Over the past year, I’ve written
extensively about two topics close to my heart: Internet of Things (IoT)
applications and the evolution of the “As A Service” Economy.
In my mind, these two topics are inexorably linked. More accurately, the “business model” bullet
in my IoT Requirements framework is predicated on adoption of As-A-Service
modes of delivery.
Few believe that IoT will take life as
islands of gadgets that exist with the marginal benefit of network connectivity
to “phone home” for updates to their software. Rather, IoT devices will be
knitted into a system that learns and evolves over time. Commercial pressures
will dictate that such systems are brought to reality as a service.
IoT will allow for new forms of decision-making
prompted by events and/or triggers that are initiated by IoT sensors. The
sensing IoT devices - whether monitoring the garage door, regulating Fido’s dog
food consumption, or watching for rainfall in a wheat field - will communicate
their observations. Some devices may take actions autonomously as well, but
they will still communicate.
Once prompted by an IoT sensor, decisions
will be based on input from multiple sources. These sources will include other
IoT sources, contextual factors (e.g., time of day, environmental conditions,
etc.), and relevant sources of insight. That’s the “correlation” reference in
my requirements list.
As each system records decisions and
related effects, it will learn.
This simplistic portrayal, which can be
described for any number of examples, forms the ideal framework to
industrialize, standardize, and scale as a service. In fact, even via “As A
Service” models that exclude IoT - such as processing financial transactions,
administering payroll, or monitoring compliance with regulatory policies - the
same essential steps are taken. This is basic systems discipline: input,
process, output.
The IoT to “As A Service” linkage comes
most prominently at the point of defining the business model. Every device manufacturer who is thinking
about Internet-enabling their products must define the ways through which their
devices are part of a new service value proposition. That “As A Service”
ecosystem may be a proprietary platform that is unique to the manufacturer. More
likely, it will be part of a broader ecosystem that involves other forms of
devices and services.
Does anyone think that the clever new
thermostats that provide remote control of room temperatures are going to
remain constrained to that functionality? I doubt it. Temperature-As-A-Service
isn’t bold enough.
I am seeing more and more IoT examples that
carry the attributes of an “As A Service” mode of operation. These include a
broad set of features that I will describe more completely in a future post,
but which include:
● Multi-tenancy
● Functional modularity
● Data security/Integrity
● Open interfaces (APIs)
● Configurability
● Dynamic capacity provisioning
● Workflow integration
● Committed services roadmap
● Little capital outlay
● Contractual flexibility
● Operating resilience
● Dynamic denial of service resilience
● Surveillance/audit
● Usage/transactional pricing
Peter Allen
has many years of operating experience as a top executive and
strategic advisor for companies of all shapes and sizes, with focus on
technology-enabled business services. He is now a Boston-based Managing
Director at Alvarez & Marsal.
Great article, thanks.
ReplyDelete