2007 experts conference survey white paper

8/14/2019 2007 Experts Conference Survey White Paper

1/26

2007 DirectoryExperts Conference

Attendee Survey ResultsHighlights and Analysis

www.netpro.com


2/26

Copyright 2007 NetPro Computing, Inc. All rights reserved.

This paper is for informational purposes only. NetPro makes no warranties, express or

implied, in this document.

NetPro Computing, NetPro and the NetPro logo are either registered trademarks or

trademarks of NetPro Computing, Inc. in the United States and/or other countries.

Microsoft, Active Directory, Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows Server 2003 are

either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. Other product and

company names mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.

NetPro Computing, Inc. 4747 N 22nd Street, Suite 400 Phoenix, AZ 85016-4774

USA

NPITIL-PR-0107-100


3/26

2007 DEC Attendee Survey Results

Copyright 2007 NetPro, Inc.

Index

Executive Overview ............................................................................................1

Introduction.........................................................................................................2

About DEC...........................................................................................................2

General Information........................................................................................................ 2

2007 Highlights............................................................................................................... 3

Survey Demographics ........................................................................................4

Highlights and Analysis .....................................................................................8

I. Issues and Priorities.................................................................................................... 8

II. Job Satisfaction ....................................................................................................... 11

III. Current Practices.................................................................................................... 15IV. Technical Environments ........................................................................................ 18

V. Directory Tool Preferences ..................................................................................... 22


4/26

2007 DEC Attendee Survey Results Page: 1


Executive Overview

This white paper summarizes the findings of a survey taken at the NetPro 2007 Directory Experts

Conference (DEC), which was held April 22 through 25 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The goal of this

survey is to gain a better understanding of the issues facing attendee organizations, the relativepriority of those issues, current tool usage, and common practices for directory and other network

infrastructure management tasks. This years report also examines how trends have evolved from

similar surveys conducted in the previous two years.

The results from those surveys, conducted at the 2005 and 2006 Directory Experts Conferences,

were widely appreciated by the directory community. We plan to continue conducting these

surveys at future DEC conferences and welcome your comments and suggestions for future

questions and areas for analysis.

High points from the survey:

Demographics

DEC 2007 attracted 675 delegates from 300 companies throughout 24 countries.

314 attendees representing a good cross section of organizations responded to this survey.

Survey respondents are primarily technicians, work within large corporate andgovernmental IT organizations, are responsible for Active Directory management and

support large numbers of directory users.

Findings Compliance and Security continue to lead directory management priorities for the third

year in a row.

Auditing Active Directory changes continues to be the most important day-to-dayrequirement.

Survey respondents report substantially higher satisfaction with their jobs than averagefor US workers more than 74% are satisfied or very satisfied with their jobs.

Job satisfaction is directly related to years of job experience only 50% of respondentswith less than one year of experience expressed satisfaction with their jobs as compared

to 82% for respondents with more than 10 years of experience.

Internal politics tops the list of worst aspects of their jobs.

Getting better tools and automation topped respondents job improvement wish list,beating the second place finisher (higher pay) by 2 to 1.

More than 50% of responding organizations follow formal infrastructure managementprocessesof those organizations, 63% consider those processes to be cumbersome and

overly bureaucratic.

Many organizations (55%) consider themselves world class or better than average intheir directory management performance.

Only 25% of IT organizations consider their infrastructure management efforts to bewell-automated.

SharePoint, MIIS (ILM), and MOM continue to show solid growth in market share.


5/26



NetPro 2007 Directory Experts Conference

Attendee Survey Results

IntroductionThe purpose of this paper is to share information gathered from a survey of attendees at NetPros

ninth Directory Experts Conference (DEC) held April 22-25, 2007 at the Red Rock Resort in Las

Vegas. The conference attracted a record 675 delegates representing 300 companies from 24

countries. Of those delegates, 314representing a good cross-section of demographics,

completed the survey over the course of the four-day conference.

The intent was to gather valuable information for attendees, analysts, trade press, and members of

the directory community. Collecting actual data and experiences provides a wealth of

information on the issues facing the directory community, the relative priority of those issues,

current tool usage, and common practices for directory and other network infrastructure

management tasks.

The 2007 survey also builds on the results of similar surveys conducted at the 2005 and 2006

Directory Experts Conferences and gives us the opportunity to examine trends and changes

between the three years.

We plan to continue conducting these surveys at future DEC conferences and welcome your

comments and suggestions for future questions and areas for analysis.

This document summarizes the information captured through the survey along with data analysis,

trends, and our insights on the implications of the findings. We believe it provides solid data for

comparisons with peer organizations and many ideas for organizations to consider as they

evaluate their directory management efforts and look for high value opportunities for

improvement and investment. We hope you find the results as fascinating as we did!

About DEC

General InformationSince its inception in 2002, DEC has been dedicated to advancing the skills of the most

experienced users of Microsoft Identity and Access (IDA) technologies. DEC places special

emphasis on the IDA technologies that IT professionals use and manage on a daily basis,

including Active Directory, Identity Lifecycle Manager (formerly MIIS), Active Directory

Federation Services (ADFS) and Rights Management Services (RMS). The DEC 2007 theme,

Identity and Access in the Longhorn Era, served as a centerpiece for highly technical 200-,

300-, and 400-level content focused on a variety of IDA issues and best practices. In addition to

the core conference sessions, DEC 2007 incorporated several pre-conference workshops

dedicated to Longhorn Active Directory, MIIS/ILM and ADFS.


6/26



2007 HighlightsDEC 2007, the ninth event of its kind, continues to surge in popularity, exceeding last years

record attendance by 120 and growing the number of companies represented from 240 to 300.

Participants enjoyed presentations, interactive discussions, and thought-provoking commentary

by a renowned group of Active Directory authorities including top-rated strategists and speakersfrom Microsoft. With more than sixty sessions, DEC 2007 provided something for everyone and

covered many facets of identity management technology. Popular speakers and topics included:

Kim Cameronthe Microsoft Architect who drives the evolution of Active Directory,Federation Services, Identity Integration Services, InfoCard and other Identity

Metasystem productskicked off the event with a presentation on the Convergence of

Intranet and Internet Identity Technologies that noted how the increasing popularity of

cross-organizational collaboration requires new identity technologies to provide securityin a firewall-less future.

Stuart Kwan (Program Manager, Identity and Access / Microsoft) kicked off the secondday with a keynote describing the current state of identity federation in the marketplace

and the problems that identity federation can solve in the future and discussing howMicrosoft Active Directory products are evolving to meet those needs.

Guido Grillenmeier (Master Technologist / Hewlett-Packard Advanced TechnologyGroup) presented an Active Directory Masters session on how to move your Active

Directory to a 64-bit Windows environment, and covered performance benefits as well as

issues and lessons learned.

Jan De Clercq (Senior Technologist / Hewlett Packard) presented an enlighteningsession called Protecting Active Directory: Red or Blue Pill?, which drew from the film

Matrix to make the argument for a more realistic view of the security world and

examined why Windows Server 2008 is a better platform for protecting Active Directory

infrastructure.

Pamela Dingle (Consultant / Nulli Secundus) brought attendees up to speed on the issuesand opportunities presented by information card technology as it inevitably moves toward

mainstream adoption.

Jeremy Palenchar (Infrastructure Architect / Avanade) offered delegates tips to avoidcommon obstacles, traps, and pitfalls in ILM projects.

Dung K. Hoang (Principal Consultant / Hewlett-Packard) provided an overview ofActive Directory Rights Management Services. His advice: Windows Server 2008/Vista

is the ideal platform to enable Digital Rights Management (DRM) to protect information

in the enterprise.

Deji Akomolafe (Infrastructure Architect / Unisys) revealed the power of Network

Access Protection (NAP) to Bounce the Barbarians. NAP is a new mechanism inWindows Server 2008 that can assist administrators in reducing network exposure to

attacks and compromise.

In addition to a full agenda of sessions, attendees had ample opportunity to network with their

peers during lunch and at the conferences evening receptions.


7/26



Survey DemographicsThe number of DEC survey respondents continues to grow. In 2007, 314 attendees completed the

surveyup from 235 in 2006 and 101 in 2005. The 2007 survey respondents represent a good

cross-section of conference participants and account for 47% of total attendees. Given the

breadth of participation, we are confident that the survey results constitute a representative

sample of roles and organizations. In addition, the sample size is large enough to support avariety of statistically valid breakdowns that allow for accurate comparisons.

Most Survey Participants are Technicians

Breakdown by Job CategoryAs expected, 77% of respondents are self-described hands-on practitioners including

consultants, administrators, system engineers, or technicians within the other category.

Table 1: Breakdown by Job Category

Job Category 2007 2006 2005

Administrator 7% 6% 10%

Consultant 19% 21% 18%

Systems Engineer 40% 40% 46%

Systems or Business Analyst 6% 6% 6%

IT Manager, Director, VP 16% 11% 14%

Other 11% 11% 7%

Industry Analyst/Trade Press 1% NA NA

Blank 0% 4% 0%

NA = Not Asked

By percentage, this years breakdown by job category is very similar to 2006.

Systems Engineers continue to be the most popular category for the third year in arow, accounting for slightly more than 40% of attendees.

The number of IT Managers, Directors, and VPs continues to grow, doubling innumber for the second year in a row.

Respondents in the Other category included developers, testers, product managers,and an attorney. Architects were the most popular responsibility, accounting for the

bulk of technical respondents in this group and 3% of overall respondents.


8/26



A Majority Work in Large Corporate or Government ITOrganizations

Breakdown by Organization Type

DEC attracts a healthy mix of attendees from IT organizations and companiesproviding software and services.

o 193 (almost 62%) are members of either a corporate (50%) or government (12%)IT organization

o Non-IT respondents include Consultants (17.5%), Service Providers (7%)Software Providers (12%) and Other (2.5%)

For a more accurate picture of best practices and technology usage patterns, this analysis will

break out government and corporations separately. Each analysis will note whether it refers to

overall survey responses or specifically to IT responses.

IT Organization Size

Of those designating the size of their IT organization (154 out of 193):o 92% are from IT organizations with more than 100 employees.o A remarkable 78% work for very large IT organizations with more than 1000

employees.

IT Respondents Support Large Numbers of UsersLarge IT organizations also means large numbers of users to support, with 71% working in

organizations that support more than 20,000 users.

Table 2: Number of Users Supported

Users Supported

Over 20,000 users 71%

5,000 to 20,000 users 19%

1,000 to 5,000 users 4%

500 to 1,000 users 3%

100 to 500 users 1%

Less than 100 users 3%

Over the past three years, weve seen a steady increase in the number of users supported. Almost

90% of 2007 IT respondents support at least 5,000 users.

Table 3: Growth in the User Base

Users Supported 2007 2006 2005

Over 5,000 users 89% 84% 83%


9/26



Respondents are Increasingly Specialized Technical Responsibilities

The table breaks down IT organization attendees by areas of technical responsibility. As

expected, the majority of attendees have responsibility for Active Directory.

However, the mix of responsibilities has evolved as the conference has broadened its

mission to include all Microsoft Identity and Access (IDA) technologies. A second trend

is increasing specialization, especially in large organizations. Respondents were asked to

specify all areas of responsibility. Of those, 81% indicated that they support three or

fewer technologies while 22% support only one. Only 2% are responsible for all seven

technologies.

Table 4: Technology Responsibilities

Size 2007 2006 2005

Active Directory 72% 90% 96%

DNS 43% 54% 59%

Exchange 15% 19% 29%MIIS 36% 39% 24%

SharePoint 16% NA NA

Non-Microsoft Platforms 7% NA NA

Entire Network 8% 13% 14%

Other 8% 14% 9%

Administrative ResponsibilitiesThis year, the survey split technology and administrative roles to allow respondents to

enter multiple choices. Again, while Active Directory was the most common

administrative responsibility for IT organization respondents, having technical

responsibility for Active Directory technology does not guarantee having anadministrative role.

Table 5: Administrative Responsibilities

Area

Directory administration 60%

Identity management 46%

Server management 37%

Audit/Compliance 35%

Security 39%

Other 4%

The breakdown of administrative responsibility also reflects the impact ofspecialization:

o 58% of IT respondents are responsible for fewer than three of theseareas.

o 13% are responsible for at least five categories.


10/26



Respondents supporting Active Directory also supported:o 58% - Server Managemento 57% - Securityo 54% - Identity Managemento 52% - Audit/Complianceo 1% - Other

Trendwise, respondents appear to be taking on more audit/compliance responsibilities,

while responsibility for security administration is declining rapidly as that role is being

assumed increasingly by separate security organizations.

Table 6: Administrative Responsibility Trends

Responsibility 2007 2006 2005

Audit/Compliance 35% 33% 31%

Security 39% 45% 54%


11/26



Highlights and Analysis

I. Issues and Priorities

Security and compliance continue to lead organizational prioritiesEvaluating changes in organizational priorities from year to year provides an indicator of the

increasing or decreasing urgency of particular issues. On an individual respondent basis,

increasing priority on a given issue indicates that the organization seeks to improve performance

in that area, while decreasing priority indicates that the organization feels that they are

performing well in that area.

For each of the issues evaluated in the survey, significantly more respondents indicated that their

organization was increasing priority over last year than decreasing priority, showing that these

issues remain areas of concern. However, as shown in the table below, the relative priority of

these issues can be ranked when aggregated across many organizations.

Decreasing

Priority

Same

Priority

Increasing

Priority

Improving directory security 7% 35% 58%

Controlling and auditing changes for corporate compliance 7% 37% 57%

Improving Windows security 6% 39% 54%

Improving quality/service levels of user support 8% 38% 54%

Simplifying sign-on 11% 38% 50%

Strengthening disaster recovery capabilities 9% 46% 46%

Improving directory team productivity 9% 47% 45%

Reducing per user support costs 12% 41% 47%

Increasing speed in resolving production issues 9% 51% 40%

Highlights

Directory Security and Corporate Compliance remain the two highest rankedpriorities for the third year in a row.

Faster and cheaper through cutting costs and increasing productivity is lessimportant than ensuring security and providing better service.

Most organizations are comfortable with the speed at which they resolve productionissues.


12/26



Year to year priorities remain similar, but the level of urgency issteadily declining

When compared strictly by ranking, organizational priorities have remained similar from year to

year.

2007 2006 2005

Controlling and auditing changes for corporate compliance 1 1 2

Improving directory security 2 3 1

Improving Windows security 3 2 3

Improving quality/service levels of user support 4 5 4

Simplifying sign-on 5 6 6

Strengthening disaster recovery capabilities 6 4 ---

Reducing per user support costs 7 7 5

Improving directory team productivity 8 8 7

Increasing speed in resolving production issues 9 9 8

However, when viewed on a relative basis, the urgency of most of these issues has been steadily

declining. For example, Improving Windows security was rated an increasing priority by 70%

of respondents in 2005, but dropped to 67% and 54% in 2006 and 2007, respectively. This

decrease reflects improving practices and tools in each of these areas.

Interestingly, the urgency of the two lowest ranked priorities, Improving directory team

productivity and Increasing speed in resolving production issues has remained relatively stable

over the three survey years.

Respondents face many unique issues when trying to achievesecurity and compliance objectives

Respondents were asked open-ended questions on specific security and compliance concerns. A

variety of general and specific issues surfaced, with security garnering more concerns than

compliance. However, responses for both questions contained considerable overlap. Keyrecurring issues include:

Group policy delegation and configuration management

Provisioning and de-provisioning user accounts and administrative privileges

Complexity of delegating fine-grained administrative tasks

Proliferation of security groups

Delegation across large numbers of groups

Active Directory Permission change tracking

Managing multiple branch offices

Separating administrative roles

Managing/monitoring multiple organizations (such as partners and vendors) sharingaccess


13/26



Auditing Active Directory changes continues to be the mostimportant day-to-day Active Directory requirement

When asked to choose their three most important requirements for Active Directory, respondents

ranked Auditing Active Directory changes as the most important requirement for the second

year in a row. The importance of keeping Active Directory operational is reflected in the second

place ranking for Monitoring Active Directory health. As noted in the open-ended security and

compliance questions discussed above, the effort and complexity of provisioning and de-

provisioning rights is becoming increasingly burdensome and is noted by the rising importance of

automated provisioning.

2007

Rank

2006

Rank

2005

Rank Attribute 2007 Weight

1 1 2 Auditing AD changes 55

2 2 1 Monitoring AD health 473 4 * Automated provisioning 39

4 3 4 AD disaster recovery 33

5 6 3 Delegation of AD rights 33

6 7 * Access control 317 5 6 Implementing AD change management processes and tools 28

8 8 5 GPO change management 209 9 7 Implementing AD troubleshooting tools 10

* Not included in the 2005 Survey


14/26



II. Job SatisfactionThis year we added a new area to the survey job satisfaction to find out if DEC attendees are

truly working at jobs they love. This new area clearly hit a nerve! Respondents were not shy

about their likes, dislikes, and ideas for improving their jobs.

Job satisfaction demographicsIn this analysis, we examined overall

job satisfaction, but we also broke it

down by various demographics.

These include organization/company

type, organization size, and job title

which were discussed in the previous

section of this white paperand

years of job experience, which is

captured in this section of the survey.

As the chart demonstrates, DEC

attendees are a highly experiencedgroup. More than 80% have more

than five years of directory and

infrastructure support experience.

Directory/infrastructure specialists have significantly higher jobsatisfaction than other workers

According to a recent study by TheConference Board, a highly regarded

business research organization, half

of all Americans today say they are

satisfied with their jobs, down from

nearly 60 percent in 1995. But amongthe 50 percent who say they are

content, only 14 percent say they are

very satisfied.1

In contrast, 74% of

DEC respondents profess above

average satisfaction with their jobs,

and 35% say they are very satisfied.

Only 1% say they are very dissatisfied

and 3% are dissatisfied with their jobs.

1. U.S Job Satisfaction Declines, The Conference Board, Press Release, Feb. 23, 2007

http://www.conference-board.org/utilities/pressDetail.cfm?press_ID=3075

Distribution by Job Experience

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Le ss than 1 ye ar 1 to 2 yea rs 3 to 4 yea rs 5 to 10 ye ars Ove r 10 yea rs

Distribution by Satisfaction Level

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Average Satisfied Very Satisfied


15/26



Who are the happiest DEC Attendees?

When it comes to job satisfaction, company type, job experience, and specific job responsibilities

all matter. So if you want to improve your job satisfaction, consider the following findings:

Type of organization The happiest respondents work for a software vendor - 85%

report they are satisfied or highly satisfied, the rest are average in satisfaction. Job Experience Confidence in your abilities and years of real-life experience can

relieve stress. Those with more than 10 years of job experience report an 82% level

of satisfaction.

Responsibilities The challenge of figuring out and implementing user needs isrewarding. Systems/business analysts report a 81% level of satisfaction, taking first

place by job title

Who are the least happy DEC attendees?

Not all DEC attendees are happy with their jobs, but given the high level of job satisfaction across

all respondents, even the groups with the lowest levels of satisfaction meet or exceed US

averages.

Type of organization Too much travel and excessive bureaucracy were the twomost common negative themes in the job comments, creating a tie between attendees

working for consulting firms and those working within government IT organizations

for least satisfied. Still, their overall satisfaction rate is 68%!

Job experience Breaking into infrastructure management is tough; newcomershave much to learn to become effective, so it is not surprising that only 50% of

respondents with less than one year of job experience are satisfied or highly satisfied

with their jobs.

Responsibilities So many users, so many changes! Administrators have a toughjob which lowers their satisfaction levels to 64%.

Satisfaction by type of organizationNo matter where they work, respondents are overwhelmingly satisfied. Service providers had the

highest percentage of dissatisfied employees (15%) while corporate and government IT

organizations had the only highly dissatisfied employees in this category (tied at 3%).

%Satisfied or Highly Satisfied by Organization Type

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

Software

vendor

Corporate IT Other Service

provider

Consulting

firm

Government

IT


16/26



Satisfaction by job experience

Job satisfaction is directly related to years of experience. Respondents with less than 1 year of

experience were more likely to rate their satisfaction as average (44%), while 6% were

dissatisfied. Employees in the 1 to 2 years group had the highest level of dissatisfaction (13%).

Interestingly, the two most experienced groups with the highest level of satisfaction, over 10

years and 5 to 10 years are also the only two with highly dissatisfied respondents, 3% and 1%

respectively.

%Satisfied or Highly Satisfied by Job Exper ience

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

Ove r 10 ye ars 5 to 10 yea rs 3 to 4 ye ars 1 to 2 ye ars Le ss than 1 ye ar

Satisfaction by job title

Administrators were the most likely to rate their job satisfaction as average (32%), while another

5% are dissatisfied. Consultants had both the most very satisfied (47%) and dissatisfied (7%)

respondents, while systems engineers and IT managers had the only highly dissatisfied

respondents at 2% apiece.

% Satisifed or Very Satisfied by Job Title

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

Systems or

Business

Analyst

Consultant Other Systems

Engineer

IT Manager,

Director, VP

Administrator


17/26



Respondents love challenges, solving problems, and continuouslearning

The answers that most respondents gave in an open-ended question about the best aspects of their

jobs would thrill their bosses. The responses show a group of inquisitive and highly dedicated

individuals who want to make a difference in their organizations. The range of responses wasenormous, but the most common themes are:

Working with new and exciting technologies

Constant challenges and new experiences

Continuous opportunities to learn and gain new skills

Being entrusted with significant responsibility

Ability to solve problems

Working with customers

Working with highly talented colleagues

Having the flexibility to do what is needed

Contributing to their companys/organizations success

Politics top the list of the worst aspects of the job

From poorly written customer requests to low confidence that Im doing the right thing,

respondents were not shy about expressing their feelings on the worst aspects of the job.

Excessive internal politics, however, was easily the most voiced complaint. Other frequently

mentioned issues include:

Long hours, not enough time

Bureaucracy and red tape

Lack of tools and resources

Stress levels

Excessive travel Managers and management decisions (and particularly, technical decisions made by

non-tech savvy managers)

Time spent on handling mundane, overhead tasks

Getting better tools and automation tops respondents wish lists

Respondents have numerous ideas on how to improve their jobs. Many suggestions involve

correcting the worst job aspects listed above, but surprisingly, getting better tools and

automation topped the wish list by far, accounting for more than 20% of responses and beating

the higher pay by 2 to 1. Other frequently mentioned improvements include:

Hiring/adding more resources

Improved communications with teams, management ,and users Better understanding of roles and responsibilities

Improved, more efficient processes

Additional/better training


18/26



III. Current Practices

Most organizations consider themselves better than average whenrating their overall directory management performance

Its called the Directory Experts Conference for a reason: 58% of attendees consider theirorganizations as above average in directory management. The percentage of attendees rating

their organizations adequate or above rose to 83% in 2007 from 81% in 2006 and 61% in 2005.

58% consider themselves either world class (20%) or better than average (37%) 25% rate their performance as adequate 14% consider themselves as less effective than we wish 3% consider themselves novices

Infrastructure support team members cover many functions

Almost all corporate and governmental respondents support many critical functions. The table

below shows the percentage of IT respondents supporting each of eight critical directory team

functions.

Critical Directory Team Functions % Supporting

Directory administration 98%

Enforcing security policies 97%Planning and "get ahead" efforts 96%

Supporting AD Users 95%

Directory troubleshooting 94%Supporting corporate auditing/compliance efforts 93%

Monitoring/tuning performance 92%Creating and generating reports 86%

Almost 70% of the respondents support all eight functions, and all IT respondents covered at least

three of the 8.

Number of Functions Supported % Supporting Cumulative %

All 8 Functions 69% 69%

7 out of 8 Functions 16% 86%



4 out of 8 Functions 1% 98%3 out of 8 Functions 2% 100%

Support teams spend the bulk of their efforts on these functions

Are Active Directory support teams overworked? Some certainly think so! More than a quarter

of the IT respondents report spending more than 100% of their time on the listed activities! Thislogistical impossibility is likely a reflection on the level of overtime and extra effort devoted by

infrastructure support team members. In any case, these eight activities account for the majority

of time for 80% of the corporate and government IT respondents.

Total Effort Devoted to Listed Functions % Respondents

Over 100% 27%

75% to 100% 29%50% to 75% 25%

25% to 50% 19%

Less than 25% 1%


19/26



More than 50% of responding organizations follow formalinfrastructure management processes

Given the large size of most attendees organizations, it is not surprising that most follow formal

infrastructure management processes (54% overall, 57% for IT only respondents.) About 1/3

follow processes that fall between formal and informal. Very few (11% overall, 8% IT) follow

informal processes. Formal does not necessarily mean effective. The majority of respondents

using formal processes consider them overly bureaucratic. Not surprisingly, this dissatisfaction is

higher among IT only respondents.

Of the 57% IT respondents using formal processes, 37% consider those processesformal and effective, while 63% consider them overly bureaucratic.

35% of respondents (both IT and overall) follow processes that fall between formaland informal.

4% of overall respondents and 3% of IT respondents consider their processesinformal, tending towards chaotic.

Outsourcing continues to gain ground in infrastructure support

Approximately 1/3 of responding organizations currently outsource one or more functions with

another 4% planning to outsource within the next 12 months. While those with plans to

outsource demonstrates relatively slow growth, the number of organizations with no plans to

outsource has dropped below the 50% tipping point for IT respondents. If outsourcing follows

other survey trends, we can expect to see a similar shift from the no plans to outsource category

to the considering category over the next year, as well as a number of considering

organizations shifting into active outsourcing categories.

Does your organization outsource any of its

infrastructure support functions?All IT-Only

No plans to outsource 50% 46%

Plan to outsource within 12 months 1% 2%

Plan to outsource within 6 months 3% 2%

Still considering 15% 16%

Yes, currently outsourcing one or more functions 31% 34%

Respondents listed a broad range of functions outsourced. Help desks led the list followed by

other support functions (network, desktop, and applications). A number of organizations

outsource administrative functions such as directory service and access administration.


20/26


21/26



IV. Technical Environments

Finding a balance between day-to-day work and migration efforts isthe top migration challenge

Technology advances, changing business needs, and security concerns force infrastructuresupport teams to perform technology migrations on a regular basis, drawing resources away from

other assignments. Finding the time and resources to perform technology migrations while still

meeting the demands of day-to-day support is the highest ranked challenge by respondents.

Interestingly, maintaining security dropped from first place in 2006 to fourth place in 2007,

perhaps indicating improvements in available tools and security practices.

What are your biggest technology migration challenges?2007 2006 2005

Balancing between day-to-day support and migration effort 40% 42% 57%

Preventing service level degradation 33% 41% 56%

Controlling/documenting changes 32% 38% 40%

Maintaining security 24% 46% 40%

Finding/developing skilled technical resources 21% 23% 22%

Respondents could check as many challenges as applied in their organizations, allowing us to

analyze the overall level of concern on a percentage basis. Over the three years of the survey, we

have seen a steady decline in the percentage of respondents viewing migrations as challenges

again a possible indicator of improvements in tools and practices.

MOM is well on the way to becoming the corporate standard foroperations management

Microsoft Operations Manager (MOM) is continuing the fast growth we noted in last years

survey. Deployment is either complete or in progress for 59% of responding organizations in

2007, up from 49% in 2006. While actual deployment lags somewhat behind respondentpredictions from 2006 to 2007, add those planning to deploy and those still considering (21%)

and we can expect to see MOM reaching a 70%+ installed market share over the next few years.

Of special interest is the 10% drop in the number of companies with no plans to implement

MOM.

MOM Adoption 2007 2006

Yes, it is fully deployed 41% 32%

Yes, deployment is in progress 18% 17%

Plan to deploy within 3 months 4% 2%




No 21% 31%


22/26



Overall Exchange usage showed no growth

It looks like everyone who wants to use Exchange is already doing so. Its overall 74% reported

usage is identical in both the 2006 and 2007 surveys. The movement within the Exchange

community revolves around version usage. Exchange 2007 is used by significantly more vendor

organizations (41%) than IT organizations (9%), an example of vendors leading the way in

technology adoption (as well as preparing to take advantage of adoption opportunities within theirIT client base).

37% of responding organizations plan to migrate to Exchange 2007 over the nexttwelve months, 33% are still considering, and the remaining 30% have no plans to do

so.

With the exception of Exchange 2007, version usage is almost identical betweenoverall respondents and IT only respondents.

Exchange 2003 is the most widely used version at 52% overall and 55% within ITorganizations.

Among the older versions, Exchange 2000 is used by 10% of respondents, whileExchange 5.5 usage is less than 8%.

MIIS has reach the 50% usage stage

Although somewhat skewed by the addition of the MIIS track at DEC, the percentage of

organizations relying on MIIS has grown steadily over the past three years as the percentage of

companies not planning to use MIIS has slowly declined. In the 2007 survey, deployment in

progress was added as an option. For the sake of comparison with previous years, its percentage

was added to Yes, already using for 2007. Following these figures, we expect continued

growth in adoption, but at a slowing rate as the number of companies in the still considering

category continues to dwindle.

MIIS Adoption 2007 2006 2005

Yes, already using 50% 43% 31%

Yes, within 3 months 2% 5% 6%Yes, within 6 months 4% 4% 1%

Yes, within 12 months 3% 3% 6%

Still considering 17% 19% 27%

No, don't plan to use 24% 26% 28%

* 2007 "Using" includes "deployment in progress"

In response to an open-ended question on how MIIS is used, the most common answers were

account provisioning and synchronization of identity information across multiple platforms

(Exchange, other directories, etc.).


23/26



SharePoint continues to make rapid gains in adoption

SharePoint is a major success for Microsoft in terms of market adoption. Already at 66% usage

among survey respondents, SharePoint shows strong signs of continuing growth over the next few

years. Especially impressive is the small percentage of companies (11%) that do not plan to use

SharePoint, as well as the large drop in this percentage from 2006. Judging from responses in

the open-ended usage question, many companies are making SharePoint the centerpiece of theirinformation-sharing processes. Document management is the next most common area followed

by use as a portal.

Sharepoint Adoption 2007 2006

Yes, already using 66% 57%

Yes, within 3 months 3% 2%




No, don't plan to use 11% 26%

SQL 2000 lives on in IT organizations

When installing new applications, 52% of IT organization respondents use both SQL 2000 and

SQL 2005, although only 7% use SQL 2000 exclusively while 27% use SQL 2005 exclusively.

Virtually everyone uses virtualization

More than 88% of respondents in all categories use virtualization within their organizations for a

multitude of purposes. Only 5% of respondents have no plans to use virtualization. Server

consolidation is by far the most popular use for virtualization with cost savings and floor space

savings as two key drivers. Other uses, in descending order of mentions, include: providing

lab/test environments, disaster recovery, increasing the efficiency of server administration,

improving utilization of existing hardware, and separating conflicting applications. As shownbelow, web/application servers are the most popular candidates for virtualization.

Which infrastructure workloads are you currently running

in a virtualized environment?* Currently In Two Years

File/Print Servers 38% 45%

Exchange Servers 8% 11%

Domain Controllers 28% 36%

SQL Servers 22% 31%

Web/Application servers 64% 63%

Custom Applications 55% 57%

Other 7% 9%

* Note: Multiple responses were allowed

IT-Only


24/26



But they choose VMWare over Microsoft Virtual Server

At this point, it looks like Microsoft has lost the virtual server war to VMWare, especially in IT

environments. Current interest in Viridian is quite low, but interest could improve if the

product garners strong positive reviews. In the meantime, survey respondents praised VMWares

capabilities, scalability, and maturity while knocking Virtual Servers stability, performance,

fewer features and lower maturity.

Which product (or products) is (or will be) the basis for

your organization's virtualization strategy?*All IT-Only

Microsoft Virtual Server 32% 23%

Microsoft next generation hypervisor "Viridian" 12% 4%

VMWare 58% 67%

A combination of Microsoft and VMWare 23% 19%

Other 3% 4%

* Note: Multiple responses were allowed

Windows Server 2008

IT organizations are split in their planned response to Windows Server 2008. Just over half

(51%) plan to implement it immediately or within 12 months of release, while the remaining 49%

will wait at least a year. The vendor community is responding more aggressively, with 29%

planning on immediate implementation upon general release.

When is your organization planning to implement Longhorn

server?

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

As soon as it is

generally available

Within 12 months of

general release

More than 12 months

after general release

No plans yet

IT-Only Vendor-Only

Survey respondents have little interest in Data Protection ManagerData Protection Manager (DPM), a component of the Microsoft System Center product, is a disk-based backup and recovery solution for Microsoft application and file servers. It is currently in

the very early stages of adoption among DEC attendees. Only 1% of respondent IT organizations

have deployed DPM and just 7% plan to do so in the next twelve months. Nearly 60% have no

plans to use DPM. Current usage is higher in the vendor community (18%) but planned

deployment mirrors that of IT organizations.


25/26



V. Directory Tool Preferences

Only 25% of IT organizations consider their infrastructuremanagement efforts to be well-automated

Automation is making inroads into the IT infrastructure management community, but mostorganizations are only partially automated. Of the IT organizations considering themselves to be

well-automated, more than half rely on native tools and scripts for their automation. Scripts must

provide a major portion of this automation given respondents low ratings of native tool

capabilities (see below). Despite the availability of many infrastructure management tools and

solutions on the market, only 13% of all responding organizations use enough third-party tools to

consider themselves well automated. Not surprisingly, the vendor community is more highly

automated than IT (36% versus 25%), with infrastructure service providers accounting for most

of the well automated responses.

How would you describe your organization's use of automation for

infrastructure management?All IT-Only Vendor

Well automated using third-party tools 13% 12% 14%

Well automated using native tools and scripts 16% 14% 21%Partially automated 50% 56% 39%

Lacks necessary automation 9% 12% 6%

Primarily manual 8% 5% 13%

Other 4% 2% 7%

Microsoft provides the most commonly used Active Directorymanagement tools

Respondents were asked an open-ended question allowing them to list as many (or as few)

software tools as they use for directory management. Not surprisingly, Microsoft leads the way

as many organizations rely on native Active Directory tools for their directory management

efforts and others use MOM. The use of home grown tools dropped slightly from last year, butmany new third-party tools, such as Joeware, received mentions. Some organizations listed quite

a collection of best of breed products.

The table below was compiled by tallying the vendors mentioned in each respondents list of

tools. The table only includes the top five responses. Other tools fell below 1% of the total.

Rank Vendor Mentions

1 Microsoft 53%

2 NetPro 20%

3 NetIQ 11%

4 Quest 9%

5 Homegrown 7%

Most respondents do not have a preferred vendor for Active Directory management tools.

Among those expressing a preference, the top three choices are: NetPro (chosen by 38%),

Microsoft (29%), and Quest (15%).


26/26


Native tools get low marks in supporting critical functions

Despite their common usage, native tools get quite low ratings from survey respondents.

Respondents were asked to rate the adequacy of native tool support for five critical functions for

Active Directory, Exchange, and SharePoint: administration, auditing, archiving, reporting, and

health management. Ratings choices were Poor, Fair, Good, or Excellent. Assessments were

quite bleak in all five functional categories.

With the exception of support for Active Directory, Exchange, and SharePointadministrative functions where native tool support averaged between Fair and

Goodthe assessments for functional support averaged below Fair for all categories.

Active Directory administration got the highest average rating (2.42) with 35% ofrespondents rating its support Good and 8% Excellent against 49% Fair and 8% Poor.

In the four remaining functional categories, Active Directory native tool capabilityratings were lower than for the corresponding functions in Exchange and SharePoint

auditing (1.70), archiving (1.67), reporting (1.72), and health management (1.95).

Exchange administrative support (2.32) was rated slightly lower than ActiveDirectory administrative support. Other Exchange tool ratings were slightly higher

than the Active Directory native tools ratings, but remain below Fair on average. SharePoint native tool ratings followed a similar pattern as Exchange, although

administrative support barely crossed into Fair (2.08).

Features matter less than quality and support when selecting tools

After looking at the top three attributes, it is clear that buyers want products that work and are

easy to support. For the third consecutive year, Quality of products in terms of stability and

bug levels remains solidly the most important attribute when selecting software products for

managing directory infrastructure. Total cost of ownership and quality of customer support

place a close second and third, respectively. Product features such as scalability, ease of use

and breadth of capabilities fall in the middle tier of importance, while relationship and

community attributes fall to the bottom of the list.2007

Rank

2006

Rank

2005

Rank Attribute

2007

Weight

1 1 1 Quality of products (stable, bug free) 70

2 2 2 Total cost of ownership 32

3 5 5 Quality of customer support 31

4 3 3 Scalability 22

5 10 9 Depth of coverage 22

6 4 4 Ability to integrate with other tools 21

7 6 6 Ease of use 21

8 7 11 Breadth of product capabilities 21

9 8 8 Best of breed capabilities 18

10 9 10 Use and support of best practices 14

11 12 12 Meets commitments to you 9

12 11 7 Dedication to exceeding your expectations in product quality and support 9

13 13 14 Community support (forums, eBooks, web site resources) 614 14 13 Other 4

2007 experts conference survey white paper

Documents