Are Information Cards and OpenID appropriate for B2B?

I previously asked the question if Microsoft truly wants Information Cards to be sucessful. Today, I will explore another B2B scenario that both Microsoft and the OpenID community should seriously consider...



The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has a publication (800-63) that defines four Levels of Assurance for electronic authentication. There are ways to incorporate this notion into SAML but not user-centric identity models.

Wouldnt it make since for the Microsoft do define an element in the WS-SecurityPolicy document where a Relying Party (RP) could define what level of assurance it requires?

The Identity Provider (IDP) should be able to interpret the required security policies of the relying party in this regard and then require the user to use a credential that has been proofed to this level.

By not reducing these types of concerns down to a single attribute, it requires the relying party to have complex logic to derive this type of concern. Even then, it still requires lots of interactions in terms of legal agreements with identity providers whom will all have their own take on the problem.

Kim Cameron, Mike Jones and others could put this one down quickly...

The value of Industry Analyst Relations

I have been following Barbara French of Tekrati and Carter Lusher of SageCircle on Twitter, both of whom help analyst relations professionals get better at interacting with industry analysts. Observing this conversation from an end customer perspective brings about a perspective that is less documented. Today, I will share a few observations.



In my interaction with analyst firms such as the Burton Group, Forrester, The 451 Group and others, I think it is nirvana to repeatedly find an analyst that can understand technology deeper than their clients. However, reality is far from nirvana in that the value proposition of analysts is more about offering insight that us end customers either cannot do for ourselves because we only have a single lens (our own business) or it would be too costly to develop ourselves.

Increasingly, at annual review time, many enterprise end customers in my network have complained about the trend of their bosses turning their strengths into weaknesses. Whether this is good for business is up to the reader. What I can say that sometimes in the world of analysts, this weakness can become a strength when leveraged appropriately. Sometimes, the best peer reviews and insight don't come from tenured senior industry peers but those who ask innocent questions that the rest of us take for granted. I have changed more presentations because my eight year old sons commentary in one year than I have from feedback from executives.

So, if I put aside ego for a moment, one has got to ask the question of analyst interaction with analyst relations folk. Maybe there is merit in an analyst relations context to help shape a new analyst where they may be new to the profession over working with seasoned professionals. If you are going to measure influence, wouldn't the best model be to influence those who are new and don't yet have a strong informed opinion?

Another general observation I have had regarding industry analysts in general is that typical background is usually one of two categories. First, there is the typical graduate from a journalism background who is really good at writing research reports that read well. Journalism teaches a person how to recognize general industry trends which can be beneficial to making the right strategic purchases. The second category are analysts who come from end-customer client organizations where they grew up in the trenches and can go a lot deeper into understanding the struggle that buyers of technology face. The analyst relations model needs to treat these two audiences differently, but more importantly need to figure out what type of analyst benefits their vendor's strategic intent.

In case you haven't noticed, we are in a recession and modern CIOs arent struggling with how to purchase SAP or other large dollar multiple year packages. They are however struggling with how to optimize their processes, how to leverage the technology they already have, and novel ways to innovatively deploy products they have installed in their data centers. This clearly gives analysts who are practitioners an advantage over their journalist peers in most scenarios. The question that analyst relations firms aren't asking themselves are whether they are gravitating towards journalism simply because it is easier to understand how to interact with because it feels like your existing marketing program with a few tweaks.

One may ask why does an Enterprise Architect for a Fortune 100 enterprise care about industry analysis in general and analyst relations specific. The answer to this question is deceptively simple. Industry analysts are one of the few professions where one is a participant in a continual process of reinventing oneself as experts. Technologies change, the business change, the coverage areas change, etc. This skill is something that is beneficial for any and every Enterprise Architect to observe, understand and emulate. I have observed the likes of Brenda Michelson, JP Morgenthal, James Kobeilus, Andrew Jacquith, Anne Thomas Manes, Nick Selby and others successfully transformed throughout their career and at some small level I want to learn their secret...

Transforming India from Good to Great

Some simple thoughts on how India can improve its position in the world of information technology...



Corporations such as IBM, Oracle and Microsoft are expanding their global presence and not just outsourcing work to India unlike their enterprise peers, but acknowledging that they want the best talent regardless of geographic location of which India is just one of many beneficiary countries.

Many corporations with research arms, leverage India for low-cost access to people where there are lots of young, bright well educated individuals who have passion around technology and the desire to learn. Over time, people from India diversify to other parts of the planet and take advantage of opportunities to visit other research centers. A typical observation is that they may arrive with a degree from their home country but will leave with postgrad or doctoral programs from their host countries.

Once the mind has been expanded with possibilities that for a variety of reasons aren't explored in India, the country loses its best and brightest. Universities in India seem to be less flexible in terms of their curiculum than their US counterparts and are under control of private trusts which constrains their greatness. In the same way that the United States has benefited from education innovation, such as the University of Phoenix, India can benefit as well if it were to permit this model.

India also seems lacking when compared to the US model in that corporations in India have less of a sense of endowments and therefore are more heavily reliant on government grants and student tuition. As we all know, with the exception of the military, the government can only achieve mediocrity at best.

India needs a system where proper stimulus is received from their corporations (think Wipro, Infosys, etc) and given in quantities a lot higher than what has been done to date where it is targeted at undergraduate programs. India has an additional advantage over US universities and that is to leveraged the untapped Indian diaspora. Imagine what could happen if Indian universities started opening branches in countries such as Trinidad, Guyana and Suriname. Expanding the sphere of influence can only help a nation become more than itself...