Skip to Content

Is this the gym you pay for but never actually show up?

Seth Godin put it so nicely: Seth’s Blog: Analytics without action

     “If you’re not prepared to change your diet or your workouts, don’t get on the scale.

meaning that if you don’t want to actually do something with the insight you gain with analytics then better don’t bother doing them.

Yet, here we are, working mainly on technicalities of yet another platform that will revolutionize business as if we hadn’t have that often enough yet (The "Mad Men" Computer, Explained By Harvard Business Review In 1969 | Fast Company | Business + Innovation).

Carsten Nitschke just reminded us withToo Busy to Innovate that we’re focusing on the wrong stuff.

If there really should be a major difference for how your organization does business it won’t help to just migrate to a new platform or tool.

Maybe funny to realize, but if the migration to the new technology platform is everything your team wants to do, then it actually doesn’t matter what platform you choose. You may as well stick with your old one.

Looking at it from the vendor point of view (and that is the view I have to have of course), every sold license is a good and generates a stream of revenue.

For vendors it’s perfectly fine to focus on speed, features and shiny UIs. That’s what we all sell.

However, that’s not the whole story. And it’s the easy part of the story, too.

The hard part: mainly on your side, as you have to change.

Frighteningly similar to having a session with your personal trainer, ain’t it?

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
  • Hi Lars,

    thanks for the mention. I would disagree with you. Even if you just want to migrate to a different platform there are certain benefits with HANA. I have run with the team for a Retailer (again a Retailer) a TCO analysis on  running his business entirely on DB2 (Runtime) and IBM AIX vs HANA. It was much cheaper (with their own numbers!!!) to run it on HANA Licenses included. There are interesting factors like for example the data compression. This means that also your persistent layer will be much smaller.

    Consider what this could mean for your back-up. Backup Software is priced typically by TB!!! And guess what it is not cheap as well as the supporting media for it.

    There is in reality 1001 reasons for doing it, the only thing the reason is different for each one of them

    • Hi Carsten,

      appreciate the disagreement. 🙂

      There are plenty examples for SAP HANA winning the deal or "the others" winning the deal. I guess by now, we've all seen most varieties of that.

      There are things you can do better/easier/cheaper with one platform than with the other - and none of the platforms comes with only advantages.

      My point is: regardless of the platform you choose, there is the option to change what you do with the data processing capabilities. Seizing this opportunity is the difficult part.

      Lowering operations costs on one end is easy but it will only do that - lowering costs.

        • Nope it wasn't... and the IT industry (that would be us) is working on all that "better business" stuff now for what ... 50+ years and still announcing it as if it just using another technology would bring the change.

          In my opinion we're past the point where the "right tools" were missing. If you will, the "printing presses" are available now, and plenty of them.

          What's missing is to fight "data illiteracy", to stick with the picture.

          And that is the difficult part I was talking about. It means we need to change how we do things. And that's not comfortable.

          • Many of us face the same question again and agin from customers - Why should I change if my business runs perfectly with present set SAP products and solutions? And the only way to answer it, is to show how the customers business benefits (saving costs) by implementing the new products/solutions.