Tuesday, 3 May 2016

Planning and Budgeting Cloud Service - Where does it fit in the the IT landscape?



Well, I am in the middle of my first PBCS implementation and this is one blog that I really wanted to put down… I wanted to talk about what a PBCS implementation is actually is like and where exactly in the IT landscape it fits in. I can be completely wrong in my inferences, so do bear with me. Now this is not a sales pitch so the truth is that in PBCS development there will be some days which were very good and we made rapid strides in the application design and development and at the same time there were other days that were agonizingly frustrating. Also, do I see benefit in having PBCS? Yes and no. There is no black and white in this matter. Most of this always boils down to tradeoff. There would be some cases when PBCS wins hands down but at the other end of the spectrum, you would have a situation where on premise planning would be the winner. 

So what exactly is PBCS? Well, I could say it is Planning and Budgeting Cloud service but that really does not capture the essence of what it is. To be more precise, PBCS is simply a Planning environment that is managed by someone else (in this case Oracle) that you can use for a small subscription fees. So where exactly does the benefit come from?

Well, the problem with most data warehousing and business intelligence projects is that the value of money happens very late in the project lifecycle. And if something is going to benefit you late in the life span, it means you need a team that captured all the fundamental assumptions about your business model in the right place and at the right time. One wrong assumption or one misstep in requirement analysis, and you are looking for a sizeable chunk of your investment down the drain with the cost of fixing them potentially on the higher side of things.

This is exactly where PBCS can come to the rescue. With PBCS, since it is a managed environment that is given to you, all you have to do is get your business model in place. No investment in server and database and the whole baling wire that comes with any EPM install. All that now needs to be done is get the business model in place. And I can tear down my business model time and again until I have an application that captures the exact metrics that I wanted from it. Once the business model is in place, you can enroll the core set of users who understand the model inside out. This will ensure that the environment is constantly evolving and the Darwinian principle kicks in ensuring the best remains and the non-core features get eliminated out. Since I have an environment that is managed by third party vendor, all that I as business need to worry about is getting my business model right.

The main disadvantage of PBCS that is see is that since it is a subscription based system, it will have a tipping point where the benefits of having a rapid development environment would not be suitable for a huge budgeting and forecasting solution or if I have a sound development plan for five plus years. This is bound to happen. The best example I can give for this is what I call the cab versus car phenomenon. Suppose I travel only by cab and initially I used to travel only once or twice far apart. In that case, it does not make sense for me to have a car since I initially have a high cost of investment involved and that too for a couple of journeys. Now suppose that travelling by cab takes my fancy and I am regularly travelling in a cab. There will be a point when the initial high cost of investment is not that high anymore and I am burning a lot more cash travelling through cab than I would if I had my own car. 

Now, to put in a bit more EPM-ish language, both in-premise and PBCS are parts of the same ecosystem whose main purpose is to help business perform better by getting a grasp of their own data and derive meaningful insights from it. If I have a sound development plan backed by adequate financial and technical resources and I am pretty sure that all the business drivers are suitably accounted for in my model, I would strongly suggest to go for the in-premise application simply because it would allow a lot more customization than a PBCS application would ever give.

However, if I am not very sure of the business model since there is a lot of variability or if the initial cost is too high for me, I would recommend that you go for the PBCS implementation since it will give me some grasp of the business model and I can have iterative developments planned to finally reach my desired business state model after trial and error. 

This is the first take that I have on PBCS. Comments and feedback are welcome. I would also be talking about the development team that is needed for a PBCS implementation, but more about it later.

No comments:

Post a Comment