This is part three of a five part discussion hosted by FOCUS between DCIM leaders from Schneider Electric, Synapsense, Intel and Fieldview.

The format for this discussion is as follows: FOCUS asked the opening question, then each of the participants submitted three questions to be answered by their fellow participants.

In this part Peter Van Deventer, CEO, Synapsense asks the questions:

Q: PETER VAN DEVENTER, CEO, SynapSense: Many DCIM vendors claim to deliver a return on investment for their customer and yet struggle to deliver verifiable cost savings. How are cost savings captured and verified with your DCIM solution and what is the typical ROI of your solution?

A: SOEREN BROGAARD JENSEN, VP Enterprise Management and Software, Schneider Electric: We need to help customers to clearly define success criteria for these systems. Goals and objectives must be agreed in advance of any DCIM project, which should be treated as a process and business project and not simply a software installation. Starting with thorough and deep assessments using smart tools should give a very accurate indication of potential savings and help to get the baseline right. It should also identify what’s achievable depending on how far you want to go with your DCIM project. Generally speaking, ROI will come in three parts:

1. Improved process and workflows; tasks completed more quickly and more accurately to increase customer satisfaction.

2. Better utilization of IT assets, infrastructure and physical resources which results in energy savings, higher efficiency and facility optimization.

3. A reduction of human error and a consequent increase in availability; because downtime is money.

A: JEFF KLAUS, Director Data Center Solutions, Intel: We agree that for DCIM to gain greater traction, vendors must make ROI easily identifiable at all stages of deployment. That said, we’re also finding that ROI is anything but “typical.” In the approximately 40 pilot projects around the globe we’re currently engaged in with our DCIM partners, we’ve discovered that ROI depends on what one does with the data.

A: FRED DIRLA, CEO, Fieldview Solutions: Those that cannot deliver an ROI, or document it, sold the client on hype, bells and whistles, or glitz. A true real-time micro data monitoring solution that normalizes mass amounts of data across a portfolio instantly shows loss, inefficiencies and demonstrates an ROI in matter of months, not years. Many times, the marketing hype states that: without controls, you can’t achieve ROI. This is simply not true, you need data to have control, and without micro data, you cannot get the most out of a control system. The control or behavioural changes that impact the efficiency of a facility can be automated or manual. Either way, without real-time micro monitoring you cannot achieve or demonstrate an ROI.

Q: PETER VAN DEVENTER, SynapSense: Is your DCIM solution capable of actively controlling and optimizing the cooling and power efficiency of the client’s data center?

A: SOEREN BROGAARD JENSEN, Schneider Electric: Yes it is...

A: JEFF KLAUS, Intel: The short answer is yes. Although we are not a DCIM solution per se, Intel is positioned to offer real-time power capping capability to our partners’ DCIM solutions because of our deep understanding of the silicon and firmware.

A: FRED DIRLA, Fieldview Solutions: This depends on how “control” is defined. It is a commonly accepted axiom that you cannot effectively control a variable that is not accurately monitored. If control is defined as: toggling things on/off then the answer is “no.” A monitoring tool which gathers and reports micro data, feeding the user’s operational process is a control enabler i.e. enabling the user to effectively control their environment vis-à-vis informed decisions, garnered by real-time data reports. Our integration with Intel DCM does add the optional capability to add active control functionality for those users wishing to take this approach.

Q: PETER VAN DEVENTER, SynapSense: In choosing a DCIM solution, data center managers must decide to align with one or many vendors to compile a DCIM solution that meets their needs. Is there a benefit to aligning with one vendor whose strategy is to offer as much as possible or is it better to align with vendors who offer more specialized solutions that integrate with one another?

A: SOEREN BROGAARD JENSEN, Schneider Electric: We would advocate that data center managers pick a DCIM solution with an open and flexible architecture that can integrate plug-ins. This enables “best of breed” functionality to be combined with industry-standard solutions. In its current state of development, there are many offerings available many of which are point solutions or could get consolidated out of existence.

Given the critical nature and long lifecycles of data centers, it’s worth considering how well resourced vendors are in terms of their capability to support your installation and invest in their solution.

A: FRED DIRLA, Fieldview Solutions: Being tied to one vendor has its benefits and risks, but in our experience, those that truly understand the DCIM stack- as outlined by analysts such as Gartner, The 451 Group, and others - know that one vendor cannot solve all data center issues. It is necessary to find vendors that have slight overlap, but specialize in the part of the stack relevant to their specific data center needs. We want clients to test drive and compare us to competitors. We have noticed that vendors not willing to stand behind a Proof of Concept or do a head-to-head comparison are often masking false claims. Every industry in the world allows a test drive of some sort; clients should not base their purchasing decisions on a vendor’s “trust us” policy.

A: JEFF KLAUS, Director Intel: We imagine that data center managers who prefer working with a single vendor will likely look for a DCIM vendor that offers a “fully loaded” solution, while those who have taken a mix and match approach will look to similarly customize their DCIM solution from best-of-breeds. Our customers tell us the things that matter most to them are the stability and potential longevity of the vendor, and the experience of their field engineers who’ll be providing direct support.

Part 1: The opening question

Part 2: Intel asks the questions

Part 3: Questions from Fieldview

The full discussion can be read in FOCUS Digital Edition, Issue 21