B/OSS Strategy_nb

Mere som dette

CM - Chapter 3 - Why organizations change

af Sander van der Kolk

CONTENUTI MULTIMEDIALI

af Virginia Ruggeri

Globalization Positive and Negative Impacts

af Tanraj Mand

Group Assignment

af Neo Kian Heng

B/OSS Strategy

Context:

Over the next several years, the biz will require new capabilities in order to drive results.

As the technology orgs evaluate options for enabling new biz capabilities thru technology investment, it is important that we have a well-considered vision on what our optimal end-state looks like. Then, specific initiative-level investment choices we make can be better aligned to move our arch blueprint towards this desired end-state (rather than towards an arbitrary one).

Operating Model

Hosting Model

Goals

Enablement of New Capabilities

Adaptability of "out-of-the-box" features

Configurability, Flexibility, Extensibility, etc.

Openness of APIs

Products & Features

LOB-Specific Features

B2B & SMB

Prepaid

Support for Network products

Digital Products (e.g., Retail, Self-service)

Personalization products

Faster Speed-to-Market

Lower Cost

Lifecycle costs

Cost to deliver new capabilities

Operational Cost structure

Strategic Leverage

Increase level of transparency and trustworthiness in B/OSS vendor relationship(s)

Increase number of potential vendors for system operation

Increase number of potential vendors for new capability delivery

Greater ability to control costs (see "Lower Cost")

Increase amount of influence on product roadmap

Larger number of viable alternative solution paths

Delivery Model

Fully Outsource to 3PV

Manage Internally with Staff Aug

Fully Outsource to B/OSS Vendor

Technology Stack

Matrix Diversified "Best of Breed"

Sprint

Integration Investments

Component choices

etc.

CRM

Assemble a new stack (or modify our existing one) consisting of best-in-breed components for (some or all of) the following: CRM, Billing, Rating, Ordering, Product Catalog, Provisioning

Vertically Diversified "Parallel Stack"

Complicates leverage for billing projects 2+ moves ahead

Produces leverage for next-move billing projects

Technical

Examples

Other case studies

TMO

AT&T

High Complexity

Likely 50+ Integration Points with existing systems

Commissions

Collections

Cash Drawer

Network Elements and/or Provisioning GW

SAP

Examples:

Duplicate vs. Shared components

CDP

POS

Accounting

Rating

Billing

Provisioning

Scope TBD: Provisioning, Customer-Facing UI, Service Integration, etc.

Out of Scope: Inventory, G/L, Commissions, Mediation, etc.

New BSS stack to include: CRM, Order Mgmt, Rating, Billing, Product Catalog, Payments, A/R, Collections, Applicable UIs

Introduce new suite(s) of BSS components to serve other LOB(s)

Leave Amdocs stack in place for core consumer postpaid LOB

Horizontally Diversified "Layered Architecture"

When building new services, evaluate Node vs. ESB vs. UFX (vs. combinations thereof) on case-by-case basis

Don't proactively replace existing CES UIs

Build greenfield UIs outside of CES suite

Strategy

Technology

TOPS Backend

Retail / POS

Invest in agnostic UI Layer

Invest in robust Integration Layer

Combinations of the above

Purchase UXF (Amdocs product)

Build in ESB

Build in Node.JS layer

Process

People

Build non-Amdocs user interaction channels (UIs, etc.) on top of integration layer

Choice: Unified UI vs. Separate UIs vs. Legacy UIs

Build non-Amdocs integration layer on top of CES backend components

Keep Amdocs components for core BSS functions (in the "backend" layer)

Fully Unified "Best of Suite"

Transformational Option

Implement full suite of non-Amdocs B/OSS vendor

Incumbent Option

Recommendations

Implications

Description

Stay on Amdocs Product Path

Amdocs Retail Solution (POS on Tablet)

Amdocs UI products (fully or partially widgetized)

Amdocs Integration Layer (REST, Headless Widgets)

Keep existing Amdocs suite in place