The Cost Angle in the Social Media Monitoring Craze
March 20, 2012
Search Engine Journal offers good advice in the very detailed article “Think Before You Pay Too Much for Social Media Monitoring.” Writer Jen Carroll explains:
“Paid tools run the gamut, from blessedly affordable (for solopreneurs and small businesses) to outrageously expensive (only the big guys can even hope to afford them)
“Just like Web analytics tools, social media reporting systems can provide a wealth of data. But, is all that data necessary? How much of it is even useful? For most small and even medium-sized organizations, I would argue that only a small slice of what most reporting tools spit out is actionable.”
Carroll follows up with specific advice under several headings: Track Only the Social Media Metrics That Matter; Try Free Social Media Monitoring Options First; and Carefully Evaluate Paid Social Media Monitoring Tools Before Purchase.
Sample advice: figure out what you need first, so you don’t pay for what you won’t use. Also this tip: pay attention to ease of use; you’ll use the tools more often if you actually like using them.
See the article for more words of wisdom on getting the best value out of social media monitoring.
Stephen E. Arnold, March 20, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
PLM Eases Cost of Change Complexity
January 6, 2012
No one likes change and for manufacturers it can be costly. So how do companies manage and budget for change processes? The article “PLM, ECO and Cost of Change” analyzes that question and how PLM systems support them.
For PLM implementation, it is important to know “how you are able to automate cost of change calculation and embed it in the overall change process.” Changes are classified into four categories which are cost reduction, product maturity, product development and other and the change cost calculation will be different for each category.
“If you estimating change that marked to save cost or time, you absolutely need to calculate the cost. However, if you making a change that related to product maturity, you probably can skip some cost of change calculation. Taking right assumption can significantly improve the speed of change processes, which is an essential part of every manufacturing organization.”
Change cost analysis is complicated. PLM systems certainly help, but companies like Inforbix simplify the process. Inforbix focuses on product data and they find and infer relationships between disparate sources of structured and unstructured product data. So do not be afraid of change. Sometimes change is good.
Jennifer Wensink, January 6, 2012
SharePoint and Its Sometimes Interesting Costs
November 3, 2011
SharePoint is touted as the ultimate solution to content management and collaboration for enterprises. Microsoft, however, never discusses the costs associated with their software, except for how it’s cost effective and overtime will save your business money. But is that true? Redmondmag.com posted an enlightening article about the hidden costs involved in a SharePoint project, “Study: SharePoint Costs High Due to Inadequate Skills.”
A study conducted by the Azaleos Corp. discovered that the average cost to run SharePoint per user is $46/month. Using Microsoft Exchange proved to be cheaper at $15-15/month per user. SharePoint users also cited downtime as the most common problem.
“The downtime mostly stemmed from hardware errors or mistakes made by IT team members. Those problems caused average monthly management costs for SharePoint to double to around $90 per user per month. Almost half (43 percent) of study respondents pointed to “a lack of administrator skills, training, and knowledge as an inhibitor to efficiently leveraging SharePoint.”
SharePoint is still a young piece of software with a manifest destiny for its future. Its problems are many, but there are a lot of third party solutions to resolve them. At the end of the article, Azaleos Corp. advertises it’s AzaleosX app to help increase uptime.
We believe that you may want to take a close look at the cost effective search and content processing solution from SurfRay. Contain costs and improve user satisfaction with one snap in for SharePoint.
Whitney Grace, November 3, 2011
SurfRay
Google Wants More Cash – Enter Google Analytics Premium
October 13, 2011
So basically for a fee, Google will provide a stronger server to run your custom reports, a dedicated account manager and a 24/7 support and service level agreement (SLA). The one thing Google didn’t note in their announcement post was the cost for the premium analytics offering. I have received tips from several sources noting that the price for the premium analytics service is A WHOPPING $150,000/year.
India Based Call Centers: The Worker Perspective
July 16, 2011
ReadWrite Enterprise asks, “What’s It Like to Work in an Indian Call Center?” For an answer, writer Klint Finley turns to a Mother Jones article by an American writer, Andrew Marantz, who sampled Indian Call Center training.
With regard to overseas call centers, ReadWrite generally focuses on is whether businesses should invest them now or wait until working conditions and customer service quality improve. That question remains unanswered here, but this piece does call attention to the workers’ perspective.
Finley summarizes:
“Much of the article revolves around the cultural impact that the business process outsourcing industry has brought to India, both good (more economic opportunities for women) and bad (the potential stifling of Indian culture as call center workers attempt to conceal their identities). Here are a few interesting points:
Other key points we noted:
- There are almost as many women as men working in the call centers.
- Many of these workers are college educated, but are doing very basic work.
- Some workers are encouraged to eat American fast food and listen to American music, even on the weekends.”
Treatment of Indian workers by their employers eager to westernize them is a tangled thicket.
How does this relate to search? Three points of contact.
First, search vendors talk about improving customer service. What seems to be more accurate is reducing the costs of support for the company offering help to its customers.
Second, it is not clear in my mind that brute force indexing or even more sophisticated systems do much to address the disconnect between what a customer needs and what is available to answer the question. If the answer is not in the processed content, who is kidding whom?
Third, the notion of improving a customer interface sounds great in a meeting. But the actual implementation is usually more about preventing the customer from contacting the company saying it is “customer facing” and “committed to excellence in customer support.”
Enterprise search vendors know how to address these issues. Right?
Cynthia Murrell July 16, 2011
What Does OmniFind 9 Cost?
June 20, 2011
Good question. We fielded this one a week or so ago. The answer was surprisingly difficult to find. We did get the info, and we wanted to pass along an item form 2010 which we wanted to document.
Cnet Japan reported “IBM Japan, Ltd., Announcing Search Software Which Mounts Both Functions ‘Reproducibility’ and ‘Comprehensiveness.’” In an article which describes the advances in this version of OmniFind, what caught our attention was the section on price. As translated via Google Translator:
“IBM OmniFind V9.1 fee is large for ‘IBM OmniFind Enterprise Edition V9.1’ is 716 million yen (excluding tax, 100PVU per case) per division that can start small ‘IBM OmniFind Enterprise Starter Edition V9.1’ is 40,000,491 yen (excluding tax, 100PVU per case, up to 200PVU).”
40 million yen was almost $500,000. We liked the entire post.
Cynthia Murrell, June 20, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Microsoft Alleges Google Apps Carry Hefty Hidden Fee
May 9, 2011
“Microsoft Attacks Google Apps with “Google Tax” marks another 22 caliber shot in the skirmish between Microsoft (the new IBM) and Google (the new Microsoft). Yep, the 22 slug is an allegation that Google imposes a “tax” on users. Interesting but many companies impose a tax on users. Some achieve the revenue with a partner fee, some with training costs, and others with strongly recommended engineering and consulting services.
After interviewing “more than 90 small and medium sized organizations using Google Apps,” Microsoft discovered that:
…For 9 out of 10 companies surveyed, Google Apps are used in parallel to Office.
Additionally, the majority of companies surveyed:
will continue to standardize on Microsoft Office, while they only evaluate free trials of Google Apps, and do not intend to spend money on deployments.
Among the small and medium sized businesses surveyed, I learned that “Only two in five adopted Google Docs and two out of three companies still use Office as their primary productivity solution.”
Microsoft, the article asserted, “has created an iceberg info-graphic that reveals Google’s hidden costs.”
There is a much recycled graphic metaphor depicting the tip-of-the-iceberg up front costs of $50 (per user), and the annual costs and one-Time costs as the unseen base of the iceberg. How hefty are these charges? The article suggests that these fees amount to almost ten times the “visible” costs, in addition to unknown costs for end-user training, staff training, and lost user productivity. I think the “lost productivity” means a person familiar with Word has to waste time trying to make Google Apps deliver the same functionality.
The bottom line is that user prefer Word. Is there a tax for using Microsoft Office? The article sidesteps this issue. In Enterprise Technology Management, a publication of ISIGlobal.com, Stephen E Arnold summarized Google’s pricing of its Google Search Appliance. The Google “tax” may be evident in those data as well. To see the US government’s Google Search Appliance fees, navigate to www.gsaadvantage.gov and search for “GB 7007″ or “GB 9009″.
Jane Livingston, May, 9, 2011
Freebie
Google and Cost Control: Work for Its Accountants Ahead
May 3, 2011
In the midst of the Twitter-changes-news information flood, I wanted to document an item I found important and directly related to search. The article that caught my attention was “Google Australia Claims 2010 Financial Loss.” The title is a good one, conveying the key factoid. The numbers reported by ItWire were interesting in themselves:
- Revenue of $151 million Kangaroo bucks
- Loss of $3 million KB
- Tax payments of $7 million KB.
Accountants can turn water into wine and lead into gold. But the point that hit me was:
Google’s biggest local cost was its 434 employees – which soaked up some $111.6 million in the period, meaning their average salary was a whopping $257,000. However, the company also spent a great deal on advertising and promotional expenses — $10.53 million in 2010. Other major expenses included travel and entertainment – which was $7.13 million. he company’s basic profit and loss statement only listed tax costs of $1.1 million, although the company was actually slated to pay some $7.4 million in taxes in 2010. However it balanced that figure out with deferred tax payments and adjustments. At the end of the year, Google Australia was holding some $21.3 million in cash and cash, as well as $34.2 million of what it said were ‘trade and other receivables’. It had some $16.1 million worth of property, plant and equipment.
Yep, costs. Employee costs are hefty, but the Google is spending for advertising and promotion. Isn’t Google one of the world’s most recognized brands? Isn’t Google the owner of the most potent online advertising system in the world?
So, the key to the future of Google is not just good accounting. Good old fashioned cost controls are going to be the key to the company’s success in Australia and elsewhere. Outfits like Facebook want to slam on the Google advertising revenue brakes if possible. If ad revenue softens, costs loom even larger than they do at this time. Even accountants run out of angles when the revenue flags.
Stephen E Arnold, May 3, 2011
Freebie
A New CRM? Search Vendors Scramble
January 22, 2011
“The New CRM Will Drive Revenue” is a posting from one of the new type of consulting firms. Individuals sign up as experts. Then the 20 somethings beat the bushes for clients who can’t pay or don’t want to pay the fees for a McKinsey, Bain, or Booz grade firm’s services. I enjoy these write ups. I also subscribe to Funny Times.
If there ever was such a thing as a “duh” statement, this would be it. Companies with better customer relationship management systems (CRM systems) will do better and attract more revenue as the economy begins to improve. Okay.
It comes as no surprise that IT professionals are going to be needed more and more as companies begin to rely more heavily on the internet in order to attract business. Basic CRM and knowledge management skills are still going to be needed but now it’s on a whole new level.
Not only are systems going to be forced into automation they will also have to create full-time mobile support because of the new age of smart phones; applications for iPhone, Droid, and Blackberry will have to be created and supported. Social networking sites such as Facebook, Myspace and Linkedin will have to be created and maintained as well in order to maximize consumer consumption.
What would have made the write up more on point for Beyond Search was a comment about the mad scramble some search and content processing vendors are now undertaking. Companies like Vivisimo are now in the customer support game, and there are others. Why?
I am not sure “customer support” is the point of the exercise. The goal is reduce costs and keep the pesky customers away. What better way to achieve this than replace humans with software created by folks who are mostly into code.
The new CRM will drive revenue? No, the new CRM reduces costs and does little to help some “customers.” Great idea.
Stephen E. Arnold and Leslie Radcliffe, January 23, 2011
Freebie unlike the repackaged search systems that improve customer support.
Mainframes Still Necessary
October 31, 2010
The last time I was in a data center was 48 hours ago. It was a big one. The racks were filled with tiny little things. There was no easy way to count the blades in the lousy light. I knew after the tour that there was no mainframe in the data center. I do run across mainframes at big companies. Earlier this year I visited an insurance company, and it had a traditional data center. Most of the machines in that data center were Dells of one sort or another. Off in one corner was a room within a room. I asked, “What’s the mainframe doing here?” The answer was, “It does some stuff. That was before my time. Let me ask one of the old timers.”
I said, “Nah.” Legacy. Old timers. Got it.
For kicks I read “Mainframes Still Essential for Hybrid Data Centers.”
http://www.techeye.net/hardware
The article points out that when you have mainframe programs to run, you better have a mainframe. No argument here. The report, as Techeye points out, was created and distributed by a mainframe centric company. Nevertheless, the write up disclosed a juicy detail:
The most important priority for mainframe users in 2010 has been reducing costs, with 65 percent picking that answer. Disaster recovery came in second at 34 percent, while application management and business/IT alignment came in at 30 percent and 29 percent respectively.
No big surprise about costs. Most recent computer science grads close dance with mainframes briefly in their love affair with technology. The disaster recovery point is also understandable. When a Web 2.0 type mucks around with a mainframe or even an AS/400, it doesn’t take long to learn that the big honkers don’t work like a Macbook.
But the killer phrase is “application and business/IT alignment.” One third of the respondents want to get the mainframe to work like more tractable systems. The “alignment” hints at getting those honkers out of the work flow.
I admire the authors of the report and even IBM for spinning PR that pumps mainframes. These machines can be little gold mines today.
The “essential” is understandable, but let’s face it. The future is miniature gizmos and energy efficiency, ease of use, and Webby stuff. A hybrid data center has no choice. Then there are the costs.
Stephen E Arnold, October 31, 2010
Freebie
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
