changes requires adapting technically. Sometimes, SaaS presents the best option, even if that means more integration effort by internal teams. All that said, I agree that fully understanding the costs of any necessary integration is very important.

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 04:15:07 +0000

It is certainly very valid that integration is an important factor to consider when looking to go SaaS (and on-premise for matter). Would you consider that some systems are better suited to SaaS than others? For example, email seems to be an early suitor? For what it’s worth, I think we will see a lot of hybrid cloud/on-premise environments for some years to come; selection will depend on cost vs benefit, as the cloud is certainly very attractive and more mature for some apps today than others, particularly the customized ERP-type ones you may be referring to.

Cheers,
Alex

(Australia)