Our
March 2002 SummitVision View From the Summit
article, "Hosting Is Dead! Long Live
Multisourcing!," showed why "multisourcing" is
the future of hosting in the enterprise.
Multisourcing is a combination of professional
services, mission-critical support, remote
management and hosting services that are offered
to customers in any combination they wish — from
a relatively standardized hosted offering to a
highly customized on-site solution. It is
essentially a flexible form of "outtasking,"
where customers maintain control of their
overall IT strategy and key applications, but
offload lower value-add, ministerial tasks to
suppliers with particular expertise and cost
economies.
In
whichever venue — and in whichever way — these
services are initially offered, they're designed
from the ground up for hosting. They allow
customers to migrate seamlessly to a hosted
infrastructure at any pace they choose: with a
single daring leap, after a succession of baby
steps (such as where most initial services are
delivered at the customer's own site and managed
remotely) or not at all. Ideally, the
multisourcer — alone or in conjunction with
closely aligned partners — will also offer a
range of complementary services.
These
services may begin with on-site and remote
infrastructure-management and managed hosting,
then progress through a succession of higher
value-added offerings, such as applications
hosting, transitional outsourcing and even
business-process outsourcing.
Multisourcing Means Multiple Backgrounds
A number of providers from all types of
backgrounds — management service providers (MSPs),
infrastructure hosts, ASPs, systems integrators
(SIs) and outsourcers — are already moving
toward multisourcing by making their offerings
more flexible, or by adding new capabilities.
Most
managed hosting providers and ASPs, for example,
now offer remote-management options; and some
even certify customers' existing system
configurations, rather than insisting on new
systems, for the delivery of services. And, if
these vendors don't already have all the
required capabilities, they can develop them
themselves (as is AT&T, for example), license
them (Sprint), acquire them or partner for them.
These
infrastructure and ASP strategies do indeed
allow the providers to deliver relatively
flexible managed-hosting and remote-management
capabilities. They are a far cry, however, from
the type of comprehensive multisourcing value
chains that integrate business consulting,
systems integration, applications development,
on-site and remote systems and applications
management, data-center operations, and ongoing
training and support skills.
A few
companies — specifically global mega-outsourcers
IBM Global Services (IGS) and EDS — are actively
putting together the range of capabilities
required to deliver comprehensive multisourcing
services. Although a few global SIs are moving
in this direction, few really have the type of
data-center-operations capabilities or
replicable-management frameworks required to
deliver efficient managed solutions. Most
acknowledge that such capabilities are not among
their core competencies or consistent with their
business models. They would prefer to partner to
deliver those solutions, rather than develop
them themselves.
This is
leading to a wide range of bilateral
relationships, in which SIs play critical demand-creation,
application-development, customization and
general-contracting roles. Given the strength of
these SIs' capabilities and client relationships,
hosting and MSPs are falling over each other to
partner with integrators.
This
gives SIs a choice of partners. They are
capitalizing by forming relationships with
systems vendors, application vendors, capacity
service providers (CSPs), ASPs, MSPs and many
others to deliver more comprehensive offerings.
Although most of these relationships are
relatively ad hoc "clean handshake" deals, some
— such as Accenture's work with Hewlett-Packard
(HP), EDS's alliance with Sun Microsystems, and
Cap Gemini Ernst & Young's relationships with
Genuity and Corio — really seem to have some
teeth. These agreements often have defined
customer-engagement models; explicit integration
points; and, in some instances, even integrated
methodologies.
Good
Start Up to a Point
These relationships are nice starts. Yet even
the most defined and secure of today's
relationships are relative point solutions — one
company partnering with another to deliver a
specific type of solution to a group of
customers. They may be suitable for relatively
straightforward, local engagements.
Unfortunately, many of today's environments —
not to mention tomorrow's Web-services-based
ones — are more complex.
Some
engagements, for example, require multilateral
and continually evolving combinations of
providers. They may, for instance, begin with
custom development and on-site implementation
and management; evolve to remote management; and
then develop to a hosted solution. Moreover,
large enterprises are increasingly looking for
seamless, integrated global rollouts across
multiple business units. These corporate clients
often have pre-established relations with their
own partners, and each business unit within
those clients may well have different partners.
Ad hoc,
or even closely integrated, bilateral
relationships among a relative handful of
partners are not sufficient to provide the type
of fast, flexible, seamless solutions — or the
single-source accountability — that will be
required. Even if they are, they will not yield
the level of repeatability necessary for
delivering cost-efficient implementations with
guaranteed high-level service-level agreements (SLAs),
or the type of substitutability required to
allow one partner to be replaced or supplemented,
easily and seamlessly, by another. These
flexible, multifaceted, multinational value
chains will require predefined integration
points and methodologies that are standardized
across multiple providers at every level of the
value chain.
This
will allow an account leader or general
contractor — prior to actually performing any
work for a customer — to define the set of
skills required for a particular engagement and
choose among any number of "interchangeable"
specialist partners. These partners then can be
brought together to provide an ideal solution
that is tailored for the needs of a specific
application and/or vertical industry, and that
is uniform across geographies.
Although the various providers may have never
heard of each other before the engagement, their
offerings and their work practices will have to
mesh seamlessly to create uniform, assured,
efficient and repeatable solutions — without the
need for costly on-the-job training.
How can
such a flexible, multifaceted value chain be put
together? More important, how can it be run in a
way that each participant will have both an
opportunity to make money and an incentive to
make the value chain work — rather than trying
to extend its own role by cannibalizing partner
offerings? And, how will the value chain
maintain the flexibility required to adapt to
rapidly changing conditions, while
simultaneously having the required structure and
stability to ensure standardized and cost-efficient
interactions between each partner — rather than
forcing partners to reinvent the wheel for each
engagement?
"Mission
Impossible" — An Early Example of Multisourcing
Think back to the classic TV series, "Mission
Impossible," where specialized agents with
distinct skills were called together — under one
team leader — to battle the world's evildoers.
In the realm of project management for a
multisourcing engagement, a team leader could
select among any combination of domain experts,
with the assurance that each: