The consulting firm Capgemini today announced that it was adding Google Apps, Premier Edition to its desktop outsourcing service. Capgemini supports over 1 million desktops for its clients, with services ranging from buying PCs, to installing software, to running the Help Desk. In the course of this work, Capgemini installs and supports Microsoft Office, Microsoft SharePoint, and IBM Lotus Notes. With today's announcement, clients can now also request Google Apps.
This announcement helps Google in several ways. First, Capgemini can offer 24/7 telephone support, a cut above Google's current offering of phone support most of the time, e-mail support the rest of the time. Second, Capgemini has been supporting desktop applications for years, and so has the procedures in place to track questions, generate a knowledge base, and otherwise bring a process orientation to support, something Google has been struggling with (based on user comments on the support forums).
Hopefully, this announcement also brings some sanity to the discussion about what Google Apps, Premier Edition can be used for. When my report on Google Apps was published several weeks ago--saying that it was a work in progress and not ready for full scale adoption by large enterprises--some bloggers said it was an in-depth, thoughtful report while others said it was a Google bash job that Microsoft must have funded (not true; Burton Group does not write reports sponsored by vendors). In other words, this debate remains highly charged, a hallmark of early technology discussions (think HD DVD vs. Blue-ray).
The Capgemini announcement is an early test of what an experienced office application provider thinks, and even it thinks that Google Apps needs some work. In my pre-announcement briefing with Capgemini in late August, Capgemini said it was targeting Google Apps, Premier Edition at three situations. First, bringing disenfranchised workers on board--workers who need some kind of office suite but for whom the enterprise has been unwilling to buy Microsoft Office. Second, for supporting highly connected mobile workers who need to collaborate while on the road. Third, collaboration needs with partners, where not having to install software to bring a person into the system is a plus.
When I started to drill into why they cut this deal now, rather than waiting for the solution to become more mature, they had several answers. First, they said it was clear that SaaS-based content management and collaboration was going to become big over time, and basically they wanted to get in on the ground floor. Second, because they had a toolbox full of solutions, they wouldn't be forced to use Google Apps where it wasn't appropriate--they could afford to wait for the product to mature, and they believed it would. Third, they felt they could bring something to the table (support infrastructure and expertise) that Google needed (it's always nice to be wanted). Fourth, even Google recognized that. Capgemini had been in discussions with Google about supporting the Google Search Appliance, and it was Google who said, "Say, would you be interested in helping us out with Google Apps?"
Six months from now, it will be interesting to see where this agreement sits: whether Google Apps has been deployed in multiple large scale situations or has been deployed nowhere. With the Salesforce.com shoe still remaining to be dropped, Microsoft working on Office Live, and Cisco making noises about WebOffice, Google will soon not be the only game in town.
Comments