ICYMI: What Practitioners Need to Know About Cloud Solutions, and What the WSJ Got Wrong

cloud solutions

Last week, Spend Matters Vice President of Research Thomas Kase delved into the cloud solution debate and targeted what The Wall Street Journal got wrong in a recent article on the topic. Our Plus post, titled WSJ Falls Short: What Procurement Should Do in Cloud Contracting — Beyond the RFP, got the attention of the WSJ, too, and a mention in the publication’s Morning Download newsletter.

Apply guided buying to your procurement organization — Guided Buying: Making P2P Consumerized and Compliant

Thomas’ article focused on the differences between on-premise cloud solutions and on-demand software, also known as software as a service (SaaS). It also is a great guide for practitioners currently in the market for cloud solutions for their organizations.

On-demand alternatives to on-premise options are said to offer more flexibility and more options. The WSJ, however, argued that businesses behind this “promise” of cloud computing are falling short. Thomas thought the publication missed a few key points in this debate.  

“[T]he WSJ arguments miss the main points of the on-premise versus on-demand debate by a wide margin," Thomas wrote. "The article almost implies on-premise delivery is cheaper than getting your solutions delivered in a software-as-a-service (SaaS) format. This is hardly the case — and it frankly overlooks the true total cost of ownership (TCO) for on-premise solutions,” 

Spend Matters was quoted in the WSJ Morning Download and specifically called out our argument on actual TCO for on-premise solutions.

"Good points, all, and we appreciate the readership and the response. We would love to keep the conversation going,” the WSJ’s Morning Download stated. The publication posed this question to Spend Matters and other critics of its article: “Is there a point at which capacity utilization or network scale allows the economic benefits of on-premise IT to reassert itself?”

It’s a question we plan to answer in the coming days on Spend Matters. Thomas’s first reaction to the question is, “Absolutely,” there is such a point. But, there is a caveat to this, which Thomas will discuss in more depth in a forthcoming article on Spend Matters. Stay tuned!

Share on Procurious

Discuss this:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.