Slack is good

Slack, is like a bad word in the new economy where everything is fast and wound so tight, multi-task and multiple project teams, matrix reporting, multi-region and what not. If you look back at your last 24 hours (that could be a just a working day or two in these days of overly long work hours, rather than the normal 3 work days type like me), what have you really accomplish between the time spent uploading the work-in-progress task to work on for half an hour slice and then download to let another task be uploaded onto your brain to work on the next slice, while the audio conference meeting is on-going and you chip in when its your turn to download a bit of what have you done for that particular task in between the regularly arranged audio conference meetings?

If you have done lot, good for you, but do you feel burn-out? Why do you feel very tired and very small tasks do get completed and closed off but another bunch landed on your incoming email and onto your longish to-do list? Because lots of time and energy has been spent to onload-work abit-offload cycles that you can only do the small task.

I find that I can work on 1 major a 1 or 2 moderately sized projects, but not 2 major +anything, I am just jumping between two fast running trains that aren’t going to the same destinations and spending lots of time and effort to catch onto each major project and then work a little bit while on the mindshare time for that project at hand. Most of the time, when you hear the word firefighting, it can mean you are so busy that you only have time to notice when a major problem pops up on a major project, rather than when you or your team members have sufficient time to smolder the potential major problem when it was just a minor issue.

So when you hear someone brags about always being in a fire fighter role, it could mean that he is so busy or the project is managed on a light touch (not because it was going so well) because he is involved in too many things at the same time.

There is this word, slack, which is a title of a great book by Tom Demarco who also wrote a wonderful book called “Peopleware” which is about how to identify, build and nurture a great project team to great project success.

A lot of companies has cut what they called slack. The layer of staff that they deemed not so productive. The fact is, slack is what gives a company the flexibility, the capacity, to do those things that matter in their past, and in their future.

Google, the fast paced Internet company has this famous 20% time thing. While BusinessInsider ( reports that “only about 10% of Googlers are using it”, last time Google checked, but it doesn’t really matter, as long as the idea of it exists, according to Google HR boss Laszlo Bock in his new book, “Work Rules!”

As companies used to have R&D labs, these are cut out of many great companies as they focus on the next-big-thing. In my opinion, it is a grave mistake to sacrifice their future by focusing on the present, albeit the counter-argument is that they have to survive the present to have a future. My take is that they have rested too long on their laurels and a quick fix is just forgetting what is their core competitive edge which is their R&D depth and breadth. Many examples abound today of the great IT giants of the 1990s and 2000s are going down that path too.

Coming back on a personal work level, is that thinking time is working time and taking on interesting projects or even better creating that interesting project (like those Googlers that created the many interesting projects) and keeping your focus and giving yourself some slack to do some thinking and re-arranging your work arrangement, unwind a little to give your mind some space, so that you can do it better and do it right.

Slack is good

Data Center Conference in Asia, 2016

This list is updated now and then onto, after I received request to list and I have checked out that the conference has at least venue, agenda, and speakers.

I was planning to attend one or two data center conferences when I travel around for work and could stay a day or two to attend these conferences and network with people. However, I couldn’t find a website that list all the major data center conferences in Asia, so I started searching and collecting them. Please send me the conference that you are aware of, and I only interested to list those that are data center or cloud focus.

It should contain the following information and has confirmed venue, agenda, and speakers. And I will list the conference in the following format:




Title of the conference/show

URL link to the conference/show details





Hong Kong

Data Center World Hong Kong and Cloud Expo Hong Kong

The Green Grid China Technical Summit
Shanghai University of Finance and Economics



Shanghai, China

DataCenterDynamics Converged Shanghai

Shenzhen, China
The Sixth Data Center Development Conference第六届中国数据中心产业发展大会



Bangalore, India

DataCenterDynamics Converged India



Data Center Summit



Asia Pacific Cloud & DC Strategy Summit





DataCenterDynamics Converged South East Asia


Johor, Malaysia

BroadGroup DataCloud South East Asia




Data Center World Asia and Cloud Expo Asia



Hong Kong

DataCenterDynamics Hong Kong

Manila, Philippines
BICSI Southeast Asia District, Philippines Conference



Beijing, China

Data Center Dynamics DC-Converged

Beijing Capital Renaissance Hotel


Beijing, China

China IDC Conference

Data Center Conference in Asia, 2016

Myth or Truth on Client Stickiness to a data center facility?

There are a few questions in this discovery journey of mine about the stickiness of client to a data center facility.

Some data center service providers give too much credit to the “stickiness” of client or give it as an easy-to-understand-answer to the media when asked if they are confident of retaining their existing client portfolio.

Some data center service providers are enlightened to regards client stickiness is not so apparent as before and are doing some major mind set shift and enhancing their solutions and their interactions with their clients.

Below is my own take on this topic.


What is customer stickiness?

Marketing books has defined this as customer loyalty, which is associated with brand.

I like Wharton business school’s definition of customer stickiness which is the increased chance to utilize the same product or service that was bought in the last time period (see reference 1).

In my opinion, in the data center industry, brand does not matter much when it comes to co-locate or to stay co-located in a particular data center facility.

I think it all boils down to three main factors:

  1. perceived value (see reference 2 and 3),
  2. risks; and
  3. most important of all, cost.

In the first place, when customer come to co-locate with Site-A, it has gone through rounds of evaluations and decided Site-A delivers the best value. And value, doesn’t mean low price. It means all things considered and after trying to normalize all the submissions to the RFQs, a particular vendor offer the best combination in terms of price, features, carriers connectivity, services, etc.

After they have chosen a site as their co-location service provider, let’s just called Site-A, and the honeymoon begins and perceived by Site-A to last forever. That at least is in the perception of the Site-A management.

In another industry, the cut throat world of airline business, customer vote with their feet unless there is limited choice for getting from point X to point Y and they are resigned to the one airline that serves that route. Site-A management may think that their client has limited choice because the client is bounded by value, risks and cost combination.

Data center co-location is a cost. Staying put or moving away, both carries a cost. This cost should be further broken down into initial setup cost, migration cost and operating cost. There are also risk factors to consider. Such costs and risks are considered for the two choices:

  1. Staying put where they are, or expand at where they currently with.
  2. Move to a new site

If you are a data center operator with healthy weighted average leased expiry (WALE) and that is your main focus, you may be thinking that customers are sticky and are in no danger of losing that account. You are wrong in a big way.

What are the reasons for the “stickiness” of existing customer to a data center facility?

Going back to the Wharton definition, what will increase chance for customer to stick with you and renew their co-location contract?

  1. Risks, especially it is mission critical to the client’s business
  2. Compared to moving away, the initial cost is higher than to stay put (even after lease renewal increment)
  3. Migration cost
  4. Shortfall of service from alternative data center service providers

Some organization, have planned for data center renewal, i.e. they review the relevance of the data center facility where they have colocation or private suite to decide whether to stay or move. I know of one global bank that will refresh one data center per region on an annual basis.

These days, companies frequently go through M&A, and their data center may be closed or the data/applications moved elsewhere on a short notice.

How does new data center business come about? At times it is due to their current data center space cannot serve their current or future needs.

And client suddenly terminating and moving their site, though rare, is not unheard of. I have heard of a extreme case of sudden termination of a major contract with a site in Asia due to continual displeasure by the client of the co-location service availability and multiple response time slippages and the client just terminate and pay the penalty. That is one pissed customer and the gain to another data center. We cannot afford to take things for granted.

Let’s examine what makes data center service provider thinks that their clients are sticky:

  1. The setup cost
  2. Cost of migration
  3. Risks of prolonged downtime
  4. Marginal gain (if any) of lower TCOs weigh against the above factors
  5. Facility people, whom the data center service providers are used to negotiate contract with, are more happy to stay put


BUT, the client may see a totally different picture:

  1. The current service provider service or the site cannot meet current or near future needs (e.g. power capacity per rack, less service offerings than one that can provide cloud, network, etc)
  2. Their perspective may not even be a move, it’s decommissioning while commissioning a new site
  3. Even for a move, they have lower cost of migration compared to the old days of portfolio of critical IT applications that nowadays are split into multiple smaller application systems
  4. Risks of prolonged downtime can be managed through migrating an application at a time, development and testing first before moving the production environment, or other proven migration methods.
  5. TCOs savings, e.g. do you have continuous energy efficiency effort, and do you reduce your PUE factor as part of utility cost recovery?
  6. Enabling new capability through putting more of their required IT capacity (development, test, production) onto cloud
  7. Merger and acquisition, or a strategy to rationalize the data center capacity that they need
  8. IT calls the shots. Facility people in enterprises these days now listens to, if not already reporting to, the CIO and his team of IT project managers

Initial cost and migration cost are a major concern, but so is staying relevant in the business competitive world which places more demand on IT being agile and flexible.

And organizations have considered or are already moving more applications, some of it mission critical, to the cloud. (see Forbes article in one of the reference link).

How about challenges brought about by technological change? Active-Active data center set-up, Active-Backup data center set-up, has enabled client to plan for migration more easily than ever. And virtualization has made IT servers a commodity, meaning the IT resources are moved virtually across data centers which can reduce the risk of downtime than possible previously.


What are causing the decrease of stickiness?

Reason number 1 is demand by the top management for IT to be agile and support or even drives the business. This has to be a top-down total solution. The client will engineer, get consultation, change development and production strategy, use technological tools and capacity (e.g. cloud) to have that agility.

A lot of organizations have gone asset-light. Banks, financial institutions, big manufacturers, big service organizations, large retailers, have gone the route of leasing their IT needs from IT companies and hosting them in third party co-location service providers.

The nature of the IT applications development methodology of prototyping based development and rapid application development, DevOps where developers and Operations making software development, testing, and release more reliable and faster. This creates a demand that the testing and development of a data center space will not need to be higher tier, while demand for agility may mean a production environment will sit on a virtualized IT resource pools that can more easily sit in multiple data centers or move to a new virtualized environment more easily than previously possible.

Moving an entire IT development, testing and production environment is no longer a daunting project except for a small proportion of enterprises that have got mission critical applications tied to a monolithic system, but that has become more and more rare. CIO will plan to make himself a part of the business solution rather than problem which means IT agility is the norm these days.

Together with the following IT tools and new way of getting IT performance and capacity:

  • commercial off the shelf software (COTS) instead of bespoke software is the norm
  • Cloud (public, hybrid, private)
  • SaaS
  • Multi-tier and distributed application architecture
  • Leased IT hardware and leased IT software

Public cloud and private cloud enabled through VPN over MAN/WAN has enabled company to use bare IT resources outside of their current network boundary, and DCaaS will breakdown the physical boundary of a data center facility.

Some organizations are doing away with physical data center co-location altogether. Ray White, a 100plus years old real estate sales and rental organization has moved its applications onto Google Apps and email.

Active-active production sites are more the new norms. So is it that hard to really perceive that your client is not that sticky anymore?


What can you do to increase the “stickiness”?

Firstly, shift to see the data center facility through the eyes of the clients, i.e. what is the perceived value? If it is just brick and mortar plus conditioned back-up power and controlled temperature environment, then what you have is cost differential which can be easily replaced by new entrants or someone with better economy of scale.

Fortunately, many data center service providers have begun to look into the value question and some are addressing it through going up the value chain. Such as DRT buying up Telx, most if not all are looking at reducing the opex by looking more seriously into the energy efficiency and helping clients saves money. Co-location service providers buying up other co-location service providers is a way to add scale and reach and perhaps drives down cost to be more cost competitive, however this is just my speculations. More likely, co-location service providers are now offering network services, a connectivity hub and inter-connecting service for within and across their key network hubs, and setting up their own cloud offering or partnering many cloud service providers.

The key here is, talk to your clients, before they called a RFQ/RFP which will be too late.

So, look at those factors:

  1. Client considering to commission a new site
  2. TCOs savings
  3. Enabling new capability through putting more of their required IT capacity (development, test, production) onto cloud
  4. Newer, faster deployment, modular build, and have IT/networking capability in-house to talk to the client IT people

Going back to the airline industry example, the full service players in the airline industry are not sitting idly while new entrants can drive value and have lower cost with the newer more economical fleet and tighter seating arrangements. The airplanes are the same product albeit with different configurations but it is limited. They distinguishes by the service that they give. They continue to innovate and reach out to its customers to protect their margin and ultimately their business. It is worth mentioning that in an industry where the average training duration is six weeks, Singapore Airlines flight attendants endure five months of schooling. Emirates Airways probably is close to the same.

It is no longer ok just to make your power and cooling infrastructure rock solid. It is to also be agile and akin to client’s IT needs. It is to be more relevant, and creates more services that the clients will use and increase that stickiness, if you will.

Make yourself more relevant to today’s data center clients.

It may well be that the cloud service providers and server manufacturers (in China, Inspur builds and own data centers for BAT type of clients, like what they already did in ChongQing and will be building in Henan) that will occupy lots of data center space as they in turn provides IT capacity and capabilities to the enterprises.

In summary, client stickiness in the data center industry is in my opinion, a myth.


Myth or Truth on Client Stickiness to a data center facility?