Here is an excellent article about the “smartphone” becoming your next computer.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal_tech/smartphones/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=210605369

I might rephrase the title to something like “Is The Mobile Handheld Computer Going To Become Your Next ‘Smartphone’? From a UC perspective, you are damn right it will!

As I pointed out in my last post about Citrix and it’s new policy of “BYOC” (Bring Your Own Computer) for its employees, the big hangup for enterprise mobility has been security and device support. Mobility is where the flexibility of UC really pays off most, much more so than at a desktop. So, as I see it, the security concerns for mobile devices can be relieved by “virtualizing” enterprise applications, just like they are starting to do for desktop use. The hosted application servers control access to sensitive information, in a hosted and secure network service environment but where the enterprise can still manage usage and access. That is where the new network infrastuctures of SOA and SaaS are taking business process applications, so we need to include wireless mobility and UC flexibility into that mix as well.

You should keep an eye on the posts of my colleague, Michael Finneran, about mobile devices and whether these should store business applications and data like a desktop computer, or just be a “terminal.” My opinion? The handheld or portable laptop device should always be at least a mobile “terminal.” If you really need to have reliable access, find a wired connection! Otherwise, use any available wireless access. If you have to do real “work,” and want to carry information with you, you will probably want a more efficient bigger screen and a keyboard, so carry a laptop (and your “smartphone” and find a place to dock and sit down!

Of course, we still need the wireless carriers to be more cooperative with consumers, who are also business users, that need mobile access to and from enterprise applications, exploiting Communication Enabled Business Process (CEBP) and self-service portals. That same need will apply to any consumer who is a “customer” of an enterprise business. But, that’s another debate that isn’t finished.

The big issue that is really shaping up is who will supply those “smartphone” devices, mobile operating systems, and mobile software clients to subscribers of wireless services, and how will enterprise organizations be able to exploit and control those devices in terms of access to proprietary business information by authorized business users. The battle for control is just starting!

Tags: Mobile UC, Unified Communications Information, Unified Communications Information by Art Rosenberg
2 Comments »

He’s singing my song! The “Holy UC, Batman..” article by my colleague Jay Brandstadter certainly struck a chord with me. For years, I have avoided falling into the jargon pit that both the voice and data industries seem to love so much; and there is good reason for this avoidance. When I work with resellers, whether VARs or telecom dealers, one of my goals is to help them understand the importance of consultative selling rather than product selling. To me this means approaching any sale from the perspective of the customer’s needs rather than from technology and products. So I try to speak the language of business… not technical jargon (of course, this encourages some in our industry to assume that I don’t understand the technology - too bad for them).

But to my point… it seems to me that the unified communications industry is so busy trying to define UC according to what a product or group of products can DO, that they’re missing a very important issue. THEY’RE CONFUSING CUSTOMERS! And when customers are confused, they don’t buy! Why not define UC according to what it means to a business - how it can improve business overall? It’s similar to defining a car as a vehicle with 2 or 4doors, 4 wheels, an engine, etc. So what? From a customer perspective, a car is a means of getting them from here to there quickly, safely and comfortably. THAT’s why they buy a car.

If I’m a customer, I don’t care if “UC” is about presence or mobility, or even integrating business processes with my communications system. I’m going to buy a solution (whether it is “real” UC or not) solely because it is going to make my business more profitable by reducing costs, making my employees more productive and/or improving customer service.

If UC is to grow as an industry, customers must buy solutions that we know are made up of products and software that we manufacture or develop…. and today’s customers are smarter than ever. Steve Burgess, a very savvy integrator and CEO of Guidant Partners, firmly says that the customer doesn’t care HOW it works, they just care that it DOES work - and that it makes a positive difference in their business. So I’m going to be so bold as to offer another definition for “UC”…. Unified communications brings together and utilizes communication tools and information tools to make workers more productive from wherever they are, provide management with the information and means to make better and faster decisions, provide better customer service and improved customer experiences, and overall help a company be more profitable. How are we going to do this? The person who signs the check to buy doesn’t really care how!!!!!!! Only the vendors who provide the products and the distribution channels who sell and install those products care “how”.

Let’s stop talking to ourselves and begin talking to the customer - please!

Tags: Unified Communications Information, Unified Communications Information by Pam Avila
2 Comments »

The recent UC Summit that was organized by UC Strategies was highlighted by defining productivity benefits at two different levels. One was for the individual end user who gained personal time-savings and convenience from UC technologies (UC-U), the other was the performance efficiency of a business process in terms of both quality and speed of process completion (UC-B). Some of this was described in the eBook, Unified Communication Cutting Through the Hype, that I and my UC Strategies colleagues published earlier this year.

While both perspectives are valid and important, there is a gap between the two. Because most business processes involve more than one person, it becomes critical to business process performance that all the individuals who are involved in the process (work flow) do so as efficiently as possible. That means that they must be able to communicate as quickly and flexibly as possible, either as as contact initiators or contact recipients/respondents, so that there is no unnecessary delay in the process as a whole. If a key decision maker or action taker should be delayed in communicating, the whole process will consequently suffer a delay. So the impact of personal productivity (UC-U) can also impact (UC-B).

I recognized this years ago when first looking at the need for UC. I suggested that UC-B performance must take into account the performance of individual users who can cause such delays to the performance of the “group” as a whole, especially in time-critical situations. Having alternative resources to fill the human availability gap is a typical business strategy that has long been used in call centers, for example, to handle real-time phone calls. However, whenever there is a requirement for specific individual, then such an individual has to maximize their communication accessibility through UC flexibility for the benefit of the group and the business process.

“Group productivity” or “UC-G” can be described as the flexible accessibility to receive and respond to timely information and people contacts as quickly as possible. UC capabilities, coupled with mobile accessibility, will maximize UC-G for the user as well as the business process. For this reason, it will be important to identify specific users who are key to a high priority business process and insure that they are fully equipped to exploit the benefits of UC technologies. So, for example, doctors and nurses who must be notified that a patient is in a life-threatening state, cannot afford to be without mobile devices that allow them to be accessed by people and information wherever they are. Business situations have similar kinds of demands when there deadlines or costly problem situations that need to be fixed as quickly as possible to minimize losses.

UC flexibility has to extend beyond the business premises and include people outside the organization who are involved or affected by the situation. This means that premise-based UC alone will not be adequate when customers and business partners need to be involved in a time-sensitive business process. UC-G will therefore have to involve capabilities like “federated presence” in order to deal with such outside contacts as effectively as possible. Similarly, metrics to track communication efficiency with people inside or outside the organization will be useful in identifying UC needs that the organization doesn’t have direct control over, but which will still impact the organization’s business process performance.

What do you think? We welcome your comments.

Tags: Unified Communications, Unified Communications Information by Art Rosenberg
3 Comments »