Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Mark Everett Hall's picture
Mark Everett Hall

Sanity as a Service

How SaaS hurts a fragile IT economy

Software as a service is a wonderful choice for a business manager. Instead of investing in a packaged software product and the new servers and network gear to support it, along with a cadre of highly-paid professional IT staff to implement and manage the software, a business executive merely subscribes to an existing service.

If you read that second sentence closely, you can see why SaaS is a drag on an IT economy that is already in low gear. SaaS providers leverage a multi-tenant architecture to reach economies of scale that reduce overhead. That translates to fewer software developers at Microsoft, Oracle, and SAP and reduced IT operations staff needed by end-user organizations. It also means fewer internal development projects as the business side settles for customizing SaaS apps instead of asking CIOs for the specific tools they want. It also equates to less hardware being bought by users, which means companies like Intel, Hewlett-Packard, IBM and their supply-chain partners in China need fewer engineers and assembly-line workers to design and build machines to run the packaged or custom apps.

Sure, SaaS providers need their own programmers, Web developers and operations staff--not to mention their MBAs, sales forces and public relations folks--to keep their businesses rolling. And they buy servers and routers to run their software. But net-net, there is a significant overall loss of IT workers as the SaaS economy grows.

In fact, it's one of the biggest points in the SaaS sales literature. To get a new application up and running in your own shop, virtually every SaaS vendor contends, it will cost you more in labor and materials than it will to subscribe to a new service. Of course, SaaS vendors couch their labor-reduction sales talk by saying that you will be able to put those people and systems to work doing something more productive or urgent. But you know that it allows you to cut heads. And in today's economy, that's just what you'll do because the most urgent and productive thing an IT executive can do in 2009 is reduce headcount.

SaaS also puts downward pressure on IT worker's salaries, adding to the outsourcing and offshoring competition IT professionals face. The glory days of the UNIX system administrator and the Java programmer are dead and buried. And when that part of IT's history is written, SaaS will be described as just one more nail in the career coffin.

Despite this dark analysis, let me go back to my first sentence. "SaaS is a wonderful choice for a business manager." It is. And, should these tough times ever pass, it will be a god-send choice to launch new business initiatives and to quickly gain competitive advantage in an expanding market. Until those days come, however, it will be used in large measure to avoid spending money, which, during a recession is an added burden weighing down our economy.

What People Are Saying

C'Mon Now

This is surprisingly uninspired analysis of the relative value of SaaS in this challenging economy. Though many previous comments have made a joke out of this fact, I really wonder how you and your editors thought this was insightful enough to publish...or even correct.

Your thesis is pretty much confined to the observation that SaaS offerings save individual businesses money by aggregating overhead costs versus building one's own apps, and then leap straight to the conclusion that this in turn reduces the number of programming and IT jobs, as well as reducing expenditure on harddware and enterprise software? And you contend that this is bad during an economic downturn because of all the cost savings individual companies realize, though it would be good during better economic times?

That is absurd. First of all, if companies ONLY have a choice between spending less or spending nothing, then there is no opportunity for them to have spent *more* on enterprise hardware and headcount to implement and maintain it. Therefore, you are offering a false argument. Better that spending-constrained companies have some means of gaining competitive advantage, ESPECIALLY in these difficult economic times, than do nothing and hope they can hang on. Secondly, in stronger economic times, companies have just as much pressure to cut costs and be "more profitable" instead of just solvent, and SaaS appeals then for the same cost savings reasons.

Whenever a new, cheaper "thing" comes along, purveyors of the "old thing" are forced to innovate and evolve. That's how we progress as an industry and as a culture. This article should have gone into these ideas at any level of depth to be taken seriously.

Then - Build vs Buy; Now - Buy vs SaaS

Similar predictions were made when the Build vs Buy paradigm was introduced and sold. The application companies such as Microsoft, Oracle and SAP - all gave same sales pitch of reducing IT cost. Did Build vs Buy increase productivity or did it decrease IT spending. I don't have data to prove or disprove it. But I am experienced and grown older. With that comes some wisdom. It was all Build on Buy

These application giants are not planning of going out of business now. Don't we know that the good old IBM applications, me and Mark developed are still running deep inside some servers driving the business processes? The Product Managers of the Buy application companies think that they are at the end of the Build paradigm and now trying to sell back the same applications in piece meal as services. Where do you think these services come from?

If you think if software were an onion, SaaS is the latest layer. I am sure, sooner or later, they will start selling applications that use these services.

  • Composite applications
  • Guided Procedures

For the young IT managers, they will all be new once again. It will be Build on SaaS. Build is here to stay for long, but it will be built with new kind of developers who study mainframes in their history class. :-)

Easwar Ram

Change or die

The death of IT professionals is premature. There is plenty of opportunity for VARs, implementers and business analysts in the SaaS Age. They just need to re-tool.

Instead of running around like a monkey with a pager, mucking with end-user workstations (read: Vista), ensuring that the patches for ERP systems are installed and the like, IT professionals can focus on true value add work. No doubt they will need to drop their MSCE hat and learn java scripting, but ask most NetSuite or SFDC partners - there is gold in them hills.

LOL!

Yes! SaaS is just the like the invention of the microwave. Think about how many fewer cooks we need now. The same will happen with IT professionals. Darn inventions!

Hooray!

I couldn't agree more. And while we're at, let's call on Washington DC to start the process of bailing out the on-premise, client-server-based ERP vendors. Perhaps in your next post, we should include some uptime statistics for our on-premise, better-value, dinosaurs. Who paid you to write this?!

Not one to ever stifle dissenting opinion, but doesn't ComputerWorld sponsor SaaScon?

Illustration of the absurd

A simple illustration of the absurdity of this fear is to take it to it's logical conclusion. I have a plan for 100% employment. We pay every able-bodied man west of the Mississippi River to dig a giant hole. Then we pay every able-bodied man east of the Mississippi to fill it in while the first group gets to work on the next hole. That would be great for employment, but it's pretty obvious that it would be disastrous for the economy and just plain silly.

Trying to get out of this economic mess by preserving inefficiencies is like trying to lift yourself up by standing in a bucket and pulling the handle.

You are spot on .... we

You are spot on .... we should have also stopped the introduction of the electric lightbulb as well .... have you any idea of how many candle makers (and all association support industries in the supply chain leading up to the candle makers .... the wick makers .... the bee keepers ... the bee hive builders ... the bees etc) all lost their livelihoods with this evil development.

Check out what happened with the bronze age:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpeqPdVyQd0

Might as well say IT hurts IT

IT is the very definition of innovation. IT creates or exposes opportunities and reduces costs. IT professionals are among the most adaptable and intelligent people I know. In fact, adaptability is a requirement for this ever changing job. SaaS is just yet another example of that change.

You do us all a disservice with this negative attitude sir.

Good

I am an IT person, and I can tell you that anything I do costs the company money, and if someone else can do it as well for less, the company wins.

The money saved will make the company more competitive, and more likely to keep the dozens of other jobs it provides. The IT economy is a drag on the world economy as you have described it. The entire value of IT is that it allows work to be done for less money, and as long as corners aren't cut, keeping costs down is good.

Conveniently only half of the picture.

So what hardware is SaaS going to run on? That someone else owns it or that it now "lives" somewhere else entirely doesn't mean the hardware ceased to exist, is now free, or suddenly needs no staff to run.