I think the business can and does make up its mind – when it comes to business outcomes. I am pretty sure that Dell, for example, was pretty focussed on business outcomes when it invested in its supply chain technology. The problem arises when the business is asked to translate those outcomes into IT, which also results in the misplaced expectations and is in part to blame for technology being used in a way which is different from that originally intended.

If IT organisations and suppliers can’t help the business to explain what it needs from technology then what’s the point?

This problem is compounded by the fact that IT suppliers primarily focus on the technology outcomes. If an IT organisation invests X then it will get Y features and functions. It remains the IT organisation’s, rather than the supplier’s problem, to translate those features and functions into business outcomes and reflecting the investment in X in terms of business value. The suppliers sales and marketing folks will help the IT buyer to make a business-focussed case for investment – but how often is that business case then reviewed in terms of the business outcomes that were achieved

I am sure that business outcomes will figure in the negotiations with IT suppliers around the ID scheme – it’s just that those outcomes won’t be tied to public acceptance of the scheme.

Ultimately, I think participation in outcome-based negotiations is what makes a strategic supplier i.e. one that really understands the business and is prepared to put some ‘skin in the game’.

I think the business can and does make up its mind – when it comes to business outcomes. I am pretty sure that Dell, for example, was pretty focussed on business outcomes when it invested in its supply chain technology. The problem arises when the business is asked to translate those outcomes into IT, which also results in the misplaced expectations and is in part to blame for technology being used in a way which is different from that originally intended.

If IT organisations and suppliers can’t help the business to explain what it needs from technology then what’s the point?

This problem is compounded by the fact that IT suppliers primarily focus on the technology outcomes. If an IT organisation invests X then it will get Y features and functions. It remains the IT organisation’s, rather than the supplier’s problem, to translate those features and functions into business outcomes and reflecting the investment in X in terms of business value. The suppliers sales and marketing folks will help the IT buyer to make a business-focussed case for investment – but how often is that business case then reviewed in terms of the business outcomes that were achieved

I am sure that business outcomes will figure in the negotiations with IT suppliers around the ID scheme – it’s just that those outcomes won’t be tied to public acceptance of the scheme.

Ultimately, I think participation in outcome-based negotiations is what makes a strategic supplier i.e. one that really understands the business and is prepared to put some ‘skin in the game’.

look at M&A – how often is there an ROI or TCO or whatever? yet IT is supposed to always delivery on its promises.

i see this as a major problem for outcome based licensing. i mean people dont use software in the way intended. and they wont use services that way either.

then there are absurdities such as the current ID card scheme. would you really want, as a software company, to be tied in business outcomes?

BPO has a role, sure, but the idea traditional horizontally focused software licensing will go away is absurd.

i think some people are getting rather carried away with these notions, even though i also believe, for the reasons outlined that current models based on procs don’t make a lot of sense either.

look at M&A – how often is there an ROI or TCO or whatever? yet IT is supposed to always delivery on its promises.

i see this as a major problem for outcome based licensing. i mean people dont use software in the way intended. and they wont use services that way either.

then there are absurdities such as the current ID card scheme. would you really want, as a software company, to be tied in business outcomes?

BPO has a role, sure, but the idea traditional horizontally focused software licensing will go away is absurd.

i think some people are getting rather carried away with these notions, even though i also believe, for the reasons outlined that current models based on procs don’t make a lot of sense either.