NederlandsSAM processes
Many organizations struggle with software licenses and only few succeed in managing software compliance. Often the advice is to get the Software Asset Management processes properly implemented. But then many questions arise. Process models like ISO 19770 or ITIL-SAM identify processes but don’t provide support for specification and implementation. In a series of articles, I will discuss SAM processes and an approach to implement them.
Why SAM processes?
Many, even most organizations, are periodically audited by software vendors. The huge amounts that must be paid for licenses and fines – which are, by the way, in many cases compensated by investments in new, unwanted software – are triggers to reflect. Some organizations choose ‘all you can eat contracts’ (expensive, but no risk for claims afterwards) or doing nothing (accept the cost for the short term and resolve the problem later; don’t cross the bridges before you come to them). The majority select a SAM tool vendor and have them their tool implemented. The implementation approach implies processes but, in fact, limited to the ability of using the software. I know many examples of organizations that after one year are frustrated by the tool and decide to select another tool. In most cases, this decision is not justified. The differences between tools are small and the results will likely be the same the next time. Probable conclusions are that input data is not reliable or SAM operators are not capable to process the data. In both cases implementing SAM processes may be the solution.
Following the first two parts in this series about the journey into SAM I want to talk a little more about the fact that you are only “as good as your information”. This means that when you want to have a reliable or effective SAM practice you first need to get the basic information fully reliable. And just gathering basic reliable information is one of the toughest jobs there is in SAM. So let’s see this step as getting your tickets and preparing your luggage.
I see an increase of SAM experts stumbling over each other with messages to the market where they think a huge SAM battle needs to be fought with expertise. And it must be mind boggling to all those people looking for assistance to select the right expert to help them out. The more I look at it, the more I see three different streams in experts: