Re: [ebxml-dev] Adoption by SMEs

["Michael C. Rawlins" <mike@rawlinsecconsulting.com>]

Mr. Boyle,

Is this a general survey or are you asking me in particular?  In either 
case, I'll bite.

1.  A, B, and C , only strike adoption by individuals.  I only see ebXML 
as being applicable to companies (including one person companies).

2. A and B

3.  A, B, and a few D

4.  I don't like either one, but if I have to choose I'll go with B

5.  Can?  Anything *can* happen, so I'll answer "will?"  In that sense, 
I think A is much more likely than B.

Your expectations are reflected by 1C, 2CD, 3AB, 4B, 5B.  We have pretty 
much the same answers on 1, 3, and 4, and differ on 2 and 5.  Three out 
of five ain't bad, eh?

However, you aren't going to "whup" me on this one.  Issues are 
debatable.  You asked about expectations, which aren't.  (If you're 
keeping score, I won that one ;^) )

Cheers,

P.S.  My comment about the discussion going on long enough?  It was 
about the specific features that QuickBooks offers, and I thought that 
discussion was starting to get a bit silly.  As for "internal 
integration and adoption strategy", I find that topic *extremely* 
germane to this list.


Todd Boyle wrote:

> At 03:17 PM 4/25/02, Michael C. Rawlins wrote:
>
> > If anyone is still reading this thread you're about as sick as I am!
> > (I'm sicker because I'm responding...)
>
> OK then here is a new thread :-)
>
> 1. What is your vision for the adoption of ebXML by individuals and
>    small businesses?
>
> A. when a Big Co. needs it so bad they compel Small Co. to install it,
>    with expenditure large enough to gain compliance by lots of SmallCos.,
>
> B. when an 800 pound gorilla like Microsoft or their application
>    software vendor needs it so bad they push it into Small Co. computer,
>
> C. when SMEs hear thru their community, from many different directions
>    that it is safe, low or zero cost, and has good advantages?
>
>
> 2. WHY will SMEs start adopting ebXML for the first time?
>
> A. because it reduces data entry costs, improves accuracy, etc.,
>
> B. because it gets lower cost suppliers or more customers, or
>
> C. because more and more transaction data such as telephone,
>    internet, banking, wireless, etc. starts being available in ebXML, or
>
> D. because there are some things they cannot buy or cannot
>    sell any other way beside peer-to-peer ebXML messaging and content?
>    (privacy and security improvements, greymarket, avoidance, etc.)
>
>
> 3. What is your expectation of their initial commitment to ebXML?
>
> A. Portal client, for example a Win32 object with a fixed
>    BP configuration, hard wired to a particular vendor or hub,
>
> B. Partial implementation, with limited configurability such as
>    a few CPPs, BPs, and fixed vocabulary such as UBL PO?
>
> C. full implementation ebXML RM, CPPA, RR, CC, BP and supporting
>    layers of XML, DBMS, SOAP, bastion security, PKI, etc., or
>
> D. ASP hosted implementation?
>
>
> 4.  What is your vision for ebXML adoption?
>
> A. rip and replace QuickPeach with a new general accounting
>     package with ebXML (full or partial), or,
>
> B. incremental adoption/nondisruptive install a BCM that runs alongside
>    their general accounting system, synchronizing changes in AR, AP,
>    available/committed cash, inventory and other resources between the 
> two
>    systems, perhaps just sufficient for a particular goal such as
>    increasing sales by receiving POs?
>
>
> 5.  Can ebXML adoption be slow?  How slow can it happen without
>    being left entirely behind by other solutions?
>
> A.  It can happen 1000, 5000, 10000, 25000 in year 1,2,3,4 that's
> a lot faster than OAGIS or any other standard in history...
>
> B.  It must happen 1000, 5000, 10000, 25000 in the first 1,2,3,4th
> quarter, that's still a lot slower than than a Microsoft or Intuit 
> product
> rollout, and **way** slower than hotmail, napster, paypal or other
> truly useful viral things.
>
> [...]
> > At any rate, I think this discussion has gone on long enough and this
> > time I *will* say no more on the topic.  We all have better things 
> to do
> > than to debate a specific vendor's small business accouting package 
> on a
> > listserv intended for ebXML related discussions...
>
> The topic of internal integration and adoption strategy is just as
> important than any other topic on this list,
>
> I know you have expectations regarding ebXML adoption.
>
> How do you think it is going to happen?
>
> I'm gonna whup ya, when you start debating the issues  heh heh! :-)
> The answers are 1C, 2CD, 3AB, 4B, 5B.
>
> I will argue that incremental adoption is how it's got to
> happen, and has to coexist with the SME applications
> having the largest market share.
>
> I will argue that adoption has to happen simultaneously,
> as a very broad-based, grass-roots technology *between*
> small businesses rather than hub-and-spoke in big
> supply chains.
>
> Then these conclusions will imply changes in ebXML architecture.
> The changes are necessary to light a conflagration of lots of
> developers building cheap simple BCMs.
>
> Having fun with this,
> Respectfully,
> Todd
> AR/AP everywhere
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS.
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.ebxml.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>

-- 
Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EC Consulting
www.rawlinsecconsulting.com