Among the usual chatter about “What do you think of the show”, at VoiceCon this week were comments about the need to modify some of the usual presentations that we have on comparing vendor offerings in unified communications, and where the industry is in unified communications. The vendors I talked to commonly voiced that for the most part, comparing the features of unified communications is a moot point, because almost every player has all the basics by now. That is pretty much what I saw too. The show was smaller, and there weren’t any tremendous new announcements this year.

This year VoiceCon was co-resident with Enterprise 2.0, which focused on social media, etc., with lots of smaller companies present. I didn’t focus on those individual players so much as the spillover of the theme of the inclusion of social media within unified communications and collaboration, or even the reverse, the disappearing of the term unified communications within a larger framework of collaboration that includes social media.

So, much of these tweaks in innovation I saw revolved around the inclusion of social media into UC. For example, highlighted in the keynote given by Mark Straton of Siemens Enterprise Communication Group, was Siemens announcement of “Socially Aware Unified Communications”. This announcement was about open, standards-based integration of social networking into the Siemens OpenScape UC platform. Rightfully, up until recently, the UC vendors had their hands full doing what I mentioned earlier - developing all the basic UC bells and whistles, but now, despite grappling with how to incorporate social media and all of its privacy and security concerns into the enterprise, the industry is now turning towards just that - bringing social networking into the fold, but with a focus on how to improve business with it.

One of Siemens goals along these lines is to unify UC and social media through innovative mash-up applications in the cloud. What Siemens announced and demonstrated was the inclusion of Twitter into OpenScape UC.  Despite the fact that yours truly, is still personally blocked from Twitter - reasons unknown - I thought this was pretty cool.

Siemens is using OpenScape and Twitter to automate routine tasks. The reasoning behind this is that more and more users are updating their social status before attending to other basic tasks. So, for example, if a person is traveling and lands at an airport, what is the first thing they do? They turn their mobile devices on. The second thing they do if they don’t have to call someone to say that they have arrived is to read emails, update FaceBook or they tweet. Therefore, if you have a socially aware mash-up application within UC that can follow what a user tweets about, and get information from those tweets that can be used to do a task - such as update the person’s presence status based on knowing that the person has landed and is reconnected with the world, then that saves the person time, and makes them more efficient, without them having to do anything.  Yes, the user would have to pre-define words or phrases, or hash tags, that the application would use to search for, but that is not a big deal in the long run for the benefits they would gain.

Similarly, from a user perspective, I loved the fact that Siemens has incorporated the Twitter feed onto the user screen, but then added OpenScape presence status next to the name of anyone that the user is following that is an OpenScape user. That is very cool.

Many other hallway conversations with vendors mentioned Twitter, FaceBook and other applications and how they applied to UC. I wouldn’t be surprised if next year that Enterprise 2.0 and UC are combined as one theme at the show.

Tags: Unified Communications by Nancy Jamison
1 Comment »

I’ve been reading comments from several analysts saying that unified communications is just the latest buzzword and marketing buzz. To these analysts I say the same thing that Congressman Barney Frank said to a woman at a health care reform town hall meeting: “On what planet do you spend most of your time?”

Yes, some will say that UC is getting more press than customers, but anyone who says that UC is just a buzzword doesn’t get it. You simply need to take a look at the many case studies that demonstrate the quantifiable benefits companies are getting from UC. And if you talk to actual end users, or read the study that I did with Nancy Jamison where we interviewed UC end users to see how UC is impacting them and their productivity, you’ll know that UC is much, much more than a buzzword. It’s real, it’s here – get used to it.

Here are a couple recent case studies, demonstrating the power of UC.

•    LifeNet, the nation’s largest non-profit, full-service organ donation agency and biomedical tissue banking system, upgraded its existing Unified Communications solution from Avaya to enhance its reliability and business security, while deploying new features and functional¬ities that make its workforce more mobile. Avaya Unified Communications solutions, including Avaya Modular Messaging and Avaya Extension to Cellular, enable LifeNet’s field workers throughout the United States to access directories, conduct conference calls, and receive voicemail and e mail on their mobile cellular devices. LifeNet also is using the one-X Deskphone Edition to speed communications and donations, and making it possible to notify LifeNet employees, wherever they are, when a donation is ready.

•    Abilene Christian University (ACU) provides each incoming student with an Apple iPhone or iPod touch. The Alcatel-Lucent OmniPCX Enterprise Communications Server, OmniTouch Contact Center solution, Alcatel-Lucent LAN switches and wireless LAN solution support an environment that gives students unique services customized for these devices and access to information wherever and whenever they need it. Students can access course calendars, campus maps, receive homework alerts, security alerts, and answer in-class surveys and quizzes, among other ACU-developed web applications.

•    Thiess, a mining, construction, and services contractor in Australia uses Cisco Unified Communications to enable business-to-business exchange of presence and instant messaging with partners. Thiess workers need to collaborate with coworkers and partners to develop project bids and execute projects. It can take as long as a year to develop proposals, and the ability to reach someone for one extra piece of information “can make the difference in winning a multibillion dollar deal, which can be lost by as little as US$100,000.” In addition, employees in temporary and remote locations need to quickly reach their mobile colleagues in any location. With Cisco Unified Presence 7.0, Thiess employees can view the availability of business partners and exchange instant messages, click a button to escalate the chat to a voice call, and then click another button to launch a MeetingPlace session to collaborate further. Thiess notes, “If we need an answer from one of our partner’s engineers while developing the proposal, we will use Cisco Unified Personal Communicator to see which engineer is available and then just send an instant message. Near a proposal deadline, the ability to communicate across company boundaries can make the difference in winning a contract.”

To be fair, UC hasn’t taken off as quickly as some of us expected, in part due to its complexity, and in part due to the economy. Just as things were ramping up and enterprises were starting to make their UC plans, the economy took a nosedive, putting technology spending on hold. Despite that, there are still some bright spots in the UC market. Many companies have been investing in UC conferencing and collaboration solutions in order to reduce their travel budgets. People can see who is available via presence capabilities, and initiate conferencing and collaboration sessions, making it easier to do work with people around the globe without leaving the office. This saves time and money, while improving the work-life balance.

Is UC just a buzzword? Heck no. There are hundreds of case studies of companies using UC to save money, increase collaboration, enhance productivity, and increase revenues. And we’re just at the beginning…

Tags: Unified Communications Information by Blair Pleasant
1 Comment »

Over the past several days the UCStrategies team has been involved in an interesting, sometimes heated, and sometimes funny discussion on a name for UC “resellers”.  As we prepare our marketing material for the UC Summit 2010, we’ve been trying to figure out the best/proper term for the data VARs, systems integrators, and telecom dealers/interconnects who offer VoIP and UC solutions to their customers.  Certainly “VARs/systems integrators/telecom dealers/interconnects” is much too long.  We could lump them together as “resellers” – but that term doesn’t even begin to describe what they do or the level of expertise that they bring to the table. 

If a rose by any other name is still a rose – what the heck is a VAR or telecom dealer who has progressed beyond selling “features and benefits” to identifying and solving customer business problems by integrating various technology elements into a “solution” (whew! that was a mouthful!)?  And while each UCS team member had their own thoughts and suggestions (some not repeatable), it seems to me that the naming issue comes down to this:

·         The name/term needs to properly position the “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” as a problem solver (or that over-used term “trusted advisor”) for their customer.  In other words, I think the term needs to focus on what the “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” does rather than where they come from or what they sell.

·         The name/term needs to be flexible and broad so that it survives the changes in the industries and changes in the “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect’s” product or solution direction.

·         “UC” should NOT be a part of the name/term because a “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” may be focusing on only one area of UC or UC may be only one silo in their overall business direction.

OK – are you tired yet of reading “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” to describe those who are integrating products to provide voice/data/mobility/video solutions to their customers?

So here’s what the team came up with – and I like it a lot…… “SOLUTIONS INTEGRATORS”!  If I were a “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect”, I’d like it because it says to a customer that I deal in solutions for their needs/problems and it says that I have the expertise to integrate elements/technologies to create those solutions.  It doesn’t reflect whether I come from a traditional voice or data environment….. it doesn’t reflect that I sell something…. it does reflect my focus on solving problems and providing solutions.  Yea!  Higher margins!

What do you think?  Does “solutions integrator” work?  And if you’re thinking about the acronym “SI” and its current meaning for “systems integrator” – DON’T GO THERE!     

Tags: Unified Communications, Unified Communications Information by Pam Avila
1 Comment »

I’m looking for a miracle!  A couple of weeks ago a company contacted me for some assistance with a proposal that they had received for a “phone system” for one of their 20+ remote offices.  I told them I’d look at the proposal and give them my thoughts.  When I saw the proposal, my first thought was “What the heck is this reseller thinking?”  My second thought was, “Don’t they ever learn?”  Will it take a miracle to get resellers to act as sales professionals instead of used car salesmen?   

More than ten years ago, I began working with data VARs and telecom dealers who were interested in changing their business models to address the new opportunities being offered by “CTI” (computer telephony integration)….. then VoIP…. and now “UC” (unified communications). One of the areas we focused on over the years was the sales process for those in the reseller channel.  It’s well documented that too many resellers sell product, not business solutions, contributing to low margins and low revenue overall. Oh, some of these resellers claim they’re selling VoIP or UC “solutions” because they integrate several products to create a “solution” – but we know this isn’t solution selling.  It isn’t focused on addressing a customer’s specific business needs – it’s focused on selling products.  And too many reseller proposals reflect this product focus, to their detriment, not to mention to their customers’ detriment.

Here’s the perfect example of a product-focused proposal that is a lost sale in the making….follow me on this one.  The proposal looked professional and had lots of info about why a customer wants to do business with this particular reseller.  It talked about relationships and trust.  It talked about excellent service.  It described the product/phone system that the reseller recommended for this customer.  It gave a bottom line price for the system.  And all of this from a reseller that I had recommended because I considered them to be way above the norm in professionalism and understanding consultative/solution selling.

But what the proposal didn’t do – and should have in a true consultative/solution selling environment – was address the customer’s specific issues and questions.  Nowhere in the proposal did the reseller indicate that they understood the customer’s business overall, much less their communication strategy.  Nowhere did the reseller indicate why they were proposing this particular product to this particular customer.  Why not product A or B instead of product C?  Nowhere did the reseller talk about how the end-users would actually benefit from having the proposed product in their office, or how management would benefit by selecting and installing the product?  Needless to say, the prospective customer was left with a lot of questions and a lack of confidence in the reseller, which is too bad because that prospect was looking to the reseller to help them develop a long term voice and data (UC) strategy that would address all of their remote offices plus their headquarters.

On my own website, in a more recent White Paper directed to vendors, I discuss the economic prospects for those resellers who have committed their business to consultative/solution selling versus the prospects for those resellers who still insist on focusing on product.

Was the situation described here a blown opportunity?  Probably!  I’m still waiting for the miracle that will turn low margins into higher margins and small sales into bigger sales….. the miracle that  will only come when the reseller channel learns how to perform even a basic consultative sale.

Tags: Unified Communications by Pam Avila
5 Comments »

The news, of course, is the Nortel announcement today of Bankruptcy proceedings.  But, as others have already commented, this is not a surprise — the rumors and preliminary actions have been visible.

What are the implications for UC?  It’s not bad news, that’s for sure.  Here’s a quick list of ideas:

• Motivation to Change to Software Format:  This is just one more signal that there is not much profit in the traditional telecom industry — both enterprise and carrier.  There are still too many players, little differentiation, and minimal or no growth.  Thus, both the suppliers (Nortel, et al.) and the customers should be motivated to look to the future and move to the new, layered software model, which just happens to be the format of all the new UC innovations, from Nortel and others in telephony as well as from those in the desktop, application, mobility and web categories.  This will produce a leaner, but more profitable and flexible set of solutions and options, with an emphasis on UC. 
• Customer Investment in the Software Layers vs. Hardware Options: Perhaps it will make sense for customers to focus on a software-based UC overlay to the traditional telephony systems as a safety play for telecom as well as a smart investment based on the UC applications value.  These software overlays could come in a variety of formats, such as the Nortel Innovative Communications Alliance with Microsoft, or Nortel’s partner solutions with IBM.  Siemens Openscape, NEC UniVerge 360, Mitel Unified IP Client for SunRay, Cisco WebEx Connect are other software layer options from the telecom community.
• Increased Focus on Service Sources and Agreements:  Existing customers will want to look carefully at their service agreements and providers to assure they have a reasonable source of parts (for the hardware components), a solid source of expertise from the smartest VARs, and with a good contract for on-going support from the vendor.  (This is good advice for any of the telecom providers, not just Nortel, and including Cisco.)  Since the pace of innovation in traditional telecom is fairly low, a good services program can deliver a long useful life for the existing products, even without new product releases.  One possible implication for UC is that the pace of hardware investment slows, opening up more budgetary room for UC investments.
• New Solutions and Approaches Look More Interesting:  With the traditional telephony base in question, customers may want to hedge their bets even further by exploring the alternative approaches, such as the desktop, mobility, or applications options for UC as described at VoiceCon and here on the UCStrategies.com site.  Of course Microsoft Office Communications Server 2007 or IBM Lotus Sametime are the leading examples of this approach.  Other options include the RIM Mobile Voice System which makes the BlackBerry phone into a corporate extension, and the embedded or integrated communcations functions of software providers such as Salesforce.com, Siebel, or Oracle.

Major events, such as this bankruptcy filing, tend to catalyze shifts in thinking and in resulting actions.  This sort of evolution has happened in many other industries in past decades — transportation, automobiles, steel, newspapers, cash registers, and steam shovels, just to name a few.  The cause and the effect have been innovations that, in the end, produced more efficient and economical solutions.  My perspective is that this is happening in communications and the software-based world we are calling Unified Communications will be the long-term winner.

Comments?

Tags: Unified Communications, Unified Communications Information by Marty Parker
2 Comments »

The only news from Avaya this past year has been that Lou D’Ambrosio was stepping down as CEO, announced back in June.  Although the former CEO alluded to medical reasons for his sudden departure, I can’t help but think that this happened a year to the date when Avaya was taken private, acquired by SIlverlake Partners, in an 8.2 billion dollar deal.  At the time, it seemed that Avaya was poised for growth.  It had a great team in place, led by a great leader, as was Lou D’Ambrosio, with a strong story, “Democratization of UC”, which he preached at VoiceCon 2008.  My initial thoughts were that this private equity firm was going to make the necessary investments and take Avaya to the next level, becoming a leader in this industry.

Now, a year and a half later, the CEO has stepped down; Charlie Giancarlo, an ex-Cisco executive, has been at the helm of the organization since June; and there have been significant lay-offs and “resignations” of key people at Avaya.  Furthermore, and more importantly, product innovation has been stagnant.  It seems that leadership at Avaya is busy, going through organizational restructuring, or in laymen’s terms, cutting out the fat from the organization.  Although it’s not unheard of for organizations to go through some restructuring, particularly when private equity is involved, the lack of product innovation is happening at a wrong time, when the industry is moving so quickly, and innovation is happening at the blink of an eye. 

Initially, I thought the privatization was a good idea; now, I’m not so sure.  With no official CEO successor (Giancarlo is still interim CEO), and staff being slashed in droves, it almost seems as if the company was being dressed for two options:  (1) To be merged with another company or (2) To reinvent itself.  The latter would be the better option, but it will cost them.  Time to market is everything, and the clock is a-ticking.  Selling it would not be worth it at this point, given the economy and the state of Avaya as it stands now. So what does this mean for Avaya customers?

Customers must assess Avaya’s next moves and figure out what that means for them.  This is a crucial moment for enterprises to start implementing a UC and collaboration strategy, and evaluating the right vendors, who are promoting interoperability, is key.  So while Avaya has been a leader in telephony, I question their ability to take it to the next level of collaboration, as we saw a few weeks ago from Cisco.  UC and collaboration is much more than just telephony, and traditional vendors will need to make the right additions to their product portfolio.  Avaya was on its way, but seems as though it’s fallen off track.  Their analyst conference is next week; stay tuned to this blog for an update.

Tags: Unified Communications Information, Unified Communications Information by Vanessa Alvarez
3 Comments »

Our UCStrategies.com team has been discussing the acquisition of Siemens Enterprise Networks (SEN) into a joint venture with The Gores Group, who also owns Enterasys and SER.

As we pondered the situation, it became clear that this is an ideal time for some dramatic action.  SEN has arguably the best software stack for UC solutions in the entire industry in their OpenScape Communications Suite.  (Yes, we mean just the OpenScape Suite, not all the updated telephony-centric products such as the HiPath 8000, et al.).  

Our modest proposal is that the new SEN look past the traditional converged voice and PBX market, in which they are in a money-losing fourth place position (this according to their own slides from yesterday’s announcement) and look instead to the future via Unified Communications. 

What if they told all of their installed base customers that the new SEN is different?  The new SEN will not declare end-of-support on all that good Siemens technology that still works.  Instead, the new SEN recommends that the customers don’t waste their time replacing PBXs with IP PBXs and buying new phones, but rather spend their time and money installing OpenScape, connected to any PBX they own (old or new, of any brand).  Since OpenScape provides the complete set of communications tools that integrate seamlessly with both Microsoft and IBM (SEN has alliances for this with both companies) and with the enterprise back-office or hosted solutions (think SAP, Salesforce.com and more), SEN has the best chance of any company to come out as the market leader in Unified Communications. 

Hmmm. So the choice is to continue to sell PBXs, where SEN lost 602 million Euros on revenues of 3,200 million Euros in FY2007 and try to hold on to fourth place with declining market share, or to use this opportunity to truncate the loses in PBX selling (but continue the more profitable servicing business) and shoot for the leadership position in UC.  Losses/share laggard or smaller but profitable leader?  Oh, yeah, let’s be the leader! 

So, there’s our modest proposal.  What do you think?  Please post away on our blog here.

Tags: Unified Communications Information, Unified Communications Information by Marty Parker
1 Comment »

Independent consultants (IC) symbiotically aid both the customer and the vendor. We help the customer better understand the vendors, and we help the vendors better understand the customer. So why then do some vendors have such a negative reaction to ICs? That’s a question I am periodically left asking myself, wondering why some vendors resist the use of an IC on a project. I wonder why they don’t seem to understand how the customer>consultant>vendor relationship can benefit all constituencies. I believe vendor resistance to ICs falls into two primary categories. One category I’ll loosely characterize as “friction”, and the second category I’ll call “competition”. This month I’ll focus on the “friction”. The “friction” speaks to the perception some vendors have that ICs sit “between” them and the customer. While not the only objection cited, one of the most common is that an IC may slow the sales cycle. I unapologetically agree with that, as we seek to bring some structure to the project and move it away from the raw “pitch” stage. Yet, there are a number of friction related complaints with which I disagree. A few of the most egregious follow: Looking at the sales cycle example, one should look at the associated opportunity growth. An IC may cause a 60-day opportunity to become a 120-day opportunity. But, that opportunity will likely grow 3, 4, or 5 fold as we help the customer better understand the magnitude of their requirements, and help them better understand why they should invest in the extra capabilities, functions, redundancy, and the like. If you are an investor, wouldn’t you wait an extra two months to increase your return four times over? Sometimes the vendor believes the IC keeps the customer from understanding the “real value” of the vendor solution. In fact, a significant portion of many IC projects involves customer education. We might not always agree with the vendor that something is “special”, but we do educate the customers to help them see the “value” of all their options.

‐ Vendors often forget the ways in which an IC can reduce the vendor’s pre‐sales time expenditure. We help the customer understand and articulate their needs; we help develop designs; we help articulate the customer’s position, their pricing requirements, their service levels requirements, and more. We also often play a crucial role, without which any vendor would be stymied - we help with the internal business case packaging for senior management so that the project actually gets funded.

‐ Customer satisfaction grows if a skilled IC is involved. We work to make the customer understand what they are buying and what they can expect from it, and we develop a clear set of criteria. Furthermore, if the customer is dissatisfied despite the vendor performing as agreed, we seek to recalibrate the customer’s expectations. We actually do push back on the customer as warranted.

‐ ICs are, in military parlance, a “force multiplier”. A vendor can spend one perishable hour with a customer. Or, a vendor could spend an hour with consultant, and see that hour pay dividends at multiple customers. Of course, if you are vendor and you choose to establish an adversarial relationship with the Consultants, then the multiplication may prove problematic for you.

In the end, vendors will be well served recognizing that independent consultants are their allies. Our allegiance is to our clients, but we really do help both parties.

Due next month… the “competitive” resistance

Tags: Unified Communications Information by Tom Marsh
No Comments »