Message from Microsoft WPC to Dynamics Partners – Transform or risk becoming Irrelevant!

July 10, 2012

Today at Microsoft WPC Doug Kennedy Microsoft VP for Partner and Channel Marketing announced some significant changes to the way Microsoft will go to market with Dynamics products that provide big opportunities or risks for Dynamics Partners. The implication for many is they must transform themselves to capitalize or risk becoming irrelevant and out of touch with Microsoft and the market.

The new strategy aligns to three customer segments; Enterprise, Corporate and SMB customers. Microsoft announced big new investments in a sales force capable of addressing BDM’s and CIO’s in very large Enterprise accounts. They also announced that their flagship AX ERP product will be available under VL (Volume Licensing). This means that Microsoft is going after the Enterprise segment and competing against SAP, Oracle and Salesforce.com. The implication for partners is customers will be able to buy both ERP and CRM products under their existing licensing agreements with Microsoft through Microsoft’s LAR’s and the services will be delivered by the large Systems Integrators addressing these accounts.

The way an existing Microsoft partner who has a focus on the Enterprise segment can capitalize on this shift in strategy will be to form very close partnerships with the SI’s who already have the relationships with the Enterprise Accounts as well as building very tight connections with the new Microsoft Solution salesforce who are being hired to target these accounts. The salesforce will have the job of ensuring that the SI’s have the relationships with partners who can help them round out their solution offerings.

Microsoft also announced their vision for how they see the SMB market opportunity for partners. Microsoft makes it clear that customer needs are changing. SMB customers want fast, connected, packaged, secure and reliable solutions. These solutions are increasing available from On-line partners who have a volume based approach to doing business. In the future the margins per new customer add will not be significant enough for traditional Microsoft VAR partners who do not have a volume mindset to survive.

So what is to become of the large traditional Dynamics Channel predominantly made up of geographic focused VAR’s (value added resellers) who now find themselves stuck in no man’s land between the Enterprise segment where the only players in town will be the large SI’s and the SMB segment where the new volume based partners are much better positioned to address the needs of SMB customers for whom many of these VAR’s traditionally have focused.

There are three strategies open to traditional VAR’s. They can either transform their business into a high velocity volume based business or they can move upwards into the Enterprise segment knowing that the only way to play will be to form partnerships with the big SI’s and the new Microsoft salesforce. There is however a segment that sits between Enterprise and SMB that is often referred to as the Corporate Accounts segment. This segment is made up of customers that think and act as if they are Enterprise accounts but they are not large enough to truly be so, but on the other hand they are not small enough to be SMB. The opportunity for the Microsoft VAR who has traditionally sold into the SMB segment is that the size of deals is generally much larger and the project cycles much longer, fitting better with their existing business models. The challenge is that these customers think and act as if they are Enterprise customers. This means that their needs are very specific to the industry, vertical or even micro vertical market that they are in. In order to be successful in targeting this segment Partners must transform themselves from being horizontal focused to being vertically focused. This will be a big challenge for many traditional VAR’s who’s business has been built up over many years supporting horizontally focused SMB customers.

Transformation is in the air. The world for Microsoft Dynamics Partners is changing at a rapid pace and so the boardrooms of the base of traditional Microsoft VAR’s must be reverberating with the voices of those Managers and Directors returning from Microsoft WPC this week with the words “We have no choice, we must choose which segment we want to address and start to transform our business and we better start today.”

For more information on Alan Dowzall go to: www.alandowzall.com


The modernisation of backup

April 30, 2012

The data protection market has changed considerably over the past decade. There has been a fundamental shift away from relying solely on tape for backup and recovery to using cloud-based backup solutions to address challenges that include backup performance, reliability, and recovery time objectives.

With the proliferation of virtualised infrastructure, big data, the Consumerisation of IT, growth in remote and branch office data and the need for high availability, has introduced a new set of requirements for the software responsible for data protection and recovery.

While we’re in the cloud backup business, we understand the role tape may play as part of an overall backup strategy, especially for large enterprise organizations. With data that requires significant periods of retention; it makes sense to move backups onto lesser expensive devices – including tape.

With that being said, we don’t believe tape should be the primary method of backup for any organization of any size. There are significant drawbacks with using tape, especially in the SMB market where it is used as the primary means of backup. Here are some examples:

Limited Time for Backup

Tape is slow. It’s common to see once per day incremental or differential backups that follow a once per week full backups. Organizations don’t want to see backup operations significantly impact production resources, so these backup operations are pushed to the wee house of the morning and to weekends.

Slow Recovery

To put it bluntly, recovering from tape can be absolute hell. It’s slow, error-prone and can be difficult depending on the number of tapes for which data has to be recovered.

Equipment Challenges

It is not uncommon for tapes to be useable only in the drives that wrote the data in the first place with the software that did it. So, recovering with a new tape unit might not be possible.

Tape was once the de facto standard for backup and as a result of its many challenges and with functional needs increasing, the next generation of data protection and recovery options became available including both disk and cloud backup.

Here’s where I sell you on the cloud, right? Not quite, that’s the not the purpose of this post. I’m more interested in determining if you’re comfortable using outdated backup technology to keep your company going after disaster strikes? I also want to tell you that it’s important to modernize your data backup infrastructure if it is out of date.

How much of your business is at stake if you’re unable to recover your organization’s most important data assets after a disaster?

By looking at the marketplace, it appears that organizations of all sizes tend to be conservative when it comes to making large scale changes to backup infrastructure even though there are new processes and opportunities (deduplication, continuous data protection, incremental forever, etc.) that can be exploited to improve disaster recovery and streamlined operations.

I hope that by reading this post you’ll start to think more about your backup infrastructure. Interested in learning more about managed cloud backup services?

If you need further information please visit http://www.c24.co.uk


How SMBs can avoid costly legal disputes over who owns social networking data | Web Filtering

January 13, 2012

There may be trouble ahead for small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) who neglect to adopt formal corporate social media policies. Lack of clearly defined company social networking accounts and data ownership criteria means they could be storing up legal trouble for themselves in the not too distant future and potentially leave the SMB sector with significant legal issues over data ownership.

Many SMBs are now truly embracing social networking applications by adopted them within their overall marketing strategies. It is almost impossible to track who owns this data as social data content is aggregated from site to site. As businesses of all sizes and types embrace social networking as a way to propagate messages and build their brands the line dividing personal and company data is becoming increasingly blurred. The important thing is that companies take steps to protect themselves as much as possible in advance.

Some simple tips to protect your social media assets and avoid litigation over data ownership:
Include a corporate social media policy alongside internet usage guidelines
Make sure company accounts are totally separate from employee personal accounts
Ensure company Facebook and twitter accounts are not tied to employee personal email accounts
Ex-employer seeks damages over non surrender of Twitter account
The legal position is at a very early stage of development. You may have read about Noah Kravitz, a California-based blogger who is being sued by his former employer, PhoneDog. His ex-employer is seeking damages because Mr. Kravitz did not surrender his Twitter account to them when he left the company. PhoneDog believe they had heavily invested in helping Mr Kravitz grow the number of followers he had on Twitter and therefore the account should be their property. The company view this Twitter account as a confidential customer list and the intellectual property of Phone Dog.

In a statement to the New York Times, the company said: “The costs and resources invested by PhoneDog Media into growing its followers, fans and general brand awareness through social media are substantial and are considered property of PhoneDog Media”.The dispute really hinges on why the account was opened in the first place. Phone Dog believe if the account was opened on behalf of PhoneDog and to be used to communicate with customers then the Twitter account is their property. Mr Kravitz maintains he opend the account with a view to using it for both professional and personal reasons and this is where the questions of why the account was opened gets blurred. This blurring between work and personal is particularly problematic in the social networking sphere.

Legal conflicts over data ownership not restrited to Twitter
Such legal conflicts have occured with other social media platforms also, in another less recent UK case a recruitment consultant moved confidential contact information to his LinkedIn account whilst employed at Hays Recruitment. This decision was one of the first to highlight the tension between businesses encouraging employees to use social networking websites for work but then claiming that the contacts and content remain confidential information at the end of their employment.

In 2007 a judgement involving the UK arm of a US business to business media publishing group (PennWell Publishing v Ornstein) ruled that the employer owned the outlook contacts of a former journalist employee even though this list contained both work and personal contacts some of which had been brought to the company by the employee.

Not defining what company data is in advance can be a costly oversight
As we’ve seen this blurring between work and personal becomes even more problematic in the social networking sphere. It’s time for every company to include a corporate social media policy alongside internet usage guidelines as part of their employment terms to avoid possible litigation and protect their social media assets and property. Without a clear internet policy many employees are unaware of the implications of sharing information on sites like Linkedin and if appropriate protection is absent many employers risk being drawn into costly legal wrangles with employees as time goes on.

www.webtitan.com

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 752 other followers