Critical.
Authoritative.
Strategic.
Subscribe to CIO Magazine »

Why You Need More Than One Software Vendor

The conventional wisdom is that it's always better to have fewer software vendors - or even a single vendor - to manage than it is to use multiple vendors.
Page:

The conventional wisdom is that it's always better to have fewer software vendors - or even a single vendor - to manage than it is to use multiple vendors. Now that, according to a recent Forrester Research report, there are only 17 large independent software vendors left, it's a good time to re-evaluate this closely held belief.

CIOs who subscribe to the "one-throat-to-choke" approach to vendor management typically think about it in one of two ways: Either they want to get the various company departments that run different tools to agree to a single provider or they want to forestall deployment of new tools until their big enterprise vendor supplies them. The goal is to, one way or the other, achieve a standard platform and make running IT easier.

But reliance on a handful of vendors may not be in your best interest. This is especially true now, when the software market is consolidating. Take the recent acquisitions of business intelligence vendors Cognos (by IBM), Hyperion (by Oracle) and Business Objects (by SAP). IT customers are waiting anxiously to see what the big guys are going to do with their newly acquired products. In the meantime, IT departments should hedge their bets.

Why Vendor Standardization Is Wrong-Headed

At the core of the desire for standardization has always been the desire to optimize IT at the expense of business constituents who prefer (or believe they need) a variety of different tools to do their jobs. By reducing the number of software products to support, limiting the number of vendors to call with a problem and minimizing potential behind-the-scenes data complexity, the IT job will be easier and overall support costs will be reduced. This optimization may, however, engender substantial employee frustration during a switch to IT's preferred tool.

Another questionable justification for standardization has been that integrating products from multiple vendors along with the data from multiple systems costs much more than standardizing on fewer vendors. Unfortunately, few IT departments compare the potential costs of integration with the costs of dependency on one vendor's product. With fewer vendors in the IT portfolio, CIOs limit their negotiating leverage; vendors won't budge on terms if they don't think they have competition.

Meanwhile, standardization produces unfortunate side effects. Business constituents wait endlessly for that elusive next version or conversion. Resentment of the IT department bubbles and boils as end users' favourite tools are retired or new tools lack functionality that users want.

Page:

Join the CIO Australia group on LinkedIn. The group is open to CIOs, IT Directors, COOs, CTOs and senior IT managers.

More about: Business Objects, Cognos, Cognos, Forrester Research, IBM, Oracle, PeopleSoft, SAP

Comments

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Users posting comments agree to the CIO comments policy.
Login or register to link comments to your user profile, or you may also post a comment without being logged in.
Related Whitepapers
Latest Stories
Community Comments
Latest Blog Posts
Whitepapers
  • The Pathways ICT Leadership Development Program | Turning today’s ICT professionals into tomorrow’s business leaders | 2012 Course Curriculum
    Developed by the CIO executive Council, pathways is a unique,flexible, self-managed, self-paced 12-month professional development program that brings together best practices, thought leadership and business insights for today’s most promising ICT professionals. Pathways is designed and delivered by leading local and global CIOs; enabling participants to capitalise on mentor CIOs’ personal experiences, expertise and knowledge.
    Learn more »
  • Case Study - TNT Express successfully reduces their paper usage and costs using a new document solution
    in 2009 TNT decided to evaluate the market for new head office multifunction devices (MFD) as their current MFD fleet was almost seven years old. The objective was to reduce the number of devices and improve productivity, meet TNT’s future technical requirements and reduce the total cost of ownership of the equipment. They were also looking for a provider who would provide cost and service reporting as well as help streamline their electronic archiving requirements via the scanning of dockets and documents. Read on.
    Learn more »
  • The eGuide to Data Movement and Governance: Helping Business Professionals Stay Up to Speed
    You fail an audit. Or customer information is compromised. Or you are called on the carpet for failing to meet a critical customer SLA. At that point you realise just how important it is to your organisation and to your career. How do you prepare for that moment? More importantly, how do you prevent it from happening in the first place? It is absolutely critical that you understand the possible consequences of a failure to properly monitor, control, and protect the movement of data. Missed opportunities and lost revenue might be the least of your worries. In some cases, poor practices can lead to lawsuits, fines, and even the failure of the business itself. The purpose of this eGuide is to help you grasp the measures that can keep your organisation on track to meet objectives and in line with regulations.
    Learn more »
All whitepapers
rhs_login_lockGet exclusive access to Invitation only events CIO, reports & analysis.
Recent comments

HP and IDG news, product videos and resources