SNOW WHITE PAPER
SAM IN AN IMPERFECT WORLD
HOW TO ADDRESS THE REAL-WORLD CHALLENGES OF
MANAGING SOFTWARE ASSETS ON TODAY’S NETWORKS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In a perfect world, managing the discovery of software assets, the capture of license entitlements and
optimization of an organization’s software usage and compliance situation would be a single-click
operation. Unfortunately, the world is not perfect and those charged with managing an organization’s
software compliance, availability and expenditure face a number of challenges that can easily derail a
Software Asset Management (SAM) program.
This paper from the SAM experts at Snow Software investigates some of the major challenges facing
SAM managers and IT executives and highlights how to build a successful strategy to overcome them,
ensuring the SAM program delivers true value to the business.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Software Asset Management – the management of the lifecycle of software applications and licenses across the corporate network – is often
portrayed as something of a turnkey solution with a high level of automation.
While that’s certainly the aim of an effective SAM strategy, the reality is that managing software and license entitlements is a complex operation that
requires a careful mix of people, processes and technology.
The ever-changing nature of delivering and managing IT – from the growth of virtualization to the expansion of enterprise platforms, the move to
cloud computing to the tracking of multiple device types – means that the odds are often stacked against those charged with managing an organization’s compliance and software spend. That is unless they have available to them the right tools and resources to achieve a high level of process
and license management automation.
This paper investigates the key issues facing SAM managers and highlights how making the right investments in fit-for-purpose SAM tools can
make the difference between success and failure:
•
Inventory Collection
•
Software Recognition
•
Tracking Software Usage
•
Capturing & Processing License Entitlements
•
Reconciling Entitlements Against Usage
•
SAM isn’t a one-man job
•
Proving the value of SAM
The following chapters will explain why each of the challenges above must not be overlooked or under-estimated. Each section will then present
advice from Snow Software’s SAM experts on how SAM managers can overcome the difficulties of managing SAM in the real world.
The paper will help SAM managers define an effective SAM strategy as well as building a wish-list for the
technology (or technologies) that will be required to provide, process and present the data and intelligence
critical to driving both cost savings and compliance across the software estate.
2.0 IDENTIFYING THE KEY CHALLENGES OF SAM IN THE REAL-WORLD
The following chapters explore the key challenges facing SAM managers as they strive to understand the network, capture license entitlements
and calculate the organization’s Effective Licensing Position (ELP). Each chapter will first identify the key issues and then offer advice for SAM managers on selecting the right tools for the job and how to create and implement an effective SAM strategy.
2.1 INVENTORY COLLECTION
THE CHALLENGE: Analysts and industry experts agree, any success with a ITAM-or SAM strategy starts with the ability to be able to find all the
relevant assets on the network. That means discovering the devices that connect to the network and collecting information about the software
applications installed on them.
The key challenge facing SAM and ITAM managers today is that more organizations than ever are now using heterogeneous IT estates – i.e. networks with more than one platform present. Put simply, it’s not enough to just know what is happening on Windows PCs and Servers, organizations now need to actively track their Mac, UNIX and Linux estates.
And it doesn’t end there. Virtualization adds another layer of complexity, where it’s not just physical assets that need to be discovered and tracked,
but virtual ones too. To add extra difficulty, it’s not enough to audit these two assets individually, organizations also need to track the relationships
between virtual devices and their physical hosts. Just like the physical estate, more and more organizations are using multiple virtualization technologies (Microsoft, VMware and Citrix) concurrently, rather than standardizing on just one method.
All of the above is in stark contrast with the capabilities of the majority of inventory (or sometimes referred to as ‘Discovery’) solutions available on
the market today. Many inventory solutions are platform-specific (often only auditing Windows platforms) or are very poor at auditing some of the
enterprise platforms such as RedHat or SUSE Linux, Solaris or AIX.
Without the ability to accurately identify all the PC, Server and workstation devices on the network, any SAM strategy is incomplete. The simple fact
is that a growing number of the most expensive software applications are no longer hosted on Windows (think IBM, Oracle and SAP), and so to
focus only on the Microsoft platform could leave the organization open to huge risks both in terms of compliance and cost management.
THE FIX: The choice is simple: either select a single inventory solution that is capable of auditing the platforms across the organization’s network, or
accept the fact that multiple inventory tools will be required to provide audit information to the SAM program.
Not all inventory tools are created equal, however, so it is important that organizations ensure their chosen solution is capable not only of
identifying the hardware running different operating systems, but also accurately finding the software installed on these devices. Linux and UNIX
platforms can be especially difficult to audit accurately, so care should be taken to ensure that the chosen inventory solution is both comprehensive and accurate in terms of the audit reported.
Above all, it is imperative that SAM managers have 100% visibility of the IT estate.
2.2 SOFTWARE RECOGNITION
THE CHALLENGE: If being able to find all the applications installed on the devices across the network is difficult, then actually recognizing what
they are in terms of commercially licensable entities is even harder.
The challenge of software recognition is essentially twofold: First, many inventory solutions rely on the discovered application files to ‘tell’ them what
they are – i.e. the inventory solution reads the information stored in the file’s meta information to determine the publisher, application name, version and so on. There are two major problems with this approach. First the meta information is often (more often that you might think!) factually
wrong or misleading, and second the meta data may not correspond to licensable application (e.g. the discovery tool says it has found “widget
2.2.4” but the organization owns a license for “widget 2” – can the license be used against the installed version?).
The second part of the challenge is that scanning individual files on their own rarely gives any insight into ‘how’ the application was installed – was it
installed as a stand-alone product or as part of a commercial bundle or suite?
These two challenges are why Software Recognition is often a task best not left to the inventory solution!
And as for solutions that rely on in-product software recognition databases? Well, that’s a bit like your anti-virus solution – great if the dictionary is
constantly updated, but organisations can all-too easily miss updates or still find themselves with hundreds if not thousands of unrecognized files
to manually investigate.
THE FIX: SAM solution providers like Snow Software understand the importance of software recognition and so offer customers what’s sometimes referred to as a ‘Software Recognition Service’ where the raw data from the inventory solution (or solutions, if you use multiple inventory solutions to monitor different platforms) is first checked against a comprehensive library of known applications and suites (something like 30 million
recognized files in Snow’s case), with any applications that are left ‘unrecognized’ being investigated by a team of skilled software audit experts.
This service-based approach to software recognition is the only way that an end user organization can realize the benefits of a Service Level
Agreement that guarantees the organization will have complete visibility and understanding of the licensable applications and suites installed on
their network. Solutions like those from Snow can even use PowerShell scripts to collect other data from devices which may further aid software
recognition.
2.3 TRACKING SOFTWARE USAGE
THE CHALLENGE: From a compliance standpoint, if an application is installed on a device, then in the vast majority of cases it needs to be licensed,
regardless of how often it is (or is not) used. As such, the process of finding and accurately recognizing the installed software is vital to ensuring
that the organization does not fall foul of licensing laws.
But that’s only a small part of the story. If an application is installed on a device (and is therefore consuming a license), but is not being used
effectively, then it is not delivering any value to the business and is an unnecessary cost. This should be as much of a concern to SAM managers
as non-compliant software.
This is why it is vital to track both the presence and the usage of software on the network. And off the network. With 75 per cent of organizations
now paying for cloud-based licenses, it’s not only the use of applications installed on PCs and Servers inside the organization that needs to be
monitored.
Yet many inventory solutions and SAM platforms either fail to track usage entirely, or fail to deliver sufficiently-rich intelligence for SAM managers to
make effective decisions about the licensing and budgeting needs.
THE FIX: Organizations should select a SAM solution that can track the usage of both on-premise and cloud-based applications. Ideally, usage
should not be limited to ‘device-based access’ (i.e. how often an application is run on/from a particular machine) but should also incorporate
user-based metrics (i.e. who is using what application, regardless of device).
In order to make informed decisions, usage metrics should not be limited to restricted categories such as ‘daily’ or ‘weekly’. A more granular level
of usage tracking that ties individual users to specific usage trends can enable SAM managers to make more intelligent decisions about whether
licenses can be re-harvested or indeed whether subscription licenses can be altered or re-negotiated with suppliers.
2.4 CAPTURING AND PROCESSING LICENSE ENTITLEMENTS
THE CHALLENGE: So far, the challenges highlighted above all concern understanding what’s installed on the network and how it is being used.
For a SAM manager, that’s only half the story. The next step is to capture and apply what the organization has actually paid for – the licenses it has
bought.
An increasing number of IT Asset Management solutions claim to offer ‘license management’ as a core competency or value-added module. The
reality, however, is that most so-called license management solutions are actually little more than glorified spread sheets with little or no licensing
intelligence built in.
What’s more, populating these solutions with different entitlements is almost always slow, and in some cases, impossible. That’s because most
ITAM solutions lack the ability to easily bulk import entitlements and even more don’t support some of the increasingly-important license metrics,
such as Processor Value Unit (PVU) licensing, named user licensing, Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) and others.
At best, these solutions carry a high administrative overhead that makes using the ‘solution’ little better than manually recording licenses in an Excel
spread sheet. At worst, they can lead SAM managers to make incorrect assumptions about entitlements, which can lead to an inaccurate Effective
Licensing Position (ELP) for Microsoft and other software vendors that results in either a compliance failure or over-spend (or worst of all, both!).
THE FIX: In the majority of cases, an ITAM platform solution is not a good choice to manage software licensing. Organizations should look for a
specialist SAM solution that can complement existing ITAM investments but offer specialist functions to import license entitlements as quickly and
accurately as possible.
Where vendors such as Microsoft create bulk entitlement records (Microsoft offers volume licensing customers a report known as the Microsoft
License Statement – MLS), these should be imported automatically, with the SAM solution ‘understanding’ what the license is, the appropriate
license metric and how it can be applied against the audited software usage (see next section). More than simply populating the license repository,
the chosen tool needs to have the flexibility and intelligence to support all the different types of license that an organization has (or is likely to)
purchased.
Moving forward, SAM solutions will need to have the ability to integrate with, and import data from, all different types of sources – such as ERP
systems for tracking software purchases made ‘outside’ normal channels. For example, credit card receipts could be used to highlight software
bought on expenses. HR systems, too, could provide valuable sources of data on employees (moving around or even leaving the organization and
thus affecting licensing requirements).
2.5 RECONCILING SOFTWARE USAGE AGAINST ENTITLEMENT
THE CHALLENGE: Having established both what’s installed (and hopefully how it is being used) and what the organization has purchased, the
SAM manager must now reconcile the two data sets to create the organization’s Effective Licensing Position (ELP). This is where a good SAM solution will come into its own; and where a bad one can do a lot of damage.
A license repository that is either ‘dumb’ (i.e. has no built-in intelligence) or focused primarily on simple per-device licensing metrics will offer little in
the way of value when it comes to calculating the ELP for volume licensing, server licensing, virtualization or user-based licensing schemes.
SAM managers forced to use these limited-capability solutions will still have to devote a lot of time (or even worse, pay an expensive consultant to
do it) to manually calculating the ELP – or risk the SAM results being highly inaccurate.
THE FIX: The benefits of selecting a ‘thoroughbred’ SAM solution over a generic ITAM workhorse platform are often most evident when it comes to
creating the Effective Licensing Position (ELP).
Organizations should select a SAM platform that matches their current and future licensing plans – i.e. one that can manage all of the different
licensing schemes the organization pays for today, or is likely to use tomorrow. In most cases, this means selecting a solution that not only has the
intelligence to capture and reconcile device-based licensing, but one that supports enterprise platforms such as IBM and Oracle, new technologies
such Virtual Desktop Infrastructure (VDI) and the management of cloud-based applications.
A truly-capable SAM solution will not only support all the prevalent license types and automate key reconciliation tasks, it will also prepare and
present the resulting reports in a way designed to help the SAM manager deliver an ELP to relevant parties and drive intelligence decision-making.
2.6 SAM ISN’T A ONE-MAN JOB
THE CHALLENGE: Although this paper offer refers to a generic ‘SAM manager’, the fact is that Software Asset Management is rarely a one-man
task. For most organizations, there will be a virtual team of stakeholders from multiple departments (IT, procurement and governance) and
business units. Organizations can also drive additional value from integrating SAM data points with other IT systems such as the help desk (where
access to inventory and licensing data can dramatically accelerate resolution times and first-time fixes).
The challenge therefore is to find a solution that enables each stakeholder to play their part effectively while also securing the integrity and confidentiality of this sensitive information. That means giving each stakeholder access to the parts of the solution that enable them to input relevant
information, generate the reports specific to their function as well as receive alerts and notifications when something requires their attention.
What most organizations don’t need is either a single-user solution that prevents multiple users working at the same time or a solution that doesn’t
have the ability to automatically schedule tasks and generate notifications.
THE FIX: The checklist for an effective SAM collaboration tool is relatively simple. The bulk of the daily tasks should be web-based, enabling the
solution to support multiple concurrent users, with the ability to create granular user profiles that enable each stakeholder to play their part without risking the integrity or security of the information.
Further, the SAM solution should feature both relevant out-of-the-box management and asset reports as well as the ability to easily create custom
reports specific to an individual organization. SAM managers shouldn’t need to be SQL gurus to get to the reports they need to manage the organization’s compliance and software expenditure!
2.7 PROVING THE VALUE OF SAM
THE CHALLENGE: One of the historic criticisms of many SAM programs has been a failure to demonstrate a meaningful return on investment. In
reality, a well-conceived and executed SAM program will drive value on many levels – from cost-avoidance through reduced compliance risk and
better preparedness to respond to vendor audits, through to tangible savings such as re-harvesting unused licenses and re-negotiating contracts
with vendors. The issue of proving the value of SAM is largely twofold – first the SAM manger needs to know what kinds of value they want to
assess. Second, the tool needs to make it easy to generate the reports that support the values determined by the SAM manager.
This second point is where most SAM tools fall short; either because they are not collecting (and therefore cannot report on) the right data about
the assets and entitlements held by the organization, or because they lack the reporting engine to create useful and actionable intelligence.
THE FIX: The importance of management reporting must not be overlooked when selecting a SAM technology platform. Ideally, the tool should
collect all the data required by the organization, but then also make it easy to create reports that can be shared with both internal and external
stakeholders.
Many SAM reports will be standard and so these should be available ‘out of the box’, but as each organization’s use of devices, licensing schemes
and technologies will differ, the solution should also make it easy to create management reports specific to the organization’s requirements. This is
where custom reporting becomes increasingly important.
SAM managers should not need to ask for help in creating reports, nor should they have to be SQL gurus themselves. Instead, the right SAM solution will provide the ability to select and compare different elements of the overall dataset, enabling the SAM manager to both answer any inbound
queries from business and compliance managers as well as proactively drive cost savings, rationalization and best practice across the organization.
3.0 SUMMARY
In a truly ideal world, organizations wouldn’t need a SAM tool – the software assets would somehow manage themselves and everything would just
fall into place, ensuring that the organizations was neither non-compliant, nor over-spending. However, in the real world all software assets need
close management – even with the advent of new delivery platforms such as cloud applications.
As Software Asset Management (SAM) has come along relatively late in the day compared to IT Asset Management, procurement and network
management solutions – the reality is that the chosen SAM technology must be able to fit around the solutions and platforms already in place.
That means accepting information from many different sources, being able to track applications across several different platforms and having the
ability to monitor the use of not only on-premise solutions, but also those hosted in the cloud.
In this scenario, organizations need a solution like Snow’s SAM portfolio, where the Snow License Manager offers a ‘single pane of glass’ overview of
all installations and licenses. Snow License Manager is fed data by whatever systems are already in place (SCCM, Altiris, LANDesk etc) and organizations also have the option to use Snow Inventory to cover platforms not already being actively monitored (Mac, UNIX, Cloud etc.).
Building the right SAM solution is particular to each organization. The chart below will help readers identify the key criteria they should use to help
select the right SAM tools and service providers.
3.1 BUILDING A SAM SOLUTION CHECKLIST
Having identified the key challenges and possible ways to address them, here is a suggested checklist that will help identify the right SAM solution
for an organization’s individual needs:
Inventory
Software Recognition
Tracking Software Usage
Capturing License
Entitlements
Reconciling usage
against entitlement
SAM Collaboration
Challenge
Fix – SAM Tool ‘must dos’
Multi-Platform networks
Support ALL the platforms in use
across the corporate network – OR
choose multiple inventory solutions.
Provide an accurate software
inventory on non-Windows platforms
Virtualization
Track both physical and virtual devices across different virtualization technologies. Select a tool that automatically associates virtual devices with
hosts and uses host configuration to
help calculate license obligations
Accuracy of recognition
Insist on guaranteed recognition of
licensable applications
Suites & Bundles
Identify both installed applications
and commercial suites and bundles
with minimal administrator
intervention
Accurate usage tracking
Not only identify installs but tracks
the actual usage of applications by
individual users
Granular usage metrics
Usage needs to be user-based and
track more than if software used
simply daily or week
Cloud application usage
Track cloud applications to guard
against over-spending
Bulk import of licenses
Intelligently import bulk license statements from multiple vendors
Support for different licensing metrics
Support all relevant licensing metrics
and vendor-specific schemes
Automation
Automate key reconciliation tasks and
minimize manual intervention
ELP calculations
Create ELPs for all license types,
including PVU, VDI, Cloud etc.
Multiple concurrent users
Support multiple users working on
same data at same time
User Roles
Support creation of granular user
profiles to access the right data and
functions without comprising integrity
Reporting Engine
Out of the box ELP and management
reports plus option to easily selfcreate custom reports
Organisational restrictions
Support organisation based content
filtering
4.0 ABOUT SNOW SOFTWARE
Snow Software is a global leader in the delivery of on-premise and cloud-based Software Asset Management solutions, including multi-platform
inventory and advanced software license management technologies. Every day, organizations ranging from small businesses to multinational
corporations and governments use Snow solutions to analyze and manage more than 1.7 billion software records.
Since 1997, Snow Software has sold over 8.8 million licenses to thousands of end user organizations and service providers worldwide who rely on
Snow’s SAM expertise to manage compliance, optimize software availability and drive cost savings.
Privately-funded, Snow Software is headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden, with international offices located in the United States, United Kingdom,
Germany, China, The Netherlands, Norway and Denmark.
4.1 NEXT STEP
To learn more about Snow Software’s SAM solutions or to discuss a no-charge proof of concept SAM project, contact your local Snow office below:
United Kingdom
Venture House
2 Arlington Square
Downshire Way, Bracknell
Berkshire, RG12 1WA
United States
Telephone +44 (0)1344 74 1047
Fax +44 (0)1344 74 1048
Telephone +1 512 646 2505
Telephone +55 11 3066-2573
Sweden
Box 1033
171 21 Solna
Norway
Vakåsveien 9
1395 Hvalstad
Denmark
Korskildelund 6
2670 Greve
Telephone +46 (0)8 545 475 30
Fax +46 (0)8 545 475 31
Telephone +47 928 95 905
Telephone +45 22 89 92 71
Germany
Leinfelderstraße 64
70771 Leinfelden-Echterdingen
The Netherlands
Tappersweg 17
2031 ET Haarlem
China
33/F Jardine House
1 Connaught Place
Central, Hong Kong
Telephone +49(0)711 722 495 80
Fax +49(0)711 722 495 79
Telephone +31 23 531 54 60
Telephone +85 290 35 22 25
1300 Guadalupe Street
Suite 260
Brazil
Rua Oscar Freire, 379 - 12o Andar
01426-001 São Paulo, SP
Austin, TX 78701