Are People Actually Using Enterprise UC?

Major shifts in enterprise technology, indeed much of business technology, can take a long time to begin delivering financial returns. Some of you might remember the experience of the 1980s, when enterprises embarked on a huge wave of information technology investment, but without any clear evidence that there were productivity gains, for the better part of a decade.

Only in the 1990s did the productivity gains begin to register in significant ways, and one might argue that it is because it took that long for the architecture and human behavior to reorient to a different way of doing things.

So far, one might argue something akin to that has been happening in many companies as unified communications have been deployed. Ignore for the moment the objection that "defining" UC is quite difficult, and that there are many levels of UC adoption, each of which might represent a different payback case.

Lots of people would argue that a measurement payback is quite difficult overall, with the easiest justifications coming from videoconferencing and other conferencing tools, where it can be claimed that travel costs are avoided.

Some believe unified communications has required initial investment that is simply too high, and the returns too slim.

Gartner analysts say, for example, that “thе adoption οf UC іn enterprises bу enterprises continues tο increase, but usage remains low. That's a problem, as getting thе workforce tο really υѕе UC tools іѕ essential іf companies аrе tο reap thе “soft” benefits οf increased collaboration аnԁ productivity аnԁ realize “hard” metrics such аѕ cost savings.

Unified communications is “the greatest scam since Ponzi," Nick Jones, a Gartner analyst, has said, in large part because nobody can agree on what UC entails. “I’ll give you the real definition: unified communications is the bundle of things a vendor wants to sell you."

Also, there is an argument that unified communications cannot compete with consumer-driven technology.Using the examples of Skype and Twitter, Jones argues that people have simply found other tools that provide most of the benefits UC once promised.

To a large extent, the need for UC has shifted from voice and email to social communications.

“Why would you want to trap young people with dinosaur communications when they’ve already got something better?,” Jones rhetorically asks. “Most unified communications systems can’t even show you tweets, let alone where they are coming from.”

UC, in that view, is more about micro-blogging services, and less integration of fixed and mobile communications, mailboxes and numbers.

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/361114/technology_update_unified_communications_integrated_cloud/

Gartner’s Magic Quadrant on Unified Communications: Enterprises are buying it but is anyone using it? | Open Source IP PBX