Please complete all required fields!
9 March 2021: Dropbox has acquired DocSend for US$165 million. This is a welcome addition to managing the risks associated with information management in a collaborative environment.
Why it’s Important
Dropbox’s acquisition is not about organic growth, as DocSend’s client base of 17,000 users is dwarfed by Dropbox’s estimated 600 million. The deal is more about positioning Dropbox against the likes of Adobe Document Cloud, by allowing organisations to track what happens to information once it is shared. Being able to manage and track document access is a critical aspect of modern, enterprise-grade file sharing which is needed for secure collaboration. It is a feature missing in most collaborative platforms - at least out of the box.
Being able to manage access and track who’s accessed a document is a good start for closing the governance issues of most collaborative platforms (e.g. Teams, Slack, Zoom, Zoho, etc.) However, organisations should look at adopting a zero trust model for information assets, involving identity management linked to access controls and an ‘encrypt everything by default’ mentality.
Related IBRS Advisory
Read more ...
Fear of missing out (FOMO) drives information and communication technology (ICT) leaders to look at new ICT applications with the promise of greater benefits. Many organisations then fail to maximise the value of their existing applications and Power BI is no exception. Hidden under a Microsoft enterprise agreement, organisations and staff are often unaware of Power BIs full capabilities.
Excel still remains a default position for most data analytics. The main reason is familiarity and flexibility to construct, but it has limited access to data warehouses making it less efficient as a business intelligence (BI) tool. Complex problems require multiple spreadsheets to capture and analyse data from multiple sources. Changes are often tedious and time-consuming.
To generate meaningful business insights, ICT leaders need to initiate the use cases and upskill staff with BI tools such as Power BI which are capable of agility and real-time value add.
Conclusion: Agility to respond to change has become essential. Compared with previous years, CIOs are expected to produce results over longer periods of time, now expectations have become much higher. Stakeholders are expecting results as soon as possible. With the trend geared towards an increase in technology dependence, the pressure of delivering results has therefore increased for CIOs and IT leaders.
Part of this new set of expectations is improved efficiency and productivity, which in most cases requires a thorough evaluation of business processes to garner potential inefficiencies. One of the primary tools organisations have at their disposal is the enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems. Eventually, it all boils down to whether or not the migration to S/4 HANA can be justified in terms of value-add-services. Implementation effort and run costs are only a part of the business case, not the whole.
Conclusion: Many organisations have implemented collaboration and in particular video-conferencing facilities to support critical business operations in response to managing the COVID-19 pandemic. While remote workers have embraced these platforms with enthusiasm, organisations have had little opportunity to govern the use of these platforms due to the need to roll them out quickly. As end-users push forward with sharing confidential data and video across many teams, issues of data access rights, data confidentiality and employee confusion will emerge. Unless organisations put in place appropriate governance on their collaboration platform, the full benefits of the platform will not be realised.
Chargeback of enterprise-wide ICT costs were developed to assign ICT costs to the point of usage. The outcome is twofold; it ensures the initial allocation of ICT assets and services are identifiable, and it enables reallocation of underutilised or unnecessary services. This relies on IT creating assets and services which are commodified and transferable.
A chargeback arrangement can increase tension between ICT and the department managers. Allocating all ICT costs to achieve a zero-sum IT department can exacerbate that tension. Making IT fully responsible and accountable for IT costs can create insular behaviours which stifle innovation and investments in new IT services for departments. Departments will feel entitled to explore ICT improvements without an effective relationship with IT. Creating a chargeback governance model that manages disputes and builds trust in the process is preferable.
Login to read your premium content.