Skip to main content

Scott Sehlhorst on SaaS

On his Tyner Blain blog, Scott Sehlhorst has a richly informative entry on software as a service (SaaS). What makes his treatment of the topic noteworthy is his focus on practical customer benefit rather than on the hype that typically surrounds SaaS.

Based on Scott's entry, here is how I boil down the problems with licensed software that SaaS solves for customers:
  1. Deployment time and expense. When a new version of the software comes out, it can take considerable time and money to roll the software out, especially in an enterprise environment. With SaaS, upgrades require little or no deployment time or expense for the customer.
  2. Administration time and expense. Typically, when software is installed at an enterprise site, administrators monitor and manage the installation to ensure it is functioning properly. With SaaS, the provider handles site administration.
  3. Lack of accessibility. If the software is installed locally on individual computers, and a customer needs to use software when she is traveling, she must bring a computer with the software installed or rely on installation on other computers. With SaaS, the service is available remotely via the web or another mechanism.
There are other subtle benefits to SaaS. Yet perhaps I've also omitted some major ones?

UPDATE: Paul Young has some additional thoughts.

Comments

Scott Sehlhorst said…
Roger, thanks very much for the shout-out! And great summary. One thing about accessibility - in some ways, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul. You trade the need to access a computer with the software locally installed for the need to have access to the SaaS server (remotely). You need an internet connection. This is changing in interesting ways, between Google Gears, Adobe Flex, and other approaches to allow for disconnected use of traditionally always-connected applications.
Dugg said…
We have found that our large customers are switching to our SaaS applications to avoid specific certifications such as PCI/DSS, GLB, HIPAA and others that can require thousands of hours and millions of dollars to bring their own application environments up to snuff.

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Stop Validating and Start Falsifying

The product management and startup worlds are buzzing about the importance of "validation". In this entry, I'll explain how this idea originated and why it's leading organizations astray. Why Validate? In lean startup circles, you constantly hear about "validated learning" and "validating" product ideas: The assumption is that you have a great product idea and seek validation from customers before expending vast resources to build and bring it to market. Indeed, it makes sense to transcend conventional approaches to making product decisions . Intuition, sales anecdotes, feature requests from customers, backward industry thinking, and spreadsheets don't form the basis for sound product decisions. Incorporating lean startup concepts , and a more scientific approach to learning markets, is undoubtedly a sounder approach. Moreover, in larger organizations, sometimes further in the product life-cycle, everyone seems to have an opinio

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the