Comments on: SaaS – A Missing Link? http://vaughanmerlyn.com/2008/12/30/saas-a-missing-link/ Vaughan Merlyn on the Changing Role of the IT Organization Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:38:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Maxim Bail http://vaughanmerlyn.com/2008/12/30/saas-a-missing-link/#comment-498 Maxim Bail Sat, 03 Jan 2009 13:14:28 +0000 http://itorganization2017.wordpress.com/?p=930#comment-498 Your blog template is not correctly displayed in the window of my browser! Please fix! I really liked the article, I will read this blog always! I am very interested in software))) +1 Your blog template is not correctly displayed in the window of my browser! Please fix! I really liked the article, I will read this blog always! I am very interested in software))) +1

]]> By: itorganization2017 http://vaughanmerlyn.com/2008/12/30/saas-a-missing-link/#comment-497 itorganization2017 Thu, 01 Jan 2009 13:56:05 +0000 http://itorganization2017.wordpress.com/?p=930#comment-497 Esteban, you raise some great questions, as usual, and I will try to get more prescriptive in future posts, but here's some initial reactions to your points. Your note that "the most successful 2.0 software vendors seem to be using a fairly traditional sales force" is true, but that was very early in the game - innovative vendors with innovative solutions selling to early adopters. Under these conditions, anything is possible. But now, as we move beyond the early adopters, I believe a very different vendor business model is needed to "cross the chasm" as Geoffrey Moore would put it. Your second question gets to a different set of issues - consumer as opposed to vendor oriented. Again, I will comment in subsequent posts, but the 'early adopter' point applies here as well. CRM, for example, and Salesforce.com's value proposition were sufficiently compelling for early adopters to overcome the inertia and jump into the SaaS fray. The question is, how to 'cross the chasm' into the larger market, and while feet-on-the-street sales forces will have their place, I don't believe this will be the predominant sales vehicle for 2.0 solutions. If 2.0 is real, it must mean 2.0 for the vendors as well as for the consumers. Esteban, you raise some great questions, as usual, and I will try to get more prescriptive in future posts, but here’s some initial reactions to your points. Your note that “the most successful 2.0 software vendors seem to be using a fairly traditional sales force” is true, but that was very early in the game – innovative vendors with innovative solutions selling to early adopters. Under these conditions, anything is possible. But now, as we move beyond the early adopters, I believe a very different vendor business model is needed to “cross the chasm” as Geoffrey Moore would put it.

Your second question gets to a different set of issues – consumer as opposed to vendor oriented. Again, I will comment in subsequent posts, but the ‘early adopter’ point applies here as well. CRM, for example, and Salesforce.com’s value proposition were sufficiently compelling for early adopters to overcome the inertia and jump into the SaaS fray. The question is, how to ‘cross the chasm’ into the larger market, and while feet-on-the-street sales forces will have their place, I don’t believe this will be the predominant sales vehicle for 2.0 solutions. If 2.0 is real, it must mean 2.0 for the vendors as well as for the consumers.

]]> By: Esteban Herrera http://vaughanmerlyn.com/2008/12/30/saas-a-missing-link/#comment-496 Esteban Herrera Thu, 01 Jan 2009 00:37:43 +0000 http://itorganization2017.wordpress.com/?p=930#comment-496 Vaughan, this all makes sense--the new environment certainly seems to require new techniques to be successful (though at the Enterprise level, the most successful 2.0 software vendors seem to be using a fairly traditional sales force). Perhaps in a future post you can be more prescriptive? What are the sales and marketing tactics and strategies that work? Where have they worked? How have progressive IT shops overcome skepticsm, security concerns, inertia etc. to begin making the move to 2.0 delivery mechanisms? I am less skeptic every day, yet I still want to see someone besides SFDC prove that there is money to be made. I know there are a few smaller, more targeted vendors out there that are possibly making money too. This blog would be a great forum to identify and discuss the techniques that make this technology commercially viable. Esteban Vaughan, this all makes sense–the new environment certainly seems to require new techniques to be successful (though at the Enterprise level, the most successful 2.0 software vendors seem to be using a fairly traditional sales force). Perhaps in a future post you can be more prescriptive?

What are the sales and marketing tactics and strategies that work? Where have they worked?

How have progressive IT shops overcome skepticsm, security concerns, inertia etc. to begin making the move to 2.0 delivery mechanisms?

I am less skeptic every day, yet I still want to see someone besides SFDC prove that there is money to be made. I know there are a few smaller, more targeted vendors out there that are possibly making money too. This blog would be a great forum to identify and discuss the techniques that make this technology commercially viable.

Esteban

]]> By: Paul Holland http://vaughanmerlyn.com/2008/12/30/saas-a-missing-link/#comment-495 Paul Holland Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:18:45 +0000 http://itorganization2017.wordpress.com/?p=930#comment-495 Vaughn, Your "SaaS - A Missing Link" blog goes straight to an important, but specific aspect of what is likely to be the most significant change in the business of building and selling commercial software products in the last 25 years. My interest is less with new start-up SaaS vendors, who frankly have no excuse for not realizing that this new product model requires a new business execution model, but with the existing community of Independent Software Vendors, ISVs. I believe that 2009 is going to be a critical time for traditional on-premise software vendors to decide whether they should jump into the SaaS pool. Not dip their toes - it's too late for that. It's time to swim or quite possibly drown. For those existing ISVs who want to make the move to SaaS, the immediate thought is how to achieve the technical leap of leveraging their existing on-premise applications into off-premise, multi-tenant SaaS solutions. However, as radical a re-engineering requirement is the business model changes that will be required for the ISV to emerge as a viable SaaS vendor. New sales and marketing approaches are just two aspects of these required business model changes. Paul Holland Vaughn,

Your “SaaS – A Missing Link” blog goes straight to an important, but specific aspect of what is likely to be the most significant change in the business of building and selling commercial software products in the last 25 years. My interest is less with new start-up SaaS vendors, who frankly have no excuse for not realizing that this new product model requires a new business execution model, but with the existing community of Independent Software Vendors, ISVs. I believe that 2009 is going to be a critical time for traditional on-premise software vendors to decide whether they should jump into the SaaS pool. Not dip their toes – it’s too late for that. It’s time to swim or quite possibly drown.

For those existing ISVs who want to make the move to SaaS, the immediate thought is how to achieve the technical leap of leveraging their existing on-premise applications into off-premise, multi-tenant SaaS solutions. However, as radical a re-engineering requirement is the business model changes that will be required for the ISV to emerge as a viable SaaS vendor. New sales and marketing approaches are just two aspects of these required business model changes.

Paul Holland

]]> By: WoW Goud http://vaughanmerlyn.com/2008/12/30/saas-a-missing-link/#comment-494 WoW Goud Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:47:04 +0000 http://itorganization2017.wordpress.com/?p=930#comment-494 The classic example of this is Microsoft’s Sharepoint. Andy The classic example of this is Microsoft’s Sharepoint.

Andy

]]>