SaaS aka software as a service is internet based software deployment model. Here provider licenses an application to customers for use as a service on demand. This fundamentally would mean that traditional Independent software vendor who provides ownership through licensing would be replaced by SAAS’s “rental” model. SAAS provider would always have power to turn off the services due to non-payment or after the on-demand contract expires.
Some features in nut shell are as underneath:
Technology model- multi-tenant architecture
Pricing model- Subscription based, Pay as you go or Pay for what you use.
Financial perspective–FromCAPEX to predictable OPEX
Massively scalable to meet increase in demand
Fix or Feature, deployed in one location and it is available to every customer.
Too much vertical growth is injurious to health of employee and employer. Let’s try to understand what is vertical and horizontal growth of an employee; well if I hire someone for a particular function of my company and regularly promote him for the same function & increase his team size this is vertical growth, now horizontal growth is if the same employee is being assigned cross functional and cross departmental responsibilities consequently enhancing his skill sets this would come under horizontal growth. Monetary benefits would generally remain same in both the growth types. So how come too much vertical growth is injurious to health of employee and employer.
Let’s take employee perspective first, everyone should continuously gauge where he stands in the job market, what is his / her demand with respect to the skill sets acquired under the current employer this defines your Employability Quotient(EMQ not EQ because is EQ de facto acronym for emotional quotient). The second important thing is to gauge how much value you are giving to your current employer such that it’s tough to ask someone else do your current job this defines your Replacement Quotient(RQ). If your EMQ is high and RQ is low that means you are on right track in terms of organizational growth. Now too much of vertical growth would mean a generalist profile with little or no choice multiple skill sets consequently lower EMQ and higher RQ which means unsustainable growth within and outside the organization.
As for employer perspective too much vertical growth is likely to result autocracy, closed groups pursuing unjustified or blind favor ruining the harmony within team. Generally this will develop what I call venomous leaders who are incapable of rational decision-making as a result contaminate entire company culture. Bright people would always stay away from such organization so ultimately its employer who suffers. So employer should always strike a balance between vertical and horizontal growth.
It is said that change is de facto ruler of universe but change always come with resistance to change. Now when it comes to changing a job there is lot anxiety that needs to be address before making a move. I would never suggest frequent job change because that does not look good in your CV and majority of job hoppers get eliminated at sourcing level of recruitment cycle. Moreover I believe if you have joined a company that is your decision and you should stick to it as there is always some scope of learning wherever you join if you have right intentions. When you work in a company there are certain things that you do as your key responsibility area and you become expert in the same and there also some new things that you never knew but you learned from your colleagues/Boss/other division. So those new things that you learn can become your weapon to hunt for a new job. Changing a job can bring more money, more responsibility, better learning curve, bigger network and perhaps elimination of monotony temporarily. Changing a job can also result losing a safe heaven, with all uncertainty and boring training schedules. Always ready with answers why you want to change?
If I see change from employer perspective; HR folks would always support an experience person to stay in the organization keeping in mind the company expenses that incurred in training and development of the employee to make him suitable and productive. But the fact of matter is if someone stays in the organization for a division for too long there is an equal chance of he/she becoming a liability rather than asset for the company. This may happen due to development of a venomous leader in the company who has too much influence in company policy and feels that he can’t be replaced and somehow employer also trapped in the same illusion. Such toxic leader lives in a close group and nobody dare to challenge their opinion if some do that they are blown out of the company. Why employees are so complacent in government jobs? Because they have firm belief that they can’t be replaced and in cases where get transferred from one city to another somehow it restricts them from turning in to a venomous leader because they are unable to form a closed group to support their ill practices. That’s why I always feel that horizontal movement is significant in keeping employee productive both from employer and employee perspective and too much vertical growth can lead to a development of venomous leader. Moreover if someone is leaving a company after substantial stay and is a true leader in that case he would have developed some of his likes e.g. Jack Welch had concrete succession plan; he developed 3 leaders equivalent to his capacity before hanging up his shoes, one was elected as CEO, and the other two left within 10 days of the decision because they deserved no lesser position. So the point is if someone leaves the company no matter what position he is in; its good for the company because it restricts in development of venomous leader and if is not that type probably there would be couple of potential leader ready who deserve to take on the vacant position.
Open source software is not new stuff for technology geeks but lot of has happened within this domain of information technology where source code is available for any one and every one to make changes. This variation of software development involves a very rational approach which reduces chances of monopolizing in product within a given industry as they case may be in traditional licensing software business model. Linux, apache, MySQL, PHP are considered backbone in software product development under open source category. Since linux is a open source O/S that’s why we have so many variation available each having idea of improvement. Now SAAS or software as a service is comparatively new buzz word which is being coined along with cloud computing, single/multi-tenant architecture, here the fundamental differentiators from marketing perspective is instant start through subscription model, cost saving as software resides in cloud so you save infrastructure cost which incur from purchasing servers, multiple license in case of multiple servers & other implementation cost that happens in case of traditional Enterprise software with client server model.
Open source coupled with SAAS can be a cool combination.