Being a CIO Today Requires More Than a Service Broker Orientation
In my discussions with CIOs, their opinions differ widely about the go forward nature of the CIO role. While most feel the CIO role will remain an important function, they also feel a sea state change is in process. According to Tim Crawford, a former CIO and strategic advisor to CIOs, “CIOs are getting out of the data center business”. In my discussions, not all yet see the complete demise for their data centers. However, it is becoming more common for CIOs to see themselves “becoming an orchestrator of business services versus a builder of new operational services”. One CIO put it this way, “the building stuff is now really table stakes. Cloud and loosely oriented partnerships are bringing vendor management to the forefront”.
As more and more of the service portfolio are provided by third parties in either infrastructure as a service (IaaS) or software as a service (SaaS) modes, the CIO needs to take on what will become an increasingly important role –the service broker. An element of the service broker role that will have increasingly importance is the ability to glue together business systems w6hether they are on premise, cloud managed (Iaas), or software as a service (Saas). Regardless of who creates or manages the applications of the enterprise, it is important to remember that integration is to a large degree the nervous system that connects applications into business capabilities. As such, the CIO’s team has a critical and continuing role in managing this linkage. For example, spaghetti code integrations can easily touch 20 or more systems for ERP or expense management systems.
Brokering integration services
As CIOs start to consider the move to cloud, they need to determine how this nervous system is connected, maintained, and improved. In particular, they need to determine maybe for the first time how to integrate their cloud systems to the rest of their enterprise systems. They clearly can continue to do so by building and maintaining hand coding or by using their existing ETL tools. This can work where one takes on an infrastructure as a service model. But it falls apart when looking at the total cost of ownership of managing the change of a SaaS model. This fact begs an interesting question. Shouldn’t the advantages of SaaS occur as well for integration? Shouldn’t there be Cloud Data Management (Integration as a Service)options? The answer is yes. Instead of investing in maintain integrations of SaaS systems which because of agile methodologies can change more frequently than traditional software development, couldn’tsomeone else manage this mess for me.
The advantage of the SaaS model is total cost of ownership and faster time to value. Instead of managing, integration between SaaS and historical environments, the integration between SaaS applications and historical applications can be maintained by the cloud data Management vendor. This would save both cost and time. As well, it would free you to focus your team’s energy upon cleaning up the integrations between historical systems and each other. This is a big advantage for organizations trying to get on the SaaS bandwagon but not incur significantly increased costs as a result.
Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS)—Provides processor, databases, etc. remotely but you control and maintain what goes on them
Software as a Service (Saas)—Provides software applications and underling infrastructure as a Service
Cloud Data Management—Provides Integration of applications in particular SaaS applications as a service
CIOs are embarking upon big changes. Building stuff is becoming less and less relevant. However, even as more and more services are managed remotely (even by other parties), it remains critical that CIOs and their teams manage the glue between applications. With SaaS application in particular, this is where Cloud Data Management can really help you control integrations with less time and cost.
Author Twitter: @MylesSuer