Mar 27 2008

Aconex twist = non-event

Further to my recent post about reopened legal proceedings involving Australian-based collaboration technology vendor Aconex and its two joint MDs, it seems that last week’s hearing was a bit of a non-event.

After the hearing on 19 March, the Notice of Motion filed by Aconex shareholder Hawthorn Glen on 27 February 2008 was dismissed, but any decision on costs relating to the Notice of Motion was reserved. On the face of it, it looks like neither side came away smiling and that we will have to continue to wait for the full judgement to finally lay this dispute to rest (in the meantime, of course, this additional hearing will no doubt have added a few more dollars to the legal expenses already incurred by Aconex).

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/aconex-shares-1/

Mar 27 2008

MBA teaching

My wife and I both went down with flu last week, spending most of the four-day UK Easter holiday weekend taking it in turns to be bed-ridden, and I only really returned to work properly a couple of days ago. No easy return, however, as I was already committed to delivering a couple of lectures to students on Manchester Business School’s MBA for Construction Executives, one yesterday afternoon, the other this morning.

This was something of a new gig for me. Through a friendship with academic Nuno Gil dating back to 2004, I have visited Manchester regularly to speak to MSc students (I’ve also done similar sessions at Reading, Loughborough, Salford and Greenwich universities, among others) but these were the first MBA cohorts I have presented to.

Many have years of construction experience as architects, engineers, QSs, etc, and were quite prepared to argue the pros and cons of online collaboration with me, and today’s session in particular got into a lively discussion about the useability of online mark-up tools, how much collaboration could be audited (we drew the line at telephone conversations), and the advantages (or otherwise) of email. A good stimulating session. Several times, I had to remind myself not to defend the technology – pointing out that several of the issues raised (eg: people bypassing their extranet system, or not being able to find things) were more to do with people and processes than technology. While I am plainly an enthusiast for the technologies, I always underline that successful collaboration is 80% or more to do with getting the people and processes right, including initial team workshops, protocol documents, initial user training, management buy-in, appointment of champions, etc, etc. Unfortunately, this was not something that we could adequately cover in just over an hour. Still, maybe next year….

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/mba-teaching/

Mar 20 2008

Online project management

A different type of software to construction collaboration technologies, project management applications remain an important part of the project manager’s armoury, with Microsoft Project and Primavera among the most widely used. However, these traditional client/server tools face competition from a growing range of online tools.

Earlier this week, webware.com‘s Rafe Needleman briefly reviewed three offerings in Kiss Microsoft Project Goodbye, looking at: Liquid Planner, Clarizen and Mumboe (more a contract lifecycle management tool). A couple of weeks ago, I read about another offering from Projity, an open source scheduling application, OpenProj 1.0, that is also offered as software-as-a-service (SaaS), Project-ON-Demand. And this week, I got an email from 5pm about its online project management application (see also VentureBeat review).

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/online-project/

Mar 19 2008

Asite signs deal with Laing O’Rourke (yawn)

A London Stock Exchange announcement says UK construction collaboration technology vendor Asite has “entered into a three year agreement with Laing O’Rourke based on Asite’s new user-based licensing model”.

The announcement talks about how Laing O’Rourke has been using Asite since 2004 and how it will use Asite to manage sourcing, collaboration, and electronic trading processes. Given that Laing O’Rourke is an investor and shareholder in Asite (it had a 1.7% shareholding in 2003, prior to the granting of options that September over a further 17m shares) – it’s hardly surprising that they’ve signed a contract.

The licensing conundrum

The announcement goes on to claim: “The new licensing model dramatically reduces the cost per project of the services and encourages the proactive use of the solutions throughout the supply chain”. Asite CEO Tony Ryan says the new licensing model “will make the use of collaboration technology a given regardless of the size of the project”. (Asite was talking about extending user-based licensing across its products last April.)

I am not sure how user-based licensing will encourage take-up of collaboration solutions throughout the supply chain. In a highly cost-conscious industry like construction many firms look to make economies wherever they can, and software usage will be no exception. Some firms faced with paying for multiple user licenses may decide they can get by with fewer, perhaps allowing users to share logins (immediately undermining any underlying audit trail showing who did what and when). An alternative and widely employed approach is project-based licensing of construction collaboration software, allowing use of the software by all authorised project team members, regardless of the number of users. This system – which can also be applied across programmes (eg: framework agreements) and enterprises – does not constrain take-up at the user level; on the contrary, it encourages collaboration.

(As an aside, isn’t this system also more in keeping with the collaborative nature of Web 2.0/SaaS – see previous post – while user-based licensing grew to support delivery of conventional software?)

Bottom line

Much will depend on the license cost per user, of course. Maybe Laing O’Rourke found project- or enterprise-based licensing too expensive? Certainly, according to the Asite announcement, the main benefit of this deal is a ‘dramatic reduction in the cost per project of the services’, so perhaps the bottom line is that Laing O’Rourke has simply negotiated a cheaper rate for using Asite?

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/asite-signs-dea/

Mar 19 2008

Large enterprise SaaS adoption on the rise

 

Large enterprise adoption of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) has increased by a third over the last year, according to a survey by analyst firm Forrester Research. In a report published last week (Competing in the Fast-Growing SaaS Market – just US$279), it said SaaS adoption in large enterprises now stands at 16 percent, up a third on the previous year’s 12 percent (see ZDnet news story). The survey was based on research conducted among 1,017 technology decision makers.

Of those surveyed, 46 percent said they were interested in or planning to deploy SaaS applications, while 37 said they were not at all interested. The most popular uses for the SaaS model were in human resources, collaboration and customer relationship management. North American companies are the heaviest users of SaaS with approximately double the utilisation rate of European firms.

The biggest barrier to SaaS adoption appears to be integration; other notable adoption barriers identified in the survey were total cost of ownership and security concerns.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/large-enterpris/

Mar 17 2008

Web 2.0 and construction collaboration

A recent white paper from Parity presents some conclusions from a survey undertaken by Bournemouth University. Web 2.0 – More than Social Networking looks at current levels of Web 2.0 adoption and understanding across UK industry, and reveals that almost half of UK senior managers do not understand the business benefits associated with embracing Web 2.0 technologies; almost a third of IT managers admit a lack of Web 2.0 understanding.

The white paper’s descriptions of Web 2.0 office tools could almost have been written about the Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)-based construction collaboration technologies now increasingly deployed on major design and construction projects:

“… file sharing features such as document history, comments, discussion and alerts, as well as advanced search, are standard.

“The inclusion of configurable approval workflow processes supports the information management process cycle, taking information from its raw state through authoring, amending and publishing – roles undertaken effectively by multiple individuals within a secure, audited and tracked environment.

“… standard security practices still apply and technology exists to impose control, limit information views to authorised personnel, protect document libraries and provide a full audit trail. …”

Sadly, I think some of the findings regarding less-than-enlightened reasons for adopting the technology also apply to the construction industry (think about how many construction businesses have been slow, if at all, to embrace ‘partnering’, integrated teams or collaborative working, despite the efforts of organisations such as Constructing Excellence to show that such strategies deliver better performance across a whole range of key performance indicators, KPIs):

“… the primary business reasons for the technology’s adoption are content and document management (44%), followed by search (27.8%). … the majority of organisations are simply buying what they perceive to be the latest document management and search technologies, rather than adopting an entirely new way of working that can transform business practices.”

The white paper goes on to point out that the biggest benefits achieved from Web 2.0 relate to the way workers interact with each other:

“Over half of respondents cited working together more efficiently (55.6%) and uniting workers across different locations (52.9%), whilst 50% rated more openness in the organisation.”

But such intangible measures on their own were insufficient for organisations to justify investments in Web 2.0:

“Organisations are simply not prepared to buy in to the concept of an open, collaborative working environment, either through misunderstanding or disbelief in the potential benefits.” [Sounds just like many construction project teams to me!]

Delivering Web 2.0 into the construction industry

I have been a Web 2.0 enthusiast for some years, and have sought to apply the tools in my day job working at BIW Technologies (by writing blogs, using RSS feeds, collaborating on Wikis, contributing to discussion forums or social networks, etc), and – as mentioned above – it is easy to identify some Web 2.0-type features in our SaaS-based construction-oriented services – not least because the industry has always been reliant upon secure sharing of information among fragmented, geographically-dispersed team members (file-sharing? – the starting point for today’s collaboration platforms; discussion forums? think about the dialogues built up through online commenting tools; RSS feeds? – think automatic alerts generated when files are published for a user’s attention or when a user needs to respond to a process request).

However, there isn’t (yet) a deeper embrace of Web 2.0 concepts across the construction sector, partly for the reasons identified by Parity/Bournemouth University’s research (ie: adherence to hierarchical structures – as opposed to more fluid ‘adhocracy‘ environments; perceived irrelevance; and security concerns). With little or no demand from customers, this has meant the technology vendors have not been pushed to incorporate more explicit Web 2.0 features into their services. Instead:

“The vision of adhocracy is being delivered by default; as organisations increasingly embrace flexible and distributed working practices and cooperation with partner organisations, the desire and opportunity for fast, effective yet secure collaborative working is growing. People are no longer working in isolation; huge structured and unstructured information resources are dispersed across the business and must be harnessed to deliver corporate value via secure sharing and collaboration.”

Maybe, as the Parity authors suggest, the IT vendors have got to change their approach, messaging and attitude. The “product based ‘collaboration suite’ message is not hitting the mark”, they say, with the result that “Web 2.0 looks set to remain a consumer-only tool – at a significant cost to business.”

Related posts: Facebook and BIW comparison (19 October 2007); SaaS and construction collaboration in 2008 (3) (29 January 2008)

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/web-20-and-cons/

Mar 14 2008

Aconex shares row – another twist

From time to time, I have a quick look at the Federal Court of Australia website to see if the case of Hawthorn Glen Pty Ltd -v- Aconex Pty Ltd, Rob Phillpot and Leigh Jasper has been resolved. Regular readers will know that construction collaboration business Aconex and its MDs have been engaged in a protracted legal dispute with a major shareholder over a share issue (for ease of reference, I’ve added a short list of related posts below).

I was not expecting a judgement to be made for another month or two, and it now seems that the dispute could drag on even longer. The latest development has seen Hawthorn Glen file a notice of motion to reopen the case, and a hearing date has been set for 19 March.

Update (20 March): I understand that an interlocutory judgment prompted by the notice of motion is due to be delivered on 26 March.

Related posts:

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/aconex-shares-r/

Mar 14 2008

Sword Group 2007 results

Sword Group, the France-based IT group that late last year acquired UK construction collaboration SaaS technology vendor CTSpace for just £6.5m, announced its annual results for the year ending 31 December 2007 yesterday. The group turned over €179m [£138m], up 26% from €142m [£109m] in 2006, generating a net profit of almost €19m [£15m], up from £16m. In its outlook for 2008, it forecast revenues of €220m [£169m] and said it expected its 2007 acquisitions to be complying with group norms on profitability by 1 July.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/sword-group-200/

Mar 13 2008

Sustainable construction: plain English guide

Within the UK membership organisation Constructing Excellence, I attend various committee meetings and have heard about a ‘Plain English guide to sustainable construction’ being produced by the organisation’s sustainability working group. I have just had a sneak preview of this guide (I’m not sure when it will become more widely available), and it is a good readable introduction to the key principles, with some pointers to examples of existing and emerging good practice.

I also skimmed through the guide to see if it made any particular mention of the potential role for ICT (recalling my submission to the BERR consultation document on sustainable construction last year – see posts here and here – a subject I also discussed over coffee this week with Building magazine’s sustainability blogger Phil Clark, looking forward to his Sustainability Now event in July).

Unfortunately, apart from references to a few tools that might be used during design and construction (eg: the BRE’s SMARTStart site waste management tool), there was little that directly addressed ICT issues. However, this may be because the guide is essentially an introduction to the overall challenges and opportunities, rather than an in-depth look at all related issues. I might raise the topic with HBG‘s Chris Gilmour, who leads the sustainability group.

On a related matter, this week’s Construction News has a small IT feature that includes a contribution from Causeway Technologies’ Tim Cole (who I sat next to at an NCCTP meeting yesterday) talking about how effective content management systems can help cut paper consumption and waste.

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/sustainable-con/

Mar 12 2008

MPS and Needlemans separate

Not being an avid watcher of the world of quantity surveying, I only recently caught up on news last month that 32-strong UK QS firm Needlemans had been acquired for an estimated £1m in shares by Mott MacDonald, where it will apparently become a specialist unit within the group’s existing QS company Franklin + Andrews.

Why should I be interested? Well, Needlemans established a sister business, MPS, that developed contract change management (CCM) software to support the implementation of New Engineering Contract family of construction contracts – an activity that brought it into competition with construction collaboration vendors such as BIW Technologies [my employer] who also deliver contract administration functionality. A Mott MacDonald spokesperson told me that: “MPS did not form part of the acquisition”, so presumably MPS directors will soon be enjoying running an independent business.

Needlemans was founded in the 1970s and established a new company Needlemans-MPS Ltd in August 2000. This then dropped the Needlemans prefix altogether in December 2003 to become Management Process Systems Ltd. However, Needlemans retained a 25% stake in the MPS business (at least up to 3 August 2007); MPS also shared Needlemans’ offices in Royston, Hertfordshire and London; and Needlemans and MPS continued to share some personnel (eg: CEO Barry Trebes and FD Adrian Morter had the same roles at both Needlemans and MPS; former BAA construction chief David H. Williams was non-exec chairman of both), until recently.

QS Week reported that Needlemans MD Barry Trebes will become ‘team leader’ of a Needlemans unit within F+A, and both he and Morter disappeared from the staff listed on MPS’s website. I did email MPS’s Robin Wilkin with a few questions earlier this week, but he has not (yet) got back in touch (I will, of course, update the blog if and when he does).

MPS is also a member of Constructing Excellence.

Update (17 March 2008): MPS’s Robin Wilkin has been in touch, but his email is essentially a long-winded ‘no comment’:

“I am not in a position to comment on the changes that may result in Needlemans as a result of the Mott MacDonald situation. Comments should be sought directly from them. MPS will continue to operate on an as normal business basis. Any changes to their business operations will continue to be driven solely by the increasing demand of customers for additional services. Requests for company information are always referred to our web site or to Company House Records.”

Permanent link to this article: https://extranetevolution.com/2008/03/mps-and-needlem/

Load more