Will Android Reach The Enterprise?

If you're watching Google Android devices, news and general buzz, you're aware it's making some serious noise in the smart phone market.  There are more and more pre-announce rumors, that usually turn into fact, it feels like every day.  There are several Netbook and Tablet devices announcements and pre-announce rumors showing up at a faster rate. I'm not going to name these devices or vendors here.  A quick few searches and you'll find them. I find the larger screen devices particularly interesting. As an aside, I'm interested in comments on how that impacts 3rd party Android application developers.

To date, I view these Android devices as "personal" or consumer oriented. They are not devices that are tightly integrated with enterprise communications or unified communications solutions.  They are usually owned personally rather than purchased by the users employer.

Yes, one can, and many do, argue that a smart phone is part of the enterprise communication landscape. I agree they are given today's world of mobility and accessing nearly anything from anywhere. There are vendors, Avaya included, doing a very nice job at smart phone access to core communication system services via a client application on the smart phone and interfaces into the core servers.  This enables these 3rd party (from the communication systems perspective) devices to be enabled into the enterprise.

Will Android-based devices be adopted in the Enterprise in a broader sense?  Will Android find it's way into devices and applications that are a tightly integrated member of the communications solutions used by businesses?


Factors to Consider From The Enterprise "Buyer" Perspective
Google Android is open source and for some that could raise cautions

• Quality: Some may view open source as having at least some additional quality risk.  An older example is Linux.  Early on I think the same concerns existed with it.  That concern doesn't exist today.  Enterprise adoption of Android products may depend on how rapidly Android devices establish a solid quality reputation.
• Predictability: According to some of my smart phone developer contacts in the know, to date, this open source has been difficult to pin down and track   Enhancements, fixes and release dates are not very predictable or committed.  Will enterprise customers be able to adapt to less certainty about when new features or software updates will be available?
• Rapid Evolution: The code base is also a quickly moving target.  That's a double-edged sword.  Not having to wait long periods of time for new features and APIs is a good thing.  On the other hand, it may make it difficult to keep sliding new updates underneath applications that rapidly.  Another factor may be if, and to what extent, this evolution impacts applications that were written for older releases.  The level of backward compatibility, or not, could be a negative either in effort or in delaying upgrades. Many enterprises have significant internal roll-out and testing intervals before fully deploying new or updated products to their end users.  Frequent updates may not be easily supported in this environment.  I believe enterprises will be refining how the adopt and deploy.  Technology is moving more rapidly and they are likely looking at how to update and deploy more quickly.
• Other choices:  I don't intend to get into this debate here but there are other platform choices that Android will have to compete with.  ChromeOS and Windows Mobile are a couple quick examples.  The iPhone platform is tied strictly to that device so it's not a factor unless Apple changes that policy.

My Expectations

• Smart phones continue to be highly adopted.  If Android penetrates this market the way many predict it will, it's completeness, confidence and quality will rise along with it.  
• Application availability on Android will continue to rise at a rapid rate.  It may never catch up to iPhone but I don't believe that will matter much.   I expect many of the most popular applications will support Android to mirror the increasing deployment of Android phones.  In short, largely due to smart phone adoption, Android shouldn't be a negative factor in considering a device for the enterprise.
• The smart phone experience is rapidly changing end user expectations.  End users, both for personal use or on their communication devices at work, are demanding and expecting much more than "phone" capability on their communication devices.  Enterprise devices based on Android can benefit from the application availability and app store ecosystem.

I won't predict to what level Android-based devices will move into the enterprise but I believe they will over the next year or two.  What do you think?  Comments welcome both from the product development and buyer perspective.

Contact or follow me at:

Twitter www.twitter.com/michaeljkillian
Facebook www.facebook.com/michael.killianbiz
LinkedIn www.linkedin.com/in/michaeljkillian

Bridging Business to Business and Personal Communications Gaps With Social Networks

Today it's rare that any company works projects totally internally.  It's also rare that you are only communicating/collaborating for "work" from 9 to 5 and for personal otherwise.  Our professional and personal lives have blurred.  Unified Communication and Collaboration "tools" need to effectively bridge multiple enterprises together, as well as allow personal/professional connections outside your enterprise to be effective and useful.   "Free" social networking services can have a role in the enterprise and in bridging multi-company and appropriate personal/professional communications.

Presence and Messaging 
If project collaborators are in multiple companies there should be one or more mutually accessible forms of presence and instant messaging to offer the same choices as intra-company systems.  We have many social networks (Skype, LinkedIn, Google Wave and now Buzz, Facebook and other networks) that contain a form of presence or logged in status as well as a "chat".  I've written before about recognizing and supporting these multiple communication modalities and broadening the definition of what a "contact" is.

When it comes to business to business, use of these networks allows much more than the voice conference call method of reaching project members.  They are also way to connect into personal communications when necessary.

Examples
You're on a multi-company conference call.  It happens to be a voice oriented call so there is no active web conference or associated collaboration tool running.  Your business partner in another company is up next on the agenda for issues and status.  There's a reminder you want to give them about an issue to be sure they describe.  You pull up their contact information on your "phone" and see they are online on Skype, or another presence and IM-capable service. You can see where they are present, click one, and privately message them with the reminder.

While on the same call, you realize you're running quite late for a family dinner date.  You pull up your contacts list on your desk "phone" to find your spouse online on Facebook.  Through a click you start a Facebook chat message and inform them you're running late and to change your reservation.  No stepping away to make a separate call home. No putting the conference call on hold to make the second call.  No going to the cell phone to do a text.  You've initiated it right from your "phone" with virtually no disruption to your ongoing meeting.

Why the quote marks around phone?  I use the term loosely these days.  Today's office communication devices are and need to be more than just a phone with voice oriented contacts and voice call log histories.  More on todays devices here.


Integrate it
Unified Communication systems can make the connection to and use of the many emerging communication networks and modalities more effective.  In my examples above, I'm talking about seeing presence indicators and access to these networks directly from my main business communication device and applications.  I want a seamless experience as opposed to having to open separate network interfaces and applications to see the presence, or use the "IM" or do a "post" to it.  I call it my communication dashboard or home screen.

What Makes Social Networks Fit?
They're "free" to the user for one.  Second, they are available for anyone to create business, personal or combined accounts.  Many businesses, professionals, and individuals have a presence on one or more of these networks and it's still growing tremendously.  They can be a highly available common ground.   I don't believe at all that these modes of communication are a short term fad.

What Hinders Social Networks As Enterprise Communication?
Agreed there are security, productivity, privacy and other concerns with these networks.  These concerns are holding back some businesses and individuals from fully supporting using them.  The players that handle it best, and avoid mistakes like Google Buzz, as one recent example, will be left standing.

Another issue I see is the rapid change and continued emergence of more and more players.  These social networks are also moving into their own email support. As if I need or want more email accounts!  Some are considering enterprise versions meaning they see the enterprise integration opportunity.

I don't recommend trying to keep pace and support all emerging networks. It's not practical.  Make an assessment of which networks are the most used, secure, open to integration, and growing.  Easier said than done right now.  Regardless, these networks demand attention in todays communication universe.

Twitter www.twitter.com/michaeljkillian
Facebook www.facebook.com/michael.killianbiz
LinkedIn www.linkedin.com/in/michaeljkillian