Enterprising Developments

Where Cloud Does and Doesn’t Work

Joe McKendrick
Insurance Experts' Forum, May 2, 2012

Cloud has been taking the business world by storm (no pun intended), and many insurers are increasingly facing decisions whether or not to move applications to the cloud. For anyone seeking a quick-read primer, HP just published a mostly objective white paper (with only a smidgeon of product promotion) that outlines some of the fundamental cases for and against cloud deployments.

Like many things, cloud isn't suitable for every part of the business, and there may be cases where its better to leave well enough alone. Here are some places where cloud may not fit:

- Migration costs: When the cost of moving applications is too great.

- Hardware lock-in: If an application uses specific hardware, chips, or drivers, it might not be a good candidate.

- Data issues or security: “Some data is better left where it is.”

In addition, there are at least five fundamental cases that can be made for cloud. Here's where cloud has the best fit:

- Unpredictable workloads: “Cloud provides capacity to handle workloads that are unpredictable since cloud can tap into shared resource pools to scale instantly if workloads exceed forecast.”

- Variable demand: “Similar to unpredictable workloads, those workloads can tap into a shared pool as needed. When not needed, the pool can be used for other purposes.”

- Repeatable applications: “This is a classic cloud use case for service providers and enterprise development environments with services that need to be provisioned over and over again within the enterprise.”

- Singularity: “Services that don’t need a lot of integration into other enterprise apps are good candidates for cloud, such as travel and expense management.”

- New applications: “Many new applications are being developed to take advantage of cloud-based functionality that abstracts away many aspects of middleware/infrastructure management and scaling.”

Joe McKendrick is an author, consultant, blogger and frequent INN contributor specializing in information technology.

Readers are encouraged to respond to Joe using the “Add Your Comments” box below. He can also be reached at joe@mckendrickresearch.com.

This blog was exclusively written for Insurance Networking News. It may not be reposted or reused without permission from Insurance Networking News.

The opinions of bloggers on www.insurancenetworking.com do not necessarily reflect those of Insurance Networking News.

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment on this post using the section below.

Add Your Comments...

Already Registered?

If you have already registered to Insurance Networking News, please use the form below to login. When completed you will immeditely be directed to post a comment.

Forgot your password?

Not Registered?

You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.

Blog Archive

The 5 "I"s of Underwriting Innovation

Underwriting has come a long way in a short time thanks to data and analytics.

Insurers are Losing the Customer Satisfaction Battle – Can Social Media Help or Hurt?

GEICO and Progressive suffered the largest individual carrier dips in satisfaction, according to the ACSI report.

Claims Transformation: Modernization Is Just the Beginning

Claims transformation is bigger than modernization, encompassing changes to the entire claims business model and philosophy rather than simply the day-to-day processes of claims operations.

Why Insurers are Leading on Data and Analytics

A State Street survey finds insurance companies are more likely to be further along in becoming “data innovators” than their financial services counterparts.

Driverless Cars: Unintended Consequences for Insurers to Watch

When bad or unexpected or unusual things happen, the computer gives up control and hands it back to the now woefully unprepared occupant.

The Other Auto Insurance Telematics Shoe Drops

Progressive's decision to charge Snapshot drivers more if their driving data indicates higher risk has started the industry down a road of data-driven adverse selection.