<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Enterprise Strategy Group X Systems Management</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/category/by-coverage-area/it-operations/management-automation/systems-management/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:55:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>ESG Research Brief: 2011 Infrastructure Management Software Spending Trends</title>
		<link>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2011/01/esg-research-brief-2011-infrastructure-management-software-spending-trends/</link>
		<comments>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2011/01/esg-research-brief-2011-infrastructure-management-software-spending-trends/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob Laliberte</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bill Lundell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Laliberte]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Briefs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Center Facilities Infrastructure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Center Power and Cooling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT Infrastructure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT Operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Management Automation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Power Management Software and Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Systems Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infrastructure]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/?p=20190</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ESG research finds that 82% of IT organizations will increase or maintain spending levels on infrastructure management solutions in 2011, with larger organizations—as measured by both number of employees and number of servers—being most likely to increase their management software investments. Look for spending on tools related to security, network, and virtual server management. IT [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="abstract">ESG research finds that 82% of IT organizations will increase or maintain spending levels on infrastructure management solutions in 2011, with larger organizations—as measured by both number of employees and number of servers—being most likely to increase their management software investments. Look for spending on tools related to security, network, and virtual server management. IT asset and inventory management will also be a spending priority, driven largely by firms’ increasing use of server virtualization. ESG is also seeing an increase in the need for data center power monitoring and management solutions.</div>
<private_premium>
<h1>Introduction</h1>
<p>As part of its annual IT spending intentions research, ESG recently completed a survey of 611 IT professionals working at midmarket (i.e., 100-999 employees) and enterprise (i.e., 1,000 or more employees) organizations across North America and Western Europe.<a href="#_ftn1">[1]</a> With organizations citing increased use of server virtualization, managing storage growth, and information security initiatives as major 2011 IT priorities, investments in related infrastructure management software are sure to follow. Indeed, as shown in Figure 1, 82% of organizations surveyed by ESG plan on increasing or maintaining their annual spending on management software.</p>
<div class="graph_top">Figure 1. Year-Over-Year Infrastructure Management Software Spending Change, 2010-2011</div>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-20205" title="2011infraF1" src="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/media/wordpress/2011/01/2011infraF1.png" alt="" width="621" height="336" /></p>
<h1>Large Shops Lead the Way in Infrastructure Management Software Spending</h1>
<p>As shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, 2011 plans for infrastructure management software spending vary significantly by company size with larger organizations leading the way. For instance, while 38% of enterprise organizations plan to increase spending on management tools, just 23% of midmarket organizations will do the same (see Figure 2). Likewise, while a mere 16% of organizations with less than 25 production servers say they will increase their management software spending in 2011, some 41% of organizations with more than 100 production servers will do so (see Figure 3).  Taken together, this data clearly shows that IT organizations must make increased investments in management tools as their environments grow and become more complex and difficult to manage.</p>
<div class="graph_top">Figure 2. Infrastructure Management Software Spending Change in 2011, by Company Size</div>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-20206" title="2011infraF2" src="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/media/wordpress/2011/01/2011infraF2.png" alt="" width="640" height="296" /></p>
<div class="graph_top">Figure 3. Infrastructure Management Software Spending Increase in 2011, by Number of Servers</div>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-20207" title="2011infraF3" src="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/media/wordpress/2011/01/2011infraF3.png" alt="" width="639" height="271" />As part of this survey, ESG asked a number of questions designed to create a “psychographic” profile of the organizations surveyed. One of these questions pertained to how the respondent viewed his/her organization’s overall purchasing pattern for IT products and services, i.e., did they consider their organization to be a “leading-edge consumer,” an “average consumer,” or a “laggard consumer?”<a href="#_ftn2">[2]</a> ESG’s analysis found that there is a significant correlation between this designation and an organization’s management software spending plans. As shown in Figure 4, “leading-edge” IT consumers are vastly more likely than “average” or “laggard” organizations to be increasing their infrastructure management software investments. ESG believes that these organizations represent advanced, cutting-edge customers that are most sophisticated in terms of implementing management processes and tools and a more automated IT management environment.</p>
<div class="graph_top">Figure 4. Infrastructure Management Software Spending Change in 2011, by IT Purchasing Patterns</div>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-20208" title="2011infraF4" src="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/media/wordpress/2011/01/2011infraF4.png" alt="" width="633" height="366" /></p>
<h1>Specific Areas of Management Software Investment</h1>
<p>ESG also asked respondents to identify the specific areas in which they plan to spend their 2011 infrastructure management software budgets. As organizations continue to increase their use of server virtualization technologies to consolidate infrastructure and create more agile and dynamic data centers, additional investments in management tools are being required for security, network infrastructure, and virtual servers (see Figure 5). Simply put, virtualization technology is driving the need for new tools that can adapt to highly dynamic environments and still provide the same levels of security and management customers are used to in the physical world. Note that it is the “leading-edge” IT organizations that are investing most heavily in virtual server management tools (see Figure 6), a trend identified and analyzed by ESG in other recent research.<a href="#_ftn3">[3]</a></p>
<p>While virtualization is providing IT organizations of all sizes with innumerable benefits, the simplicity of provisioning servers in virtual environments can turn tracking virtual machines and application dependencies, as well as preventing “server sprawl,” into a logistical nightmare. As such, one-quarter of organizations (25%) cited IT asset and inventory management tools as a key area of management software spending in 2011. It is also worth noting that nearly one in five respondents (19%) identified infrastructure power monitoring and management tools as a likely area of investment, indicating that end-users need more sophisticated tools and processes to ensure data center power and cooling efficiency.</p>
<div class="graph_top">Figure 5. Infrastructure Management Software-specific Investment Over Next 12-18 Months</div>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-20209" title="2011infraF5" src="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/media/wordpress/2011/01/2011infraF5.png" alt="" width="632" height="585" /></p>
<div class="graph_top">Figure 6. Leading-edge IT Organizations are More Likely to Invest in Virtual Server Management Tools</div>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-20210" title="2011infraF6" src="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/media/wordpress/2011/01/2011infraF6.png" alt="" width="629" height="352" />When ESG further analyzed specific 2011 management software spending priorities by company size (as measured by number of employees), several interesting themes emerged (see Figure 7):</p>
<ul>
<li>Midmarket organizations are still focused primarily on “the basics.” As such, server and storage management tools represent this segment’s two top spending priorities.</li>
<li>Storage management appears to be more of a priority for the midmarket: 28% of midmarket organizations say they will make investments in storage management tools in 2011 compared to 17% of enterprises. ESG believes this discrepancy can be explained by the fact that enterprise consumers most likely have storage management solutions already in place for SANs and other networked storage environments. For their part, as midmarket organizations experience significant storage growth—especially related to new server virtualization environments—they may be finding the need for new tools to support a rapidly growing networked storage environment.</li>
<li>Enterprise-class organizations are much more likely to buy advanced management solutions such as IT asset/inventory management, cross-domain configuration management, IT chargeback, and business service management. ESG believes this is due to larger organizations transitioning to more highly-virtualized, dynamic (or “private cloud”) environments. Indeed, respondents that cited “increased use of server virtualization” as a top 2011 IT priority were nearly twice as likely (35%) to have plans for IT asset/inventory management tools as were respondents that did not view virtualization as a major 2011 initiative (18%).</li>
<li>Nearly one in four midmarket organizations will stick to management tools that come bundled with existing products. However, ESG believes these organizations’ appetites for more sophisticated third-party management solutions will increase as their IT environments grow and become more fluid thanks to the influences of virtualization and cloud computing.</li>
</ul>
<div class="graph_top">Figure 7. Infrastructure Management Software-specific Investment Over Next 12-18 Months, by Company Size</div>
<p><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-20204" title="2011infraF7" src="http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/media/wordpress/2011/01/2011infraF7.png" alt="" width="627" height="607" /></p>
<h1>The Bigger Truth</h1>
<p>ESG’s 2011 IT spending intentions survey indicates that more than 80% of IT organizations will spend the same or more this year on infrastructure management solutions as last year. While the top focus areas of security, network, and virtual server management are fairly consistent across all organizations, IT vendors would be well-advised to dig a little deeper and understand how specific priorities and spending plans vary by company size and organizational profile.</p>
<p>It is also be important for would-be management software vendors to understand how organizations are currently justifying their IT investments. As discussed in ESG’s spending report,<a href="#_ftn4">[4]</a> organizations are still focused on reducing operational costs where they can, but the gap between lower costs and business process improvement as the gating factor in deciding on a given IT investment is narrowing. Management vendors, therefore, should be able to demonstrate how better management will allow the same or fewer resources to manage growing environments <em>and</em> how advanced management solutions that provide increased levels of automation can actually improve business processes.</p>
<p>From an end-user perspective, as organizations mature their virtualized data center environments, their management solutions will need to mature accordingly. Capabilities will need to progress beyond basic monitoring and management to deliver increased data center automation and orchestration. Organizations should thoroughly investigate solutions to understand the capabilities available today as well as what is on their vendors’ product roadmaps. Such evaluations should include any partnerships that will deliver the requisite functionality.</p>
<hr size="1" /><a name="_ftn1">[1]</a> See ESG Research Report, <a href="../../../../../2011/01/2011-it-spending-intentions-survey/" target="_blank"><em>2011 IT Spending Intentions Survey</em></a>, January 2011. Note: infrastructure management software questions were posed to a subset of the total survey respondent base. This sub-sample consisted of 168 respondents.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn2">[2]</a> Complete definitions of these categories are as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>Leading-edge consumers – we stay on top of the most current technology trends and purchase related products as soon as they are available.</li>
<li>Average consumers – we stay on top of technology trends but generally wait to purchase related products until they have proven acceptance in the market.</li>
<li>Laggard consumers – we don’t really stay on top of technology trends and tend to make investments only after those technologies have been widely accepted in the market.</li>
</ul>
<p><a name="_ftn3">[3]</a> See also ESG Research Report, <a href="../../../../../2010/11/the-evolution-of-server-virtualization/" target="_blank"><em>The Evolution of Server Virtualization</em></a>, November 2011.</p>
<p><a name="_ftn4">[4]</a> See ESG Research Report, <a href="../../../../../2011/01/2011-it-spending-intentions-survey/" target="_blank"><em>2011 IT Spending Intentions Survey</em></a>, January 2011.</p>
</private_premium>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2011/01/esg-research-brief-2011-infrastructure-management-software-spending-trends/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Grow Up! The New World Of Managing IT Stuff</title>
		<link>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2011/01/grow-up-the-new-world-of-managing-it-stuff/</link>
		<comments>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2011/01/grow-up-the-new-world-of-managing-it-stuff/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 16:44:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Duplessie</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Event Monitoring and Root Cause Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT Infrastructure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT Operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Management Automation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Network Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Server Virtualization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Steve Duplessie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Storage Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Systems Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virtualization Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[servers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VMware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/?p=19707</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We recently did some absolutely brilliant work (I had nothing to do with it, thus it is legitimately statistically and analytically brilliant) segmenting the overall IT market by users’ sophistication with server virtualization techniques and implementations.  Our ESG Server Virtualization Maturity Model has been a smash hit, and will soon be released publicly in fits [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We recently did some absolutely brilliant work (I had nothing to do with it,  thus it is legitimately statistically and analytically brilliant) segmenting the  overall IT market by users’ sophistication with server virtualization techniques  and implementations.  Our ESG Server Virtualization Maturity Model has been a  smash hit, and will soon be released publicly in fits and spurts.  (I’m not  trying to be evasive–it can’t come out all at once or no one will be able to  digest it. We looked across every industry and every major IT function to  categorize Laggards, Followers, and Leaders–what they mean, and more  importantly, what are the specific concerns, challenges, requirements, or  downright show-stoppers for each group within each industry sector, within each  maturity segment.  It’s a ton of data cuts.)</p>
<p>We looked across Servers, Storage, Networking, Security, and the Application  organizations within IT.  Guess what? The answers differ based on who you talk  to! (Surprise surprise!)</p>
<p>We segmented the market into (3) categories, based on (4) primary  metrics:</p>
<ol>
<li>Scope of Deployment – the % of servers that have been virtualized.</li>
<li>Virtual Production Ration – % of VMs in production.</li>
<li>Efficiency – consolidation ration of VMs per physical machine.</li>
<li>Workload Penetration – deployments across multiple workloads (by  types).</li>
</ol>
<p>I could go on all day about the results, but since I titled this blog in the  “management” area, I’ll make a few summary points and then (hopefully) give you  management food for thought.</p>
<p>Takeaways:</p>
<ul>
<li>Server virtualization is becoming ubiquitous.  Duh.  <strong>BUT</strong>,  and this is a big but….58% of organization have virtualized less than 1/3 of  their servers.</li>
<li>Thus far IT owned applications dominate what’s being virtualized.   File/Print, etc.  59% haven’t virtualized ANY “mission-critical”  applications.</li>
<li>Those who do virtualize are able to document increased return on investment  as they become more advanced.</li>
<li>“Dynamic IT” is still an illusion.  Very few are truly engaged in utilizing  the advanced capabilities of virtualization yet.</li>
<li>There will be an avalanche of growth over the next 24 months–but it IS NOT  going to come from the “leaders” (so stop marketing to them, you silly  people.)</li>
</ul>
<p>I can’t tell you what all this means for your business–but an ESG analyst  can.  (Bug them, not me!  If you don’t, you are a dope.  You will learn  things.)</p>
<p>Anyhow, as I promised long ago in the title, there is an interesting parallel  to all of this when it comes to “Managing” stuff–or management  products/technologies.</p>
<p>When speaking with ESG’s management guru, <a href="../../../../../bob-laliberte/" target="_blank">Bob  Laliberte</a>, it became clear to me.  Bob called it perfectly, he said:</p>
<p>“A laggard IT operation ‘monitors.’  A follower ‘manages.’  A leader  ‘automates.’”</p>
<p>Brilliant in its simplicity, it is completely accurate.  Whether we’re  talking about managing a virtual environment or a backup process, it’s all true.   For an advanced society, we sure do spend a ton of time “monitoring,” don’t we?   How do you monitor something that isn’t real?  And why bother?</p>
<p>If our management techniques are stuck in medieval times, how do we expect to  ever truly reap the rewards of “dynamic IT?”  It’s bullshit.  We never will.  We  can put all the <a href="http://www.vmware.com/" target="_blank">VMware</a> in the world all over our environment and without the  ability to AUTONOMOUSLY manage it, it will always suck.  Why? Because it will  always come down to the lowest common denominator–the ultimate point of  failure–a person’s ability to make the right decision at the exact right time  and execute it perfectly.  It’s unreasonable.</p>
<p>This IT stuff was brutally hard to manage when it was one stovepipe with one  app running to one department.  It’s simply not possible to manage any longer if  “monitoring” is even in the conversation.  I contend that you are a liar (mostly  to yourself) if you think you are actually “managing” anything.</p>
<p>If you want to really manage–constantly optimize your environment in a  never-ending sea of changing requirements and workloads–then your job is to set  policy and best practice and let some tool way smarter than you or I can ever be  automate it.</p>
<p>Management is NOT knob turning anymore.  Knob turning is how you marginalize  yourself out of a job.  Remember those assembly line workers who built cars?   They turned knobs.  Robots do that now.  Robots that are smarter, cheaper, and  better at turning those knobs.  Know where the strategic “management” is now?  It’s in designing what you want to have happen, and programming the robots to  execute on it.</p>
<p>This holds true wherever a knob is twisted.  Storage has TONS of knob  turners.  Networking still has knob turners. Servers and Apps and Databases all  have lots and lots of knobs–but guess what? The knobs are becoming virtual.  Currently, the server virtualization layer is consuming more and more of those  infrastructure functions into itself.  I’m not saying it’s right, but it IS  happening.  Your knob expertise will be consumed or at least controlled at a  different layer–above the device.  You need to become the architect of the  OUTCOME, not the guy who fixes the leak.</p>
<p>You architect.  Tools monitor.  Tools manage.  Tools automate your plan.</p>
<p>Then you are truly valuable.</p>
<p>You can read Steve&#8217;s other blog entries at <a href="http://www.thebiggertruth.com/" target="_blank">The Bigger Truth</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2011/01/grow-up-the-new-world-of-managing-it-stuff/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Your organization is well protected, but what about all of your partners?</title>
		<link>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2010/05/your-organization-is-well-protected-but-what-about-all-of-your-partners/</link>
		<comments>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2010/05/your-organization-is-well-protected-but-what-about-all-of-your-partners/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 15:50:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kevin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Laliberte]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Protection Software & Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disaster Recovery Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT Operations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Information and Risk Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Management Automation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Systems Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SunGard]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/?p=16149</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Organizations have spent millions of dollars and years of effort to ensure the business can either continue operations or at the very least recover from a disaster in a timely manner. The majority of these efforts tend to be focused on implementing technology in multiple data centers across the state, country or globe so critical applications can [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Organizations have spent millions of dollars and years of effort to ensure  the business can either continue operations or at the very least recover from a  disaster in a timely manner. The majority of these efforts tend to be focused  on implementing technology in multiple data centers across the state, country or  globe so critical applications can be  accessed and the business can operate  with minimal disruption.</p>
<p>A couple of areas that tend to be overlooked are 1. employees and 2. partners  and suppliers. Does your organization’s BC/DR plan include procedures for  employees? Perhaps the recent threat of the Swine Flu or its politically  correct H1N1 name have prompted organizations to take a closer look at  the workforce and identify those personnel responsible for  mission critical functions.  Some have taken steps to ensure that these  employees could continue to do their jobs–even if forced to work from remote  locations for long periods of time.  But what about an organization’s partners  and suppliers–how well are they protected and how fast could they recover? How  would you find out? In either case,  finding out this information could result  in quite lengthy and manual processes.  Wouldn’t be fun the first time you did  it and probably wouldn’t get much easier every time after that.</p>
<p>I recently talked with <a href="http://www.sungard.com/" target="_blank">SunGard</a> about some new software modules from their Continuity  Management Solutions that are specifically designed to address these needs.  Their Vendor and Workforce Assessment modules will allow organizations to  quickly create online surveys that can be deployed to all employees and vendors  via e-mail. Results are collected and provide insight into gaps that exist and  need to be corrected. Examples of these gaps include an employee that doesn’t  have a laptop and can’t work from home during severe weather or a supplier that  has inadequate protection plans that could jeopardize your organization’s  ability to deliver goods or services. Once set up, it could be done on an annual  basis to ensure accuracy and that the proper remediation has taken place. Or it  can identify a continued weak link in your supply chain that needs to be  replaced.</p>
<p>If your organization doesn’t know how well your partners are protected, you  may want to consider checking out this software–which can also be consumed  via software as a service.</p>
<p>Read Bob&#8217;s other blog entries at <a href="http://www.datacentercontinuum.com/" target="_blank">Data Center Continuum</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.enterprisestrategygroup.com/2010/05/your-organization-is-well-protected-but-what-about-all-of-your-partners/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

