An outsider's view on what's wrong with IBM SWG IM pillar

This is the body of Eric's message. I've just cut and pasted it in to a new post so that we can actually have a dialogue that is on topic. -G We shouldn't doubt these numbers. There might be some inaccuracy but the overall trend is visible. IBM is not really increasing it's marketshare in the DBMS market which is probably not the fault of IDS. This is the consequence of an inefficient non- product related marketing strategy that has currently found it's peak level in the absurd "Smarter Planet" campaign. Many of us have again and again advised IBM that more product-specific marketing strategy is needed. It has been simply ignored. Instead we have been consecutively told that things will improve. From my point of view almost nothing has really improved during the last 3 years and I like many of my colleagues are loosing our patience: a) still no clear positioning of DB2 and IDS While IBM tells the Informix people that IDS is the data server of choice for OLTP, it still performs and publishes OLTP benchmarks with DB2 (LUW). Outside of the Informix world, IBM tells a different story: Take DB2 LUW for everything ! If this fails, which is often the case in environments where database clustering, high availability and replication are key factors, IBM sales might show "Cinderella" (IDS) to the customer before the deal is completely lost. However this tactic doesn't make IBM trustworthy. Customers expect from my IBM a well-funded advice about which IBM product will meet their requirements best. Unfortunately IBM isn't able to do that because of b) b) missing education/certificaton of IBM technical sales specialists on IDS As Mike pointed out several times in the past: There is a GREAT discrepancy in the number of DB2 and IDS certified IT specialists. Allmost all of the heritage Informixer's have been certified on DB2, but not the other way round. And Mike numbers aren't that wrong, I see exactly the same picture here in Germany as well as in the UK. This lack of education results in wrong recommendations to the customer and probably lost deals. How can IBM sales recommend the right product depending on the customer needs if they don't know their own portfolio of data servers ? This is a point that needs to be fixed immediately by the management ! I already pointed that out to IBM management at the IIUG conference last year. "Yes, we know that and we will work on this..." It seems just like another lip service. c) IBM sponsored academic initiatives for DB2, but not for IDS It is obvious that IBM has at least one dedicated employee which job is to travel around the universities worldwide and promote/teach DB2 as already pointed out several times (see http://www.informix-zone.com/node/569). I wonder why this guy can't promote IDS too during his world tours ? Ok, he like any other heritage IBMer, never got certified on IDS (:- But there are many smart Informix people inside IBM that could do the same job for IDS. So it is just a matter of investment from IBM to the same for IDS as they do for DB2. There are many other issues that are suboptimal and need to get improved like the IBM (Informix) website, the lack of Informix specific advertising materials (like cups, pencils, caps, t-shirts...), the still sluggish integration of IDS with other IBM products and and.... The new "branding" - funnily enough nobody outside of IBM heard about that - might be a step in the right direction. But measured on the agility and cleverness of the IBM marketing machine in the past, I'm not really confident that we see a real change. Maybe just another flicker of hope that will probably emerge as an empty promise (:- - no education and certification of the IBM

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > This is the body of Eric's message. And Steve Mills's PA is sitting there thinking "What's an SWGIM Pillar???" :o) -- Cheers, Obnoxio The Clown http://obotheclown.blogspot.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by OpenProtect(http://www.openprotect.com), and is believed to be clean.

On Jan 23, 10:09 am, Ian Michael Gumby <im_gu...@hotmail.com> wrote: Since the last post was a copy of Eric's post, I'm using this post to address some of the points raised. 'a) still no clear positioning of DB2 and IDS ' Yes this is true. I've raised concerns that while Ambush has written a letter which I believe that Eric's InformixZone and the IIUG have had prominently displayed on their website has had no or little impact on the sales and marketing teams. At one point over 2 years ago, there was a rumor that IBM would be doing a published benchmark using IDS. Rather than the 'old standard' TPC-C, when the TPC-E benchmark specifications would be released, they would use IDS for that. Since that statement was made, IBM has released several TPC-C benchmarks on DB2 as well as using Sybase. One would think that in light of Ambush's letter, and the 'message' that IDS was the OLTP engine of choice while DB2 was the DW engine of choice, no one bothered to communicate that to their brethren in the hardware division and those in Information Management who were working with them. I find it hard to imagine that IBM hardware would run a database benchmark without consulting with Information Management. So its not just an issue of making a statement, but making sure that the message gets out to S&D. One would hope that the message was discussed with the pillar sales team which is cross matrixed to S&D so that they can help clarify the message. I agree with Eric that even though Janet Perna left the building at the end of '05, the message of 'lead with DB2' is still the Message of the Day. While this calls in to question the viability of IDS, it also diminishes the credibility of the IBM sales force. Since Steve Mills should be well versed in SSM (Solution Selling Methodology), I don't have to remind him that such a tactic would not only remove IBM from 'column B' it would make sure that they are going to be column fodder going forward. In short, it is the kiss of death to the deal and forces the sales team to further work to supplant column A. 'b) missing education/certificaton of IBM technical sales specialists on IDS ' Yes this is a major, major gap in S&D. After the acquisition, all of the IT Specialists where 'encouraged' to gain DB2 certification. Understandably this was done during the adapted project 'Arrowhead' era. Once 'Arrowhead' was deemed to be impossible, the lack of parity was never addressed. Without a doubt Janet Perna was biased towards her baby, DB2. (I don't think I need to add any details to support this... ;-) In 2006, when Ambush takes charge, outlines their plans for DB2 and IDS, there is nothing being done to change this parity. Oddly enough, to correct the balance so that there are local resources to the sales teams doesn't mean spending a lot of money. (Sure you'd have to send some of the IT specialists... ok the majority of the IT specialists to IDS training) Or the IT specialist could cross train each other and then study to pass the certification exam. The only thing it would take to make this happen is to modify the FLMs' PBCs. That's it. While I'm not sure if Steve Mills or Ambush had spent any time in S&D, its important to point out two facts. Customers choose IBM because of the support they give behind the product. (Aligned and Integrated accounts have dedicated sales teams and IT specialists to help with some of the quick technical challenges that don't require a services engagement.) Customers are hesitant to purchase an IBM product where their local sales team can not support the product. Sales teams are reluctant to sell a product which they do not have local support. So without product knowledge, it is impossible for the aligned and integrated accounts to promote an IDS solution. You can not sell a product that you do not know. 'c) IBM sponsored academic initiatives for DB2, but not for IDS ' I think that this goes back to the fact that Ambush's letter and the stated go to market strategy was never effectively communicated to the sales force. When I was on the IIUG BoD, I asked my contacts about the potential to get grant money to do University or R&D work using IDS. The key reason would be to create market awareness of IDS and how it can be used in certain industries. By creating a solution which can be used in a repeatable sell, IBM would then have the ability to break in to 'white space' accounts. (Like the Chicago Financial community) I know that Eric and I are not alone. Others have approached IBM about helping to jump start campus initiatives. Really, this shouldn't be coming from the community but from the WW Sales and Marketing team. Yes there is more that we can detail about the level of frustration that we have. IBM has set a high target for the upcoming year. While IBM can RIF and Offshore their IGS/BCS back end commitments to lower cost countries, SWG's IM will have a difficult time in making their numbers unless they start working *smart*. DB2 Mainframe revenues are shrinking as customers are moving off the mainframe and when they do, they start to look for alternatives to DB2 in the LUW world. SWG's IM will have to start to think outside the box in order to stay afloat. But hey! What do I know? ;-) Cheers! -G

On Jan 23, 10:14 am, Obnoxio The Clown <obno...@serendipita.com> wrote: > Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > This is the body of Eric's message. > > And Steve Mills's PA is sitting there thinking "What's an SWGIM > Pillar???" :o) > > -- > Cheers, > Obnoxio The Clown > I doubt that. Unless you thought I should have said SWG DB2 ? Maybe she and Steve didn't get the memo either? Or that they thought it would take 3 years from being announced before it went in to effect? (Oh and I'm going to hell for saying that one!)