BeyeNETWORK - The Global Vision for BI and Beyond

Reasons to Consider Independent Business Intelligence Providers

Published: October 15, 2008

Ted Cuzillo questions whether shoppers should ignore their well-founded skepticism and consider only integrated business intelligence suites or build with the best-of-breed and flexibility in mind?

I don’t buy business intelligence tools, I just keep an eye on the industry, talk to a lot of people and report what I hear. I follow my journalistic nose, and for months now I’ve sensed that something is not quite right.

Take, for example, InformationWeek’s recent portrayal of the market for business intelligence (BI) tools as “down to IBM, SAP, Oracle and Microsoft.”

Really? Whenever I hear such certainty, I get suspicious. This sounds like other recent wisdom we’ve heard: “buy Internet stocks” in the late ‘90s, “buy real estate” two years ago, and “fresh” when your nose tells you it’s not.

Let’s admit, the pitch from the Big Four has a pleasant ring. They want BI shoppers to believe, for one thing, that the family of components is one big happy family. All the parts interact as if made from the same cloth, and they get along the way everyone does in the warm glow of a ‘50s TV comedy.

The trouble is that while sweet promises come and go, failed BI initiatives can leave a bitter taste.

Should shoppers ignore their well-founded skepticism and consider only the Big Four’s integrated suites? Or should they go with their instincts and build with the best-of-breed and flexibility in mind? I went to see what the experts say – and they say plenty.

The top reason I heard for open systems is the ability to mix and match. You can build your own optimal set of tools for your organization's unique needs – with tools you know will work the way you need them to.

The experts agree that you shouldn't leave that selection up to those who design "integrated" suites.

In many cases, the Big Four's solutions just may not be good enough. For example, while IBM offers a complete suite, its data modeling tool is not one of the keepers. "Their data modeling tool is used by three people in the whole world,” says Sid Adelman, of Adelman & Associates. He lists several preferable alternatives, such as tools from CA and Teradata.

You may wonder if you can install a component from another provider into an integrated suite. But that too can be trouble. You may stumble on the platform’s "spider web" of underlying pieces.
Mark Madsen of Third Nature found, for example, that he couldn't run the IBM Solo products intermixed with the BEA products. "They don’t interoperate," he says, "so if you make a bet on one, you make a bet on all.”

“If you went with a stand-alone product, they have everything there,” he said. It’s more modular, which makes it easier to deploy and manage.

Then there's your freedom to apply leverage with a vendor, and ultimately the freedom to walk away.

The allure of bundling is strong. The sales people offer you a discount on one thing if you buy that other thing. You're family, right? You think you might be invited to the big year-end party, or at least get a discount ticket?

“They’ve got you," Adelman says, "and they’re going to think of you as their captive audience.”

Ah, the price increases! One former CTO I talked to recalls a year-over-year jump of 40%.

Imagine a conversation with one of the Big Four. You're playing the captive customer. You complain, and the vendor responds, “What, you don’t like that? You don’t like our support? You don't like the new pricing structure? What are you going to do, wise guy, pull it all out?

You're locked in, along with the expertise that's tied to it.
"Talk about a heart transplant!” Adelman says.

Those who bought open systems switch out at will. They simply say, “Mr. Vendor, we don't like your product. We don't like your pricing. In the next cycle, we're going somewhere else!”

That freedom to adopt better, more advanced tools is critical in the rapidly evolving state of technology. The experts tell me that there's a lot on the horizon and plenty of reason to stay open.
"Really exciting tools are coming along fast,” says Mark Albala, vice president at the CS Solutions consultancy in New Jersey. “There are tons of them.”

Among the "tons" of tiny innovators, he's especially excited about one called Woopra. It's a free service that lets web administrators read data on visitors as they come and go. He also rattles off other names, such as Kognitio and Ab Initio.

The other part of the stack is the platform – preferably an open platform. MicroStrategy is the only one that integrates the innovators cleanly, without the "spider web."

During rapid change, the independent vendors have to listen to customers. Even veterans cannot ignore their customers.

“Customers tend to be able to influence product direction [of independent vendors] more easily,” says Sven Jensen, vice president at the Cambridge, MA, consulting group Sapient.

Meanwhile, not even the experts can say what's going to happen with some recently acquired tools as they're dragged into the new mother company's orbit.

“What will happen to Cognos as it gets sucked into IBM?” Madsen asked. Will it retain its independent database roots or will it be pulled toward DB2?

While acquired BI tools come under the new parent’s influence, some of the bright minds that made those tools what they are drift away. “Some stay for the money,” said an IT manager who’d rather not be identified, “but a lot of those who can leave do.” They’re usually replaced with “company functionaries,” who tend to be complacent.

An independent vendor, by contrast, is powerfully motivated to steer a straight course. Customers are far more assured of a stable platform.

Naturally, there's a downside to buying from independents. People with expertise with some of the less well-known tools can be harder to find.

Even so, I can’t help but conclude that the advantage of a supposedly “integrated” platform is dubious – and that open systems have a clear advantage in today’s steady evolution of tools and processes.