The BI Survey 8

2008 by Board International and written by Nigel Pendse – “The BI Survey provides a detailed quantitative analysis of why customers buy BI tools, what they use them for, how successful they are and why they eventually abandon them. It is based on the analysis of the real-world experience of over 2600 respondents (1894 users, 256 consultants and 472 vendors) from around the world. This year’s Survey also includes more analyses of how vendor, user and consultant perceptions vary. As such, it is the largest, most thorough fact-based analysis of the growing BI market. The BI Survey 8 benefits both from the experience of the seven previous editions and the ability to analyze trends based on up to eight years of data…

In descending order, 23 products or groups of products had enough usage to be analyzed individually throughout this Survey: MicroStrategy, Infor PM OLAP, QlikTech QlikView, BOARD, Microsoft Analysis Services, Cognos Reporting, BusinessObjects, SAP BI/BW, WebFOCUS, Cubeware Cockpit, Cognos TM1 Server, arcplan, Microsoft Reporting Services, Panorama NovaView, Bissantz, Hyperion Essbase, Crystal Reports, Cognos Analysis, Targit, Oracle BIEE/BISEO, Actuate Platform, Microsoft Excel PivotTables and MIK. LogiXML is also included in some analyses, even though its sample size was just below the threshold…

Just as was found in previous years, product functionality has a relatively low correlation with project success, being the second lowest ranked product-related factor. This was the most frequently cited reason for choosing products, not only in this edition of the Survey, but in every one of the previous editions — and yet it ranked only eighth in the BBI-driven rankings. This again confirms that organizations spend too much time assessing product features — even though most mature products are likely to have all necessary features, and minor gaps can be worked around — and too little time evaluating query performance, despite the fact that poor query performance cannot be disguised and always antagonizes users…”

180 View – This report is a summary report prepared by Board – one of the Business Intelligence vendors. Naturally, they have been selective in what they have summarized, but there is enough interesting material to check it out. However, we suggest caution in the acceptance of the conclusions of the report that found some of the better known products to provide less benefits. The better known products may have been implemented in much more challenging environments.

Business Intelligence: A Guide for Midsize Companies

2009 from SAP – “Typical uses of a BI solution for a midsize company are to:

• Determine the inventory level of a product or part
• Identify its best-selling products and see if this holds true in all of its distribution channels
• Identify customers that are cutting back on their purchases so that special inducements can be offered to retain them
• Implement dashboards and scorecards so that executives and supervisors can quickly recognize operational exceptions or key performance indicators (KPIs) that fall outside of accepted ranges
• Establish and monitor performance metrics and take corrective actions if they are in danger of not being met
• Compare departmental turnover to identify potential morale problems
• Compare year-to-date sales for this year with last year and forecast what sales are likely to be for the entire year
• Track customer orders and desired ship dates against finished-goods inventory and adjust the manufacturing production cycle and supply chain logistics to reduce inventory carrying costs
• Integrate operational, spreadsheet, and historic data for analysis purposes – while helping to stamp out “spreadsheet chaos” – to provide consistency and “a single version of the truth” for the organization
• Provide business users with the ability to perform their own ad hoc analyses without having to involve scarce IT resources
• Align daily operations with strategic objectives and quickly recognize when they are not in agreement..."

180 View – We thought the BI examples above would be useful. There is also other useful information in the article including “Business intelligence is not just about tools and their applications; it’s also concerned with distribution and control. Reports should be able to be published to the Web and delivered to a user’s preferred mobile device. However, not every employee should have access to every report or analysis – and administration, monitoring, security, and control are also part of the BI environment.”

Microsoft discontinues PerformancePoint

February 3, 2009 from ComputerWorld Canada – “Microsoft Corp. announced recently that it was giving its relatively new business intelligence product PerformancePoint Server the axe, a casualty of a tough BI market, the worsening economy, and the strength of its enterprise portal product SharePoint Server…”

180 View – It’s hard to believe that Microsoft would walk away from a product because of a tough market or economy. Microsoft typically takes a long-term view of its R&D. The article goes on to say “We wanted to have BI for the masses,” said Kristina Kerr, a lead project manager with Microsoft headquarters. “But we weren’t that different from the other mega-vendors in the space.” That’s also not what you expect to hear from Microsoft who have successfully competed with mega vendors before. Can anyone out there can shed some light? Thanks

Gartner's 5 predictions for BI in 2009 and beyond

January 16, 2009 from InfoWorld – “Through 2012 more than 35 percent of the largest 5,000 companies will regularly fail to make insightful decisions about significant changes in their business and markets, according to analyst house Gartner…

Gartner's second prediction is that by 2012 business units, rather than IT, will control at least 40 percent of the total budget for BI. The problem here, Gartner wrote, is that "business users have lost confidence in the ability of [IT] to deliver the information they need to make decisions."…

180 View – We don’t know how Gartner arrived at the 1st prediction about companies not making insightful decisions, but it is a huge concern for the decision-makers in any organization. Imagine making decisions while driving your car without a dashboard, poor visibility and running on empty. We think the 2nd prediction has already happened. Initially BI was adopted by IT as a new and powerful technology. Today, financial and operational management are not satisfied with lack of information to make decisions, and recognize BI as the solution. Business is now driving the implementation of BI in both large and mid-sized companies

The story of 2009? Enterprise disruption?

December 2008 from Scobleizer.com - “…So, why did this catch my eye? First, they are taking something very expensive, Business Intelligence charting and dashboarding, and making it free. That alone is pretty disruptive. When Microsoft is charging $a few hundred a seat (and Microsoft is disrupting lots of other players in the market who charge a lot more than that) you know there’s disruption when some new player comes along and under prices everyone.

But don’t focus on that disruption.

Instead, look at the bigger picture. Here they are using Google spreadsheets to bring you live, collaborative, business intelligence. Watch the second video to see how different this is from most of the “old-school” approaches that haven’t yet built on a platform designed for the web from the start.

See that’s the real disruption: there’s a new platform being built. Right now it’s ugly and incomplete. But every year it gets better and better. Will 2009 be the year when lots of you try out a web-based collaboration suite like the ones from Zoho or Google?...”

180 View – It’s still early days for free BI over the internet. Once the kinks are ironed out, Google/Panorama need to overcome the resistance of many companies to let their data reside on someone else’s server (in the clouds). Second, the majority of business analysts will be reluctant to drop their beloved Excel.

Business Intelligence and Information Technology

December 1, 2008 from CIO Today – “Business intelligence (BI) is all about improving decision-making -- as is the role of the management accountant. Yet most people who attend BI conferences are IT specialists. So far, there have been few converts from finance. Even if a chief information officer can persuade a firm to invest in BI, the benefits it offers cannot be delivered without engaging the organization to use it. BI could release many management accountants from the budgeting and reporting cycle and allow them to support decision-making more effectively. They have important roles to play in helping to realize BI's potential...

Most large organizations already have an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system and database. These are the core, and usually the most costly, building blocks of the BI stack. BI reporting and analysis tools could give nontechnical business users access to the data already captured. An investment in BI could be seen as an incremental cost to release the potential in this data…”

180 View – The article offers insights into the business case and implementation of BI. In our opinion, ERP investment should include Business Intelligence.

BI/CPM survey 2008

December 2008 from CAmagazine and written by Michael Burns– “…According to research and advisory firm Gartner, “Megavendors are beginning to dominate the business intelligence market — in less than one year, Microsoft, Oracle, SAP and IBM will have gone from accounting for a quarter of the market to owning over two-thirds of it.”

The acquisitions represent a growing trend toward providing end-to-end solutions. Initially ERP was a back-office application (financials, distribution, etc.). Then it came to include the front office (CRM, eCommerce). Now it encompasses BI and corporate performance management. ERP systems contain a ton of data that needs to be turned into information. That is BI’s job. CPM includes BI as well as budgeting, forecasting and consolidation…”

Business Intelligence: Bright Spot in IT Investment

October, 2008 from Computer Economics – “…According to our recent survey of technology trends, nearly 60% of organizations are investing in BI initiatives this year. Yet as our data shows, obtaining a positive return on investment is not easy--or at least it is not easy to demonstrate--and budget overruns are more common for BI than for nearly any other technology in our study…

BI applications deliver hard ROI through reduction of time and resources spent on gathering and reporting financial and other information. Soft returns are often more difficult to quantify. Most agree that having access to more timely and accurate data results in better decision-making and operational performance, but it is often impossible to prove with hard evidence…”

180 View – We also see a lot of interest from all our clients in business intelligence, but there is confusion in what is meant by BI. Our definition is turning data into information to make decisions. So BI could be a report writer, a query tool within a system allowing for easy retrieval of data based on multiple criteria, a dashboard or OLAP (OnLine Analytical Processing). Most systems already come equipped with a report writer and a query tool. What’s hot today is a dashboard that is role specific and configurable without programmer involvement. OLAP involves easily analyzing data from different dimensions (customer, region, product type…), drill down and graphing results. OLAP initially was targeted to large companies but falling prices now make it applicable to small and mid sized organizations.

The Right Stuff

November 3, 2008 from Business Finance – “…For many years, companies focused their reporting and analysis efforts on accounting measures and some high-level operating data (units produced, utilization rates, or number of employees, for example). As corporations have broadened the scope of their automation in recent years to include customer relationship management, supply chain management, and other externally facing and operating functions, they have been collecting a much wider and deeper range of data that can be used to measure performance…

The traditional reliance on accounting information as the basis for management reports produces information mostly about the past. Thus it is not surprising that our benchmark research finds that only 20 percent of participants said that they get enough information about leading indicators that will help them to anticipate business issues or opportunities, 60 percent reported that they do not get enough, and 20 percent are not getting any. Creating leading indicators usually requires a combination of operating and accounting information…

One common reason why most companies do not go beyond a historical, inward focus in their reporting is a set of constraints that have been internalized to the point where they have become habit…

They also may not have an IT infrastructure that makes doing this feasible. In far too many cases, information is held in separate systems that don't interoperate easily or is fragmented…”

180 View – We agree that organizations should generate ratios on their leading indicators but we don’t think the problem is mostly about habit/stagnation or lack of IT infrastructure. We think the problem is more about organizations that don’t know the difference between a leading and a lagging indicator. And even if they did, it’s not just a question of integration. It will often require investment in ways to gather the information such as conducting customer satisfaction surveys that have nothing to do with ERP systems.

Sloppy Spreadsheets: Readers Speak Out

June 18, 2008 from CFO.com – One example is “The worst practice that I see every day is sending spreadsheets out to people and not setting up the sheet to print. I received a simple spreadsheet today that, when printed, came out as a three-page portrait, when it should have been a one-page landscape. So after printing the garbage, I had to take time to re-format the entire print function.

I require that my staff format every spreadsheet before it's sent out. I tell them to assume I am forwarding it to the president, and he will just print it.”

180 View – There are a lot more examples of sloppy spreadsheets in the article.

Starting Small Is Good Way to Build BI Benefits

June 10, 2008 from ITBusinessEdge – “Whenever I talk to customers, I ask them how they determined their ROI. And they’ll often say they haven’t yet, or it’s very difficult. With BI, companies will see the benefits of BI and keep on investing in it, because it’s helping them with certain efficiencies and with performance management issues. But at the same time, it’s hard to actually quantify the value in dollar terms. Is it just doing a cost benefit analysis, so over a certain number of years, the money the company might have been spending in certain areas will be less now that it's adopted a BI platform?

For organizations making a first-time investment in BI, I find that if they have a small goal, such as helping customer service reps manage their time more efficiently, and can use BI to achieve those goals, that works better than making a large investment at the beginning.

180 View – We think the topic is interesting and could use a lot more discussion. First in terms of business case, we agree that building a cost benefit analysis for BI is difficult. Any estimates on savings from BI because of better decision-making are WAG (Wild Ass Guesses). However it is ok to have intangible benefits that justify an investment, especially if the benefit is linked to CSF’s (what an organization must do well in order to be successful). There also may be savings from BI that can be quantified. Some organizations need to go through hoops to get something equivalent using traditional reporting tools. Calculate the savings from eliminating these traditional reporting methods to help support the business case.

The other interesting idea in the article relates to starting small. When you can tell a senior executive that, in no later than three months, he will get a solution, it's very different from saying, I'm going to deliver a project in 18 months, and trust me. A small project is a good idea as long as the investment in BI considered the big picture. You would not want to invest in a technology that would fail at a later point.

Spreadsheet "Worst Practices"

May 14, 2008 from CFO.com – “There's little doubt that electronic spreadsheets are the most widely-used financial software application. But they are also the most-abused.

It takes some effort — often a lot of effort — to develop and maintain sound, proper, and effective spreadsheet practices. The spreadsheet's very ease of use encourages sloppy habits, and even seasoned finance professionals can find themselves falling into bad habits. At its worst, spreadsheet sloppiness, reflected in poor design, difficult manipulation, and lack of documentation, can lead an auditor to declare that a company has ineffective controls over some aspect of financial reporting. But even less serious spreadsheet follies can cause major headaches….”

180 View – A reader of the article commented online with the following – “A comprehensive set of Best Practice Spreadsheet Modelling Standards and Conventions are available at www.ssrb.org. The Standards aim to promote discipline and consistency amongst spreadsheet model developers. They Standards are quite comprehensive and can be applied to any spreadsheet modelling task.” I had not heard of ssrb.org before but did take a quick peek at their free 77 page document. If you have time to wade through it, please let us know what you think.

IBM offers $5B for Cognos

November 13, 2007 from CBR – “The deal, valued at $5bn, or roughly $58 per share, would absorb the last-remaining top tier BI (Business Intelligence) pure play vendor still standing...

With the field's top three vendors (Business Objects, Hyperion, and now Cognos) sold off, players in what's left of the independent BI market are pointing to opportunities and omissions now that the usual suspects are off the map.”

180 View – ERP systems have been characterized as data rich and information poor. By including BI in ERP (which partly explains the acquisition of Hyperion by Oracle and Business Objects by SAP), organizations should not need to customize their systems to extract or slice and dice their ERP data. Although IBM does not sell ERP systems, they do have big opportunities with Cognos. A portion of IBM's existing clients will be interested in Cognos, and IBM can also offer their services to Cognos customers. As well, Cognos will be used by some of the customers of the ERP vendors including SAP, Oracle and Microsoft. As IBM does not compete in the ERP space, IBM could be recommended by SAP, Oracle, Microsoft… for Cognos implementations as IBM is not an ERP competitor.

SAP Buys Business Objects for $6.78 Billion

October 8, 2007 from PC World – “The acquisition is intended partly to help SAP reach an ambitious goal of doubling its customer base to 100,000 by 2010. Schwarz said about 40 percent of Business Objects' customers are using SAP today. Business Objects has roughly 45,000 customers, suggesting SAP will gain about 27,000 new customers through the deal.

SAP has made some progress with its own business intelligence software, including an analytics engine called BI Accelerator. But Business Objects excels in ease of use and user interface technologies, which will become increasingly important to BI in the future, IDC's Lykkegaard said.

"Business intelligence in the future will increasingly become a user interface for applications," he said. "You'll do your analysis from the BI interface and then dive directly into the transactional data you want to examine."

180 View – For those of you who don’t know Business Objects, you do probably know Crystal Reports, which was acquired by Business Objects in 2003. We think it’s going to be a hard swallow by SAP in that Business Objects has multiple products that overlap not only themselves but also with SAP’s existing business intelligence tools. Also difficult will be supporting all the competing ERP vendors that rely on Crystal reports.

Worst Practices in Business Intelligence: Why BI Applications Succeed Where BI Tools Fail

2007 from Information Builders – “Business intelligence (BI) software emerged in response to the need for accurate and timely information to support informed business decisions. With origins in COBOL-based, green-line reports in the 70s and 80s, BI has evolved into a complex market comprised of tools and platforms. Tools exist for report design, ad hoc query, and online analytical processing (OLAP), while BI platforms combine these tools with databases, integration technology, and portals to deliver sophisticated BI applications. Whereas COBOL required IT involvement and months to generate a single report, today’s solutions are targeted toward business users and boast real-time reports. Why is it then that the majority of organizations still feel that their information access and reporting needs are unfulfilled?

BI software – tools, platforms, and applications alike – holds great potential for helping organizations readily access the enterprise information needed to make informed business decisions and, ultimately, achieve their business objectives. But, as with any technology, the implementation, roll out, and usage practices play a critical role in the success of BI.

In tracking mediocre results, and even failure1, in the implementation of BI software over the years, many common threads, or “worst practices,” can be found. The top-four worst practices for BI include:

• Assuming the average business user has the know-how or the time to use BI tools
• Allowing Excel to become the default BI “platform”
• Assuming a data warehouse will solve all information access and delivery requirements
• Selecting a BI tool without a specific business need

These worst practices set companies on the auspicious path of BI failure. They have been repeated by some of the best run and smartest companies in the world. Typically, these worst practices are the result of wanting to ride the latest technology wave without balancing the hype with practical knowledge and experience…

Excerpt from Worst Practice #1: Assuming the Average Business User Has the Know-How or the Time to Use BI Tools:

Unfortunately, the end-user market is flooded with misguided hype from the vendor community, indicating that, “BI tools are for everyone.” Today’s BI tools are typically targeted at business users because they no longer require specific programming or database knowledge and primarily use graphical, drag-and-drop interfaces to allow businesspeople to compose questions and retrieve formatted results from databases. Even with these advances, however, they are still too complex for the average end user to adopt as a part of their day-to-day routine.

Furthermore, few business users are involved in the decision process when it comes to BI. Because of this, their need for simplicity is neglected and BI tools are forced on them from the IT developers and business unit power users – a sure recipe for failure…

180 View - The whitepaper is self-serving but also provides useful information .

Nine ways to screw up a good BI implementation

June 4, 2007 from CIO Insights – “According to a BusinessWeek Research Services survey released in the fall of 2006, 62% of respondents said recent large-scale or strategic business intelligence (BI) initiatives returned the value they expected. What about the other one-third?
Vendors touting BI like Cognos, Oracle, SAP, Microsoft, IBM and Business Objects say it can deliver knowledge, efficiency, better decisions, and profit to almost any organization that uses it—when done wisely.

Even the smartest companies can make some dumb mistakes when it comes to business intelligence.

Dumb idea #1 – Not having BI. No surprise that Gartner's 2007 survey of 1400 CIOs found BI was again the most highly ranked technology priority. A Ventana Research study in the fall of 2006 of 488 companies indicates that 53% of companies plan to implement query and reporting software, while 40% plan to implement analytics and data mining applications.

Dumb idea #2 – Not having a BI roadmap and buy-in. "Just build it, they will come," is stinking thinking. Too many IT departments build a data warehouse based on the assumption that once it is built, users will automatically see the benefit. They don’t, unless you get the users on board.

Dumb idea #3 – Reliance on spreadsheets. Admit it, you know people who hide behind spreadsheets. They do it because they are comfortable with them and because they know how to manipulate the numbers to satisfy the politics of their organizations. Not smart in the long run..."

180 View – We especially like the “stinking thinking” re “just build it, they will come”. The writer says you need users on board to overcome this problem. We agree that will help, but often users don’t know what they want. As the writer discusses in dumb idea #8 (“Not knowing how to define information requirements), BI needs to link back to metrics that support the business. We think that the metrics should map to the critical success factors (defined as those things you must do well in order to be successful). BI is not just about technology; more importantly, it’s about knowing what to measure and how to motivate.

Oracle Buys Hyperion

March 1, 2007 from CRN – “Oracle said it would create a more comprehensive business intelligence software suite following its US$3.3 billion acquisition of Hyperion on Thursday. The two firms said the deal, which is expected to close sometime next month, would allow Oracle to integrate Hyperion's business performance management software into its own business intelligence (BI) product. Oracle's first BI product was released at the beginning of last year.

Hyperion started out primarily as a provider of financial reporting services but has also become successful with its online analytical processing (OLAP) engine, which allows users to quickly analyze complex queries. A few years ago, Hyperion made a strategic acquisition of its own when it spent US$140 million to buy Brio, which gave it an improved query tool…”

180 View – The acquisition represents the growing trend by ERP vendors to provide an end-to-end solution. Initially ERP was a back office application (financials, distribution…) Then it included the front office (CRM, eCommerce…). And now it includes Corporate Performance Management / Business Intelligence. In the short run, this aquisition should be good for all concerned. But what happens when sales fall off as a result of Hyperion prospects who are reluctant to acquire Hyperion because they don't use Oracle ERP systems?

The Magic of BI

September 28, 2006 from SQL Server Magazine – “According to Gartner’s Magic Quadrant for Data Warehouse Database Management Systems, 2006 report (published September 12), Microsoft’s BI platform revenue grew at a rate of 35.9 percent in 2005. And Microsoft’s recent earnings reports (http://www.microsoft.com/msft/earnings/default.mspx) document that Microsoft SQL Server revenue as a whole also grew 35 percent year over year in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006. In Microsoft’s press release about its BI growth (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/sep06/09-22BIMomentumPR.mspx), Jeff Raikes, president of the Microsoft Business Division, says:

“Our ongoing BI investments are enabling a transformation of the way people interact with important business information. We continue to evolve our solution set, recently rounding it out with an integrated performance management application, such that our offering will provide customers with a complete, flexible and cost-effective BI solution, one that enables truly pervasive BI across the enterprise.”

Those of you familiar with Gartner’s magic quadrant model know that it breaks vendors into four categories: niche player, challenger, visionary, or leader. Garner assigns a vendor’s standing in the quadrant based on the vendor’s completeness of vision and ability to execute that vision. Gartner’s recent magic quadrant report shows that Microsoft has made great progress across the board in data warehousing and is now on the line between challenger and leader.”


180 View – Here is another indicator of Business Intelligence becoming part of the end-to-end strategy of ERP vendors. Microsoft has a huge advantage over many of its rivals, and will exploit this advantage over the years to come.

BI and CPM markets in 2007: When two become one

January 22, 2007 from IT Director – “For years analysts have asked suppliers "so which market are you in - BI (Business Intelligence) or CPM (Corporate Performance Management)?" Suppliers were somewhat coy about the answer. BI and CPM were perceived as distinct and separate markets. BI was the high margin Cash Cow and CPM was the Question Mark in the portfolio. Suppliers did not want to risk cashflow from the large $7bn BI market by gambling on the smaller $1bn CPM market. Hence supplier commitment to a CPM marketing message or a BI marketing message vacillated depending on whether cashflow or new market penetration was the current key directive. But all has now changed.

2006 was a great year for the CPM vendors and most registered 30%+ revenue growth. Sniffing opportunity, supplier indecisiveness vapourised overnight. The answer to the "which market are you in?" question has been categorically answered: "BOTH".

All the BI vendors are now firmly positioning themselves in the PM market. Business Objects will shortly unveil ambitious PM plans based on their acquisitions of ALG and SRC. Cognos boasts an Innovation Centre that delivers industry sector CPM solutions in Cognos Performance Blueprints. It now talks openly of "Cognos BI/PM solutions". SAP (with SEM) and Oracle (touting both its own CPM suite and the ex-PeopleSoft EPM suite) are pushing new BI and CPM solutions as part of their 'enterprise solution stacks'. SAS is leveraging its analytics market leadership position into enterprise PM products. Microsoft will launch its PerformancePoint PM suite in 2007.

Paradoxically Hyperion is moving in the opposite direction. Having led the CPM market from its inception it is now reverting to its BI roots and will present 'Why Buy BI from a Performance Management Vendor' at the upcoming Gartner BI Summit.

So what's next for the BI/PM vendors? BI as a category will gradually disappear, as OLAP did before BI. "Content Intelligence" will become the new category and the next holy grail. Already SAS, IBM and Cognos are offering enterprise search for unstructured data - emails, Word, PDF documents and the like.

If the BI/PM vendors can combine their mastery of data intelligence (as in BI) with text intelligence (as in document management) to slice and dice, drill down, and aggregate data and text for any question a user might care to ask, then customers will really have something to rave about - a way of emulating the way we currently work with paper. The answers to "where did I put that file?", "what does this information and data mean for the business?" and "what is the context for these conclusions?" will become only a mouse click away. The adoption of SOA will make this easier. Structured and unstructured data management software tools will converge facilitated by SOA.

Expect more acquisitions and new competitors in the Content Intelligence space. HP's recent acquisition of BI/PM provider Knightsbridge is ominous, as is Google's emerging presence in the Corporates with its Google (enterprise) Search Appliance - British Airways is a reference customer.

But what of the pure-play BI and PM vendors? In PM the likes of CorVu and Pilot will provide specialist niche market solutions to government, healthcare, and other markets where specialist non-standard PM solutions are required. BI 2.0 will emerge, but in a slightly different form than most commentators are predicting. High growth vendors such as QlikTech, Spotfire, and Tableau offer fast, flexible, highly interactive and visual solutions for knowledge workers. BI 2.0 will be for the scientific, technical, and professional knowledge workers - the rest of us will access more basic BI functionality and reporting as part of enterprise-wide performance management systems.”

180 View – We disagree with the author that BI and CPM are becoming one. All organizations require BI but only the larger ones need CPM that includes consolidation, strategic planning, scorecarding and forecasting.

SAS Review

October 1, 2006 from CAmagazine and written by Michael Burns – “In the global market for corporate performance management and business intelligence software, SAS Institute Inc. is unquestionably a leader. With 10,000 employees, 4.5 million users and 40,000 customer sites in 110 countries, the company earned revenue of US$1.74 billion last year. Based in Cary, North Carolina, it has offices throughout the world, including Toronto. It also has the distinction of being the world's largest privately held software company.

In the past, SAS competed with companies like Hyperion and Cognos. Today, it also shares the market with some ERP vendors that are bundling CPM components with their systems. So why would anyone want to use multiple products if they could just use one integrated ERP solution?”

Business Intelligence Tools - Vendor Analysis

July 6, 2006 from IDC – “IDC defines the BI tools market as being composed of two market segments: query, reporting, and analysis (QRA) and advanced analytics. A further segmentation by software packaging divides the market into standalone and database-embedded BI tools:
1) Query, reporting, and analysis software includes ad hoc query and multidimensional analysis tools as well as dashboards and production reporting tools. Query and reporting tools are designed specifically to support ad hoc data access and report building by either IT or business users. This category does not include other application development tools that may be used for building reports but are not specifically designed for that purpose. Multidimensional analysis tools include both online analytical processing (OLAP) servers and client-side analysis tools that provide a data management environment used for modeling business problems and analyzing business data. Packaged data marts, which are preconfigured software combining data transformation, management, and access in a single package, usually with business models, are also included in this functional market.
2) Advanced analytics software includes data mining and statistical software (previously called technical data analysis). It uses technologies such as neural networks, rule induction, and clustering, among others, to discover relationships in data and make predictions that are hidden, not apparent, or too complex to be extracted using query, reporting, and multidimensional analysis software. This market also includes technical, econometric, and other mathematics-specific software that provides libraries of statistical algorithms and tests for analyzing data. Although statistics products vary in sophistication, most provide base-level functions such as frequencies, cross-tabulation, and chi square. This market also includes a specialized form of statistical software focused on functional areas such as the industrial design of experiments, clinical trial testing, exploratory data analysis, and high-volume and real-time statistical analysis…

In 2005, the BI market grew 11.5% to reach $5.7 billion in worldwide license and maintenance revenue. As Table 1 shows, the database-embedded BI server market experienced a higher growth rate (19.9%) than did standalone BI software (10.7%). The query, reporting, and analysis market outgrew the advanced analytics market in 2005. We had anticipated a higher growth rate for advanced analytics. One of the reasons for the lower-than-expected performance of this market segment was a larger-than-expected shift in revenue to query, reporting, and analysis tools as well as to packaged analytic applications by SAS, the largest advanced analytics tools vendor.

Business Objects
Business Objects ended 2005 again as the leading BI software vendor, with $795 million in BI tools revenue and a 14% market share. Business Objects is the dominant query, reporting, and analysis vendor, with a broad user base spanning all major geographic regions, company size segments, and industries. Building on this base, the company has ambitious goals for growth. This growth can either be organic or involve further acquisitions. Both paths will likely contribute to Business Objects' top line over the foreseeable future, with most of the organic growth coming from query, reporting, and analysis tools from both expanding the company's user base within enterprise accounts and deeper penetration of midsize organizations.

SAS Institute
SAS was the second-largest vendor in 2005, with $582 million in BI tools revenue and a 10.2% market share. Fifty-nine percent of SAS' BI tools revenue comes from advanced analytics software. However, in 2005 the company saw strong performance from its Enterprise BI Server product suite, which resulted in a 26% growth in its query, reporting, and analysis revenue (for more details see SAS Revamps Its BI Software and Finds Traction Outside Its Core Competency of Data Mining and Statistics, IDC #34846, February 2006). SAS is also continuing to find success in specialty analytic applications that take advantage of its advanced analytics tools. Examples include applications for various types of forecasting, optimization, and descriptive and predictive analytics. Although this revenue is not accounted for in the current BI tools study, it influences the company's overall product mix and in aggregate has a tempering effect on BI tools revenue.

In the short term, IDC does not see any serious challenge to SAS' dominance of the advanced analytics market and expects the company to continue to experience above-market growth rates for query, reporting, and analysis. However, at the same time there is likely going to be a long-term, continuous shift toward more packaged analytic applications.

Cognos
Cognos finished 2005 as the third-largest BI vendor, with $567 million in BI software revenue and a 9.9% market share. Like its longtime rival Business Objects, Cognos experienced competitive market pressures, which kept its query, reporting, and analysis revenue growth rate below that of the market. IDC speculates that the company's ReportNet product, which had tremendous growth when it was first introduced at the end of 2003, encountered tough competition from the many
reporting products in the market from specialty BI and database vendors. Although Cognos still derives a majority of its revenue from BI tools, the company experienced a higher growth rate in its business performance management applications than it did in BI tools. This trend is indicative of a steady shift toward a focus on analytic applications. As the market for BI tools matures, Cognos is likely to continue to expand on its strategy of both developing and acquiring packaged analytic applications in areas such as workforce analytics (released in 2006), supply chain analytics, customer analytics, and business performance management. This expected shift will put internal pressure on BI tools. However, these trends take years to play out; in the meantime, Cognos remains solidly one of the top BI tools software providers.

Microsoft
IDC estimates the value of Microsoft's BI tools at $353 million, which puts the company into fourth place with a 6.2% market share. Among its closest competitors, Microsoft is a relative newcomer to the BI tools market; the company introduced its OLAP server at the end of 1997. Nevertheless, Microsoft has seen strong growth over the past several years as it has expanded and enhanced its database-embedded BI features and combined them with related tools such as data integration. Specifically, the high growth rate in 2004 is attributed to the release of SQL Server Reporting Services.

More recently, Microsoft acquired ProClarity. (The acquisition closed in 2006; therefore, IDC has shown the two companies as separate entities in this 2005 market share study.) This acquisition filled an important gap in Microsoft's BI software portfolio. The company now has not only server-side BI engines for OLAP and data mining but also a Web-based (as well as thick-client) end-user query, reporting, and analysis tool.

Microsoft's impact on the BI tools market cannot be overemphasized. Currently this is especially true with respect to its Reporting Services and Analysis Services products. However, the company is also going to have an impact at the "front end" of BI in the coming years. Note that although Microsoft Excel is not counted as a purpose-built BI tool, Microsoft's recent focus on promoting Excel as a key interface for BI is also going to have a negative impact on competition. Again, this impact will not create any sudden material shifts in the market, but an evolutionary change has been put into motion by the database vendors, and it will reshape the BI tools market over the next 15 years…

The next wave of BI will reach out to these employees as well as other organizational stakeholders such as suppliers, partners, customers, and government agencies to improve information delivery and decision support functionality for all. This shift in market focus can be only partially addressed through existing BI software, which as already mentioned was created with the analyst or power user as the intended audience. Clearly a frontline employee will have limited use for an OLAP or an ad hoc query tool. In fact, to address the needs of frontline employees and line-of-business managers, organizations must redefine and expand what they mean by BI. The expanded vision of BI must take into account not only the technologies involved but also business drivers and performance management methodologies.

180 View – IDC provides analysis on many other BI vendors including Hyperion, Oracle, MicroStrategy, SAP, SPSS, Information Builders, IBM, Actuate, Lawson and QlikTech. The analysis also includes BI business drivers. If you’re into BI, you should check this article out.

2006 Business Intelligence / Corporate Performance Management Survey

June 2006 from CAmagazine written by Michael Burns - "Our Business Intelligence survey has morphed into a Corporate Performance Management (CPM) survey. Business Intelligence is but one component of CPM. Our attached survey includes the leading Business Intelligence and CPM vendors. You will find analysis for Cognos, DynacTools, Hyperion, Khalix, Microsoft Office Business Scorecard Manager, OutlookSoft, Panorama, PROPHIX, SAS, TARGIT and Vanguard.

ProClarity: If You Can't Beat 'Em, Buy 'Em

April 13, 2006 from SQL Server Magazine - "Microsoft dramatically shook up the business intelligence (BI) market competitive landscape last week with the acquisition of ProClarity, one of the leading developers of third-party analysis and visualization tools for the Microsoft BI platform. The Microsoft press release emphasizes the compatibility of the two companies' visions. The release features a statement from Bill Baker, general manager of Microsoft Office Business Applications, who says the ProClarity acquisition will help Microsoft "build even more BI capabilities into the Microsoft Office system productivity tools people use every day." And ProClarity CEO Bob Lokken says his company shares "Microsoft's enthusiasm for making BI accessible to all decision maker's within an organization."

Although I haven't reviewed ProClarity's latest market-share data, I know that the company was one of the first third-party providers of tools for the Microsoft BI space and is widely regarded as one of the best BI providers in the market. Microsoft regularly buys small software companies to roll into its own product suites, but it's rare for Microsoft to acquire such a visible, leading player. I've been following the SQL Server space since the product's beginnings (when SQL Server ran on LAN Manager and OS/2), and I can't recall Microsoft ever acquiring a product that has such a significant market share in a mature market segment--at least in the SQL Server space. (I'm sure someone will quickly point out some major event I've missed, and I'll be glad to pass that info along next week!)

I worked with the first release of the ProClarity platform and attended one of the company's earliest partner-training events in the days of SQL Server 7.0. I remember joking with CEO Bob Lokken, "So, when is Microsoft going to buy you?" From the start, ProClarity's offering was strong, especially when compared to the weak Microsoft offerings of the time, which relied on Microsoft Office as a BI front end. In addition, the ProClarity platform did a great job of leveraging Microsoft technology.

The move to acquire the mature ProClarity product raises some interesting questions:
Will Microsoft integrate ProClarity into existing Microsoft tool offerings (i.e., Office), or will ProClarity become a standalone, high-end product? What does this acquisition mean for other third-party BI tool providers? Which companies will be able to compete, and which small tool companies may go out of business?

Microsoft hasn't revealed whether ProClarity's platform will be integrated into the Microsoft BI stack or be consumed by the upcoming Office 2007. But ProClarity Analytics is a best-of-breed product, and Microsoft has made great BI-related strides in the upcoming Office release. So tool choices for Microsoft customers are bound to be varied and rich.

I'm not sure I'd want to be a standalone-tool competitor in the Microsoft BI space. Competition in this arena will be tough given the massive upcoming BI improvements in Office 2007 and the acquisition of ProClarity. I'm sure BI competitors such as Cognos and Business Objects are also keenly interested in this acquisition. Microsoft BI has made enormous strides over the years, and the company has become recognized as a leading player in the BI space. The ProClarity acquisition can only make Microsoft an even stronger player."

Accounting System/ERP Customer Survey

April 2006 from CAmagazine written by Michael Burns - Check out the results of our 2nd customer survey of accounting and ERP systems. See how well readers like the system they're using, and how they rate the developers and implementation partners. We also asked for some general feedback about return on investment and future plans.

Eight Tips For Creating A Vendor Short List

February 23, 2006 from Managing Automation and based in part on an interview with Michael Burns - "Your list of requirements should match up with pre-defined critical success factors (CSF) -- those things you must do well in order to be successful as a business, adds Michael Burns, president of 180 Systems Ltd., a business consultancy in Toronto. "If a requirement can't be mapped directly to a CSF, then it's not critical."...

When creating your RFP, Burns suggests asking vendors to respond not with a yes or no but with a number between one and seven. "When they say yes, that can mean anything," Burns says. You can get more specific through a numbering system, where a "6" might indicate that a feature is available in the current release of the software, a "5" that it will be available in six months, and a "1" that it would require a major modification or workaround. Combining your weighted requirements with these weighted responses will give you a way of scoring vendors to determine which makes your short list, he says.

You might be tempted to skip the reference check process, assuming you'll get only positive responses. However, according to Burns, "forty percent of the time, the reference is not a positive one," he says. "It's amazing how little vendors know about their customers." Burns offers a checklist of questions to ask each reference and advises that you tell each one a little about yourself before asking any questions so that they have a level of comfort with you.
Don't spend time on system demonstrations until you've narrowed your list to a handful of finalists. You can even take a two-pronged approach, Burns suggests, where the first demo is done over the Internet and the second one is more in-depth. In all, you should attend no more than four demonstrations, and limit each to two to three hours, he says. Ask demo attendees to identify major strengths and weaknesses, he says."

Microsoft unveils mid-market BI software

March 16, 2006 from InfoWorld - "Microsoft unveiled new business intelligence (BI) software Wednesday that was designed to let mid-market companies use analytics and scorecards to study business data through various organizational roles. BIO (Business Intelligence Optimization) for Microsoft Dynamics SL, slated for release to manufacturing in May, allows business users to build, manage and use scorecards and reports, according to Microsoft officials. Users can then view the analytical reports with Microsoft tools such as Excel, Office SharePoint Services, and other Office products or directly within the BIO application.

Microsoft developed the new BI software with channel partner NexVue Analytics. BIO is built on SQL Server Analysis Services and integrates with SQL Server 2000 and 2005, Microsoft said. The software is scheduled for general availability in June. Pricing for the BIO Foundation, an entry-level option, starts at $3,600 and includes financial analytics and a two-user license. Additional users and project, distribution, and field service analytics solutions can be licensed for additional fees."

180 View - You will find many examples of ERP vendoprs acquiring or developing BI solutions. Sage began selling its version of the eAnalytics Portal authored by Dynamic Software Systems International. Late in 2005, Exact Software acquired Vanguard Business Systems, which makes a BI product. Systems Union acquired F9 and MIS AG a few years ago... ERP systems generate lots of data but without BI it's not easy to get useful information to make decisions.

The Effect of the BI Application on Business Performance

March 1, 2006 from DM Review - "Over the last couple of years, most of the business intelligence (BI) vendors have relabeled their products as performance management solutions. Their definitions of performance management have varied, depending on what products they happen to include in their suites, but they usually fail to demonstrate exactly how their products have helped the business performance of their customers. Even if they tried, it would be very difficult for them to show how the particular features of their products generated superior business performance compared to competitive products...

The latest OLAP Survey had an even larger sample than the four previous editions: data from 2,100 participants in 95 countries was used to analyze dozens of aspects of the purchase and use of more than two dozen OLAP products. In total, 5,551 people responded, but some were not yet users, others were vendors using their own products and some were unable to answer questions. This is by far the largest independent survey of BI users ever carried out.
How Do You Measure Business Performance? Because of the wide range of products included, The OLAP Surveys don't compare features of products - how could you compare the features of Hyperion Essbase and Oracle Discoverer? Instead, since the second edition of The OLAP Surveys in 2002, we've used a benefits-based benchmark. After all, why would you buy any BI product if you weren't hoping to gain business benefit?

We came up with a basket of eight possible business benefits. They cover various areas, focusing on aspects such as reduced costs, increased revenues, improved customer satisfaction and greater internal efficiency. We also allowed respondents to add a ninth if they thought it relevant. Few did, and because no consistent ninth benefit has emerged, we continue to use the same standard list of eight benefits:

• Saved headcount in IT,
• Saved headcount in business departments,
• Reduced external IT costs (hardware, support, consulting or software licensing),
• Saved other non-IT costs (e.g., inventory, waste, financing),
• Faster or more accurate reporting,
• Increased revenues through better sales and marketing analysis,
• Improved customer satisfaction through enhanced product quality and/or service levels,
• Better business decisions through more thorough or timely analysis...

The OLAP Survey uses the business benefit index to measure the effect of numerous factors, including:

• Product choice,
• Methods of product selection,
• Architecture (MOLAP versus ROLAP),
• Input data volumes,
• Server platform,
• License fees paid,
• External consulting costs,
• Type of lead implementer,
• The extent of Web deployment,
• Deployment time,
• Data load/aggregation time,
• Query performance.

Of all the aspects evaluated, query time turned out to have the biggest impact on the business benefits achieved. Others, such as data volumes and server platform, had remarkably little impact on the BBI. This year, even product choice had little impact, though it was higher than in previous years.

180 View - The author has focused his attention on Online Analytical Processing (OLAP), which is but one component of corporate performance management systems. The other components - strategic planning, scorecarding, budgeting and forecasting, and consolidation - would have a much bigger impact.