We all know that relying too heavily on technology can be perilous.  And while most IT pros recognize that software asset management tools in and of themselves don’t represent a “silver bullet” for managing one’s license position, they generally have a long way to go toward establishing, communicating, and enforcing the SAM processes necessary to address the gaps inherent in any technology.  What may surprise you is that even if you believe you have effective SAM processes in place, you’re still not necessarily in the clear.

Let’s assume you’ve finally got all your ducks in a row: You’ve consolidated all your historical license information, established procedures by which new software purchases and entitlement details are thoroughly documented, developed a sound software usage policy, and configured your SAM tool to reconcile all that licensing information with installed software. You feel confident, and you’re ready to tell your boss that your new SAM program is officially “up and running.” 

(more…)

It’s been a big month for the BSA. Since the beginning of March, the BSA has issued press releases documenting five U.S. settlements totaling close to $525,000 (see the list of losers below).  Over the years, I’ve attempted to ferret out patterns that would suggest certain types of organizations may be at higher risk of a BSA software audit; but as usual, the companies involved span a wide range of sizes, geographies, and industries.  The only common thread I can find among all five (aside from the predominance of Adobe and Microsoft software) is an identical string of text embedded within each press release: “BSA was alerted to the unlicensed software use by a confidential report made on its web site www.nopiracy.com.” (Read my recent blog post elaborating on this trend.)

Though it may seem self-serving for software license management vendors such as ourselves to continue harping on the importance of rigorous asset management practices, it’s clear that the message isn’t getting through to many end-user organizations.  In times fraught with layoffs, salary cuts, and a general sense of workplace malaise it’s not reasonable to assume businesses can successfully curb workers’ very human instinct to inflict reciprocal damage upon their impassive corporate leaders—especially when it can be done with the impunity of whistleblower status and the ability to claim the moral high ground. One thing companies can control, however, is the perpetuation of careless, if not downright reckless, software licensing practices. Business executives can add this to the ever-growing list of good reasons to insist upon the establishment of a thoughtful, comprehensive software asset management strategy. It may just be best way to break the BSA’s winning streak. 

(more…)

When the global economy first sank into recession, dozens of reports were published in which technology analysts speculated that software vendors would rely more heavily on software audits—and the resulting financial settlements—to compensate for lower revenues.  In tandem with this, organizations targeted by vendor audits were expected to have a higher rate of non-compliance because software asset management initiatives would be back-burnered—along with the true-ups that frequently come as a result—until budgets were once again secure.

So did these predictions bear themselves out?  From a philosophical standpoint, one could just as easily argue that software companies have a lot more to lose during uncertain economic times by terrorizing their customers.  But the answer would appear to be “yes,” at least in the United Kingdom, where a fair amount of research has been conducted on the topic. (I have yet to come across any specific research suggesting a US or overall global increase in vendor audits.)

(more…)

For anyone in the UK, the Software Industry Research Board (SIRB) has scheduled next year’s UK Software Management and Licensing Conference to take place on 21^st April 2010 at the Madejski Stadium in Reading, Berkshire.  They are conducting some advance research among end-user organizations to guide the content of the workshops.  Whether you plan on attending or not, the conference organizers would appreciate any participation in their software asset management survey that’s representative of likely attendees (those responsible for the commercial and operational management of software licenses).  The deadline for responses is 24^th December 09.ng, Berkshire. 

(more…)

In my last post, I briefly mentioned my view that executive management generally views software asset management as a “non-critical” IT initiative. I am here to argue that, especially in a poor economy, software asset management becomes all the more “mission critical.”  At first blush, I admit this position might seem a bit somewhat self-serving, given that my paycheck hinges on the “enlightened” few IT and business decision-makers in today’s financial climate who agree with me.  But before you abandon ship, allow me to make my case (what software vendor worth its mettle wouldn’t?).

One thing we can agree upon is that there’s very little agreement on what, exactly, “mission critical” means.  Traditionally, it’s understood to mean any activity, process, equipment, application, etc. that’s critical to the daily operations of a company.  In other words, if the mission-critical entity ceased to function, the company itself would cease to operate.  The cynic in me can’t resist pointing out that the less “nuanced” among us often casually sling about the term as a means of fortifying and advancing our own professional agendas.  (By the way, here’s a very rigorous and academic definition of “mission critical” that most C-level execs would never have the patience (or humility) to adopt.)    

(more…)