Originating Author: David Vellante
With the advent of services-oriented architecture (SOA), Web 2.0, software (or storage) as a service (SaaS) and the general consumerization of IT, constructing a storage architecture comprised of clearly defined, re-usable services is starting to have some appeal. This approach seems to lend itself more to the big six (EMC, Hitachi, HP, IBM, NetApp, and Sun) than smaller firms because larger companies have a broad technology portfolio and the resources to slog out the contractual terms necessary to actually earn a profit on such an arrangement.
The premise of a services-oriented approach involves:
- Defining, communicating and offering sets of pre-defined services that can be purchased and consumed in a menu-like fashion;
- Charging (back) for services consumed with transparent pricing and usage metrics;
- Reducing complexity by winnowing the number of suppliers and "one-off" configurations that create migration headaches down the road;
- Evolving service offerings as business needs warrant and technology matures.
All this is designed to make IT more cost efficient and operate with a model much more like a managed service provider or Google (without the advertising). This type of messaging will have immediate appeal to line-of-business heads and senior management, but it's not likely to resonate well with many core technology constituents. This is because it sends a message to these individuals that the days of easily bypassing the corporate standard are gone. Many in the organization will have good relationships with a diverse set of suppliers and enjoy the flexibility of deploying "best-of-breed du jour."
So when should such an approach be proposed? There are at least three very related cases where this makes sense:
- An organization that is going through a cost-cutting transformation and rationalizing infrastructure is high on its priority list (think HP/Randy Mott);
- An organization with a new leader that has been empowered to break through inertia and implement change;
- An incumbent supplier has an exceedingly strong relationship with a customer and is in a strong position to deliver such services.
In all three cases, the sale will be made outside of the server room and much closer to the board room.
Action Item: Selling services-oriented storage requires a broad technology portfolio and layers of services including virtualization, security, data migration, provisioning and dozens of other capabilities. These however are table stakes in marketing such a solution to an internal IT organization. Suppliers must target and secure senior management sponsors and champions from business lines, procurement, finance and the CIO to effectively persuade technology professionals to buy into a storage services architecture.
Footnotes: