- When "Good Enough" Is Not Good Enough
- Cisco Systems
Our findings show that although there is a place for building out a low-cost tactical network, the ongoing operations, upgrades, and lack of preparedness to meet new business challenges prove to be hindrances organizations in the long run. Rather than just considering capital costs, organizations must look at total cost of ownership, including their operations, and return on investment (ROI), and also including business capabilities enabled by a strategic network, as they build out their networks to address their business needs for today and tomorrow. Customer and employee experience must also figure into the equation.
As device proliferation continues along with the demand for mobility, the network provides the context for ensuring compliance and security. When coupled with the trend toward virtualization and cloud computing services, the network becomes the common thread that brings all these systems together, providing a consistent flow of intelligence end to end. Looking to the future, as more demanding applications such as video and desktop virtualization become part of everyday business, the strategic role of the network is even more critical. Trading off price for capability and strategic value is a risky proposition and one we have seen fail time and again.
Download Paper
(Webtorials membership required. Click here to register or if you forgot your username/password.)
This paper provides excellent food for thought. In particular, it makes a strong case for looking at what I have often referred to as a "Strategic ROI" as compared to a "Tactical ROI."
In these days of economic pressure on all sides, we are constantly faced with looking for excellent price points. But the true question here is, "How do you get the best price-performance point?" And as part of that performance, how does the ability to evolve the network figure into the equation?
I am sure that you will find this paper useful in itself, but I also hope that you will use this as a springboard for interactive discussion. I'm really looking forward to hearing what you think about the points made in the paper.