Fluency

Application Rationalization

Last updated

Application rationalization is the exercise of deciding which of an enterprise’s software applications to keep, consolidate, or retire. It usually fails on evidence, because licence and login data show what is provisioned rather than which systems carry work.

What Application Rationalization actually means

The standard inputs are a licence inventory, a spend report, and login telemetry. Together they establish what is paid for and roughly who signs in. Neither establishes what a system is for, which workflows depend on it, or what would break if it were switched off, and those are the questions the decision actually turns on.

This produces two symmetrical errors. Systems with low login counts are cut, and turn out to carry one critical step in a process nobody mapped, so the saving is reversed by an incident. Systems with high login counts are kept, and turn out to be a place people go to copy data out into a spreadsheet where the real work happens. Login volume measures habit, not value.

Rationalizing against observed execution asks a different question: for each workflow, which applications does it actually touch, in what order, and where does data get carried between them by hand. That surfaces the systems a process genuinely depends on, the ones being routed around, and the pairs that exist only because they do not talk to each other.

The same evidence answers the follow-on question, which is what to automate. A workflow that crosses six systems with manual carries between them is both a rationalization candidate and an automation candidate, and the two decisions are usually made by different teams working from different data.

Examples

Cutting the system that held a critical step

An application with fifteen monthly active users is retired to save licence cost. It contained the only pricing-approval step for a product line, and the process it supported fails in the following month.

High usage, low value

A system shows heavy daily logins. Observation shows most sessions consist of exporting a report into a spreadsheet where the actual analysis happens. The system is a data source, not a workplace, and could be replaced by a feed.

The pair that exists because of a gap

Two applications are both retained because both are used constantly. The usage is people copying records between them. Closing the gap removes the need for one of them and the manual step at the same time.

Frequently asked questions

Application rationalization is deciding which of an enterprise’s software applications to keep, consolidate, or retire. The goal is reducing cost and complexity without breaking the workflows that depend on the systems being removed.

Because the evidence base is licence, spend, and login data, which describe what is provisioned and who signs in. None of it describes which workflows depend on a system, so decisions get made about value using a proxy for habit.

It measures frequency of access, not contribution. A rarely-used system can hold a mandatory step in a critical process, and a heavily-used one can be a place people go only to export data into a spreadsheet where the real work happens.

Observed execution: for each workflow, which applications it touches, in what order, and where data is carried between them by hand. That identifies genuine dependencies, systems being routed around, and pairs that exist only because they do not integrate.

They are the same analysis used twice. A workflow crossing several systems with manual carries between them is both a candidate for consolidation and a candidate for automation, and the two decisions are usually made separately from different data.

Ready to deploy AI across your enterprise?

Discover how Fluency can help you continuously deploy AI.