Best in Breed (continued)
Financial analysts, CFOs, and CIOs are negative about best-in-breed software. The CFOs and CIOs think it's best (if possible) to have as few suppliers as possible and as few platforms. They also think (and the analysts tend to agree) that any software worth building will soon be offered by the ERP players.
This reduce-the-suppliers stance is fundamentally silly,
even though it's very common.
Here's why. In their race for market dominance, all the ERP players chose to
skip a lot of application areas; in other areas, they have provided
veneer rather than substance; and in still other areas, they
simply haven't kept up with innovation. Nothing suggests
that the future will be any different, so in areas where
the ERP company doesn't cut it, you have two choices: do
it by hand or look at a supplier who does cut it.
What is silly is choosing to do it by hand when
there is a reasonable, cost-effective solution available
simply because you have a policy to reduce the number of
suppliers is pretty darn silly.
Now, silly behavior by corporations can still drive markets.
Some people believe that this (admittedly silly) drive to
reduce suppliers has actually made the best-in-breed model untenable.
We don't think so. We've found in the past year that there are
three different best-in-breed models that work for both customers
and suppliers.
In the longer version of this piece, we describe those models
and cite some companies that do seem to be growing and making
money by adopting them.
If you are interested in reading the longer piece,
please fill out our inquiry form
and mention "Best-in-Breed."
We will send you a free copy as well as information about
subscribing to Short Takes.
For other Short Takes, see our archive.
|
