Breathing Open Air at NetSuite

NetSuite positions itself as “a leading vendor of on-demand (or cloud computing) integrated business management software suites for midsized businesses and divisions of large companies.” In other words, contrary to its software as a service (SaaS) peers that excel in one departmental function (e.g., Salesforce.com in the on-demand sales force automation [SFA] niche), NetSuite enables over 6,600 mid-market companies to manage their core business operations holistically in a single system.

Its flagship product, NetSuite OneWorld [evaluate this product], includes the realms of accounting/enterprise resource planning (ERP), customer relationship management (CRM), and electronic commerce (e-commerce). Moreover, NetSuite’s patent-pending “real-time dashboard” technology provides easy-to-use views of up-to-date and role-specific business information. Lately, NetSuite has also been acting as a reseller for AdaptivePlanning’s business performance management (BPM) solution.

But the “suite” and “SaaS” themes are only two legs of a three-legged stool that represents NetSuite’s product strategy. Namely, “verticalization in the cloud” is NetSuite’s third “big idea” when it comes to on-demand software differentiation. In fact, NetSuite has made great inroads into certain industries. Particular success has been noted in wholesale distribution, with the NetSuite OneWorld for Distributors product. There is also a healthy install base amid software companies (NetSuite’s peers).

Building Cuckoo Nests Within SAP (and Oracle) Customers

One of the major developments of late has been NetSuite’s hub-and-spoke approach to divisions of large SAP (and perhaps Oracle) corporate customers. Earlier in 2009, NetSuite boldly took the fight into SAP’s “back yard” by becoming the first SaaS suite vendor to receive IDW PS 880 certification in Germany. This involved an audit of the company’s financial management software to determine whether its software complies with the German legal regulations of trade and tax laws.

How Do People in Different Regions of the World Select Software?

The joke “If … Made Toasters” (here is one of many variations) has been circulating and evolving on the Web for quite a long time. The first time I read it was at least 10 years ago, but once in a while I still receive it in my inbox. Since we’re always looking for something different, I’m taking the initiative and starting a new topic in a similar pattern—how do people in different regions select software?

The United States (US): In order to select software, Americans need a lot of time and talented people to create derivative selection instruments, key performance indicators (KPIs), and even standards for software selection. After that, they will outsource the rest of the work to China and India.

Germany: In order to perform the most precise software selection, the German selection engineers have developed a selection model that includes 100 modules with 1,000 selection criteria for each module. This selection model gives the best results in the world. The only problem is that the cost of selecting the software is usually higher than the price of the software being selected.

Japan: The Japanese adopted some software selection methodologies that were originally created in the US. These methods weren’t popular in the US at the time, but the Japanese managed to use these methods to make their selection processes very lean. They also invented a portable device called “Selectman” that can perform 50 selection projects using two AAA batteries.

China: Although China is not the best in the world in terms of selecting software, it receives massive amounts of selection contracts outsourced from all over the world. When foreigners complain: “can we find any lousier software selection service?”, the Chinese will showcase the selection projects they have done for themselves, which are even worse.

Canada: The Canadian method is endless: when eventually the decision is made, all three competing vendors are chosen because the Canadians don’t want to make anyone feel bad.

I’ll stop here and let you provide other possibilities. Please add the regions you want to write about in the comments and let’s see how long the list can be.

Vendors Jostle and Profess Economic Stimulus Readiness

On paper (and as debated and discussed on TV channels ad nausuem), the goal of the Act was to stimulate the US economy and create (or save) jobs through a mix of increased federal appropriations, expanded mandatory spending, and tax cuts. Major policy objectives included in ARRA are the following:

* mitigate the effects of the economic downturn on low-income and unemployed folks (via extending unemployment benefits, food stamps, etc.)
* prevent state budget cuts in social and educational services (i.e., keep teachers, firemen, and policemen at work)
* invest in transportation and water infrastructure
* increase emphasis on renewable energy, conservation, and efficiency
* implement the widespread use of electronic medical records (EMR) and health information technology (IT)
* expand access to broadband services

But any stimulus money that a general contractor or manufacturer receives via US federal departments (e.g., Department of Transportation [DOT]) or agencies’ (e.g., Federal Highway Administration [FHWA]) contracts and competitive grants, as well as via US state/local government agencies’ contracts and competitive grants, comes with many strings attached, especially in terms of stringent reporting requirements. In other words, the money and funds that are envisioned to go towards infrastructure, computerizing Americans’ health records, renewable energy, the largest home and commercial building weatherization program in history, the education reform and college affordability and access, etc., are subject to an unprecedented focus on oversight, accountability, and transparency.

There are reportedly 25 US federal agencies cited as having programs funded by ARRA. Each federal agency had to meet with the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to develop agency specific policy documents, systems, and processes to track ARRA progress and funding.

You see, to that end, Deltek finds itself in an interesting (and quite advantageous) position. Namely, as a vendor that has long served both the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) marketplace and the Government Contracting (GovCon) sector, Deltek believes itself to be at the center of something it calls “accountability and opportunity.” But before I delve into Deltek’s ARRA-oriented offerings, let me first talk about what I learned at the abovementioned Deltek Insight 2009 track entitled “Stimulus & Beyond (Navigating the Brave New World)”.

The Background of ARRA

Indeed, the discussions about the effects of Obama’s stimulus plan still keep on raging, with opinions and claims almost as divided, disputed, and controversial as in the ongoing health care reform debate. At the time of Deltek’s user conference, the stimulus plan (ARRA) was just signed into law after narrowly passing in Congress, with only a few Republican “renegade” senators supporting it.

While I always have my own opinions and doubts about the exact number of jobs created (or saved), I am always open to hearing from someone who likely knows much more about the subject than I do. Therefore, I keenly attended the keynote speech by former Congressman Thomas M. Davis, a Republican who served seven terms in the US House of Representatives, serving Virginia’s 11th Congressional district. During that time, Davis chaired the Committee on Government Reform and Subcommittee on Technology and Procurement Policy.