Webster defines a commodity as “a mass-produced unspecialized product“. Based on that definition, enterprise software packages (centrally deployed applications that address the needs of multiple groups or functions within an organization) cannot be classified as commodities. Enterprise software segments have a lifecycle; evolving from Emerging to Mature. The JCL Management segment is mature with multiple products to choose from, including JCLplus+ from Software Engineering of America (SEA).
So, in a mature segment with multiple products to choose from, does it really matter which one you have, or does that segment become a ‘commodity’ since multiple options are considered ‘roughly equivalent’? After all, each tool provides the same basic functions, with some specific features that may or may not be differentiating.
The obvious answer is not all products are the same because not all vendors are the same. As a case in point, early in my career working in the aerospace industry, I was part of a project to reduce software maintenance costs by identifying and rationalizing overlapping enterprise software products. In the sort package segment, we owned and supported all three major sorting packages from IBM, Computer Associates, and SyncSort. Each package had been purchased based on a feature that differentiated that package within that release / snapshot in time. During the rationalization process we chose the VENDOR that was most focused on that segment and most dedicated to providing the best support, and timely product updates, over the next 5 years.
For many organizations, it is obvious that their current JCL Management product, and Vendor, are NOT leading the segment in terms of timely software updates, quality support services, and Vendor focus on the segment. For them the next step is to analyze the real cost of ownership to maintain an inferior product from a Vendor who is not leading the segment it terms of product focus and ensuring their customers are receiving maximum value from their ongoing investment. When reviewing the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), the Operational Costs typically far outweigh the Startup Costs and Retirement Costs over the years of ownership. Therefore, the longer you wait, the more your current solution is costing.
When reviewing the TCO for your current product, the differentiating factors reside in the following areas:
Software Maintenance & Support The annual maintenance fee from the Vendor, which can often increase by 3%+ annually, can be substantially different between Vendors. Further, JCLplus+, the segment-leader product, may be less expensive than the current product, especially if that product has been licensed for many years while the annual maintenance fees steadily increased.
Lost Opportunity Costs Inferior products are generally only used on an ad hoc basis and are not fully integrated into the SDLC process and JCL life cycle; moving batch applications thru the process from PROD to DEV to TEST back to PROD.
Ongoing Admin Support This includes the increased time and expense to support an inferior tool, especially if the tool is ‘buggy’ and not aggressively maintained to support all versions of z/OS.
Pride of Ownership As discussed in a previous article, it is human nature to live up to the standard of workmanship in their surroundings. That is why workers in clean, modern work spaces are more productive than workers in the rundown environments. If the tools your team uses are perceived to be inferior, workmanship suffers.
In summary, the overall costs of maintaining an inferior JCL Management tool are much greater than is obvious. Further, converting from a poorly integrated, inferior product to the segment-leading JCLplus+ from SEA is very straightforward, provides a short return on investment, reduces the ongoing admin costs, reduces the lost opportunity costs, and increases pride of ownership and productivity.
