March 17, 2008
Straddling the Hybrid On-Premise and On-Demand Worlds
With the Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) event season in full throttle, I’ve found myself consulting with a new generation of aspiring SaaS players who are trying to learn about the fundamentals of this rapidly evolving marketplace quickly so they can respond to changing customer requirements and capitalize on new market opportunities.
Starting with SoftLetter’s SaaS Sales and Marketing Seminar in Atlanta which has been upgraded to the SaaS University for Waltham, MA in June, and continuing with OpSource’s SaaS Summit last month in San Francisco, a widening array of incumbent software vendors (ISVs) and old-line technology vendors have approached me seeking help in their efforts to join the SaaS movement.
Some of these companies have lived well for years in niche markets, others have enjoyed cashcow businesses at a mass market level with hardware-based solutions. Now they see a combination of market forces fundamentally changing their worlds and they are trying to transform their business models quickly to respond to a rapidly changing competitive landscape and customer preferences.
Although established SaaS companies clearly understand the differences between the old and new worlds of on-premise software products versus on-demand software services, these new arrivals are still learning about the challenges, as well as opportunities associated with SaaS.
What all of these companies have in common is that they can’t afford to discard their legacy software business in order to capitalize on SaaS opportunities. Instead, they must adopt a hybrid strategy that can support the needs of their existing customers while satisfying the changing expectations of a new generation of software user, without ripping themselves apart in the process.
What these companies are learning is that living in a hybrid world requires two different approaches to software development and delivery, two different go-to-market strategies, two different sales and marketing methodologies, and two different types of personnel.
Agile development replaces the long upgrade cycles of the past. Hosting replaces packaging issues when it comes to software delivery. Online marketing and telesales are more important than direct sales or traditional resellers. And, business-oriented customer support becomes essential rather than tech support to ensure customer loyalty and reference-ability.
Underneath these tangible differences is the more fundamental and subtle differences in attitude between the on-premise and on-demand worlds. In the old world, making the software work was the customer’s problem. The customer bought the software before they were sure it worked, hired the consultants and staff to get it up and running, bought the infrastructure to properly support it, and notified the vendor if something went wrong or they needed more help.
In the new world, making the software work is the SaaS provider’s responsibility. The customer can try it before they subscribe to it. They don’t have to hire additional staff or purchase more servers. They may still hire a few consultants to help with a smaller assortment of deployment issues, or to help with change management and training requirements. And, the customer expects the SaaS provider to keep the software service up and running, and continuously enhance it.
Can traditional software and technology vendors straddle these two worlds?
I think the answer for many of these vendors must be the same as the famous line in the movie Apollo Thirteen, “Failure is not an option.”
The big ISVs–Microsoft, Oracle and SAP–have the deep pockets to finance this balancing act. Other ISVs like Business Objects and Callidus Software are also demonstrating that hybrid models can work.
The smaller firms will have to make sacrifices in order to traverse this transition process. Many are fortunate that they are privately-held companies that don’t have to satisfy Wall Street’s short-term time horizons, especially in today’s frantic economic climate. Others are equally fortunate to have a loyal installed base of customers who will patiently work with them to ensure that the migration process is successful.
But, in each of these cases there will be plenty of potential landmines which will require careful planning and cautious execution. Thoroughly understanding these potential pitfalls will be essential if these new SaaS players are going to succeed in the on-demand marketplace.


The Hybrid Model seems to be the the opener for most transitional companies.
It just makes sense to NOT bastardize your own revenue streams. Specially through such a business model transition.
IMHO, the hybrid model with die as saas takes over.
Kinda of like the outside sales guy..
Uri — March 17, 2008 @ 12:28 pm
At SchoolDude, we had the luxury of starting over with the pure SaaS model and we’ve all drunk the Kool-Aid. We are completely committed to the SaaS model. Hybrid is the equivalent of building two businesses which by definition means division of focus, resources, and chance of success. We tried to do the hybrid model at our previous on premise software company and were not successful.
My view is this: Pursuing the hybrid model is like trying to simultaneously straddle ride two horses. One is a 2 year old thoroughbred and the other is a 15 year old nag. You get the visual – at some point, the business owner has to pick a horse and ride it or fall off and get trampled by both of them!
Lee
Anonymous — March 18, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
The Hybrid model would definitely be viable if the target markets for the two offerings are different. The automobile industry has successfully created luxury brands – so why cant ISVs?
Some SMB customers and readers of the Wall street journal (Mar 18) claimed that SaaS offerings were a real life saver and perfect for their needs. However, enterprise customers sometimes need security and integration functions which are not easily offered as a SaaS. Additionally, when a function is a core competence for an enterprise, using a SaaS solution and outsouring it would be a folly.
SaaS versions with the right set of features bundled in, should not cannibalize revenues from the on-premise version. The trick is selecting the right set of features and tiered pricing.
Ranjit Nayak — March 18, 2008 @ 2:47 pm
Jeff, great post. It’s interesting, at StackSafe we took a different path when we launched our solution 2 months ago. The nature of the problem we are solving requires customer premise based software (making copies of production software infrastructure stacks over the WAN to a hosted service is simply not yet feasible for our target market due to bandwidth restrictions). At the same time, we wanted to provide the ease of purchase, install and use that a SaaS model can often provide. We therefore went with a combined model. Our customer premise based software is packaged as a turnkey software appliance (making ease of install as close as possible to hosted software as we could), but it is licensed as an annual subscription (to provide ease of purchase) and includes as part of that subscription an “in the sky” update service with regular updates and 24×7 support (for long term ease of use). From my perspective, we will see more examples of companies adopting models that combine different parts of the traditional customer premise based software models with the advantages of hosted software to provide the best solutions to meet customers real business objectives.
-Jonah Paransky
(www.stacksafe.com/blog)
Jonah Paransky — April 3, 2008 @ 10:02 am