Managing Automation - January 2009 - (Page 38) [EXECUTIVE Q&A] even exceptional information. I still believe that, but I would agree if we come to this fastmoving world with no buffers, no inventory any longer, we as human beings have to adjust our behavior a little bit to such a system, which I think is missing. So I would not say it’s the speed of our brains and thinking. It more might be cultural and behavior aspects. Q: How do you see the shape of the software industry in the next five to 10 years? Is it going to be a classic three-major-player market, with the rest very small companies? Or do you see some other model emerging? I’m still believing in this model of a few large ones and many, many small ones because I cannot see today — and this might be because of my limited imagination — that somebody can very quickly build up an infrastructure like the last players have done. I always think about how long it would take me to redo, even if I have enough capacity, the SAP business suite, not only with all the functions, but with all the quality, and how long it would take to get it to maturity. nation of industrialization and consumerization. So, in the back[bone], it’s very industrialized and very reliable. But when it comes to the end consumer, the end user, there’s more proliferation. You need different types of suppliers. You need interconnectivity. As long as the players in the market have a similar view on that, I think that is a good way for cooperation. Q: Is there actually cooperation? A: I think if you follow us, you see that we were able to partner with nearly everybody, large or small. We have to learn to partner with even large companies. Customers expect it. We have to also help smaller ones to come up. Do you think the consolidation in the industry is pretty much at the end of the cycle at this point? There are a few areas where consolidation is still happening, but it’s more or less coming to an end. A: Q: A: Q: The barriers to entry are too high? Q: Have customers benefited from the consolidation or has it largely been a supplyA: The barriers would get larger and larger. side phenomenon? It doesn’t mean the barriers of entry for very A: With scale, I think there is always some innovative add-ons might be too high. That’s the point. That’s why I said many, many smaller companies. If somebody is extremely smart, he might have enough money to enter. He cannot do it overnight. So, money alone is benefit for clients because you could argue that, with scale, you can invest more R&D euros, which, in the end, extends the software and helps everybody who participates. You have a broader portfolio. You have more choice. On Business ByDesign: “Assumption is assumption, and proof is something different. I don’t want to have too many moving parts in this model.” not the point. The point is also time. You ask about five years. From that point of view, I think, you will see more stability in the backbone, in the core, and there might be more fluidity around it. You could say it’s a combi- Q: But too much choice can be confusing. A: Yes. You have more choices, and you have a higher risk of whether they are still there in five to 10 years. There might be a little less choice [as a result of consolidation], but you could more or less guarantee that what I buy and invest in is there for a longer time because it has more power and more scale behind it. Q: The Society of Information Management in the U.S. recently issued its latest member survey. Again this year it shows that the number one concern among CIOs is the alignment between business and IT. What has been the root of the problem? The root cause, from my point of view, is the feeling of many businesspeople that they A: ma January 38 2009
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.