the impact of social technologies on the enterprise
DESCRIPTION
Presentation by Jonathan Yarmis, AMR Research at Newsgator Partner Advisory Council meeting, 11/5/08TRANSCRIPT
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 1
The Platform Revolution: A Look Into Disruptive Technologies
Jonathan L. Yarmis
VP Disruptive Technologies
AMR Research
August 21, 2008
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 2
About AMR Research
•Objective research, analysis, and
measurement firm focused on helping
clients improve supply chain and
operational performance through best
practices and technology.
•Founded in 1986, with Headquarters in
Boston, USA, and International
operations based in London, UK
•100+ Research Analysts – Min. 15 yrs.
industry experience
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 3
Agenda
•Enterprise Trends
•The user in control
•Technology Trends
•The Perfect Wave
•User Trends
•The user in control
•User 2.0
•Social Networking
•What do users want?
•What are they getting?
•Why aren’t they getting what they want?
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 4
The New Enterprise Reality
•Users have more computing power at home than at work
•Users are embracing disruptive technologies
•Social networking
•Video
•Users are controlling key new platforms
•Mobility
•User-oriented cloud technologies
•What happens when the user meets the enterprise?
• IT has never effectively stopped any end-user technology initiative
•But it has never had to deal with the power available to the user
today
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 5
Technology Trends
• Independent phenomena
•Social networks, virtual worlds and other community-based
solutions
•Mobility
•Cloud computing and stream computing
•Alternative business models
•Most often advertising-supported
•Different license, revenue models
•Mutually reinforcing
•Mobility enables more social
•Cloud supports mobility
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 6
User Trends
•The user is in control
•The user has always been in control
•The role of social networks
•Social networking: expanding platform capabilities
•User-driven collaboration
•Demand sensing and demand generation
•Changing user requirements
•User 2.0
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 7
User 2.0
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 8
Spending on Enterprise 2.0
Q26./Q29. How will annual spending on Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies change from 2008 compared to 2007? In 2009 compared to 2008?
% of Responses: Total Respondents N=41
76%
63%
24%
37%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2008 2009
Stay the Same
Increase
Average Increase for 2008: +15.31%
Average Increase for 2009: +10.95%
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 9
Current Use of Enterprise 2.0 (All Industries)
Q4. Which of the following best describes your company’s current plans for each of the following Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies? Select only one.
% of Responses: Total Respondents N=200
3%
15%
19%
21%
24%
26%
31%
32%
33%
34%
35%
37%
40%
51%
64%
10%
22%
23%
18%
20%
24%
14%
16%
27%
22%
22%
16%
13%
13%
14%
7%
23%
21%
20%
21%
14%
21%
16%
14%
16%
16%
18%
14%
15%
12%
0%
14%
14%
14%
13%
16%
10%
15%
9%
10%
11%
13%
12%
7%
6%
3%
6%
4%
6%
7%
4%
6%
7%
6%
6%
4%
6%
3%
5%
3%
77%
22%
21%
21%
16%
18%
19%
16%
12%
14%
14%
11%
18%
10%
2%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Other
3D Web
Mash-ups
Semantic Web Technologies
Rich Client Technologies
Tagging
P2P
Social Networking
Collective Intelligence
RSS
WIKIS
Podcasts
Blogs
IM/Presence Apps
Web Service
Using Implementing Evaluating Eval. n 12 mos Eval. In 24 mos No plans
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 10
Current Use of Enterprise 2.0 (by Industry)
Q1. Which of the following BEST describes your company’s plans for Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies? Select one.
% of Responses: Total Respondents by Industry N=139(Life Sciences N=33; High Tech N=36; Industrial Mfg N=31; Retail N=39)
52%
36%26% 23%
9%
25%
23%
18%
27%22%
23%44%
9%11%
26%
15%
3% 6%3% 0%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Life Sciences High Tech Industrial Mfg Retail
Plan to evaluate withinthe next 12 - 24 months
Plan to evaluate in thenext 12 months
Currently evaluating
Currently implementing
Currently using
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 11
Department Use of Enterprise 2.0
Q10a. Which department within your company makes the MOST use of Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies TODAY?
% of Responses: Total Respondents LOB N=119; IT N=81
15%
21%
15%
13%
13%
8%
4%4%3%3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
LOB
Finance
Strategy
Human Resources
Supply Chain
Manufacturing Operations
Research & Development
Customer Service
Sales & Marketing
Corporate Communications andPubic Relations
IT
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 12
Organization responsible for Enterprise 2.0 Strategy
Q13a. Which organization is/will be PRIMARILY responsible for setting the STRATEGY for the adoption of Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies within your company? Select only one.
% of Responses: Total Respondents by IT/IS vs. LOB N=200
23%
49%
28%
4%
13% 5%
9% 16%
6% 4%
5% 5%
5% 6%3%
6%3%1%3% 0%
2% 2%1% 0%0% 1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
LOB IT/IS
Other
Public Relations
Finance
Legal
Human Resources
Supply Chain
Customer Service
Sales & Marketing
Manufacturing Operations
Strategy
Research & Development
Corporate Communications
IT
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 13
Business Issues Driving Use of Enterprise 2.0
Q12. Which of the following business issues is driving your company MOST toward the adoption of Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies? Select one.
% of Responses: Total Respondents N=200
1%
1%
4%
4%
7%
13%
13%
14%
22%
22%
0% 10% 20% 30%
Other
Supporting f inancial processes
Improving governance, risk and compliance
Improving procurement and sourcing processes
Improving research and development
Supporting or enhancing sales efforts
Improving business intelligence and decision support
Improving info w orker productivity or know ledge management
Improving corporate communications, PR or reputation
Improving customer service and support
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 14
Benefits Realized from Use of Enterprise 2.0
Q15. Which of the following is the LARGEST benefit your company has realized from its Enterprise 2.0 efforts to date? Select one.
% of Responses: Total Respondents Currently Using Enterprise 2.0 N=66
6%
11%
15%
18%
18%
32%
0% 20% 40%
Reduction of sales,marketing, or support
costs/overhead
Increased efficiency inR&D/Manufacturing/Admin
functions
Better understanding andcommunication ofcustomer issues
Better understanding andcommunication of internal
issues
Increased sales orincreased customer
satisfaction
Better collaboration w /i /between dpts or groups
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 15
Primary Use by Length of Time Using
Q8. Which of the following best describes how your company PRIMARILY uses/will use its Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies?/How long has your company used Enterprise 2.0 tools and Technologies? Select only one.
% of Responses: Total Respondents N=200
26% 25%
52%
48%
25%
35%
10%
25%
4%16%
25%
9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
To better interfacewith customers
To better interfacewith suppliers and
partners
To better facilitateinternal
collaboration
3 or more years
2 to less than 3 years
1 to less than 2 years
Less than 1 Year
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 16
Obstacles to further adoption of Enterprise 2.0
Q20. Which of the following do you feel is the LARGEST obstacle your company is facing toward further adoption of Enterprise 2.0 tools and technologies within your organization? Select only one.
% of Responses: Total Respondents N=145
1%
6%
8%
9%
10%
12%
15%
19%
20%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
None of the above
Lack of interest by end users in the organization
Roadblocks put in place by IT
Lack of quantified business justification or ROI
Immaturity or unreliability of Enterprise 2.0 T&T
Roadblocks put in place by Legal or Finance
Lack of interest or understanding in the organization
Inability to integrate Ent 2.0 into other apps orfunctions
Lack of understanding of Enterprise 2.0 technologies
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 17
Justification
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 18
Summary
• Social technologies are the next wave of computing, building upon
task- and process-automation
• They are foundational to next-generation enterprise solutions
• Your users are deploying social technologies
• Both consumer and enterprise-capable
• It is not a matter of whether or even when, just how and who
• Who?
• Way too many vendors
• Without underlying business models
• Running out of money
• Evaluate not only what a vendor does but how likely they are to
survive
© 2008 AMR Research, Inc. | Page 19
For Further Information
Jonathan L. Yarmis
(T) 203-227-7841
IM: AIM/MSN/Yahoo jyarmis
Twitter: jyarmis
Facebook: http://profile.to/jyarmis/
http://www.amrresearch.com/services/Market_Services/Advanced_Emerging_Disruptive_Technologies.asp