I recently met a friend of mine, a senior executive at a well-known financial services firm, and we soon found ourselves mulling over today’s tough business climate and the weakening U.S. economy. As veterans of this industry, we’ve weathered tough times before, but this time feels much different. Organizations today are fighting to win customers on a global basis, and have spent a small fortune on CRM implementations in an attempt to provide a better customer experience.

However, these systems are not able to automate the numerous customer touch points in a consistent manner -- one that’s capable of leveraging and protecting their brand and providing a truly unique and informed customer experience. It's a missed opportunity and one that organizations are desperate to resolve.

Worse, customer’s expectations have grown to the point that they expect organizations to speak to them at “the audience of one” level and convey high quality communications at each and every touch-point. Companies like Amazon have excelled in personalizing the customer experience to the point that customers are now asking themselves, “If they can do it, why can’t you?”

Solutions such as dynamic enterprise publishing or “transpromotional” (TransPromo) marketing are earning a seat at the table for many organizations as it enables them to reduce costs and to increase revenue-enhancing activities. These offerings primarily focus on interactive content and transactional output capabilities with proactive marketing which allows an organization to maximize document white space, manage and leverage multi-channel distribution, combine content from multiple sources while creating interactive two way communications.

Large companies are leveraging technology in order to provide the same level of service as the neighborhood mom and pop shop and are delivering personalized and customized customer communications in a process the analyst community call TransPromo.

The true power and ultimate value of TransPromo is its ability to integrate and manage communications across all channels to generate a unified and meaningful customer experience that meets regulation requirements. By creating a consolidated enterprise strategy that supports reusable content, organizations can achieve a meaningful customer relationship that translates into long term loyally and improved profitability across the enterprise.

While streamlined processes and simplified support and infrastructure reduce operational costs, faster time to market, quicker response to changing conditions, and finer control of customer communications all increase revenue opportunities. Not a bad conversion rate considering today’s economy.

StreamServe is a global leader in dynamic document composition, delivery, and document management software solutions for ERP and CRM systems.

On Tuesday, January 22^nd, HP announced that they have acquired our #1 competitor which we view as yet another example of the continued market validation for document creation, management and delivery. In case you missed it, at the end of 2007, EMC acquired Document Sciences for $85m which clearly set the trend. The value of “transactional” document management is becoming a critical must have in many large organizations. “Transpromo”, as it is being referred to (Transactional Promotion), is the next area of growth that has evolved out of the output management or document management market.

Market leaders like StreamServe and Exstream have created a high growth niche around high volume printing and the ability to compose, manage and deliver content. 90% of all the content in virtually every company is a static, scanned image--its dead and it desperately needs to be brought to life. HP has decided they need to be in this space, but from a “printing” angle and for years, they have tried to figure out what to do with a technology they had called “Dazzle”. This was basically print spooling software guaranteeing delivery of a document to a printer. So now HP acquires Exstream to replace Dazzle and help drive the printing business even further.

HP is clearly shopping for software angles to drive hardware sales. That’s great for HP, but not customers. ERP, CRM and ECM vendors have been trying to extend the business process to utilize bills, invoices, packing slips, correspondence, or virtually any document for campaign and promotional purposes. Yet this should not require specific hardware or design tools. It should be open, best of breed, flexible and not aligned to the bottom of the tech food chain – the printer.

One would think companies that are directly associated with documents, content creation and output would be the first to the acquisition table. If I were Adobe, I’d be looking over my shoulder. First EMC buys a document composition product to integrate with its content (Documentum) and now HP loads the gun with Exstream to drive more composition, printing and ink. HP has been acquiring lots of creation tools. Sounds like what Adobe does (and better than anyone else in my opinion) to me.

In today’s highly competitive business environment, smart companies recognize the value of each and every customer and they are trying to demonstrate that value by providing personalized, highly relevant documents and by communicating with them down to the “audience of one” level. Organizations, across industries, believe in the power of 1-to-1 marketing and now so does EMC and HP. We believe it’s only a matter of time before other, more closely aligned vendors, will get in the game because their customers will demand it. But the real question is what’s taking so long?

StreamServe is a global leader in dynamic document composition, delivery, and document management software solutions for ERP and CRM systems.

Matt Szulik, the longtime CEO of Red Hat stepped down yesterday relinquishing his position to an unknown executive in the software business (the COO of Delta Airlines).

Matt and I met in 1980. We were both hired in the Boston office of Exxon Office Systems. This was back in the days of the first Fax machine (Qwip), the first electronic typewriter (Qyx) and the first Word Processor (Vydec). Exxon bought these companies in hopes of diversifying from Oil. They still did pretty well with oil, sucked at computers though. We still had fun.

When we both left Exxon, our paths diverged but remained in the software business to this day until he ended up at Red Hat and I landed at Novell. Matt was gracious, professional and as always, aggressive. In 2002 we (Novell) bought Red Hat’s competitor, SuSe Linux. I certainly didn’t win any renewed friendship with Matt over that move, but Red Hat just got stronger thanks to Matt’s limitless social and professional drive to win.

Matt personified Open Source. He wasn’t a talking head, he emotionally believed in what he was trying to do. He did the change the world.

Best of luck to you and your family.
Chris

StreamServe is a global leader in dynamic document composition, delivery, and document management software solutions for ERP and CRM systems.

Disclaimer – I have been a proponent of open source since 1997. It’s a terrific development model. It’s a lousy distribution model…so far. I am worried that this model will collapse under its own weight. The following is my opinion:

Problem #1
Advocates of the GPL seem to care most about the freedom of the community and not the fact that programmers need to eat, buy clothes and buy plasma TV’s. This means they need money.

Don’t programmers get satisfaction when their software is used it for *anything*? Does it really matter if it’s free, commercial, open or proprietary? Aren’t we taking the meritocracy just a bit too far? I think the GPL is beginning to slow down and hamper open source adoption for exactly the reason it was created. It’s time to change.

Problem #2
The GPL effectively prohibits any sort of commercial use. With version 3 due out soon, it gets even more restrictive because of the Microsoft/Novell patent tax pact. The BSD and MIT licenses do not prohibit commercial use. That means that it is possible for someone to make money off of them, i.e., to eat, buy clothes, buy plasma TV’s.

The GPL attempts to force people and businesses to release their source code. Okay, but that doesn’t mean it’s free. It’s free as in a puppy is free. If a closed-source company decides to use some GPL open-source code in its product, the company will do one of three things:

• use the open-source code, shut up and lie…because of the restrictions
• write their own code from scratch… because of the restrictions
• “provide” it (download it yourself), but not integrate it with anything (arms length)…because of the restrictions

Is this really a productive way to move the open source community forward? It might have worked in the beginning with Linux but is it really necessary now? Don’t you think Linux (server and desktop) would grow exponentially faster without the GPL? Why spend so much time trying to cheat or get around the GPL?

Most open-source programmers are employed by commercial companies and work on their open-source projects in their spare time (or your time). Why not pay them! Corporations using your open-source project are potential employers. I also believe that corporations are much more likely to use your open-source project if it is released under a truly free license.

I like the MIT license. Coupled with a commercial license, it doesn’t get any simpler.

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php

StreamServe is a global leader in dynamic document composition, delivery, and document management software solutions for ERP and CRM systems.

First of all, what is a “Web” form versus a static or client (fat) form? Unless you live under a rock, you know every time you use the internet you are using some kind of Web form. Typically, these are HTML. Google uses them for searches, Overstock.com uses them for shipping and credit card information, your bank uses them for your login and password, and so on. Almost every site on the Web has some type of form somewhere. They’re hard to miss and hard to live without. We never really think about the importance of this simple interface.

Almost daily, the Web is being used to develop and deliver interactive and customizable applications. Many of the early applications were nothing more than a database search and some form of on-line ordering. Forms that are provided as part of the Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) are not really suited for complex data entry with many dependencies between different fields. As a result, complex forms contain large scrollable areas which can be confusing. In many applications, only a small fraction of the fields really has to be filled for any given situation. Consequently, there are many fields that just distract the user and suck up screen space. You really need to “design” a form for Web use. Also, is it just me, or do you find it incredibly annoying when you fill in a form and the input is not validated until you hit enter? Form input should be interactively validated immediately.

I remember filling in a Web form to open an account at a financial institution, and then receiving a version in the mail only to find out I had to fill it in all over again (on paper). Many banks still do this because of regulatory issues, poor design, or because they have way too many lawyers. On the bright side, the Web actually is becoming more interactive with applications for collaboration, and corporate intranet applications are replacing proprietary interfaces to applications. Many of these applications push the Web model to its limits, especially the user interaction components. Compared to client side forms products such as PureEdge and Adobe, the Web is still a bit limited in its interactivity and versatility. However, its popularity and emergence as a standard for networked applications on the internet and intranet indicate that the interactive Web form is finally getting traction. It’s 24 x 7 with no human intervention. New standards are emerging like XForms, XFA, DHTML, etc. This means well-established user-friendly interfaces that you might typically see on a Windows or MAC desktop should be transferred to or integrated with the Web.

Why interactive forms?

Forms are easy enough to create when they are simple, like search boxes. But what if you need them to be complex? How do you know whether to use a client-based forms tool or a Web-based forms tool? Which is appropriate for what application?

Certain application considerations might make the choice obvious. For example, if you are creating an e-commerce Web site that will be accessible to the public over the Internet, you would develop the application using Web Forms pages. If you are building a processing-intensive, highly responsive application that needs the full functionality of the client computer — such as an office productivity application — you would use client based forms.

You can use Web Forms to create more than just Web sites; many other applications lend themselves to a thin client as well, such as purchase order systems, benefits applications, and airline reservations. An important benefit of any Web based forms application is that it has no distribution costs. Users already have installed the browser, the only piece of the application that they need. Thorough knowledge of a programming language should not be a requirement for creating forms. In addition, support for rapid prototyping is important so that it is easy for form developers to involve their users. It is beneficial if a form can be filled out on any platform using any browser. Proprietary approaches that work only for certain browsers should be avoided (like active X – sorry, couldn’t resist).

Where there are intensive processes like supply chain, or a manufacturing process and a chain of documents needs to be filled in, interactive forms within workflow authorization (compliance and legal requirements) clearly create a cost benefit. You can even look at this from a geographic and vertical industry perspective. Process-oriented countries such as Germany have a lot of recognition and requirements for interactive forms. The same goes for banking and insurance industries that have an intensive flow of documents between the company and the intermediaries. Sweden, with its rich background of ERP vendors (Intentia), also ranks quite high in the usage of Interactive Forms.

If you integrate this technology into a clear ecosystem with SAP, IBM, or Adobe, you can generate significant value in specific industries which would in turn stimulate market momentum.

Forms and SOA

Web or interactive forms applications are platform-independent; that is, they are "reach" applications. Users can interact with your application regardless of what type of browser they have and even what type of computer they are using. Interactive forms are a result of an industry-wide shift to open, service-oriented architectures from proprietary approaches. According to my CTO, Dennis Ladd, SOA’s integration by design makes it feasible to wrap rich product functionality around individual transactions, rather than around a server, database, or entire application. In the past, this would have been infeasible due to the cost of integration. Now, a “mortgage application” can have its own feature set separately from a backend application, allowing it to have its own features, business rules, and behavior. In essence, it is now free to traverse an application landscape rather than being bound to a single database or program. Thus each time the back-end applications change, the desktop app for the end user need not change, thus avoiding length and costly rollouts to end user.
The new age enterprise will embrace SOA technologies like interactive forms to rapidly respond to market innovations and demand. It will be integrated within the platforms of ERP, CRM, ECM, and solutions that are very transactional and document based…which is just about everything.

StreamServe is a global leader in dynamic document composition, delivery, and document management software solutions for ERP and CRM systems.