Covering the "convergence beat" has been an interesting task. I'm currently finishing my fifth month writing Considering Convergence, and we've covered quite a few technologies, topics, and issues. From specific product focuses to analyzing the present, past, and future of the industry, there is one thing evident: VoIP, convergence, and the 'fusion' of technologies across a single network, has and will continue to be the standard for business communications. Ten years ago, the idea of convergence was just being developed into product form for the first time. Now, ten years later, the idea has been revolutionized into a whole industry.
Simply put, this industry is booming with exciting new developments and innovation in technology. As a user and analyst of such technology, it's often difficult to integrate specific products, strategies, and solutions into the "big picture" that modern organizations and businesses demand.
My previous blog, "The Future of Key Systems", illustrates a specific facet of a larger problem that I see developing in the convergence field. To be frank, I'm always concerned that some strategies don't 'converge' technologies between multiple organizational networks and systems, but they in fact diverge. Key systems engineer a distinct border and wall around other applications and environments, which is why they simply function as a non-integral telephony system.
I recently had a very interesting conversation with a co-worker about the very same issue, in a different way. We were discussing identity management, and specifically, how some applications and environments fail to integrate themselves into the bigger picture. Therefore, organizations develop multiple "data silos" that contain parallel information about employees, users, clients, and other entities, that don't flow from one system to another.
Convergence is more than telephony or voice over IP. It also isn't about a single product or solution that handles 99% of an organization's technical needs. Convergence is, however, about simplification, integration, ease of access, and the seamless exchange of communications and integration.
As customers and users, it's easy to drown in ROI, feature sets, scalability, and the bottom line when considering a communication system. One recent reader commented that some organizations utilize IP-enabled key systems because of the previous investment in non-IP telephone terminals. What organizations must consider, is how communications systems integrate with their overall technology architecture.
Some organizations argue that they don't need integration between telephony and other applications. This answer is valid, but it may only hold validity for the present time. What about five years down the road? Ten? We should invest in architectures and solutions that can deliver new functionality and higher levels of integration now, and especially in the future.
These issues illustrate some of the core concerns that users and analysts of the convergence field and technologies should have. Business communications should always be part of the larger picture, and never have predefined boundaries. In my honest opinion, the companies that provide solutions in this field are the ones that will offer unparalleled integration, stability, promise, and ingenuity to the end user.
It's truly exciting for me to cover a field that is still in its infancy. What improvements and developments result from the next few years will define the future of communications, integration, and convergence of systems as we know it.
I'm happy to say that the last five months of Considering Convergence have been great, and I hope for many more. I appreciate all of your continued commentary and discussion. We're all still learning about this developing field, and at 21 years old, I still have a long way to go. It's exciting to be watching an industry as it grows and improves. I hope you're excited as well.
Advertisement: |
The Leader in Network Knowledge
Convergence was never a tangible...
It is a marketing tool. It is the same thing many of us have been saying for some time. Customers would reach a point where they would implement "convergence" and inevitably get stuck in a "now what" conundrum.
It was like that laughable Cisco commercial where the IT tech puts an IP Phone on a desk and says "I just saved you $1 Million." - Really? How?
Convergence is an enabler - a means to an end. The reason why convergence is or isn't important to an Enterprise is entirely dependant on the type of business that Enterprise is involved in and their long term goals.
There is no way to paint a broad stroke across the face of IT to determine that convergence is good or bad, a success or a failure, necessary or just a waste of cash.
Everyone needs convergence and divergence. Finding the right mix to address a specific business goal is the hard part.
Post new comment