As you probably know by now, and as reported by ebizQ, Oracle Corp. plans to acquire Hyperion Solutions Corp. Herewith, some thoughts on that planned acquisition, and its implications for BPM.
Oracle makes databases. Oracle also makes software that analyzes information in databases and, it is hoped, delivers analyses that help to inform better business decisions. This is frequently called "business intelligence" (BI).
Hyperion makes software that analyzes and reports on indicators of how well the business infrastructure is performing – and, directly and indirectly, how well the supporting IT infrastructure is performing. Those reports are intended to help decision-makers improve business performance. This is frequently called "business performance management" (BPM, at least frequently enough to cause confusion with business process management, about which more very soon now, as well as here previously.)
Oracle and Hyperion have said that companies are increasingly combining business intelligence and performance management functionality. Perhaps. I would argue that there are probably more companies doing neither, and many companies doing one or both, but only in limited fashion, and not necessarily well.
However, one of the clear and unarguable benefits of the Oracle-Hyperion link-up is stated fairly clearly in the "Letter to Hyperion Customers" posted at what is still, so far, the Hyperion Web site.
"The proposed combination extends Hyperion's capabilities beyond the finance department with operational analytic applications and complementary BI tools from Oracle. Oracle customers will gain access to Hyperion's best-of-breed performance management solutions and to our domain expertise in financial management."
By my lights, this is at the core of much of what's going on among BPM-related vendors, and what's affecting many user strategies. Vendors are trying to extend the reach of their particular solutions – and their "control" over those user "accounts" – by acquiring and/or allying with providers of additional functionality. Users, meanwhile, are trying to identify areas where BPM-related functionality is flourishing – within, say, IT and/or financial departments – and to replicate and scale those successes.
So this may actually be one of those lucky times when vendor and user needs and incentives are fairly closely aligned. What users need are policies, proven practices, and technologies that together help them know enough about current processes and their interdependencies to achieve continuous improvement of those processes. Business activity monitoring (BAM) and optimization, analytics, BI, and other previously disparate takes on this challenge are instead, I believe, elements of larger concepts discussed here previously. These include business knowledge management (BKM), human-centric BPM, and human interaction management, among others.
Smart vendors, such as Oracle and Hyperion, are reading the tea leaves and responding accordingly, from their respective strengths. Users have to be their own industry analysts (and work closely with the full-time industry analysts their companies engage) to differentiate such alliances and acquisition from those driven more from desperation or necessity. If vendors appear to be working together or merging while adoption of their independent offerings is stagnant or decreasing, this may be a sign.
Meanwhile, IT and BPM decision-makers at enterprises already using Oracle and Hyperion solutions stand to gain greater integration, of those solutions and the services that support them. Those decision-makers at enterprises using competing comparable solution sets may want to call upon their chosen vendors, and demand information about how they intend to respond. Please let me know how they do respond, and how you respond to those responses. Meanwhile, vendor evolution continues…
Leave a comment