Perform and Transform

My open letter to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella at the beginning of the World Partner Conference last Monday was not without a resonance. My warning of three disappointing fiscal years for established software companies in the wake of the transition from OnPremises to Cloud made its mark – and not just among German Microsoft partners. At a well-frequented “German session” with around 200 attendees we discussed possible steps in the change from the traditional business model to a new world. The Cloud Maturity Model that we presented shows the way in which existing customer installations can be transferred to the cloud step by step with a high functional benefit and cost savings effect.

Microsoft COO Kevin Turner, in charge of global channel business, also seems to see this as a blueprint for the migration of partners into perfect cloud companies. Unlike my pointed formulation of a three-year Vale of Tears, however, he sees for Microsoft und partners a twofold challenge to “perform and transform”. This will be accompanied by a series of training measures, marketing activities and product innovations that enable partners to totally reposition themselves in the Microsoft ecosphere.

His colleague Phil Sorgen, Corporate Vice President of Microsoft’s Worldwide Partner Group, identified four distinguishing features for the successful implementation of performance and change capability: concentration on one’s own intellectual property, the ability to digitize marketing and sales activities, accelerated customer acquisition and high retention rates for fixed-term contracts, and fine adjustment of in-house controlling and evaluation methods. Sorgen encouraged Microsoft partners to go fully and completely for the cloud. According to his market analysis partners whose cloud revenues amount to more than 50 percent of their total sales achieve higher growth rates and profits than those whose cloud business makes up less than 50 percent of their sales revenue. In other words, the ones have already left the Vale of Tears behind them and the others have yet to do so.

Kevin Turner underscored with impressive figures that the transition has long gained substance. Around half of the license agreements Microsoft has signed with corporate customers over the past half-year include cloud components. One million new users a month are joining the Office 365 cloud version, and the Office apps for Android and iOS have already been downloaded more than 100 million times.

As for the man to whom I wrote my open letter, Satya Nadella, irrespective of the personal response that I received immediately after he received my letter, the impression he made was that he well understands the partners’ worries. The “new Microsoft,” he assured attendees from the first day of the World Partner Conference to the last, was inconceivable without the partners and their commercial success. He made it equally clear, however, that Microsoft partners must now understand and follow up on the change of course Microsoft has undertaken. Sooner rather than later, with performance and transformation.

Kunden zuerst, Partner danach

Ein offener Brief an Satya Nadella

Mein lieber Satya Nadella.

Ich sitze in meinem Hotelzimmer in Orlando und freue mich auf die Eröffnung der Microsoft World Partner Conference am heutigen Montag. Die Zeitverschiebung und der Jetlag lassen mich noch keinen Schlaf finden – und auch die Gedanken an Microsofts Zukunft lassen mich nicht unbedingt ruhig schlafen…

Dabei – und zunächst – finde ich es wirklich beeindruckend, wie sich Microsoft unter Ihrer Ägide als Chief Executive Officer bereits verändert hat. Die Devise – „Cloud First, Mobile First“ halte ich im Kern für richtig – ja, ich möchte sie noch ergänzen um die Überzeugung: „Ohne Mobile kein Cloud Computing“.

Aber ich möchte auch ergänzen: Ohne eine klare Vision für die Partner in der Microsoft Ökosphäre kann es keinen Erfolg für Microsoft geben. Deshalb ist die diesjährige WPC vielleicht die wichtigste überhaupt. Denn die klassischen Umsatzströme, die sich aus dem dominanten PC-Geschäft ergaben, beginnen zu versiegen. Die von Ihnen eingeleiteten Kurskorrekturen in Richtung „Cloud First, Mobile First“ hätten nicht später kommen dürfen. Jetzt geht es darum, sie auch umzusetzen. Dazu braucht es eine gemeinsame Vision für Microsoft, Kunden und Partner.

Aber die ist nicht unbedingt zu erkennen. Jeder Partner muss derzeit für sich selbst einen Weg in die Cloud finden. Das Kartenmaterial dafür ist derzeit noch unzureichend. Eines allerdings ist sicher: Es gibt ein Hindernis auf dem Weg in die Cloud, das Microsoft ebenso wie seine Partner überwinden muss. Es ist das rund drei enttäuschende Fiskaljahre währende „Tal der Tränen“.

Denn der Weg in die Cloud ist nicht nur ein technisches, nicht nur ein marketingtechnisches Abenteuer. Es ist wegen des damit verbundenen Wechsels des Geschäftsmodells vom Lizenzumsatz zu Mieteinnahmen vor allem eine bilanztechnische Herausforderung. Denn die Mieteinnahmen können in den ersten Quartalen den Wegfall der Lizenzumsätze nicht annähernd ersetzen. Bislang waren wir alle in der Lage, den Zeitpunkt zu bestimmen, wann wir den Durchmarsch durch dieses Tal beginnen. Jetzt zeichnet sich ab, dass uns der Markt diese Entscheidung abnimmt. Die sinkenden Umsatzzahlen im PC-Umfeld zeigen dies Microsoft bereits.

Aber für viele Partner – einmal vorausgesetzt, dass sie genug Rücklagen angesammelt haben, um diesen Ritt durchs Tal der Tränen zu überstehen – ist noch überhaupt nicht klar, was sie am anderen Ende des Tales tatsächlich erwartet. Wo liegen die Einnahmequellen in einer cloudifizierten Welt? Wie kann man bestehende Lösungsportfolien in die neue Welt überführen? Und damit auch die Kunden?

Darauf muss diese WPC Antworten geben. Stattdessen hören wir im Vorfeld irritierende Nachrichten. Die Preispolitik rund um SQL Server Lizenzen ist dabei ein veritables Beispiel. Allein in Deutschland haben rund 200 Software-Partner zwischen 400 und 500.000 Lizenzen des SQL Server in den Markt gebracht – in der Regel handelt es sich dabei um die kostengünstige Runtime-Variante, die für die Cloud nicht mehr zur Verfügung stehen wird. Für Kunden und Partner bedeutet das, dass sie die bestehenden OnPremises-Lösungen nicht nur nicht eins-zu-eins in die Cloud verlagern können – sie müssen auch eine wesentlich teurere Variante wählen. Der Kostenvorteil, den der Weg in die Cloud bieten soll, wäre damit bereits aufgebraucht. Was wir dagegen brauchen, sind funktionale Argumente, die sich aus zusätzlichen Services aus der Cloud heraus ergeben. Aber genau hier fehlt es bislang an der gemeinsamen Vision.

Wir Partner haben deshalb ein Cloud Maturity Model entwickelt, das – ausgehend von der aktuellen Nutzungssituation beim Kunden – einen schrittweisen Weg in die Cloud vorsieht und dabei für den Anwender mit jedem Schritt zusätzlichen Nutzen bereithält. Es beginnt mit dem Wechsel von OnPremises in die Cloud – auch in Teilen als Hybridlösung. Es folgt die Ergänzung zusätzlicher Funktionalität – zum Beispiel für die mobile Nutzung – durch Cloud-Services, die von Dritten erbracht werden können. Und schließlich erfolgt der komplette Wechsel auf eine service-orientierte Architektur. Nur auf der Basis eines solchen Wachstumsmodells, das den Kunden und Partnern die Möglichkeit gibt, einen Wechsel in die Cloud überhaupt erst kalkulierbar zu machen, kann die Transition gelingen.

SAP mit Business by Design und auch IBM mit seinen Cloud-Aktivitäten sind zuletzt daran gescheitert, ihren Partnern eine vergleichbare Vision zu vermitteln. Werden wir sie von Ihnen, mein lieber Satya Nadella, nun hören? Ich wünsche es uns allen.

Wir brauchen eine Vision, die „Cloud First, Mobile First“ für die gesamte Ökosphäre umsetzt. Und dann müssen wir sie verbreiten. Erst den Kunden, dann den Partnern.

Customers First, Then Partners

An Open Letter to Satya Nadella

Dear Satya Nadella,

I am sitting in my hotel room in Orlando looking forward to the opening of the Microsoft World Partner Conference today, Monday. The time difference and jetlag have left me unable to get a wink of sleep—and thinking about Microsoft’s future is hardly conducive to sleeping easily…

And yet—to begin with—I am truly impressed by how Microsoft has changed already on your watch as Chief Executive Officer. The slogan “Cloud First, Mobile First” is in my option fundamentally right. I would like to add to it my personal conviction that without mobile there is no cloud computing.

I would further like to add, however, that without a clear vision for the partners in the Microsoft ecosphere there can be no success for Microsoft. That is why this year’s WPC may well be the most important ever. The classic sales streams that were a result of the predominant PC business are starting to dry up. The course corrections toward “Cloud First, Mobile First” that you have ushered in came not a moment too soon. What now matters is to implement them, and that requires a common vision for Microsoft, customers and partners.

This vision is not necessarily apparent. At present, every partner must find his own way to the cloud. The maps that exist are, as yet, inadequate. One point is clear, however. There is an obstacle on the road to the cloud that both Microsoft and its partners must surmount. It is the “Vale of Tears” that lasts for around three disappointing fiscal years.

The road to the cloud is not merely a technical and not merely a marketing adventure. It is, above all, an accounting challenge due to the change of business model from license sales to rental revenues that it involves. In the first quarters rental revenue comes nowhere near to offsetting the downturn in license sales. Until now we have all been able to decide when we embark on the journey through this vale. It now looks as though the market is making this decision for us. Falling sales figures in the PC segment are already showing Microsoft that this is what is happening.

But for many partners—always assuming that they have accumulated sufficient reserves to survive this journey through the Vale of Tears—what actually awaits them at the other end of the vale is still not at all clear. Where are the sources of revenue in a cloudified world? How can existing solution portfolios be carried over into the new world—and with them the customers?

These are questions to which this WPC must provide answers. Instead, what we have heard in the run-up is irritating news. Pricing policy for SQL Server licenses is a case in point. In Germany alone around 200 software partners have marketed 400 to 500,000 SQL Server licenses. As a rule they have been the less expensive runtime version that will no longer be available for the cloud. What this means for customers and partners is that they will not only no longer be able to transfer existing on-premises solutions to the cloud one-to-one; they will also have to switch to a much more expensive version. That alone would use up the cost benefit that going for the cloud is supposed to provide. What we need, in contrast, are functional arguments arising from additional services that are available from the cloud. And that is precisely where a common vision has so far been missing.

That is why we partners have developed a cloud maturity model. Starting from the customer’s current usage situation, it envisions a step-by-step road to the cloud that offers the user additional benefit with each step. It begins with the transition from on-premises to the cloud—partly as a hybrid solution. Then comes additional functionality, such as for mobile use, in the form of cloud services that third parties can provide. Finally, there is the full transition to a service-oriented architecture. Only on the basis of a growth model of this kind that enables customers and partners to cost the transition to the cloud in the first place can the transition succeed.

SAP with Business by Design and IBM with its cloud activities failed not least because they were unable to offer their partners a comparable vision. Are we now about to hear one from you, Satya Nadella? I sincerely hope so for all our sakes.

We need a vision that implements “Cloud First, Mobile First” for the entire ecosphere. And then we must spread it. First to the customers and then to the Partners.

Sincerely Yours,

Heinz-Paul Bonn

AMD–Another Microsoft Device

History, they say, never repeats itself – except, perhaps, as a farce. That really does seem to be the case. A few hundred Bonnblogs ago we wondered what IBM was going to do with its war chest of around $100 bn and whether Big Blue would be able to catapult itself back into the centre of the IT action by means of acquisitions.

Now that Microsoft has a war chest of around $100 bn the question that constantly arises is which takeovers Redmond has in mind and why they might serve to bring Microsoft back to the centre of the cloud-based IT scene. The day before yesterday Salesforce was seen as a likely candidate for a Microsoft takeover; yesterday it was the microchip manufacturer AMD.

The two companies could hardly be more different.

Salesforce with its cloud-based CRM software is undermining established providers of sales support solutions and securing important sources of revenue. Oracle, SAP and indeed Microsoft are not achieving anywhere near the same growth rates in this market segment. It is a highflyer and there is talk of astronomically high takeover prices. The latest figure to be bandied about was a fabulous $60 billion price tag.

Advanced Micro Devices in contrast supplies the Who’s Who of the IT scene with chips and thereby secures important sources of revenue for them. AMD graphics or computing chips power Apple MacBooks, Sony’s PlayStation and Microsoft’s Xbox too. Yet the industry oldtimer is nonetheless valued most cautiously. The current price tag is a mere $1.26 bn.

That is little more than one per cent of Microsoft’s war chest and, conversely, the sum that Microsoft has to pay AMD annually for its Xbox microprocessors. So Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella could hardly go wrong by acquiring AMD, especially as competitors such as Sony or Apple would then face the alternative of either allowing Microsoft to participate in their business success via AMD or building up totally new supply chains.

But did Satya Nadella not just state in his mail to Microsoft employees that it isn’t a hardware company? Did he not repeat that it is a cloud first, mobile first organisation that has enough on its plate to see its own PC business safely into the cloud? Nadella owes his well-filled war chest to the PC product business, which accounts for 40 per cent of Microsoft sales and three quarters of Microsoft profits. The challenge must then surely be to keep Microsoft’s profitability high despite lower future profit margins from the cloud. What that requires cost reductions and not cost drivers like in-house chip production.

The problem for all established companies that are preparing for the cloud is that they have grown large and fat on an inflow of dollars from the licence business, whereas companies like Salesforce, Amazon or Facebook, which have lived under the cloud from the outset, are lean and streamlined in their positioning. Their partner structure is totally different too and does not rely on the traditional cascade model in which the manufacturer, the consultant and the implementer share the licence cake.

They, in contrast, live on complex and multi-faceted relationships between platform and service, between offerings that strengthen each other and on a market presence that builds up reciprocally. They use the dynamics of the cloud rather than the statics of co-marketing. How difficult this has become for Microsoft is indicated by the latest poll of partners, 25 per cent of whom said that Microsoft was their most important supplier, but 70 per cent see Microsoft merely as an important partner among many. The old binding mechanisms no longer work.

IBM also underwent – and suffered from – this trend. After all of its acquisitions in recent years Armonk has been forced to realise that the company is still the same: IBM. Microsoft too will face the same experience, with or without Salesforce, with or without AMD. Change does not come from without and not by means of acquisitions. The transition to a flawless cloud company can only succeed from within and with products that pass on the company’s own heartbeat and that of its employees.

AMD would otherwise just be Another Microsoft Device. And that would really be money poured down the drain.