SAP adopts Oracle strategy, Oracle’s problems

by Dennis Byron on October 10, 2007

In acquir­ing Busi­ness Objects (BOBJ), the con­ven­tional wis­dom is that SAP (SAP) has given in and adopted Oracle’s growth strat­egy. I actu­ally think the acqui­si­tion was still more tac­ti­cal (what SAP calls “tuck-in”) than strate­gic. It’s just that the tuck requires let­ting out more than a few holes in the belt. But, with­out chang­ing strat­egy, SAP has bought into many of Oracle’s tech­ni­cal prob­lems. That might be more an issue than if SAP had sim­ply changed acqui­si­tion strategy.

First, did the acqui­si­tion rep­re­sent a strat­egy change or a tac­ti­cal move con­sis­tent with the already announced tuck-in strat­egy? At the con­fer­ence call, Hen­ning Kager­mann con­firmed that this was not a change and check­ing past con­fer­ence calls, I agree. Because of SAP’s own pres­ence in busi­ness intel­li­gence (BI) and ana­lyt­ics, the acqui­si­tion only slightly increases the “address­able mar­ket” SAP is aim­ing at for 2010 (from $70 bil­lion to $75 bil­lion). But it does allow much faster pen­e­tra­tion of what SAP calls the enter­prise “busi­ness user” role, in the first leg of the strat­egy stool, grow­ing SAP’s busi­ness process plat­form busi­ness. Kager­mann esti­mated that the acqui­si­tion accel­er­ated time to mar­ket rel­a­tive to the business-user role by at least a few years. SAP made the anal­ogy that this acqui­si­tion increases busi­ness user pen­e­tra­tion in the same way that the ear­lier Versa, Pilot and Out­look­soft acqui­si­tions did.

The acqui­si­tion does not change SAP’s other two strate­gic legs: enter­ing the small/medium enter­prise (SME) ERP mar­ket with Busi­ness ByDe­sign (BBD) and grow­ing SAP’s mid­dle­ware busi­ness (already over $1B annu­ally and on tar­get to over­take Ora­cle). These sec­ond two objec­tives are actu­ally big­ger pieces of SAP’s 2010 growth objec­tive than the business-user role expan­sion enabled by the Busi­ness Objects acquisition.

But the big­ger issue is that SAP now faces many of the same incom­pat­i­ble archi­tec­tural chal­lenges faced by Ora­cle with its many acqui­si­tions. At the con­fer­ence call, the talk was all about keep­ing Busi­ness Objects inde­pen­dent and only lever­ag­ing syn­er­gies in busi­ness infra­struc­ture. For exam­ple, Busi­ness Objects might drop salesforce.com (CRM) and become a BBD user.

But prod­uct infra­struc­ture was also men­tioned with some tan­ta­liz­ing hints that the two enti­ties are already think­ing about things like incor­po­rat­ing BI Accel­er­a­tor into the Busi­ness Object suite for exam­ple or hav­ing the Busi­ness Objects suite use SAP’s mas­ter data man­age­ment NetWeaver func­tion­al­ity. The Oracle-like anal­ogy is that Busi­ness Objects was only just begin­ning to nor­mal­ize the four sep­a­rate archi­tec­tures in its suite, and SAP had not yet inte­grated Pilot and Out­look­soft into BW. The whole line-up is a mish­mash of prod­ucts that were not sched­uled to come together for four-six more months even when the com­pa­nies were sep­a­rate. Assum­ing this mish­mash can be decom­posed into true ser­vices and re-hosted in a ser­vices ori­ented archi­tec­ture (SOA), this will be a good test of NetWeaver’s enter­prise SOA capability.

There was also talk of a joint port­fo­lio of industry-specific BI prod­ucts, which Busi­ness Objects lacks as dis­cussed here last month. There was also a lot of talk about that old term, Oper­a­tional BI, com­bin­ing SAP’s ERP with BI.

Although not men­tioned in the con­fer­ence call, there was also a lot of blather in the blo­gos­phere about this being some kind of EU play. Let’s see what Neelie Kroes of the EU Com­pe­ti­tion Com­mis­sion (EU CC) thinks of the deal? If the EU CC fails to look at this acqui­si­tion after squash­ing GE and Hon­ey­well a few years ago, it will prove that the EU is not anti-competition, just anti-American.

–Den­nis Byron

Tags: busi­ness intel­li­gence, ERP, ser­vices ori­ented archi­tec­ture, NetWeaver, EU

Tags: , , , ,

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: