You are on page 1of 40

Summary

As enterprise mobility products and services progress through their market life cycles,
innovation and cost optimization opportunities arise. IT leaders must comprehend mobile
asset maturity and commoditization to plan successful road maps, negotiate pricing, plan
divestments and manage portfolios.

Overview

Key Findings
The Nexus of Forces has created markets for a new wave of products and services that are
beginning to see adoption in the enterprise, and mobility remains one of the top three IT
investment priorities in the CIO agenda.
The broad acknowledgment that the enterprise can't keep pace with cloud and consumer
mobility innovations continues to impact technology acquisition patterns, but IT is
increasingly adapting its approach to the new role of facilitator and a setter of dynamic
boundaries.
The rapid pace of evolution of mobility assets remains a key characteristic of this market.
Organizations investing in mobile technologies must be aware of the ephemeral nature of
mobile technology, where operational, development and security paradigms may shift
rapidly in light of innovation.
Enterprise mobility has radically transformed over the last seven years and the initial
investments in traditional mobility infrastructure have moved into obsolescence.

Recommendations
Re-evaluate mobility management requirements (if you are an organization currently
utilizing only basic MDM or Exchange ActiveSync), with a focus on content access and
mobile app adoption and, if appropriate, begin evaluating broader EMM suites.
Look for opportunities to leverage mobile back end as a service (mBaaS) to speed
application development and integration, defray capital investments, and enable agility and
flexibility in the API layer as mobile solutions evolve. Evaluate your mobile app strategy
annually to ensure that it remains flexible and adaptable to evolving mobile technologies
and requirements.
Consider an enterprise-grade EFSS solution and prioritize investments there if you seek to
get back control of employees' usage of personal cloud storage at work.
Evaluate mobile collaboration products that may improve user experience and productivity if
you currently support a substantial base of mobile apps and cloud services for significant
portions of your end-user population.

Table of Contents

Analysis
o What You Need to Know

o The IT Market Clock

Useful Market Life

Commoditization

Market Life and Commoditization Measures

IT Market Clock Changes for 2014

o IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary

o Market Background

o Supplier Landscape

o Asset Class Profiles

Advantage

Choice

Cost

Replacement

Gartner Recommended Reading

Tables

Table 1. Summary Measures of Standardization

Table 2. Scores for the Number of Available Suppliers

Table 3. Evaluating Access to Appropriate Skills

Figures

Figure 1. IT Market Clock for Enterprise Mobility, 2014

Figure 2. Market Life and Commoditization Measures

Figure 3. IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary, Part 1


Figure 4. IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary, Part 2

Figure 5. IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary, Part 3

Analysis
This document was revised on 29 May 2015. The document you are viewing is the corrected
version. For more information, see the Corrections page on gartner.com.

What You Need to Know


This market clock research analyzes 25 information technology assets, commercially available in a
range of mobility markets, and that are relevant for enterprise-mobility-related initiatives and
investment decisions. This includes enterprise mobility management suites, enterprise file sync and
share products, mobile collaboration tools, mobile application development platforms, and emerging
hardware form factors available as software, hardware or cloud service.
Each IT asset class maps onto the IT Market Clock graphic through two parameters:
commoditization and progress through its own market life cycle. Organizations must understand
both parameters when setting current and future strategies for deploying, sourcing and retiring key
assets.
Most organizations already own portfolios of mobile assets and are about to invest further in 2014
and 2015, to pursue new mobile business initiatives that involve both employees and end
customers. Only by understanding commoditization and maturity of IT assets can organizations:
Determine the right time to adopt and invest in emerging technology options, such as
mobile cloud services.
Establish road map plans for replacement and upgrade of existing technology assets.
Gauge expectations for new contract negotiations.
Make informed decisions regarding contract duration and review cycles.
Prioritize the resources and efforts invested in sourcing decisions.
Proactively manage their portfolios of mobility assets.

The IT Market Clock


This IT Market Clock illustrates the relative market maturity and commoditization levels of the main
mobile and wireless technology asset classes. For more details on the methodology,
see "Introducing the Gartner IT Market Clock" and Note 1.
During the early stages of a specific technology asset's market life, it will be used primarily by early
adopters. The value it delivers will be available to only a few organizations, and it will usually be
highly differentiating, commanding a higher price. The level of innovation will likely be high, as will
the level of skills needed to fully exploit it.
If demand and supply grow, processes become more standardized, and the skills required to exploit
the technology become more readily available, so costs will fall. This leads the technology to enter a
mass-customized phase, during which it becomes semi-industrialized typically consisting of
standardized modules or components that require some customization in deployment to meet the
needs of buying organizations. The pace of change in standardization and pricing may be high if
demand and supply grow rapidly, and enterprises should monitor both of these factors closely to
ensure maximized discounts. During this period of market evolution, strategic advantage can
usually be found through the choice of supplier and/or delivery model.
As the technology matures, the level of choice will continue to grow, and the skills required to use it
will cease to command a premium price. Products and technologies from competing suppliers
become more functionally equivalent, making it easier to switch among them. The asset class will
be at its most commoditized (and price competition will be at its highest). In the commoditized
phase, switching costs, prices and margins for suppliers reach their minimum levels.
Higher levels of commoditization typically lead to market consolidation, as scale becomes a
requirement for profitably, delivering products and services under growing pressure on prices.
Where competition is not evident, the availability of the appropriate skills and support from adjacent
products will decline, as technology assets approach the end of their support lives. The result is a
final phase of market development, during which the level of commoditization for the asset class
decreases. Prices rise because of reduced supplier choice and/or the declining availability of the
skills needed to maintain and run the products.
Figure 1 positions 25 classes of technology assets according to where they are in their market lives,
and their relative commoditization levels.
Figure 1. IT Market Clock for Enterprise Mobility, 2014

SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)


Useful Market Life
For each enterprise mobility technology asset class, market life is a relative measure of where the
asset class currently sits in its own life cycle. Measures are stated using the metaphor of a 12-hour
clock face, and the full market lifetime of delivery comprises one complete 12-hour cycle, from
12:00 until 12:00. The market life comprises four phases:
Advantage: From 12:00 to 3:00, during which time the market typically moves from an
emerging status to adolescent status. Levels of demand and competition are typically low,
so the technology is procured for what it delivers, not for its placement in its own market.
Choice: From 3:00 to 6:00, during which time the market typically moves from an
adolescent status to early mainstream. This is the phase of highest-demand growth, during
which supply options should increase and prices should fall at their fastest rate.
Cost: From 6:00 to 9:00, during which time the market moves from early mainstream to
mature mainstream. During this phase, commoditization is at its highest level, and cost will
be the strongest motivator in most procurement decisions.
Replacement: From 9:00 to 12:00, during which time the market moves from mature
mainstream through legacy and to its market end (after this, the technology is no longer
viable to procure or use). Procurement and operating costs will steadily rise, and enterprises
should seek alternative approaches to fulfilling their business requirements.
The market life positions of technology asset classes are based on a consensus assessment of
technology and market maturity. Some asset classes also appear in Gartner Hype Cycles, the span
of which covers adoption of up to 20% to 50% market penetration, which equates to around 5:00 on
the IT Market Clock.

Commoditization
Commoditization is shown on the IT Market Clock as the (radial) distance from the center of the
clock. The farther toward the outside an asset class is, the more commoditized it is.
Commoditization is evaluated on a scale of four to 20, with 20 being the maximum level of
commoditization. Commoditization is the sum of three measures:
The level of standardization: Determines the potential ease with which the product or
technology can be interchanged, hence the buyer's potential capability to exercise choice.
The number of suppliers: Defines the range of choice available to buyers, hence their
potential ability to take advantage of the interchangeability/interoperability yielded by
standardization.
Access to the appropriate skills: Every product and technology requires some level of
internal capability to use it. The ease with which these capabilities can be obtained and
augmented directly impacts the internal cost of switching suppliers.

Levels of Standardization
Table 1 summarizes the scores corresponding to the different levels of standardization.
Table 1. Summary Measures of Standardization

Score IT Hardware IT Software IT Services

10 Open standards, Highly componentized. Most interfaces Significant cross-supplier


broadly based and conform to codified or open-standard adoption of a common
enforced definitions. Covered by free/low-cost licensing technology and processes.
or Open Source Initiative (OSI)-recognized, Many codified or open
open-source license agreements. standards.

8 Open standards Componentized. Interfaces for core Limited cross-supplier


embraced in core functionality conform to codified definitions. adoption of common
areas Covered by free/low-cost licensing or OSI- technology and processes.
recognized, open-source license agreements. Some codified or open
standards.

6 Commercial Partly componentized. A mix of open and Cross-supplier adoption of


standards proprietary formats and interfaces to common technology and
embraced in core functionality. processes. Some codified
areas commercial standards.

4 Limited commercial Not componentized. Proprietary file formats. Limited cross-supplier


standards Interface through published proprietary APIs. adoption of common
technology and processes.

2 Proprietary Limited interoperability with competing Proprietary technology


technology products. Proprietary file formats and no and/or processes employed
employed by each published APIs. by each leading supplier.
leading vendor

SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)

Level of Supplier Choice


Table 2 summarizes the scores corresponding to the levels of supplier choice.
Table 2. Scores for the Number of Available Suppliers

Score Number of Suppliers

5 Five or more suppliers

4 At least three geographically overlapping suppliers; consistent level of choice in all geographies

3 Three major suppliers, nonoverlapping

2 Two suppliers

1 Single supplier

SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)

Ease of Access to Appropriate Skills


Table 3 summarizes the scores corresponding to the levels of skills availability.

Table 3. Evaluating Access to Appropriate Skills

Score Access to Skills

5 Skill levels reduced, and becoming part of general skill set

4 Skills readily available; costs falling

3 Supply and demand for skills balanced; stable costs

2 Skills in short supply; situation improving (demand falling and/or supply increasing)

1 Skills in short supply; shortage set to stay same or worsen

SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)

Market Life and Commoditization Measures


Figure 2 summarizes the market life position, as well as the commoditization scores for each asset
class.
Figure 2. Market Life and Commoditization Measures
SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)

IT Market Clock Changes for 2014


Eight new asset classes have been added to the IT Market Clock for 2014, while fourteen have
been retired, the bulk of which fall into the mobile platform/operating system space, which have
been discontinued in this IT Market Clock, for the reasons outlined below.

New for 2014


These assets have been added to the IT Market Clock:
Wearables: This asset captures a range of products that incorporate advanced mobile
technologies into a form that can be worn on the body, but specifically those impacting or
potentially impacting the enterprise. Examples include smartwatches, smart eyewear such
as Google Glass, and activity trackers such as the Nike FuelBand.
Mobile back end as a service (mBaaS): This asset captures cloud services that act as an
aggregator or broker to various mobile app services ("back ends") such as data integration,
cloud storage, social networks, user management, geolocation and various push notification
services. Access to these services is supplied to mobile developers via a unified API and
software development kit (SDK), enabling rapid development and reusability of these back-
end app services.
Mobile data protection: This asset class encompasses products and cloud services that
enable enterprises to protect and control access to organizational data (such as documents,
emails and other digital material) on mobile and client devices. This asset class covers
technologies such as mobile data encryption and rights management.
Mobile app analytics: This asset class covers in-app and server-based analytics enabled
through SDKs to instrument apps in order to capture data about app downloads, usage,
usability, performance, crashes and bugs as it relates to the device and network conditions.
Mobile app testing: This asset class covers a range of products and services, from cloud-
based device "farms" to crowdsourced testing, that enable various aspects of mobile app
testing, including functional, usability, performance, security and localization testing.
Secure mobile messaging: This asset class encompasses products and cloud services that
facilitate secure and/or compliant communications on mobile devices, such as SMS, email
or IM. Products and services vary considerably. For example, services for monitoring and
archiving SMS messages for compliance with HIPAA or financial industry regulations are
included, as are ephemeral messaging products, which allow a user to send email or other
message types that are securely deleted once read by the intended recipient.
Mobile security containers: This asset class captures products aimed at isolating and
securing apps and data on mobile devices for the purposes of enterprise information
management and protection. Such products allow an organization to isolate corporate email,
calendar and contacts from similar personal information, which is useful in a bring your own
device (BYOD) or corporate owned, personally enabled (COPE) environment. Other
products in this class seek to create "managed cooperatives" of enterprise apps, which
allows the organization to separate business and personal app data and apply a range of
management and security policies to these apps.
Mobile development containers: This asset class represents native containers or
sandboxes that can be used to encapsulate and run a mobile app built in HTML5 or some
other language across multiple device platforms. Mobile development containers can be
open source or proprietary to a particular vendor, and they offer hooks into the target native
device OS to enable a hybrid mobile app experience that combines native and Web.

Off the IT Market Clock


Fourteen assets have gone off the IT Market Clock for 2014:
Nine of these assets fall into the category of mobile operating systems. The decision was
made to remove these assets to make room in the IT Market Clock for more software-
related emerging assets in an area of very rapid innovation, and that better align to the
mission of the IT Market Clock research. As such, BlackBerry 7, Windows Phone, Android
3.x, iOS, Windows Mobile 6.x, new Symbian, BlackBerry 10, Android 4.x and the Asha
platform were all dropped from the IT Market Clock based on the decision criteria outlined
above.
Advanced mobile browsers: This asset class has commoditized, as the browser version that
ships with a modern mobile OS is the browser used in the vast majority of cases (except
where a secure browser is required). Nearly all the browsers that ship with the most popular
operating systems are WebKit-based, and, as such, differences between them are generally
not significant enough to drive enterprises to specify one over another. These browsers are
not to be confused with secure browsers, however, which are browsers secured specifically
for certain enterprise use cases. Secure browsers are supplied as part of enterprise mobile
management (EMM) suites in the vast majority of cases, and as such, are covered under
that asset class.
Secure corporate email: This asset class has been subsumed under the larger asset class
of "secure mobile messaging," which facilitates inclusion of adjacent communications
technologies with special enterprise security or regulatory compliance focus.
Mobile containers: This asset class has been split into "mobile security containers" and
"mobile development containers" to more accurately reflect the Gartner taxonomy for the
concern.
End of Life
With the removal of mobile operating systems from the 2014 IT Market Clock, no assets appear as
"end of life" in the current report. Enterprise mobility technologies are entering the market at a rapid
pace, and most of the assets included here have been in the market for only a few years or less.
Thus, the IT Market Clock for Enterprise Mobility is heavily weighted toward asset classes that are
in the earlier phases of their life cycles.
It is worth noting that had operating system assets been included in this IT Market Clock,
the Asha platform, which appeared in the Advantage phase in last year's IT Market Clock,
would have moved to "end of life," as Microsoft's acquisition of Nokia and subsequent
abandonment of that platform served to move it immediately to the last phase.

Phase Changes
A number of IT assets have moved in their market life. Other IT assets have moved ahead in their
life time, that is, to the next phase in the graphic, as indicated below:
Enterprise file sync and share
Enterprise mobile management
Public app stores

Other Changes
Some assets have been renamed in this year's version to align with current de facto terminology:
Mobile containers: This asset class from the 2013 IT Market Clock has been split into two
new asset classes to reflect the nature of the market and to align with the Gartner mobile
container taxonomy (see "Learn the Taxonomy of Mobile and Endpoint Management
Architectures" ). The two new asset classes are mobile security containers and mobile
development containers.
Secure corporate email: This asset class has been subsumed under the umbrella of a new
asset class called "secure mobile messaging," which encompasses not only secure email,
but other forms of secure mobile communication as well, including SMS messaging and
ephemeral messaging.

Assets Not Included


This IT Market Clock does not include a number of asset categories, specifically in the Advantage
phase, that are included in Gartner Hype Cycles, because they are still immature for consideration
by the average organization investing in enterprise mobility. Many of these assets are technologies
that are positioned before the Peak of Inflated Expectations, for example, Near Field
Communication (NFC). They may become relevant in the coming months, and may be included in
the next update of this IT Market Clock.

IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary


This summary (see Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5) is a companion to Figure 1. The summary
maps each asset class by current market life status and expected change in an easy-to-read grid
format. Each element is color-coded by priority of the actions required:
Red denotes a recommendation that should be acted on in the next 12 months.
Yellow denotes a recommendation that should be acted on in 24 months.
Green denotes a recommendation that is less urgent.
Figure 3. IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary, Part 1
SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)
Figure 4. IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary, Part 2
SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)
Figure 5. IT Market Clock Recommendation Summary, Part 3
SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)

Market Background
This IT Market Clock spans multiple mobile markets and technology domains. Mobile technology
assets tend to move rapidly from inception to maturity, but innovations continue at a great pace
under fierce competitive and customer pressures. Mobile markets are aggressive and evolving
quickly, too. Asset categories in this IT Market Clock are characterized by rapid transformation;
many will move to the next phase in less than two years, and their expected lifetime is definitely
shorter than for other areas in IT.
Cloud, collaboration and social computing are converging with consumer mobility and affecting
organizations and their IT changing IT management requirements and priorities, rules and
management policies accordingly. The next wave of mobility encompasses wearable, sensors and
connected objects, and will rapidly push the evolution of apps, services, tools and security
capabilities that are needed in emerging scenarios.
In such a dynamic space, there are generational trends that influence IT choices, particularly
different versions of mobile OS platforms and evolving mobile application development paradigms,
and drive opportunities for disinvestments from older releases and reinvestments in the newest
products in the Advantage phase. There are also substitution trends , where older technologies or
products tend to be substituted or should be by newer products and technical capabilities; for
example, tablets replacing PCs in certain task-specific areas such as plant operations or quality
control.
The list of key ongoing trends in mobility markets that IT planners need to be aware of are:
Mobility management: Driven by the massive adoption of consumer devices in business,
mobility management is the most critical mobility investment today. Mobile device
management (MDM) offerings have evolved into EMM, encompassing mobile application
management (MAM), marketing content management (MCM) and expanding onto virtual
clients/desktop management. EMM offerings are maturing and being adopted by
organizations.
BYOD: This support model is becoming the norm for most organizations, forcing IT to deal
with technical and support challenges. The need to protect the corporate footprint on a
personal device calls for investments in EMM, secure corporate messaging, enterprise file
synchronization and sharing (EFSS), containers and mobile data protection.
"Appification": This refers to the progressive adoption of mobile apps instead of browsers to
access the Internet. Relevant IT assets include public app stores, enterprise app stores and
EMM for mobile application distribution and discovery.
Mobile application development: The key emerging trend in this area is the growing
preference for developing hybrid applications and cross-compiled apps, which in the current
market state balances trade-offs between native and pure Web development. Hybrid
development and cross-platform compiling tools are becoming increasingly popular options
for enterprises, as IT looks to support broader devices and device capabilities without the
complexity and expense of native app development. Also gaining momentum for the very
same reasons are rapid mobile app development tools for business-to-employee (B2E) and
business-to-consumer (B2C) apps that enable customers to focus on rapid deployment and
high productivity with no programming involved rather than higher control and
customization.
Mobile collaboration: This is a range of capabilities that enable mobile workers to
collaborate in real time on smartphones and tablets are emerging, particularly with the
combination of cloud services and optimized apps. In particular, EFSS and activity streams
enable secure and social collaboration. These capabilities complement, or even replace,
traditional corporate email; wireless email has completely commoditized as any email
servers support it with native functions. Most enterprises complement native controls in the
email server with additional policies provided by MDM offerings. Regulated organizations
that require separation of corporate email from personal content prefer to work with secure
corporate messaging products based on container technology. Other relevant assets in this
area include real-time messaging apps, such as WhatsApp (mobile IM) and mobile
collaboration clients where multiple capabilities (for example, email and file sharing)
converge for simpler user experience.

Supplier Landscape
The enterprise mobility domain encompasses a range of technology areas and markets
characterized by players such as (exemplifying selection):
Mobility software infrastructure vendors: Microsoft
Mobile application platform and development tool vendors: IBM, Kony, SAP, Sencha
Public app store providers: Apple, Google, Microsoft, BlackBerry, HTC, Nokia, Samsung
Management and security: AirWatch by VMware, BlackBerry, Citrix, Good Technology, IBM,
MobileIron, SAP, Symantec, Sophos
Mobile collaboration, content and file sharing: Box, Citrix, Dropbox, EMC, Google,
Microsoft, Oracle
Service providers: Google, Facebook, Box, Roambi, mobile carriers and other service
providers
Some suppliers show great vision in understanding and addressing technology trends (for example,
cloud, collaboration and social), already adapting their offerings to meet emerging demands and
drive innovation. Others tend to focus on short-term opportunities, and make very tactical moves. In
each category, multiple small and niche players struggle to gain market presence, particularly in
application platform and development tools, management and security. We expect competition to
get tougher in the next few years, possibly with acquisitions, changes of businesses and potential
failures. It is important to assess financial and customer references when choosing to invest in
smaller and niche players.

Asset Class Profiles

Advantage

Wearables
Definition: Wearables is a generic term for a rapidly emerging class of mobile devices that can be
worn on the body. Examples include smartwatches (for example, the LG G Watch), smart eyewear
(for example, Google Glass), and even smart textiles (or "e-textiles"), which are worn as a garment.
Common uses include personal health and fitness applications, "glanceable" and ubiquitous
computing, and a nascent market for augmented reality applications.
Trend Analysis: While the consumer domain is the primary focus of most wearables on the market
today, enterprises are showing a growing interest in these technologies for a variety of potential
uses. Some organizations in industries with field service, machinery operators, maintenance or
other workers that require both hands free to perform their duties are beginning to investigate
smartwatches or eyewear for alerts and general messaging, or augmented reality applications.
Forward-thinking organizations with employees that work in hazardous environments are exploring
potential uses for health and environmental monitoring. In addition, as employees start to bring
personally owned wearables into the workplace, enterprises are beginning to think about the
potential impact to security, wireless networks and BYOD policies.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: Wearables are the next phase of personal computing. The almost limitless
possibilities to be derived from the nexus of mobility, social networks, cloud services and big data
magnify the potential impact of wearables far beyond their intrinsic computing capabilities. In the
coming years, organizations in all industries can expect wearable technology to be introduced into
their environments as personally owned devices brought by users into the workplace. As wearables
find their place as enterprise technology, individual business processes and, ultimately, entire
industries stand to be revolutionized by their application.
User Advice: Investigate whether and how users are utilizing personally owned wearables on
organizational premises and networks, and evaluate any potential impact to security, network or
BYOD policies. Explore potential enterprise use cases where hands-free alerting or "always
available" computing may have substantial impact, such as with field service employees, drivers,
machine operators and the like. Look into potential augmented reality applications, where visual
overlays or auditory cues could aid in working more efficiently, such as with a virtual schematic
overlay rendered on smart eyewear for a machinery maintenance technician. Update technology
road maps to include evaluation or anticipated adoption of wearable technology.
Selected Vendors: Google; LG; Samsung

Mobile Back End as a Service


Definition: Mobile back end as a service (mBaaS) is cloud-based mobile app services. mBaaS
provides foundational server-side capabilities needed for mobile apps, including one or more of the
following: user management, analytics, data storage, push notifications, geolocation, social network
connectors and data integration. mBaaS providers offer client libraries for their services, making
development against the back end a natural extension of developing the mobile app itself, using
SDKs for iOS, Android or Windows Phone, or JavaScript.
Trend Analysis: The mBaaS market is evolving rapidly with new players of all sizes still emerging,
such as Amazon and Oracle. Cloud services are becoming more widely accepted for most mobile
app development efforts, and the vendor activity in the mBaaS market reflects the strong
momentum of developer demand. Cloud back-end services are a natural fit for mobile apps
because of their architecture and connectivity models, which require portability, reusability and ease
of integration.
Using mBaaS means that mobile apps may store sensitive data in the cloud. Enterprises need to
ensure that the security of the services and provider infrastructure meets corporate requirements,
as well as regulatory compliance standards. Enterprises that use or are evaluating general platform
as a service (PaaS) offerings should also review these solutions' mobile services, as the latter has
started to be offered as part of the overall PaaS capabilities.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: mBaaS accelerates the delivery of mobile apps, resulting in quicker time to
market and ROI. As cloud-based services, they require virtually no capital investment and can
significantly lower the time and cost required to configure, develop and deploy necessary back-end
components for mobile apps. However, mBaaS does represent an ongoing operational expense,
typically based on usage, which must be factored into the business case for the mobile apps that it
supports.
User Advice: Evaluate mBaaS when mobile app projects require rapid development and
deployment, and when back-end service capabilities are not part of any existing mobile platform.
Carefully consider vendor viability and long-term strategic fit with overall enterprise architecture, as
the mBaaS market and technologies are evolving rapidly.
Selected Vendors: Amazon (Amazon Web Services [AWS]); AnyPresence; Appcelerator;
Backendless; Convertigo; Kinvey; Kumulos; Microsoft (Azure); Oracle; Parse; salesforce.com

Mobile Data Protection


Definition: Mobile data protection is a class of products that aim to control data leakage and protect
enterprise information through methods such as encryption, rights management or a combination of
capabilities. These systems may, for instance, allow an organization to protect data through intrinsic
file encryption that is part of the file itself and goes where the file goes. (Contrast this with common
approaches that seek to protect the data at rest by encrypting it while it's on the device, and to
protect the "data in motion" via secure tunnels/VPNs, but which cannot extend protection once the
file leaves controlled devices and networks.) Also in this class are rights management products and
services, which allow classification of data and control over file operations that may be carried out,
such as viewing, editing or forwarding.
Trend Analysis: Mobile users today employ multiple devices and utilize a growing assortment of
public apps and cloud services to get their work done. Some of these technologies may be
enterprise-supplied and -controlled, while others may be user-selected and -purchased. This
technology landscape affords the user a high degree of flexibility and choice, which presumably
leads to greater productivity and user satisfaction. The trade-off, however, is an increasing number
of vectors for data leakage.
Most mobile data security strategies today focus on device- and network-level encryption, and on
limiting leakage vectors by controlling device settings and app functionality via EMM. The former is
inadequate once files leave controlled devices and networks, and the latter is an oblique approach
to the problem that still leaves holes when a user can simply forward a document to an external
email account. Intrinsic file encryption and rights management address these problems directly by
encrypting files such that no unauthorized user can open them even if they leak outside
enterprise control points or by controlling actions that may be taken with enterprise data. Today,
these approaches usually have a trade-off a "walled garden" of applications that limit the
freedom of choice that users increasingly value. But future solutions will facilitate choice in apps
through approaches such as app wrapping or SDK enablement.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: As described above, the explosion of mobile and cloud services in the enterprise
has created myriad vectors for data leakage. The threat from this leaked data is real, and
organizations that overlook it under current pressures for user satisfaction only increase their risk.
The widely used approach of controlling device settings and app functionality via EMM is indirect
and incomplete, but organizations must decide whether the risks of mobile data leakage justify
additional investments in mobile data security. Mobile data protection technologies address the data
security problem directly, but organizations should carefully evaluate the trade-off that today only
encryption or rights-aware apps can be used with such systems, and understand their complexities
before making a purchase. Organizations must also bear in mind that these products are evolving
very rapidly, and the "walled garden," in the strictest sense, may soon be a thing of the past.
User Advice: Re-examine your mobile data security strategy and determine if investment in mobile
data protection technology is right for your organization's level of risk acceptance.
Selected Vendors: Microsoft; WatchDox; Intralinks; Boole Server; InfoCert; Beachhead Solutions;
Sophos

Mobile App Analytics


Definition: Mobile app analytics allow enterprises to assess and measure mobile app success and
performance through instrumentation of the mobile app. The mobile app is instrumented with APIs
to collect in-app usage along with contextual information about the device hardware and software
configurations, network conditions and other available information.
Trend Analysis: Mobile app analytics tools collect and report on benchmark (app store stats),
operational (app crashes and bugs), and behavioral (funnel and cohort analysis) data for a given
mobile app or collection of apps. The analytics allow enterprises to better measure their successes
and refine their mobile app deployments.
A bifurcation of the analytics market is underway. Traditional Web analytics vendors, such as
Google, Webtrends and Adobe Omniture, are evolving to include mobile analytics as part of a 360-
degree view of the customer. Similarly, application performance management (APM) vendors, such
as New Relic, AppDynamics and Microsoft, are adding mobile user behavior metrics in order to
measure the mobile user experience in addition to their traditional focus on application and server
performance. Given the plethora of tools, enterprises must find the optimal mix based on the type
and number of end users in order to maximize the return on investment of mobile analytics without
negatively impacting app performance or encroaching on the privacy of the app users.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: Unlike in the Web world where the use of analytics is deep-rooted and
unquestioned, enterprises typically don't consistently employ in-depth mobile app analytics, which
leads to limited visibility into the apps' usage and adoption. Mobile analytics are critical for
continuous improvement of the app itself, as well as for gathering useful business intelligence.
User Advice: Enterprises need to ensure that mobile analytics relevant to their business goals are
incorporated and used with each mobile app in order to maximize the value and return of each app
project. Mobile analytics are an essential part of the mobile software development life cycle (SDLC),
and continue to provide benefits throughout the life of a live app in production by providing data that
can be used to improve user engagement, increase user retention and identify specific functions to
enhance the overall user experience (UX).
Selected Vendors: Flurry; Localytics; Crittercism; AppDynamics; App Annie; Mixpanel; Google;
Microsoft

Mobile App Testing


Definition: Mobile app testing tools and services enable the quality control of mobile app
development across a variety of devices using manual or automated techniques. The types of
testing span usability, functional, performance, security and localization use cases. Mobile app
testing also takes into account specific hardware and OS combinations along with varying network
connectivity.
Trend Analysis: Mobile app testing is increasing in complexity because of the continuous evolution
and introduction of new devices, OSs, screen sizes, hardware capabilities and network variations.
Mobile testing is on the critical path for organizations delivering mobile apps, and there are many
options from which to choose. Solutions include packaged testing tools, cloud-based services,
outsourced providers, and crowdsourced testing. Gaining access to a broad spectrum of live
devices is becoming more necessary, especially when considering emerging devices like apps for
wearables, which need to be simulated "in the wild." As a result, enterprises must leverage a
combination of testing tools and services to perform the requisite types of QA testing to ensure high-
quality mobile apps.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Poor app quality is the primary reason behind the weak adoption, usage and
even failure of many mobile apps. Enterprises that are developing mobile apps need to employ
mobile app testing tools and services to help mitigate the risks associated with testing increasingly
sophisticated contextual mobile applications.
User Advice: Mobile app development teams should adopt a broad array of tools and services to
fulfill their testing requirements. No single solution addresses all of an organization's testing needs
across the end-to-end mobile app development life cycle.
Selected Vendors: Perfecto Mobile; Keynote Systems; Applause; Testbirds; Google (Appurify);
Apple (TestFlight)

Secure Mobile Messaging


Definition: Secure mobile messaging refers to a range of products that allow protection of
corporate email and other messages on a mobile device. One approach is through a proprietary
messaging client that is secured and isolated from personal content on the device through
containerization; encryption, data leakage prevention (DLP) and selective remote wipe can be
enforced on the corporate container through either a server component or third-party EMM tools.
Another approach is with the native email client, through virtualization of the corporate message,
which is stored on the server side only (nothing on the device) and rendered for visualization or
editing in a thin client (or Web browser) on the device, upon provisioning of credentials. Ephemeral
messaging services that self-destroy after reception are yet another approach to protect sent
corporate information.
Trend Analysis: While wireless email capabilities are a commodity feature provided natively by any
email server, protection and security of corporate email on mobile devices are open issues for many
organizations. BYOD leads organizations to deliver the corporate email within the native email
client, where corporate email accounts are also connected. Unfortunately, today's native mobile
email clients offer limited support for IT control, exposing organizations to the risk of losing
confidential information. To cope with this problem, enterprises can use proprietary email mobile
clients combined with EMM systems, such as Good Technology, Citrix and AirWatch products; or
stand-alone products such as Zix. Going forward, the evolution of mobile OSs will include native
capabilities to protect corporate email in native clients, reducing the need for proprietary messaging
clients.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: Enterprises should focus on the importance of protecting corporate information
that can easily be shared in mobile messaging and email, for the use cases that require data
protection.
User Advice: Choose proprietary mobile email clients to protect corporate email on consumer
devices, for use cases that require isolation of corporate content from personal on a mobile device.
Selected Vendors: VMware (AirWatch); BlackBerry; Citrix; Cortado; Divide; Globo; Good
Technology; Landesk (LetMobile); Vaporstream; Zix
Mobile Business Intelligence
Definition: Mobile business intelligence (BI) is the delivery of reports, dashboards and basic
analytics capabilities through tablets and to a lesser extent smartphones. The BI content is
rendered on the smaller screens of mobile devices and the navigation achieved through touch-
based interfaces. Tablets and other mobile devices offer improved user experiences, with the ability
to navigate around and drill into reports through touchscreen interfaces and finger gestures, such as
tapping, squeezing or swiping through the content. The mobile device's location awareness enables
contextualized experiences for BI users.
Trend Analysis: With the rapidly increasing mobility of the workforce, mobile BI is a core focus area
for BI vendors. In prior years, vendors attempted to leverage the laptop as the endpoint device,
pushing online analytical processing (OLAP) cubes onto the PC platform for disconnected reporting
and analysis, with limited success.
Today, BI vendors target smaller-form-factor devices, such as smartphones and tablets. The initial
attempts on mobile devices did not attract users, due to limited screen and interface capabilities.
Today, full-screen smartphones and, even more so, tablets (with their interactive user experience),
are targeted as BI front ends. There is a huge and growing interest in mobile BI, but adoption is
relatively sluggish due to cost, security and complexity challenges. We expect a flurry of
development efforts by the vendor community (see "Innovation Insight: Mobile BI Innovation
Expands Business Analytics Boundaries" and"Magic Quadrant for Business Intelligence and
Analytics Platforms" ). However, end-user organizations will invest carefully in new platforms for
their employees, and will likely enable only small user groups to test the viability of new-generation
mobile BI applications and devices.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Decision making takes place not only in the office and the boardroom, but also
on the road, in warehouses, in supermarkets, in client meetings and in airport lounges, where the
decision maker often needs quick access to only a few key metrics shown on a mobile device. This
approach can reduce decision bottlenecks, increase business process efficiency and enable
broader input into the decision.
User Advice: Identify use cases where mobile users need easy access to up-to-date information in
back-office applications and data warehouses. Run a small pilot to test the mobile BI applications.
The main infrastructure, consisting of the data warehouse, BI platform, data integration and data
quality, must be in good shape before implementing mobile BI.
Selected Vendors: Antivia; Datazen; IBM; Information Builders; MeLLmo; MicroStrategy; Oracle;
Qlik; SAP (BusinessObjects); Tableau Software; Tibco Software; Transpara

Mobile Collaboration
Definition: A mobile collaboration client aggregates multiple functions pertaining to collaboration
tasks in a single client application, under one user interface (UI). Collaboration clients can have
different scopes, such as messaging-centric, aggregating telephony, SMS, email, IM, presence and
activity streams; relation-centric, aggregating phone contacts, social and network contacts; and
content-centric, aggregating file synchronization, sharing, access and collaborative creation. No
product integrates all possible functions today. Mobile collaboration encompasses the integration of
collaboration features on the client and server (or cloud services) sides.
Trend Analysis: Mobile apps can boost productivity and facilitate collaboration between
employees. However, apps, cloud services and content from various sources tend to accumulate
rapidly on a device. Over time, this accumulation increases complexity, progressively diminishing
the user's experience and the initial benefits. Mobile collaboration clients and services represent an
emerging solution to that problem.
First examples included messaging-centric clients developed on mobile devices as native hubs,
aggregating SMS, email, instant messaging, mobile messaging, contact details and presence. More
recent content-centric clients focus on simplifying content access, consumption and collaborative
creation through integration of sources and repositories, editing tools, collaboration and sharing
capabilities. Their mobile apps are combined with a cloud service that integrates back-end
repositories or other clouds. Some of these products can also use analytics from server
components to adapt data presentation in the client app to the user's behavior and preferences, for
a more effective experience.
No mobile collaboration client products integrate every possible function today, but in the future,
they will expand their scope. Leading offerings will encompass a broader range of collaboration
functions. Optimization of user interactions will be possible by exploiting analytics of content
consumption or collaboration patterns for each employee for example, to create
recommendations for content visualization and to personalize the application in real time.
Mobile collaboration technology is featured as a technology profile in a number of Hype Cycles
published in 2014.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: A new generation of tools is developing that aims at progressively reducing
fragmentation by converging multiple collaboration capabilities under a unique client application
screen. The availability of mobile collaboration clients will raise mobile workers' productivity and
engagement within the workplace, and externally with customers and partners.
User Advice: Consider mobile collaboration technology with optimized mobile experience for
collaborative content access and creation. Implement appropriate controls to limit the risks of
security breaches and data losses.
Selected Vendors: AgreeYa Mobility; bigtincan; BlackBerry; harmon.ie; Showpad; Unify

Mobile Security Containers


Definition: Mobile security containerization products provide the ability to partition, manage and
secure the corporate footprint on a mobile device. The granularity of a container can vary from a
complete corporate workspace, including dedicated email client, browser and multiple applications,
to a single application or file. A container can be protected through encryption, selective remote
wipe, and data leakage prevention through policy enforcement from a management tool. Containers
can be implemented with different technologies: as an application (for example, Good Technology),
at the OS level (for example, BlackBerry 10, Samsung Knox and Apple iOS 7); through various
forms of virtualization, such as hypervisors; or through server-side centrally virtualized apps. Many
containers focus on preventing enterprise data loss, but containers also can promote efficiency and
operations for mobile users with increased management and remote support. Containers can be
used both with native apps and HTML5 apps.
Trend Analysis: Security containers have seen significant adoption in recent months. The evolution
of MDM into EMM has made security containers available from a larger pool of vendors, and the
need to manage and secure enterprise data on user smartphones and tablets has driven many
organizations that adopt EMM to implement security containers. In addition, stand-alone container
products such as Divide (purchased by Google) and NitroDesk TouchDown (purchased by
Symantec) have significant market penetration.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Using security containers allows companies to establish a common security and
authentication standard for mobile support, and to separate organizational and user data.
Organizations that require stronger controls than those available in the native OS should consider
security container products as part of their overall mobile security and management strategy.
User Advice: Security containers are an important technology asset for many enterprises
supporting organizational data and apps on both business or user-owned (that is, BYOD) devices.
Make security containers a requirement when evaluating EMM products, if native OS controls are
inadequate from a security, management or support perspective.
Selected Vendors: Good Technology; Citrix; VMware (AirWatch); Symantec; Google; IBM

Enterprise App Stores


Definition: Enterprise app stores support app discovery and downloads through a local storefront
client or browser on a smart device or PC. Enterprise app stores are private, cloud-based or
deployed on-premises, and help organizations deploy apps for employees and partners (see "Hype
Cycle for Mobile Device Technologies, 2014" ).
Trend Analysis: Enterprise app stores emulate public store paradigms but are private,
implemented on internal servers or through private clouds. They aggregate and present in-house
and custom-developed apps, as well as selected apps from public app stores and enable users
to discover, rate and recommend apps through an optimized portal client application on the device.
Private mobile app stores are critical for organizations deploying large numbers of mobile apps, or
public apps that have been wrapped or customized to work within the context of mobile application
management or EMM policies. They facilitate easy discovery and distribution of apps to the mobile
workforce and end customers, and are an integral part of systems that provide app security controls
and management capabilities.
EMM vendors offer an enterprise app store as part of their products suites, and a majority of
organizations today acquire this asset through an EMM suite purchase. Citrix goes beyond mobile
devices to support any endpoint client with its unified corporate app store for mobile, Web, SaaS
and Windows applications. Enterprise app store capabilities are also available within mobile
application management and mobile application development platform (MADP) offerings. Trends in
recent months reflect continued market consolidation around EMM, though a handful of stand-alone
MAM vendors remain, with some, such as Apperian, having strong recent quarters.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Enterprise app stores should be considered foundational assets as mobility
evolves from a communication focus to a productivity focus.
User Advice: Add enterprise app store requirements to your EMM vendor selections and
investments.
Selected Vendors: VMware (AirWatch); Apperian; Citrix; IBM; Good Technology; Kony; MobileIron;
SAP; Symantec

Mobile Cloud Email


Definition: Mobile cloud email is a vendor-offered, multitenant, Internet-delivered email service
available for mobile devices, and is scalable and flexible.
Trend Analysis: Microsoft, IBM and Google offer cloud email services on mobile devices, and will
continue to expand mobile support. Microsoft and IBM customers should evaluate migrations to
online services once software license contracts reach renewal. At this point, Google is considered a
less-expensive alternative. Cloud email currently has minimal adoption, but will grow significantly
through 2016. Cloud email support is expanding rapidly in the wireless email market, and will
transform it in the long term. BlackBerry offers cloud BlackBerry Enterprise Service (BES) through
the Microsoft Office 365 cloud offering. We expect further developments in combination with main
cloud service providers (CSPs).
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: Organizations with large populations of users who don't rely heavily on email,
such as retail or manufacturing floor workers, data entry clerks and hospitality personnel, can
immediately benefit from cloud email services.
User Advice: Consider mobile cloud email services as part of a wider cloud email strategy.
Selected Vendors: Google; IBM; Microsoft

Mobile Web Adaptation Platforms


Definition: Mobile Web adaptation platforms take existing websites and, at a minimum level,
optimize them for mobile; some offer transcoding graphics, layout and feature adaptation, and other
responsive design capabilities. These products range from very simple screen configuration tools to
full application development (AD) tools. Mobile Web applications for mobile devices only require a
Web browser to execute. They differ from mobile native apps in that they use Web technologies
such as HTML5, JavaScript and CSS, and are portable across multiple OS platforms.
Trend Analysis: Such tools have existed for many years, but have adapted significantly with the
evolution of the mobile Web from the early WAP browsers to today's HTML5 mobile browsers.
Multiple offerings are available, from Web-hosted to on-premises-installed options. The interest in
delivering responsive websites and apps has driven interest in these platforms.
Another driver for mobile Web adoption has been the improvements in HTML5 and browsers, as
critical mass for support of HTML5 materializes across devices with capable browsers. However,
testing and interoperability issues will remain due to implementation differences. The proliferation of
WebKit-based browsers in mobile will help with this.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: A major reason to go with mobile Web applications is to support multiple
platforms. Another consideration is security, because device-resident or -cached data introduces
security concerns. Mobile Web applications can in certain scenarios, and with careful attention to
APIs and extensions provide a rich user experience that comes close to that of the native
application with much less development effort and greater portability and flexibility.
User Advice: Enterprises should consider use for both internal portals and consumer sites. Use
Web-standard approaches when portability and ease of development are goals. HTML5 and
standard Web technologies make the most sense when multiplatform viability is a strong
requirement. Native approaches make more sense when there is a need to take advantage of
leading-edge device capabilities, such as embedded sensors and accelerometers.
Selected Vendors: Mad Mobile; Mobify; Moovweb; July Systems; Usablenet

Choice
Enterprise File Synchronization and Sharing
Definition: Enterprise file synchronization and sharing (EFSS) refers to a range of on-premises or
cloud-based capabilities that enable individuals to synchronize and share documents, photos,
videos and files across multiple devices, such as smartphones, tablets and PCs. File sharing can be
within the organization as well as externally (for example, with partners and customers), or on a
mobile device among apps. Cloud data storage, security and collaboration are complementary
features of EFSS offerings, to address enterprise priorities. On the client, these features are offered
through native applications, the file browser or the Web browser.
Trend Analysis: IT organizations are increasingly aware of security, privacy and compliance issues
originating from personal cloud services that are frequently used at work. However, users want
modern productivity tools to help them work more effectively, something IT has often been slow to
supply. BYOD accelerates this trend. While awareness of this phenomenon has grown, many
organizations are still in denial about the ongoing use of personal cloud services, or undecided on
what to do. But mature organizations are investing in EFSS capabilities to enable secure mobile
content sharing and productivity, to reduce risks and to improve productivity.
EFSS offerings include capabilities such as file synchronization and sharing, storage and backup,
native mobile apps, content creation and collaboration, and back-end server integration with
SharePoint and other corporate platforms. They provide security features such as password
protection, remote wipe, data encryption, data protection and digital rights management; and
management functions such as integration with Active Directory. Modern UIs optimized for mobile
use are key elements for acceptance. Storage options from leading vendors are increasingly
flexible, offering storage in the cloud as part of the service (public cloud model), integration with
existing repositories or third-party services (hybrid), or implementation as a separate repository on-
site (on-premises).
The EFSS market is crowded, with multiple players from areas such as mobility, storage and
backup, collaboration, content management, business applications and security. Some have stand-
alone offerings that organizations need to acquire through new purchases and suppliers
("destinations"); others offer EFSS as "extensions" to other IT products. Over the next three years,
the EFSS market will continue to grow and commoditize. By 2017, the EFSS market will be partly
absorbed into adjacent markets, such as collaboration and content management; a few destination
players will transform their EFSS offerings into broader ones that include collaboration, content
editing and creation, analytics, and mobility in the cloud.
Security and compliance risks may slow adoption in the enterprise. The cost of storage services
may also be difficult to justify versus existing on-premises infrastructure, especially for large
deployments. This may lead enterprises to increasingly prefer hybrid solutions.
EFSS technology is featured as a technology profile in a number of Hype Cycles published in 2014.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Enterprise file sharing will enable higher productivity and collaboration for mobile
workers who deal with multiple devices. Organizations investing in such capabilities will enable a
more modern and collaborative real-time workplace, reducing or avoiding the inherent
security/compliance threats of personal cloud services. The business benefits are increased
productivity and cost savings.
User Advice: Organizations with mobility and employee-owned device programs in place must
explore potential risks of personal cloud services, and consider deployment of EFSS capabilities,
which enhance mobile collaboration and user productivity with appropriate IT control.
Selected Vendors: Accellion; Acronis; VMware (AirWatch); Alfresco; Boole Server; Box; Citrix;
Dropbox; Egnyte; EMC; IBM (Fiberlink); Good Technology; Google; Hightail; Huddle; IBM; Intralinks;
Mezeo; Microsoft; Novell; OpenText; Oxygen Cloud; ownCloud; SAP; SugarSync; TeamDrive; Trend
Micro; Workshare; WatchDox

Mobile Development Containers


Definition: Mobile development containers enable deployment of HTML5-coded apps or WebViews
in an app sandbox that provides access to native device functions.
Trend Analysis: The driving force behind mobile development containers is the growing popularity
of developing apps with HTML5 and the need to support multiple device platforms. Development
containers offer the ability to build an app with a single codebase (HTML5/JavaScript, CSS) and
then leverage native containers for different OSs to deploy as a hybrid application.
The container provides access to hardware resources and enables deployment via commercial and
enterprise app stores. Developer containers are typically provided by either mobile application
development platform vendors or development frameworks, and range from open-source Apache
Cordova, to custom extensions on top of Cordova, to full-feature proprietary containers. The
MADPs that offer customized and proprietary development containers provide features typically
unavailable in pure HTML5 applications, such as user identification and authentication, in-app
analytics, data encryption requirements, and APIs that leverage mobile middleware solutions from
the platform providers.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Use of mobile development containers can reduce development effort in building
cross-device platform apps. A significant advantage of using development containers for hybrid
apps is being able to dynamically deploy new versions of apps without going through the app store
and packaging processes required with native apps.
User Advice: Developer containers are an effective method of packaging and deploying HTML5
apps as native-wrapped applications. As mobile containers mature, Gartner believes there will be
more variation in the capabilities offered, particularly from a management and security perspective.
Selected Vendors: Adobe (PhoneGap); Apache Cordova; Kony; Pegasystems (Pega Application
Mobility Platform [AMP]); IBM Worklight; MobileForce (formerly Fonemine)

Enterprise Mobile Management


Definition: Enterprise mobile management systems go beyond core device management,
broadening into neighboring areas like mobile application management, content and document
management, client virtualization and workspaces, security, network management, and system
management. As of 2014, Gartner no longer tracks basic MDM in a Magic Quadrant, as the key
vendors in this space have evolved their offerings into more general purpose EMM suites in
response to organizations demanding an increasing degree functionality in support of more complex
mobile usage scenarios.
Trend Analysis: EMM continues to see rapid adoption in the enterprise. Client buying patterns
indicate that EMM is now the go-to asset when purchasing a mobility management capability. The
widespread deployment of basic MDM is now being built upon in the areas of mobile content
management, mobile application management, security containers, certificate management and
expense management in a high percentage of organizations, and sales of top-tier offerings that
include these components are brisk. The continued adoption of BYOD is driving organizations to
deploy EMM to both user-owned and enterprise-owned devices.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: As mobile apps proliferate, and as more and more enterprise data resides on
mobile smart devices, EMM will be the main management console many organizations use for
securely supporting enterprise content on mobile devices.
User Advice: Companies employing only basic MDM should re-evaluate their management and
security needs as mobile devices move from simple communication tools into the powerful
handheld personal computers they are. IT planners should expect increasing functionality in support
of application, content, expense and access management.
Selected Vendors: VMware (AirWatch); MobileIron; Citrix; IBM; Good Technology; Soti; SAP

Cross-Platform Mobile Application Development Platforms


Definition: MADP cross-compilers are development platforms that enable creation of an application
with a single codebase that is then compiled into native or interpreted by a runtime once installed on
a mobile device. These platforms leverage a variety of languages such as Java, JavaScript, C++
and C#.
Trend Analysis: Ideally, IT organizations want a single development platform for their mobile
application projects, just as they once selected an application server standard for their desktop
applications. In response, a range of cross-compiler MADPs have emerged and are evolving
rapidly. Previously, most mobile platforms supported development in proprietary languages, and
then generated into native applications. Now, common languages such as Java, JavaScript and C+
+ are used by cross-compiler MADPs, enabling broad community-supported code and greater
extensibility. Many of these MADPs also support mobile app management, mobile back-end
services, testing tools and development workflow tools.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Any organizations due to support mobility across a variety of use cases, users,
devices and applications can definitely find benefits in leveraging these tools for mobile application
developments, thanks to the lower effort of optimizing across platforms. Enterprises with a large
customer base, field service or sales forces could see a big impact. Project times and overall total
cost of ownership (TCO) for mobile line-of-business applications can be reduced.
User Advice: Skills are also a key consideration in cross-compiler MADP decisions. Although less
risky than SDK coding, cross-compiler MADP may present challenges. In choosing one of these
platforms, consider what development language and proprietary tools are used, what skills are
needed, and what level of support and training may be required.
Selected Vendors: Pegasystems; DSI; Embarcadero; Kony; Xamarin

Tablets
Definition: A tablet is a device based on a touchscreen display (typically with a multitouch
interface), historically focused on the consumption of media, but increasingly viable as a general-
purpose computing device capable of an array of content creation and line-of-business-oriented
tasks. The device can facilitate input via an on-screen keyboard or a supplementary device, such as
a keyboard or pen. Some products support voice controls, and future products will support gestures
as well. The device has a screen with a diagonal dimension that is a minimum of five inches, and
may include screens that are as large as are practical for handheld use, roughly up to 15 inches. It
features wireless connectivity with Wi-Fi, third generation (3G) or both, a long battery life and
lengthy standby times, with instant-on access from a suspended state. Examples of tablets are the
Apple iPad, Microsoft Surface and Samsung Galaxy Tab.
Trend Analysis: The iPad originated a new category of mobile devices, one that has proven
disruptive for the handheld consumer electronics market: e-readers and portable media players, as
well as PCs. Tablets are available from many vendors, running a number of major operating
systems. Organizations have seen an increasing demand from their user bases, similar to what they
initially experienced with the iPhone, to connect the iPad and other tablets to organizational
resources in order to access email and other applications. Mobile application software vendors,
EMM vendors and security vendors support tablets. An increasing number of organizations are
replacing PCs with tablets for specific job functions that require a lighter-weight, easily portable, yet
powerful computing device. Examples include pharmaceutical sales, manufacturing quality control,
field service employees and healthcare workers, to name a few.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: Tablets have found their place in the enterprise, and have proven viable
replacements for PCs in certain specific job areas. Knowledge workers increasingly utilize tablets as
a larger-screened, "grab and go" alternative to laptops for certain tasks. Tablets continue to move
into enterprise networks via BYOD as well. Tablets are enabling new business scenarios involving
employees and customers, where a simple touchscreen interface and immediacy can improve
efficiency, collaboration and client satisfaction.
User Advice: Plan for adoption and support of tablets, especially as noncorporate assets, to
support business activities and applications for employees, and to deliver content to end customers.
Look for opportunities to equip specific users with more task-appropriate tablets over legacy PCs
wherever mobility and improved portability are priorities, and legacy PC applications aren't a barrier.
Selected Vendors: Apple; Dell; Lenovo; Motorola; Samsung

Activity Streams
Definition: An activity stream is a publish-and-subscribe notification mechanism and conversation
space, typical of social networking. It lists activities or events relevant to a person, group, topic or
everything in the environment. A subscriber can "follow" entities such as other participants, groups,
topics or even business application objects to track their related activities. For example, a project
management application may add status information, while a physical object connected to the
Internet may report its state (for example, a tunnel reporting a lane closure). Mobile apps are
increasingly feeding activity streams, or aggregating feeds from multiple sources.
Trend Analysis: Activity streams are deeply connected to and enabled by mobile devices. Mobile
users interact with their communities, sharing content, publishing status or short texts (140-
character length) in real time. Twitter is the most successful example, with 500 million subscribers.
Activity streams are popular on Facebook and other social networking sites that aggregate user
activities from other online services where the user has accounts or contacts. Users can control
how much of their activity stream is available to other users. Activity streams are increasingly used
in business environments, with streams injected by people, as well as business applications (for
example, about business events). Activity streams are becoming a general-purpose mechanism for
personalized information dissemination.
Twitter's open nature is unsuitable for internal use within enterprises, or for confidential
communication with partners, leaving an opportunity for new offerings. Services such as
salesforce.com's Chatter, Microsoft's Yammer, VMware's Socialcast, and Socialspring provide
activity streams aimed at individual companies, and provide IT control and security. Activity streams
are rapidly becoming a standard feature in enterprise social software platforms. Enterprise-oriented
services support real-time communication and collaboration among employees, partners and
customers, building private communities associated with individual companies, and accessible only
by people working for that company. We expect to see consolidation in this market among the big
players during the next 18 months.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Enterprise-oriented services can help organizations promote real-time mobile
collaboration among employees, partners and customers.
User Advice: Experiment with enterprise activity streams for mobile collaboration initiatives to
contain costs and risks, accelerate deployment and demonstrate value.
Selected Vendors: BroadVision; Cisco; Citrix; Facebook; Google (Jaiku); IBM; Identi.ca; Jive;
Microsoft; salesforce.com; SAP; HootSuite (Seesmic); Sharetronix; Skype; Socialspring; Socialtext;
Twitter; VMware

Packaged Mobile Web Adaptation Platforms


Definition: Packaged mobile Web adaptation platforms are code-free mobile app development
tools typically deployed as SaaS, and typically aimed at B2E use cases. They are appropriate for an
enterprise that aims to quickly mobilize a common task or process with business analysts as
opposed to developers. The apps built on these tools can range from simple forms to apps that
require little to some customization.
Trend Analysis: Enterprises focusing on specific business processes can choose vertical-focused,
rapid-development tools for implementing mobile apps. These tools provide application templates
and prebuilt integration focused on a narrow group of back-end applications, industries or users with
rapid-deployment requirements. Enterprises will continue to adopt mobile applications in this area,
and vendors offering highly evolved SaaS-based tools are better-positioned with enterprises that
are severely constrained in development, projects or capital.
The adoption rate, driven by pent up demand for mobile apps in the enterprise, will increase among
niche vertical markets and among small or midsize businesses that are short on developer staffing.
Large enterprises with the desire and scale to industrialize mobile app development will also
increase adoption of these tools.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Packaged mobile Web adaptation platform tools for B2E apps offer quick-to-
deploy, agile solutions that extend business software to highly mobile workers. They can reduce the
break-even payback time on mobile projects to less than two months by lowering capital
expenditures on mobile project software. Enterprises using pay-as-you-go methods can pilot
applications without investing in server licenses, and by limiting integration expenditures.
User Advice: Consider these development tools for specific mobile app use cases that require
quick and simple deployment. This can be an appropriate method for enterprises that want to
experiment with mobile apps without major upfront investment, when severe capital spending
constraints apply, or for disposable apps that suit specific or one-off circumstances, such as
responding to a natural disaster.
Selected Vendors: appsFreedom; MobileForce; ClickSoftware; Capriza; Movilizer; RFgen
Platform-Specific Mobile Application Development Platforms
Definition: Each mobile operating system vendor provides tools for developing native mobile
applications, compiled to binaries in the platform's format and, therefore, executable on those
devices only. A package of software and support is usually provided in support of this type of
development, starting with a free download and access to online documentation. The software
includes a targeted integrated development environment (IDE), visual interface designer, emulator
and debugging tools.
Trend Analysis: MADPs for native development are often chosen to deliver sophisticated app
features, performances and user experiences, based on integration with hardware features such as
sensors, accelerometers, gyroscope, camera and GPS. For example, consumer-facing apps such
as e-commerce and games are most often built with these tools. The native approach requires
multiple specific development skills per OS platform, raising complexity and costs. When multiple
operating systems are targeted for native-level apps, application developers tend increasingly to
work with cross-compiler MADPs (see the Cross-Platform Mobile App Development Platforms
section). However, native MADP tools will always be one step ahead, as new operating system
versions are released with capabilities that will be supported first on these tools.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: Through native MADPs, organizations can undertake mobile application
developments that require rich feature sets, performances and experience. Situations that involve
demanding users, such as end customers in B2C applications, require these tools for best results. If
multiple OS platforms are targeted, a separate app development effort is needed. This raises the
costs and complexity of application development; therefore, enterprises should also evaluate
alternatives in cross-compiler MADPs and hybrid app approaches.
User Advice: Native MADP tools are provided by the targeted OS vendor, no alternative choice is
available: for Apple devices, Apple's tool is based on Objective-C and Swift; for Android devices, the
Java-based Google toolset; for BlackBerry 10 devices, several tools supporting HTML5 and C; for
BlackBerry 7 devices, Java-based tools; for Windows Phone devices, Microsoft's C#, .NET and
XAML tools (integrated into Visual Studio for Windows Phone 8).
Selected Vendors: Apple; BlackBerry; Google; Microsoft

Mobile IM
Definition: Mobile instant messaging (MIM) refers to the use of an online IM application
corporate or public with presence and buddy lists on a mobile device and a wireless network.
Sometimes, this can integrate voice and voice over IP (VoIP) services.
Trend Analysis: The adoption of MIM has progressed in different regions. Standards such as the
Instant Messaging and Presence Service (IMPS) protocol from the Open Mobile Alliance initiative
and Cisco Jabber on the Internet are driving interoperability despite the variety of IM approaches
and products generating fragmentation.
Devices ship with preloaded clients to connect to selected Internet IM services either proprietary
or public. Various mobile applications are available for selected platforms in respective app stores.
Apple's devices are equipped with iMessage, BlackBerry's devices with BlackBerry Messenger
(BBM), and Windows Phone devices with a Windows Live client. Android devices have a range of
messenger application options. MIM clients are available to connect smartphones with enterprise
collaboration platforms, such as Microsoft's Lync and IBM's Sametime.
Real-time mobile messaging services such as WhatsApp are rapidly growing and replacing
traditional IM services on mobile devices. Social networks are also increasingly converging with
mobile messaging, for example, the integration of WhatsApp messaging with Facebook's mobile
app after Facebook acquired the former.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: There will be a broad impact on organizations with large mobile workforces,
because MIM is an enabler for enhancing real-time collaboration. For CSPs, MIM is an opportunity
to deliver a comprehensive offering around personal messaging in addition to SMS and Multimedia
Messaging Service (MMS). However, it is also a threat, as applications such as WhatsApp
Messenger and BBM continue to cannibalize the SMS revenue stream.
User Advice: Consider personal communication tools on mobile devices, such as IM, to help real-
time collaboration, and drive efficiency and productivity.
Selected Vendors: Apple; BlackBerry; CGI; Comverse; IBM; Microsoft; Nokia; Palringo; Tekelec

Cost

Public App Stores


Definition: Public app stores support app discovery and downloads through a local storefront client
or browser. Public stores categorize apps in games, travel, productivity, entertainment, books,
utilities, education, travel and search, with ratings and comments to facilitate app selection.
Trend Analysis: Mobile app stores are targeted to smartphone and tablet users for a range of apps
that includes entertainment, utilities, social networks, music, productivity, travel and news. Apple
boosted the concept in 2008 when it launched its App Store, offering a selection of free,
advertisement-based or priced mobile apps, which propelled the success of the iPhone and iPad
reaching over 775,000 apps as of early 2013. This success story forced other handset and OS
manufacturers to launch their own app stores as part of their value propositions (for example,
Google Play, BlackBerry World and the Microsoft Store). Third parties, such as Handango, GetJar
and Amazon, have also developed their own app stores. Public app stores are relevant for
enterprises, because consumerization and BYOD models drive adoption in the mobile workforce.
Additionally, public app stores are key integration points with enterprise app stores, working in
conjunction to deliver functionality to mobile users. Some support enterprise-oriented features, such
as volume licensing (Apple) or enterprise partitions or private stores (Microsoft, Google). Mobile
B2C application initiatives targeting end customers must leverage public app stores for application
distribution and discovery by target users.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: App stores represent an opportunity for organizations to distribute B2C
applications and content to their end customers. They are key pieces of enterprise mobile
functionality, in that they integrate with enterprise app stores and provide functionality such as
volume licensing or enterprise-specific partitions. They may also represent a threat, depending on
how they are viewed, because employees can easily download personal apps on devices that are
linked to corporate applications.
User Advice: Explore opportunities to exploit public app stores to distribute mobile B2C
applications to the customer base. Evaluate the security exposure of permitting employees to
access app stores and to download apps on smartphones that connect to corporate applications.
Evaluate the implications of public app store requirements when implementing an enterprise app
store.
Selected Vendors: Apple; BlackBerry; Google; Microsoft; Nokia; O2; Orange; Vodafone

Telecom Expense Management


Definition: Telecom expense management (TEM) includes the management of fixed and mobile
communication services and hardware. It may also include professional services that support
sourcing, auditing and strategy. TEM employs offerings ranging from on-premises and SaaS-based
applications to a managed-service scenario to full business process outsourcing (BPO) offerings for
managing telecom spending (see "Hype Cycle for Wireless Devices, Software and Services,
2013" ).
Trend Analysis: TEM has seen continued increases in adoption and awareness, even as the
growth of BYOD, and the new relationships businesses are establishing with carriers to support it
are creating pressures for TEM vendors to adapt. While some EMM offerings include basic TEM
capabilities, they are limited in capabilities, and interest in TEM as a stand-alone product remains
high despite the rapid growth of EMM. In the U.S. and Western Europe, TEM has become a mature
service, with well-known offerings and high penetration and adoption in the large-enterprise space.
Increasingly, as wireless carriers adapt their contractual and service delivery models to BYOD
trends (split voice/data contracts, mix of user-liable and corporate-liable lines under the same
contract), TEM is evolving to meet the demand for capabilities that can manage such environments.
Time to Next Market Phase: Two to five years.
Business Impact: TEM reduces the costs of telecom services by providing rate plan optimization
and invoice management (error reduction dispute management), and provides service management
and resources for management, where there was none. It can also be useful in measuring and
monitoring the effectiveness of savings initiatives related to telecom costs.
User Advice: Consider fixed and mobile TEM as part of outsourcing strategies for cellular, data,
long distance, Wi-Fi hot spots, dial-up and any other remote-access services. Consider
benchmarking current hard and soft costs to understand the full impact of TEM services. Consider
TEM to measure and monitor the effectiveness of cost initiatives that have an impact on carrier fees
and contractual relationships, such as BYOD.
Selected Vendors: IBM Emptoris Rivermine; Quickcomm; Tangoe

Mobile Device Management


Definition: This is a range of products and services that enables organizations to deploy and
support corporate applications to mobile devices, such as smartphones and tablets, possibly for
personal use, enforcing policies and maintaining the desired level of IT control across multiple
platforms. Areas of functionality include security, provisioning, software and inventory management,
and decommissioning.
Trend Analysis: As consumer devices, mobile applications and BYOD became popular in business
contexts and substituted for traditional corporate mobility products such as BlackBerry,
organizations invested in MDM products. MDM offerings are mature and core capabilities have
commoditized. Mobility app and cloud service adoption continue to expand, forcing organizations to
look beyond basic MDM capabilities, into areas of mobile application management, document
management, and virtual client management. Leading MDM vendors have evolved their MDM
products into EMM offerings that encompass many of those capabilities, converging with more
traditional PC management. The MDM market has transformed into EMM, and vendors that do not
provide EMM capabilities are likely to disappear in the coming years.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: Basic MDM products alone are rapidly becoming insufficient to address the
growing range of mobile scenarios required by organizations. While MDM is a core technology for
enabling the mobile enterprise, it is increasingly viewed simply as one of several management and
security capabilities.
User Advice: Consider the evolution of your MDM deployment into a broader EMM suite, by either
investing in your vendor's products for MAM and MCM, or by migrating to a suitable EMM platform
that meets your requirements.
Selected Vendors: VMware (AirWatch); Good Technology (BoxTone); Citrix; Fiberlink; Fixmo; Good
Technology; Ibelem; IBM; Landesk; McAfee; MobileIron; OpenPeak; Smith Micro Software; Soti;
Sophos; SAP; Symantec; Tangoe; Trend Micro

Java ME
Definition: Java ME is a version of Java designed for use in small devices, such as mobile phones.
Java ME is part of the related technologies that include definitions of profiles and configurations for
mobile application developers.
Trend Analysis: Mobile application developments for smartphones moved progressively away from
Java ME technology, into native or cross-platform development tools. Java ME fell into the Trough
of Disillusionment and off the Hype Cycle in 2011. This technology was used with S40, WM6.x and,
more recently, Asha devices, for application development. In fact, Java ME used to be and still is
the de facto programming standard for feature phones that do not support HTML5.
All those platforms are obsolete now, and today's dominant OSs such as Android, iOS and
Windows Phone do not support it. Therefore, Java ME is approaching end of life at this point,
however it will remain in the market for several years.
Time to Next Market Phase: Less than two years.
Business Impact: The expected Java ME effect on business was scalability of mobile applications
through standardized, OS-neutral application interfaces for wireless devices. Java ME also
promised widespread inclusion by handset vendors. It has had niche market success, and now it
has been replaced by mobile Web technologies. While Java ME is approaching end of life for the
predominant uses it has been put to in the past, it's small footprint may see it find renewed life in the
Internet of Things.
User Advice: Consider mobile Web application development technologies and MADP offerings
now.
Selected Vendors: IBM; Motorola; Nokia; Oracle; BlackBerry

Replacement
No assets in this phase.

Gartner Recommended Reading


Some documents may not be available as part of your current Gartner subscription.
"Taxonomy, Definitions and Vendor Landscape for Mobile AD Technologies"
"Hype Cycle for Mobile Applications and Development, 2014"
"Hype Cycle for Social Software, 2014"
"Hype Cycle for Unified Communications and Collaboration, 2014"
"Magic Quadrant for Enterprise File Synchronization and Sharing"
"Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Mobility Management Suites"
"Magic Quadrant for Mobile Application Development Platforms"
"HTML5: The Future of Mobile or Irrelevant"
"Emerging Technology Analysis: Mobile Business Intelligence"
"Introducing the Gartner IT Market Clock"
very Budget Is an IT Budget
in

12 September 2014

G00263281

Analyst(s): Michael Smith

Summary

IT is now ubiquitous. Competitive advantage is increasingly determined by


competencies needed to select, implement and manage IT. CIOs can use this
special report to examine how responsibility for budgeting IT expenses
should be distributed as enterprises transform into digital businesses.

Table of Contents

Analysis

Research Highlights

Gartner Recommended Reading

Figures

Figure 1. Gaining Competitive Advantage by Properly Distributing IT Budgeting


Responsibility

Figure 2. The Expansion of Technologies Considered to Be IT

Analysis

A budget is a management tool for steering resources toward desired business objectives. A
budget is also a mechanism that is required in both the public and private sector, for the CFO
to demonstrate to independent auditors that the necessary internal procedures are in place to
control where money comes from and how it is used. The statement "Every budget is an IT
budget" evokes different meanings and connotations among IT and business professionals.
The extremes among these are:
IT has become so ubiquitous that it is no longer necessary for the enterprise to
maintain a central IT budget; therefore, control for IT spending should be distributed
throughout the enterprise.

IT has become so ubiquitous, and the IT department understands how to manage this
technology better than any other department, so the CIO should control all IT spending
and, therefore, have influence over all departmental budgets throughout the enterprise.

As with most extreme views, neither of these has broad applicability, leaving the best approach
somewhere in between. But how should this ubiquitous resource, in all its new forms, be
managed, and how should control over IT spending be distributed throughout the enterprise?

The research for this special report uncovered areas that can be exploited to gain competitive
advantage during the next few years, as developed economies enter the age of digital
business. These areas include both opportunities and threats that are managed best by
assigning responsibility to those functions within the enterprise with the most capability and
experience to deal with them. Rather than the extremes listed above, the optimal distribution of
responsibility results in a balance between the IT functions and virtually all other business
functions.

We arrived at these conclusions by employing the following approaches:

1. Looking for historical precedents: How were responsibilities for technology spending
distributed previously during periods of significant technology-driven disruptive innovation,
and what were the results?

2. Recognizing that not all enterprises use IT the same way, and not all enterprises will be
affected by the transformation to digital business in the same way.

3. Making clear our findings and recommendations through the use of technology
definitions designed to help in distributing budgetary responsibility for these technologies.

4. Recognizing that the distribution of responsibility for budgeting IT spending must


balance the speed necessary to exploit opportunities with the need to mitigate clear and
present risks that are inherent in these opportunities.

5. Understanding that the proper distribution of responsibilities for budgeting IT spending


is not a short-term issue, because the capabilities necessary to excel in the age of digital
business will become the core competencies for sustainable enterprises in the long term.

The goal of this special report is to provide guidance on distributing budgeting responsibility for
IT in the age of digital business that will enable competitive advantage. Figure 1 provides a
conceptual diagram of how this can happen.
Figure 1. Gaining Competitive Advantage by Properly Distributing IT Budgeting
Responsibility

SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)

Gartner's Hype Cycle is represented by the red curve in Figure 1. The Hype Cycle can be
applied to the transformation to digital business. The phases of this transformation are shown
along the X axis. These phases have been repeated over and over again with all technology-
driven innovations. The Hype Cycle can also be applied to the macroeconomic periods of
disruptive innovation for example, the advent of the PC in the 1980s, client server
computing in the 1990s and e-business in the 2000s. There were similarities in each of these
periods regarding how responsibility for technology spending was distributed. During the first
two phases of the Hype Cycle, spending was driven by non-IT business functions. Marketing,
product development, operations, HR and even finance made many of the acquisition
decisions during the Trigger Innovation and Peak of Inflated Expectations phases. Within one
to two years of the cycle, as modifications, maintenance and integration issues began to
surface, these business functions began to look to the IT department for support. The lack of IT
involvement, followed by the inheritance of ongoing support, resulted in waste: redundancy,
incompatibility, obsolescence and an unnecessarily high total cost of ownership (TCO). These
were the primary reason for the next phase of the Hype Cycle the Trough of Disillusionment.

The objective of this report is to learn from these major periods of disruptive innovation of the
past by distributing responsibility of technology spending appropriately, in order to minimize the
waste and achieve competitive advantage as shown by the green curve in Figure 1.
Key to making this happen in the current period of disruptive innovation is an understanding of
the technologies needed for the transformation to digital business. By defining and
understanding these technologies, proper distribution of budgetary responsibility can be
achieved (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. The Expansion of Technologies Considered to Be IT

SOURCE: GARTNER (SEPTEMBER 2014)

The vertical rectangles contain the various technologies: digital marketing (DM), the Internet of
Things (IoT), operational technology (OT) and traditional IT. What is common among all of
these technologies is summarized in the horizontal rectangle.

Each of these technologies is fully defined and explained in "Define Digital Technologies to
Decide Who Budgets for Them" (see below). Proper distribution of budgetary responsibility is
facilitated by sharing and understanding the definitions for all five of these technologies with
the management team of our enterprise. We use these definitions throughout the research
documents that comprise this report to provide prescriptive advice on how this distribution of
responsibility can be done to promote collaboration among all the business functions involved.

Research Highlights

The following is a brief summary of the research documents that make up this special report:

"Every Budget Is an IT Budget" Michael Smith

This document provides a brief overview of the special report.


"Define Digital Technologies to Decide Who Budgets for Them" Jim McGittigan,
Michael Smith

This research features the definitions and explanations of the five technologies used in
digital business.

"Opportunities and Threats When Every Budget Is an IT Budget" Kurt Potter, Richard
Hunter

Big change always involves both opportunities and threats. This document introduces
and explains those provided by the transformation to digital business.

"The Four Futures of IT When Digital Business Makes Every Budget an IT Budget" Bill
Swanton, Michael Smith

The transformation to digital business will not be the same for all enterprises. This
research presents four possible futures, and how responsibility for budgeting IT should be
distributed in each one.

"How CIOs Influence Decisions When Every Budget Is an IT Budget" Cassio Dreyfuss,
Michael Smith

In addition to the four futures, cultures and work patterns vary among enterprises. This
research explores how culture influences the distribution of responsibility for IT budgeting.

"Digital Technology Budgeting From the Marketing Perspective" Laura McLellan,


Michael Smith

Gartner has done significant research on how marketing uses technology. This
document shares the key findings from that research, and is written from the marketing
perspective.

"The Importance of Operational Technology in Budgeting for the Digital


Business" Kristian Steenstrup

For years, Gartner has published research on how capital-intensive industries use OT,
and the role the IT department has played as OT becomes more IT oriented. There are
lessons learned in the evolution of shared responsibility that can be applied to other forms
of technology.

"Every Budget Is an IT Budget, but What About the Public Sector?" Jerry Mechling,
Michael Smith
Budgeting is as important in the public sector as it is in the private sector, but there are
differences. This research presents the findings of this special report specifically for the
public sector.

"CIOs Should Let IT Asset Managers Win Them More Budget Until Digital-Business
Governance Improves" Stewart Buchanan, Michael Smith

In order to avoid the waste that resulted in previous periods of disruptive innovation,
CIOs can use IT asset management concepts (for example, IT life cycle management and
TCO) to "earn" budgetary responsibility for the technologies used in the transformation to
digital business.

Gartner Recommended Reading

Some documents may not be available as part of your current Gartner subscription.

"Understanding Gartner's Hype Cycles"