What Is This COE Thing?

Since joining Oracle, I've heard this same question repeatedly:  "This Oracle HCM Cloud Center Of Excellence team you've joined...what do they do?"  So I thought I'd attempt to answer that question here in the hopes that people may get some benefit from it.

Be aware that you can search the web and find many definitions regarding a Center of Excellence is and what it does.  Forget that stuff, most of it does not apply here.  We're creating an entirely different model.

Our team does not create any of the core elements of the Cloud HCM product: the software nor the service.  We focus on making all aspects of the product better.  At the risk of using language that is already overused in enterprise software, we work to make the customer experience better.  And the work is a mix of strategic initiatives and responses to current issues.

Some of our typical activities include:

• Providing internal tools and processes for improved delivery of software services
• Serving as functional and technical experts for strategic customers with unique challenges
• Creating aids and solutions to help customers move from subscription to Go Live better, faster and cheaper
• Give feedback to Product Development on wide-spread product issues that may lead to solutions within Cloud HCM products
• Guiding strategic partners about products, methodologies, and current issues through regularly scheduled "cadence calls".

The upshot is that our team is located at the intersection of product development, delivery, and service.  We're a team of experts in all aspects of Oracle Cloud HCM and we apply that expertise wherever it's needed: internal Oracle teams, strategic partners, and customers.

So there you have it.  That's what we do.  And we're ready for you when you need us. So question answered...I hope...you can let me know in the comments.

About Bugs

Been a few weeks since I last checked in.  Onboarding with Oracle has been like drinking from a data firehose, so I've been a bit pressed for time...

As I write this, I'm sitting out on my backyard patio right around sundown.  It's been unseasonable warm here in Utah of late, so the flying bugs are out in abundance.  While they're a bit irritating, they're not the type of bugs I have on my mind this evening.  I'm thinking more about software bugs.

I design a software bug as a flaw that causes said software to perform differently than designed or intended.  Simple definition for my simple mind, I suppose.

One of the eye-opening insights in having an insider's perspective at Oracle has been looking at software bugs.  Not the volume of bugs so much as the type of bugs.  If I apply my simple definition of a software bug, over half the logged bugs are not really bugs at all.  The software is working as designed or intended, but we're not seeing the expected result.  Could be any one of a number of reasons:  applying the software incorrectly due to lack of knowledge, desire for features not provided, violation of business rules, data quality flaws in converted or interfaced data, errors in writing data...the list goes on and on.

Wading through this data, I see a couple of trends.  First, it's pretty obvious that enterprise software vendors could do a better job of educating and enabling customers and partners on how their software works...especially from a systems engineering perspective.  Second, the industry needs better tools for evaluating data quality prior to converting or interfacing data between data sources...a symptom of the old "garbage in, garbage out" rule.

If we could improve in this area, think of the reduced workload for application developers.  Keep in mind that most enterprise software application development teams are dealing with at least four application versions simultaneously:  the previously released version(s) in the field, the latest release in the field, the next release being built, and the design work for the release after the version currently being built.  Anything we can do to alleviate the bug resolution workload allows vendors to apply that extra bandwidth in ways that will shorten release cycle times...something everybody wants.

I'm sure there are more trends to add to the list.  You have a contribution to make?  The comments await.

Know What Ya Got

There are two extremely bad decisions commonly made with enterprise software, and I see both take place every day.

This doesn't work the way we expect.  File a bug.

Over the years, my own experience tells me that two-thirds of bugs filed aren't really bugs.  What we really have is a user who fails to understand how the software works.  And, yes, we can always respond with RTM (or worse), but the stream of bugs that aren't bugs continues to be filed.  Stop for a second and imagine all the software development productivity lost in addressing bugs that aren't bugs.  And we wonder why it takes so long to introduce new releases and features?

This doesn't work the way we expect.  We'll have to customize the software.

We're not talking about extensions or bolt-ons.  We're talking about changing the code delivered out of the box.  Seems like around 75 percent of Oracle enterprise applications customers customize delivered code in one way or another.  SaaS will cut this number way down, but it's still widely prevalent throughout the installed customer base of Oracle enterprise applications.

Why is customization bad?  First, it means a customer must have a team of developers to build and maintain the customization through it's lifecycle.  It's that maintenance part that gets really costly...each new update, each new release, each new expansion require testing and likely some change to the customized code.  And here comes the incredibly crazy part of customization:  I would confidently bet my lungs against yours that over two-thirds of those customizations are unnecessary to accomplish the purposes of the customer.  Because the software out of the box already has the functionality to achieve business goal in mind...but it's likely a new way of doing things, and many folks don't want to change.  Even when the change might be better.  So we customize the code.

What to do?

As a very young man, I spent some time as a Boy Scout.   I was a really lousy Boy Scout.  Nothing that I liked about the entire thing.  Later on, after I grew up, I developed a great appreciation for Scouting as a Scout Master.  Nevertheless, I was a lousy Scout and resented my folks for putting me through it.

My Scout Master was retired military.  Lots of gruffness at a time when I just wasn't ready for that. Only one thing he ever taught us stuck with me:  "when you realize you're lost, take a breath, know what ya got, and figure out how to use what you've got to get yourself unlost."

Years later, I got lost in the woods.  The advice from that Scout Master saved my life.  And it's been a great principle for me ever since, in many situations:  "know what ya got."

Most enterprise customers today don't know what they've got.  That knowledge gap leads to filing bugs that aren't really bugs and building customizations when existing functionality gets the job done.  And telling customers to RTM adds almost now value (heck, even most of the people building the software dread reading those things).  If those of us in the industry want our customers to succeed with our products, we have to help by showing and telling.  Which also means we have to earn the trust of our customers, because showing and telling achieves nothing if the audience fails to engage.

So you want to reduce the bogus bug filings?  Cut back on customizations that slow everyone down? Work with your customers.  Customer success starts there.

The Golden Path

Geek Warning:  The Golden Path is a term in Frank Herbert's fictional Dune universe referring to Leto II Atreides's strategy to prevent humanity's ultimate destruction.

Just back from a little "stay-cation".  My batteries were running a little low, so it was good to recharge for a bit.  The #Beat39 theme continued to roll around in my brain and I want to share a predominant line of thinking from that.

Back in the olden days when Oracle was first developing Fusion Applications, they made a big effort to discover common threads of business practices across a range of industries and organizations. Processing invoices, controlling inventory, managing employee performance reviews, completing projects, billing customers...it's a long list of common business practices and common activities.

The result of that effort was a set of common "best practices", by industry, that were baked into Fusion Applications.  That collection of best practices became known as the Oracle Business Process Model ("Oracle BPM").  You can see an example for the Project Portfolio Management Suite here.  As Fusion Applications have evolved into Oracle Cloud Application Services (Oracle's SaaS offerings), Oracle BPM has evolved right along with it.  You'll find the latest Oracle BPM in Oracle SaaS.

Back in the really olden days, customers and their implementation partners would generally follow a three-step implementing strategy:  1) understand the customer's current business process; 2) design the customer's future business process; 3) implement enterprise software to model the customer's future business process as closely as possible.

With today's SaaS applications, customers may be better served by following a different strategy: 1) configure a SaaS zone and test the "baked in" business processes with an eye toward utilizing those processes in your own organization; 2) address and resolve any business process gaps; 3) test and go live.  In short, maximize your use of enterprise software in the way the software was designed to be used, business processes and all.  Being open to business process change is the "Golden Path" to a successful SaaS implementation.

While this idea is nothing new, it's a pretty fundamental shift in perspective.  Thoughts?  Comments welcome.

Beat 39

Let's start today's thought with a tidbit from the Standish Group's 2013 Chaos Report.  In that report, the Standish Group cheerfully shares that IT project success came in at 39%...cheerful because that is an improvement.  In other words, 6 out of 10 IT projects are failing to meet schedule, cost and quality objectives and we're thinking that's good news.  Yikes!!!

If we look at the numbers in SaaS carefully - regardless of vendor - we see a pretty consistent gap between sales and "go live".  Guess how large the gap is?  Yeah, about 61%.  Arithmetic anybody?  Granted that my access to data is somewhat limited here but, even with my small sample size, it's one of those things that make me "stop and go hmmm".

The upshot?  In the developing space of SaaS, I think we may have all underestimated the level of difficulty in implementing those nifty SaaS applications.  At the very least, it seems like we're missing the boat on how to move from vision to achievement.

Enablement.  SaaS customers need tools that ease the implementation and use of the applications.  And preferably things that scale...inventing the tool every time you tackle the project buys nothing but headaches.  But I think good tools for enablement are the key if we're ever going to "Beat 39".

More on this in later posts.  I think I may be focusing on this for a bit.