Hubadviser https://hubadviser.com/en/home/ Thu, 30 Apr 2026 12:55:19 +0000 en-GB hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 https://hubadviser.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/cropped-Hubadviser-Icon-32x32.png Hubadviser https://hubadviser.com/en/home/ 32 32 198762493 Repositioning your IT department as a business partner https://hubadviser.com/en/repositioning-your-it-department-as-a-business-partner/ Tue, 28 Apr 2026 14:29:29 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=31218 By Cyril JOUAN Cyril is a CIO, Director of Digital Transformation, and a member of the Executive Committee (COMEX) at the mid-sized company Ecosystem. An experienced IT leader and SAP specialist, he has over 25 years of experience leading complex transformations across organizations ranging from SMEs to Fortune 100 companies. A former Executive Partner at Gartner and Partner at Hubadviser, he advises executive committees and CIOs on governance, IT performance, strategic prioritization, and AI adoption. He is also President of CJOCoaching, a certified coach, and an NLP Master Practitioner. The 2 pillars to transform the perception of your IT department in 6 months By Hubadviser – exclusive interview INTRODUCTION 90% of the conversations I have with CIOs end up in the same place. Not on tech. Not on budgets. On internal politics. How can I gain more influence at the executive committee level? How can I finally be seen as a business contributor, not just a risk manager? How can I change my relationship with my CEO? If these questions resonate with you, you are not alone. And you are not complaining, you are clearly seeing what is holding you back. I am Cyril Jouan. 25 years as a CIO in radically different environments: industry, startups, retail, SMEs, Fortune 100. Then several years as an Executive Partner at Gartner, supporting around fifty CIOs on their strategy and internal positioning. What have I seen everywhere, without exception? Competent CIOs struggling to operate at the right level. Not due to lack of talent, but due to lack of political visibility. That’s exactly what we’re going to work on here. Two pillars: reassess, then reposition. Concrete actions, field-tested tips, pitfalls to avoid. And for each action, a deliberate political dimension, because that’s where everything truly happens. Adopt this framework, and you will change the place of your IT department within the organization. Pillar 1: Reassess (months 1–3) “You cannot change a perception without first understanding how it was built” Action 1: Re-decode power dynamics with a fresh perspective You know the org chart. You know the people. But do you really know the power map as it exists today? Alliances shift. Power dynamics evolve. A director who was your ally two years ago may have changed priorities. The classic mistake of an established CIO: believing political dynamics are fixed because they were once understood. Rebuild your map from scratch: Are your initial sponsors still truly there? Who is slowing down your initiatives behind the scenes, and what are they protecting? New executive committee members: have you proactively briefed them on what IT does, or are you waiting for them to come to you? Within business teams, power dynamics have shifted. Who has gained influence? Have you repositioned accordingly? Method: Organize one-on-one lunches with each executive committee member, even those you think you know well. Ask them a simple question: “If you had to describe the role of IT to someone external, what would you say?” Their answer will reveal the real perception they have of your department. 💡 Tip: Do the same exercise with second-level managers, not just the executive committee. This is often where the most honest perceptions and frustrations emerge. Action 2: Conduct a perception audit of your IT department Before trying to change your positioning, take a snapshot of the situation. You cannot improve what you do not measure. What you need to assess: If your executive committee had to rate you today, what score would they give, and based on what criteria? Do business teams see you as an accelerator or a bottleneck? Does your CEO truly trust you, or are they managing IT around you without telling you? Is your seat at the executive committee secured, or simply tolerated? Method: Ask your CEO for structured feedback. Not informally, schedule a dedicated time slot and ask precise questions: “In which areas do you believe IT has delivered well over the past 12 months?” “On which topics would you like me to be involved earlier?” “How would you describe the role of IT in our 3-year strategy?” 💡 Tip: Complement this internal audit with an external benchmark. Reach out to 2 or 3 CIO peers in comparable companies and compare your positioning. This will give you concrete arguments for your executive committee. ⚠️ Warning: If your CEO says “everything is fine” without going into detail, it is a red flag. It often means they lack visibility on what you do, which can be worse than direct criticism. Action 3: Map your quick wins and blind spots You know your IT landscape. But do you know it from a “perceived business value” perspective? This is where most CIOs have a blind spot. Rework your mapping using a different framework: Actual impact vs perceived impact: Identify 3 to 5 initiatives that had measurable impact over the past 18 months. Who knows about them outside of IT? Chronic irritants: What are the 3 topics that keep coming up in executive meetings or informal discussions? Available quick wins: What concrete problems could you solve in 4 to 6 weeks with visible impact? Unaddressed strategic topics: AI, data, cybersecurity, do you have a clear, consistent position, or does it change depending on who you are speaking to? Method: Identify 3 high-visibility quick wins that you can deliver within 8 weeks. These are your concrete proofs of value. 💡 Tip: Choose quick wins that directly impact the daily work of the executive committee or key business teams. A dashboard for the CEO, an automation that saves the CFO 2 hours per week, or a visible improvement on a tool used by sales teams. Perceived impact matters more than technical complexity. ⚠️ Warning: Resist the temptation to launch a “large transformation program”. That is exactly what reinforces the perception of slow and costly IT. Start with fast and visible wins. Action 4: Assess your real maturity with an external perspective You have been in your role for a long time. You know your IT better than

L’article Repositioning your IT department as a business partner est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

By Cyril JOUAN

Cyril is a CIO, Director of Digital Transformation, and a member of the Executive Committee (COMEX) at the mid-sized company Ecosystem. An experienced IT leader and SAP specialist, he has over 25 years of experience leading complex transformations across organizations ranging from SMEs to Fortune 100 companies. A former Executive Partner at Gartner and Partner at Hubadviser, he advises executive committees and CIOs on governance, IT performance, strategic prioritization, and AI adoption. He is also President of CJOCoaching, a certified coach, and an NLP Master Practitioner.

The 2 pillars to transform the perception of your IT department in 6 months

By Hubadviser – exclusive interview

INTRODUCTION

90% of the conversations I have with CIOs end up in the same place. Not on tech. Not on budgets. On internal politics. How can I gain more influence at the executive committee level? How can I finally be seen as a business contributor, not just a risk manager? How can I change my relationship with my CEO? If these questions resonate with you, you are not alone. And you are not complaining, you are clearly seeing what is holding you back.

I am Cyril Jouan. 25 years as a CIO in radically different environments: industry, startups, retail, SMEs, Fortune 100. Then several years as an Executive Partner at Gartner, supporting around fifty CIOs on their strategy and internal positioning.

What have I seen everywhere, without exception? Competent CIOs struggling to operate at the right level. Not due to lack of talent, but due to lack of political visibility.

That’s exactly what we’re going to work on here. Two pillars: reassess, then reposition. Concrete actions, field-tested tips, pitfalls to avoid. And for each action, a deliberate political dimension, because that’s where everything truly happens. Adopt this framework, and you will change the place of your IT department within the organization.

Pillar 1: Reassess (months 1–3)

“You cannot change a perception without first understanding how it was built”

Action 1: Re-decode power dynamics with a fresh perspective

You know the org chart. You know the people. But do you really know the power map as it exists today? Alliances shift. Power dynamics evolve. A director who was your ally two years ago may have changed priorities.

The classic mistake of an established CIO: believing political dynamics are fixed because they were once understood. Rebuild your map from scratch:

  • Are your initial sponsors still truly there?
  • Who is slowing down your initiatives behind the scenes, and what are they protecting?
  • New executive committee members: have you proactively briefed them on what IT does, or are you waiting for them to come to you?
  • Within business teams, power dynamics have shifted. Who has gained influence? Have you repositioned accordingly?

Method: Organize one-on-one lunches with each executive committee member, even those you think you know well. Ask them a simple question: “If you had to describe the role of IT to someone external, what would you say?” Their answer will reveal the real perception they have of your department.

💡 Tip: Do the same exercise with second-level managers, not just the executive committee. This is often where the most honest perceptions and frustrations emerge.

Action 2: Conduct a perception audit of your IT department

Before trying to change your positioning, take a snapshot of the situation. You cannot improve what you do not measure.

What you need to assess:

  • If your executive committee had to rate you today, what score would they give, and based on what criteria?
  • Do business teams see you as an accelerator or a bottleneck?
  • Does your CEO truly trust you, or are they managing IT around you without telling you?
  • Is your seat at the executive committee secured, or simply tolerated?

Method: Ask your CEO for structured feedback. Not informally, schedule a dedicated time slot and ask precise questions:

  1. “In which areas do you believe IT has delivered well over the past 12 months?”
  2. “On which topics would you like me to be involved earlier?”
  3. “How would you describe the role of IT in our 3-year strategy?”

💡 Tip: Complement this internal audit with an external benchmark. Reach out to 2 or 3 CIO peers in comparable companies and compare your positioning. This will give you concrete arguments for your executive committee.

⚠️ Warning: If your CEO says “everything is fine” without going into detail, it is a red flag. It often means they lack visibility on what you do, which can be worse than direct criticism.

Action 3: Map your quick wins and blind spots

You know your IT landscape. But do you know it from a “perceived business value” perspective? This is where most CIOs have a blind spot.

Rework your mapping using a different framework:

  • Actual impact vs perceived impact: Identify 3 to 5 initiatives that had measurable impact over the past 18 months. Who knows about them outside of IT?
  • Chronic irritants: What are the 3 topics that keep coming up in executive meetings or informal discussions?
  • Available quick wins: What concrete problems could you solve in 4 to 6 weeks with visible impact?
  • Unaddressed strategic topics: AI, data, cybersecurity, do you have a clear, consistent position, or does it change depending on who you are speaking to?

Method: Identify 3 high-visibility quick wins that you can deliver within 8 weeks. These are your concrete proofs of value.

💡 Tip: Choose quick wins that directly impact the daily work of the executive committee or key business teams. A dashboard for the CEO, an automation that saves the CFO 2 hours per week, or a visible improvement on a tool used by sales teams. Perceived impact matters more than technical complexity.

⚠️ Warning: Resist the temptation to launch a “large transformation program”. That is exactly what reinforces the perception of slow and costly IT. Start with fast and visible wins.

Action 4: Assess your real maturity with an external perspective

You have been in your role for a long time. You know your IT better than anyone. And that is exactly the problem.

This is not a criticism, it is neuroscience. The more immersed you are in a system, the more your brain automatically fills the gaps. You no longer see certain flaws because you have adapted to them. You have integrated them as constants, not as problems. An external perspective does not have that memory. It sees what you no longer notice.

That is why an external audit is not a sign of weakness. It is a management tool.

Step 1: Frame the audit so it is useful, not decorative

Not a 200k€ exhaustive audit producing a 300-page report that no one reads. A 3 to 5-week flash diagnostic, focused on 3 specific areas:

  • Cybersecurity: Is your security posture truly up to date? An incident is what turns an ignored weakness into a public crisis and personal accountability.
  • Governance: Are your IT decision-making processes clear and respected by business teams, or bypassed whenever possible?
  • Delivered value: Can you demonstrate, with data, what IT has concretely contributed to the business over the past 12 months?

Who should you appoint? Avoid large generalist consulting firms for this type of mission, you will mostly pay for their brand. Turn instead to specialized firms (cyber, IT governance) or senior independent consultants, former CIOs themselves, who understand the operational reality of mid-sized companies.

A reasonable budget for this type of flash diagnostic ranges from €15,000 to €40,000, depending on the size of your IT landscape and the number of areas covered. This is the cost of an informed decision, not just a report.

Step 2: Get approval from your CEO without signaling weakness

This is where many CIOs fail. They present the audit as a defensive necessity or worse, as self-criticism. Both approaches signal uncertainty. The right approach is to position the audit as an offensive lever.

“We are entering a transformation phase. Before committing additional resources, I want an objective view of our starting point, not mine, an external one. It will give us stronger arguments for upcoming budget decisions.”

You are not asking permission to check if everything is fine. You are proposing a strategic management tool for the executive committee.

 
Step 3: Use the results as a political lever
 

Compare the audit conclusions with how your IT department is perceived by the executive committee. The gap between the two, in either direction, becomes your working material.

An external audit gives legitimacy that your own voice cannot achieve. It is no longer “the CIO asking”, it is “an external diagnosis recommending”. For budget or resource requests, the difference is significant.

💡 Tip: Present the results in 15 minutes, not 2 hours. 3 slides: findings, risks, recommendations with associated budget. Decision-makers remember what is short and impactful.

⚠️ Warning: If the audit reveals issues you were already aware of but did not escalate, own it. It is a moment of truth. It is better to be the one leading the diagnosis than the one subjected to it.

Checkpoint month 3: Are you ready to step up?

These first 3 months have laid the foundations. Before going further, ask yourself these 4 questions honestly:

  1. Do I really know how my IT department is perceived at the executive committee level? Not what people politely told me, but what decisions, budgets, and behaviors actually reveal.
  2. Do I have an objective measure of my IT maturity? Not my own, inevitably biased view, but an external perspective on cybersecurity, governance, and the value delivered to the business.
  3. Have I identified my 3 quick wins for the next 8 weeks? Concrete, visible, measurable. Wins that tell a new story about my IT department.
  4. Do I know my sponsors and my resistance forces? Who will support this repositioning with me? Who will slow it down, consciously or not?

If you do not have these answers, do not move to Pillar 2. Restart the perception audit, or get support.

Pillar 2: Reposition (months 4–6)

“An IT department without a strategic narrative is one that is controlled by others”….

Want to learn more?

You understand the challenges. Now take action.

Download the full white paper to discover concrete methods, quick wins, and political levers to reposition your IT department as a business partner in 6 months.

Download the full white paper

L’article Repositioning your IT department as a business partner est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> 31218 Cloud and sovereignty – Migrating to a sovereign cloud https://hubadviser.com/en/cloud-and-sovereignty-migrating-to-a-sovereign-cloud/ Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:33:34 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=30912 Experience feedback from a defense sector company How a defense company successfully migrated its entire Azure infrastructure to a European cloud in just 12 weeks, highlighting the methodology, key trade-offs and lessons learned. About the author Flavien Berwick has built his expertise at the intersection of cloud computing, cybersecurity, and highly regulated environments. He notably worked at the French Ministry of the Armed Forces, where he contributed to classified infrastructures and digital transformation projects within the military institution, as well as at the Ministry of the Interior and Overseas Territories. He is currently working at Exo, a company based in Montreal, Canada. Author of the book “DevOps for Transforming Institutions,” with a foreword by General Éric Autelet, a leading figure in digital sovereignty in France, Flavien combines a strategic vision of the geopolitical challenges of the cloud with hands-on operational experience in migrating to sovereign infrastructures. This dual perspective, both strategic and field-oriented, makes his insights particularly valuable for CIOs considering a sovereign approach. Cloud, DevOps and Sovereign Infrastructure Expert Introduction This article is based on a webinar organized by Hubadviser on the topic of reconciling cloud and sovereignty. The objective was to move beyond theoretical discussions around digital sovereignty and focus on practical insights, through the real-world experience of an expert who has led migrations toward sovereign infrastructures. In this article, you will find A concise overview of the legal risks associated with dependence on US cloud providers, including the Cloud Act, FISA and OFAC A detailed account of a migration from Azure to Scaleway for a defense sector company, completed in 12 weeks An overview of the three sovereign cloud models available in Europe, including trusted clouds, European public clouds and self-hosted approaches A comprehensive mapping of European and open source alternatives, function by function Five key operational lessons drawn from this experience 1. Why digital sovereignty has become an operational priority Digital sovereignty is no longer a theoretical concern. In 2024 and 2025, several strong signals have turned it into a concrete priority for CIOs. These include the enforcement of US extraterritorial sanctions impacting European players, such as account freezes through platforms like Visa, Amazon or PayPal, growing concerns about Europe’s technological dependency often described as “digital vassalization,” and the increasing geopolitical dimension of digital infrastructures, now considered strategic assets. Behind these signals, three legal mechanisms directly expose European organizations. The Cloud Act allows US authorities to access data hosted outside the United States by American providers. FISA Section 702 enables intelligence collection on non-US citizens. In addition, governments retain the ability to restrict the sale or renewal of software licenses to foreign entities. “The risk is not that a US cloud provider would cut off access to an entire country, as that would be damaging to their own economy. The real risk lies in targeted actions, whether against a key individual, a sensitive company, or a critical organization.” Flavien Berwick Cloud : An unavoidable imperative At the same time, CIOs are facing increasing pressure to gain agility and responsiveness, and to enable the adoption of artificial intelligence within their organizations. Scalable infrastructures, on-demand access to GPUs, and the ability to rapidly deploy new services, cloud is no longer an option; it is a prerequisite to meet competitiveness and digital transformation challenges. As a result, the equation becomes more complex. It is no longer about choosing between cloud and sovereignty, both are essential. The real question becomes : how can they be reconciled ? This is precisely the focus of this experience feedback. It is within this context that Flavien Berwick, an expert in sovereign infrastructures with experience at the Ministry of the Armed Forces and the Ministry of the Interior, shares the details of a migration he led for a company in the defense sector. 2. Starting point : a defense company running on Azure The company in question designs solutions for the defense sector. As such, it was required to strictly comply with sovereignty requirements in order to be eligible for its clients’ tenders. Its infrastructure was historically hosted on Microsoft Azure, a choice initially driven by a Windows-based environment. The initial assessment revealed an almost complete dependency on US-based services. The key question “The first question I asked the CTO was what exactly they were trying to protect themselves against. As in cybersecurity, full autonomy is not realistic. The priority is to clearly define the risks you want to mitigate.”— F. Berwick The CTO’s answer was clear. The objective was to avoid potential US targeting of its services, whether through restricted access to Azure or the risk of intellectual property exposure. In this context, moving to a sovereign cloud became the natural strategic decision. 3. Before and after : the transformation at a glance The table below summarizes the initial state of the infrastructure, fully dependent on US-based services, and the final state after migrating to a sovereign stack. Beyond the change of cloud provider, the migration was also an opportunity to structure key components of the infrastructure, including VPN, identity and access management, observability, and governance, which were previously either missing or only partially implemented. Function Initial state (Azure and US stack) Final state (sovereign) Cloud IaaS Azure Scaleway Office and email Microsoft 365 and Exchange Nextcloud, OnlyOffice, Infomaniak Code repository GitHub GitLab self-hosted Web protection and CDN Cloudflare Bunny.net VPN Cisco AnyConnect Tailscale Authentication and IAM Microsoft Samba, FreeIPA, Keycloak Configuration management Manual or partial Ansible (Infrastructure as Code) Observability Not implemented FluentBit, OpenSearch Documentation and wiki Not implemented Wiki.js Governance Partial Documented and formalized   4. Overview of alternatives : three sovereign cloud models Trusted cloud providers through joint ventures These are joint ventures between European and American players, such as S3NS for Thales and Google, Bleu for Orange Capgemini and Microsoft, and Azure Sovereign Cloud. They rely on US technologies hosted in Europe, with local encryption key management using a bring your own key approach and controlled update mechanisms. The main advantage lies in familiarity for existing teams. However,

L’article Cloud and sovereignty – Migrating to a sovereign cloud est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

Experience feedback from a defense sector company

How a defense company successfully migrated its entire Azure infrastructure to a European cloud in just 12 weeks, highlighting the methodology, key trade-offs and lessons learned.

About the author

Flavien Berwick has built his expertise at the intersection of cloud computing, cybersecurity, and highly regulated environments. He notably worked at the French Ministry of the Armed Forces, where he contributed to classified infrastructures and digital transformation projects within the military institution, as well as at the Ministry of the Interior and Overseas Territories. He is currently working at Exo, a company based in Montreal, Canada.

Author of the book “DevOps for Transforming Institutions,” with a foreword by General Éric Autelet, a leading figure in digital sovereignty in France, Flavien combines a strategic vision of the geopolitical challenges of the cloud with hands-on operational experience in migrating to sovereign infrastructures. This dual perspective, both strategic and field-oriented, makes his insights particularly valuable for CIOs considering a sovereign approach.

Cloud, DevOps and Sovereign Infrastructure Expert

Introduction

This article is based on a webinar organized by Hubadviser on the topic of reconciling cloud and sovereignty. The objective was to move beyond theoretical discussions around digital sovereignty and focus on practical insights, through the real-world experience of an expert who has led migrations toward sovereign infrastructures.

In this article, you will find

  • A concise overview of the legal risks associated with dependence on US cloud providers, including the Cloud Act, FISA and OFAC
  • A detailed account of a migration from Azure to Scaleway for a defense sector company, completed in 12 weeks
  • An overview of the three sovereign cloud models available in Europe, including trusted clouds, European public clouds and self-hosted approaches
  • A comprehensive mapping of European and open source alternatives, function by function
  • Five key operational lessons drawn from this experience

1. Why digital sovereignty has become an operational priority

Digital sovereignty is no longer a theoretical concern. In 2024 and 2025, several strong signals have turned it into a concrete priority for CIOs.

These include the enforcement of US extraterritorial sanctions impacting European players, such as account freezes through platforms like Visa, Amazon or PayPal, growing concerns about Europe’s technological dependency often described as “digital vassalization,” and the increasing geopolitical dimension of digital infrastructures, now considered strategic assets.

Behind these signals, three legal mechanisms directly expose European organizations. The Cloud Act allows US authorities to access data hosted outside the United States by American providers. FISA Section 702 enables intelligence collection on non-US citizens. In addition, governments retain the ability to restrict the sale or renewal of software licenses to foreign entities.

“The risk is not that a US cloud provider would cut off access to an entire country, as that would be damaging to their own economy. The real risk lies in targeted actions, whether against a key individual, a sensitive company, or a critical organization.”

Flavien Berwick

Cloud : An unavoidable imperative

At the same time, CIOs are facing increasing pressure to gain agility and responsiveness, and to enable the adoption of artificial intelligence within their organizations. Scalable infrastructures, on-demand access to GPUs, and the ability to rapidly deploy new services, cloud is no longer an option; it is a prerequisite to meet competitiveness and digital transformation challenges.

As a result, the equation becomes more complex. It is no longer about choosing between cloud and sovereignty, both are essential. The real question becomes : how can they be reconciled ? This is precisely the focus of this experience feedback.

It is within this context that Flavien Berwick, an expert in sovereign infrastructures with experience at the Ministry of the Armed Forces and the Ministry of the Interior, shares the details of a migration he led for a company in the defense sector.

2. Starting point : a defense company running on Azure

The company in question designs solutions for the defense sector. As such, it was required to strictly comply with sovereignty requirements in order to be eligible for its clients’ tenders. Its infrastructure was historically hosted on Microsoft Azure, a choice initially driven by a Windows-based environment.

The initial assessment revealed an almost complete dependency on US-based services.

The key question

“The first question I asked the CTO was what exactly they were trying to protect themselves against. As in cybersecurity, full autonomy is not realistic. The priority is to clearly define the risks you want to mitigate.”
— F. Berwick

The CTO’s answer was clear. The objective was to avoid potential US targeting of its services, whether through restricted access to Azure or the risk of intellectual property exposure.

In this context, moving to a sovereign cloud became the natural strategic decision.

3. Before and after : the transformation at a glance

The table below summarizes the initial state of the infrastructure, fully dependent on US-based services, and the final state after migrating to a sovereign stack.

Beyond the change of cloud provider, the migration was also an opportunity to structure key components of the infrastructure, including VPN, identity and access management, observability, and governance, which were previously either missing or only partially implemented.

FunctionInitial state (Azure and US stack)Final state (sovereign)
Cloud IaaSAzureScaleway
Office and emailMicrosoft 365 and ExchangeNextcloud, OnlyOffice, Infomaniak
Code repositoryGitHubGitLab self-hosted
Web protection and CDNCloudflareBunny.net
VPNCisco AnyConnectTailscale
Authentication and IAMMicrosoftSamba, FreeIPA, Keycloak
Configuration managementManual or partialAnsible (Infrastructure as Code)
ObservabilityNot implementedFluentBit, OpenSearch
Documentation and wikiNot implementedWiki.js
GovernancePartialDocumented and formalized

 

4. Overview of alternatives : three sovereign cloud models

Trusted cloud providers through joint ventures

These are joint ventures between European and American players, such as S3NS for Thales and Google, Bleu for Orange Capgemini and Microsoft, and Azure Sovereign Cloud.

They rely on US technologies hosted in Europe, with local encryption key management using a bring your own key approach and controlled update mechanisms.

The main advantage lies in familiarity for existing teams. However, limitations include access to only a subset of the original product, with missing services such as AI capabilities, Cloud Shell or notebooks, continued dependence on US licensing, and access often restricted behind a contact-based onboarding process.

European public cloud providers

These providers operate under European law and rely on open source or internally developed technologies. Examples include Scaleway, OVHcloud, Outscale, United Cloud and Hetzner.

While historically perceived as less feature-rich, they now offer immediate accessibility and have introduced their own innovations, including quantum computing initiatives, IPFS-based storage and advanced networking such as layer 2 virtual private racks.

In practice, they cover the vast majority of use cases, with around 95 percent of needs addressed. They also provide a smoother transition path for teams coming from on-premise environments.

Self-hosted and colocation models

These approaches are typically reserved for highly critical systems in sectors such as defense, energy or healthcare.

They often involve air-gapped environments to meet strict certification requirements, including restricted or classified information levels, as well as eIDAS-compliant colocation setups.

Common technologies include OpenStack, Rancher, Nexus, Proxmox, perpetual VMware licenses and certified custom-built platforms.

5. Choosing Scaleway

Among the available European public cloud providers, the company selected Scaleway. A subsidiary of the Iliad Group, Scaleway has emerged in recent years as one of the most ambitious European cloud providers, with a clear positioning: offering a sovereign alternative to American hyperscalers without compromising on developer experience.

Scaleway Profile

Scaleway is a French cloud provider operating under European law, with all its data centers located in France and the Netherlands. Unlike “trusted cloud” offerings (such as S3NS or Bleu), Scaleway has developed its own software stack in-house, based on open-source components, without technological dependency on any American vendor. The company offers a comprehensive range of services: virtual instances (VMs), managed Kubernetes (Kapsule/Kosmos), managed databases, object storage (S3-compatible), load balancing, private networking (vRack), and dedicated GPU offerings for AI.

Certifications and Compliance

  • ISO 27001:2022: the benchmark standard for information security management systems.
  • HDS (Health Data Hosting): certification obtained in July 2024, enabling the hosting of health data in compliance with French Ministry of Health requirements.
  • SecNumCloud (in progress): Scaleway achieved the ANSSI J0 milestone in January 2025 and is targeting full qualification. A key differentiator is that Scaleway is qualifying its entire cloud offering, rather than a specific, isolated product.
  • Native GDPR compliance: data is hosted in Europe, operated by European teams, with no exposure to extraterritorial legislation.

Why Scaleway in This Specific Context

Several concrete factors influenced the company’s decision:

  • Self-service access: unlike S3NS or Bleu, where onboarding requires a commercial process (“Contact us”), Scaleway offers immediate sign-up, similar to AWS or Azure. For a mid-sized company, this is a decisive advantage.
  • Team familiarity: the company’s two system administrators had already used Scaleway on previous projects, making the learning curve negligible.
  • Ease of adoption: transitioning from on-premise environments to Scaleway is smoother than to AWS, where the breadth of services (300+) can be overwhelming.
  • Talent pool: Scaleway has sufficient recognition in Europe to allow the company to recruit skilled professionals familiar with the platform.
  • Relevant certifications: ISO 27001 and HDS covered immediate needs, while the ongoing SecNumCloud qualification provided a strong outlook for future public sector tenders.

“With Scaleway, you can sign up directly, just like with AWS or Azure. You’re not stuck in three days of discussions with sales teams. For a technical team that wants to move fast, it makes a real difference.” — F. Berwick

It is important to note that this choice is neither a partnership nor a commercial endorsement. Other European cloud providers (OVHcloud, Outscale, Hetzner) could also have been suitable depending on the context. In this case, the decision to use Scaleway resulted from an alignment between existing skills, required certifications, and ease of access to the platform.

6. Timeline : a 12-week migration

The migration was carried out over a 12-week period, structured into three distinct phases.

The company relied on two system administrators who were already familiar with Scaleway, which significantly accelerated execution.

PhaseTimelineKey actions
1. Alignment and scopingWeeks 1 to 2• CTO interview to define needs, scope and initial estimates
• Presentation of the vision to the entire company
• Feedback collection and addressing concerns
• Finalization of the migration plan with system administrators
2. Platform buildWeeks 3 to 8• Governance and documentation setup using Wiki.js
• Scaleway landing zone including network, IAM, VPN and load balancer
• Identity stack with FreeIPA, Samba, Keycloak and SSO
• Deployment of core services such as Nextcloud, GitLab and reverse proxy
• Migration of Azure virtual machines to Scaleway using qcow2 format
• Backup strategy and observability with FluentBit and OpenSearch
• Automation through Ansible, including certificates and group policies
3. Cutover and adoptionWeeks 9 to 12• Migration of email services to Infomaniak and DNS to Bunny.net
• Progressive onboarding of employees
• Support, feedback collection, adjustments and stabilization

 

The core challenge : rebuilding the equivalent of Active Directory

Microsoft’s strength lies in its ability to consolidate multiple capabilities into a single product, such as Azure AD or Entra ID.

In a sovereign environment, achieving the same level of functionality requires combining several components. The following architecture was implemented

  • VPN with Tailscale to provide secure access to internal services, replacing Cisco AnyConnect
  • Windows authentication with Samba AD to manage the existing Windows environment
  • Linux authentication with FreeIPA to control access across Linux servers
  • Single sign-on with Keycloak to unify authentication across all services
  • Configuration management with Ansible to automate updates, certificates and group policies
  • Observability with FluentBit and OpenSearch to centralize logs and enable monitoring

7. Comprehensive mapping of alternatives

The table below provides an overview of available solutions for each IT function, structured across three categories: traditional tools, typically US-based, open source alternatives, and private European or Canadian solutions.

TopicTraditional toolsOpen source alternativesEuropean and Canadian private solutions
AuthenticationMicrosoft Active DirectorySamba AD DC, FreeIPAUnivention
Unified Endpoint ManagementInTune (Microsoft 365), Jamf Pro, NinjaOne, ManageEngineFleetdm, opsiRelution, Matrix42, SOTI
Office suiteOffice 365, Google WorkspaceLaSuite.coop, Nextcloud, OnlyOfficeInfomaniak, Proton, Leviia, Wimi, Hexagone
VPNOpenVPN, Cloudflare, Cisco AnyConnectOpenVPN, Pangolin, HeadscaleTailscale, Netbird
DNS and CDNCloudflare, Akamai, AWS CloudFrontNGINX, Varnish, PowerDNSBunny.net
Cloud providerAzure, Google Cloud Platform, AWS, OracleOpenStack, CloudStack, OpenNebula, Microcloud, Proxmox, RancherScaleway, OVHcloud, Outscale, United Cloud, Hetzner, IONOS, Exoscale
AI modelsOpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Azure, AWSHugging Face ecosystem including Meta, DeepSeek, Qwen, BGE, Google, Mistral AI, OpenAIMistral AI, H Company, Cohere, Black Forest Labs, Aleph Alpha
Operating systemWindows, Red Hat Enterprise Linux, macOSDebian, AlmaLinux, Ubuntu, CentOS Stream, openSUSESUSE Linux Enterprise

8. Five key lessons learned

1. Your technical teams are already on board

This is a consistent pattern. Technical teams tend to see the shift toward open source as a natural step in their professional growth. Moving from Windows to Linux or from VMware to Kubernetes means working with modern, in-demand technologies that enhance their market value.

The barrier is almost never technical. It is primarily political.

2. The decision is political, not technical

Migrating to a sovereign cloud reshapes investment priorities, HR policies and IT consumption habits.

This is not a decision that can be made by the IT department alone. It must be validated at the executive level, with clear sponsorship from top management.

3. Start with a limited scope, but move to production

The right approach is to identify a pilot project with motivated teams, experiment, and then move quickly into production.

The common pitfall is remaining stuck in a prolonged testing phase, with parallel infrastructures that never fully converge. This leads to increased costs without delivering meaningful or lasting learning.

4. Build internal capabilities

External support can be valuable at the beginning. However, the objective should always be to make internal teams autonomous.

Over-reliance on external partners simply replaces technological dependency with human dependency.

5. Systematically capture and share knowledge

Every incident, bug and decision should be documented through post-mortems and centralized in a collaborative knowledge base, such as Wiki.js in this case.

This discipline is what differentiates a successful migration from a fragile infrastructure.

9. A pragmatic approach : hybrid cloud

Migrating to a sovereign cloud does not mean completely abandoning AWS, Azure or Google Cloud.

The key recommendation from this experience is to adopt a three-layer hybrid approach

  • Daily operations on a European cloud, such as Scaleway or OVHcloud, for hosting and core services
  • Innovation and experimentation on hyperscalers for specific use cases, including advanced AI or rapid prototyping that are not yet fully available in Europe
  • Critical systems on SecNumCloud-certified environments or self-hosted infrastructures for classified data and regulated workloads

“Up to 95 percent of use cases are already covered by current capabilities from providers like Scaleway or OVHcloud. Organizations should carefully assess their real needs before defaulting to a US hyperscaler.”
— F. Berwick

10. Key takeaways

This experience shows that migrating to a sovereign cloud can be achieved within 12 weeks for a mid-sized organization, provided that four key principles are followed

  • Developing an internal sovereign capability, even if only partial
  • Recognizing that sovereignty is primarily a political decision requiring executive-level sponsorship
  • Engaging all stakeholders from the outset, including technical teams, leadership and business users
  • Adopting a hybrid cloud approach, with sovereignty for core operations and openness for innovation

Digital sovereignty is neither an illusion nor a rejection of progress.

It is a strategic choice for independence that, as demonstrated in this experience, can be implemented in a pragmatic, gradual and controlled manner.

L’article Cloud and sovereignty – Migrating to a sovereign cloud est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> 30912 The end of ECC support reshuffles the SAP model and IT governance landscape. https://hubadviser.com/en/the-end-of-ecc-support-reshuffles-the-sap-model-and-it-governance-landscape/ https://hubadviser.com/en/the-end-of-ecc-support-reshuffles-the-sap-model-and-it-governance-landscape/#respond Wed, 12 Nov 2025 13:02:13 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=30129 SAP ECC : end of support… What attitude should you adopt based on your context ? January 2026 will mark, for many companies, the end of official support for SAP ECC, and for the most recent versions, 2027 will mark the end of standard maintenance. Beyond a simple technical deadline, this represents a paradigm shift for CIOs. SAP is continuing its shift toward the cloud and subscription model, leading to the gradual disappearance of perpetual licenses and on-premises environments. Behind this evolution lies a clear reality: CIOs no longer buy a product, they rent a service, they no longer control updates, they follow the pace set by the vendor, and costs have become recurring, variable, and difficult to predict. In an uncertain economic context, this shift raises key questions : How can organizations adapt to this transformation without simply enduring it ? Should they migrate now to S/4HANA Cloud ? Postpone the decision through third-party maintenance ? Or take advantage of this transition to rethink their IT model more broadly ?   At Hubadviser, we support CIOs every week as they face these choices. Some aim to reduce costs, others want to accelerate their transformation. But all are questioning what attitude to adopt in response to this structural shift. With this in mind, we present four typical scenarios, based on : the findings of the Rimini Street survey conducted among nearly 500 North American CIOs, and Gartner’s analyses, particularly those of Mike Tucciarone, to help each CIO identify the strategy best suited to their context. A key finding : SAP customers remain loyal but concerned Before discussing possible trajectories, it is essential to understand the starting point. The survey conducted by Rimini Street among 455 organizations reveals a paradox : SAP customers are generally satisfied, yet concerned about the future economic model. Here are the main insights : 79% of the CIOs surveyed said they were satisfied with SAP, including 27% “completely satisfied” and 52% “generally satisfied.” Among ECC users, this rate rises to 82%. However, 9 out of 10 customers are worried about the increase and unpredictability of subscription costs. 95% acknowledge that it is difficult to demonstrate a clear ROI for migration to S/4HANA. Finally, 67% of companies holding a perpetual license do not wish to move to a subscription model. The distribution of SAP environments illustrates this diversity : 30 % → S/4HANA On-Premises  20 % → S/4HANA Cloud  34 % → ECC 6.0  18 % → ECC 5.0  13 % → R/3 or previous version In summary, the vast majority of SAP customers do not plan to leave the ecosystem, but they seek to better control their costs, their pace, and the value they generate. As Mike Tucciarone (Gartner) points out : “SAP ERP remains a trusted solution. Even though the modular approach is gaining ground, we are not yet seeing a massive exodus from the SAP ecosystem.”  Since a large-scale departure from SAP seems unlikely in the short term, the question is no longer “Should we stay or leave ?” but rather : “What stance should we adopt toward SAP, given our strategy, resources, and IT maturity ?”  It is precisely with this in mind that we propose four typical scenarios. Each corresponds to a different company profile and highlights the key factors to consider before making a structural decision about your ERP strategy. A key finding : SAP customers remain loyal but concerned 1. Your priority is cost reduction Objective : Navigate a challenging period without disrupting your IT landscape. Your company is facing strong pressure on IT budgets. Your main goal is to stabilize existing systems and reduce recurring expenses without compromising operations. The right approach : Stay on ECC End official SAP maintenance Switch to third-party support (e.g., Rimini Street, Spinnaker Support, Support Revolution) This strategy allows you to : Cut maintenance costs by up to 50% Gain 5 to 7 years of breathing room Preserve system stability Keep in mind : Innovation capabilities will be limited This is a temporary approach A medium-term reinvestment must be planned In summary : a pragmatic waiting strategy to weather a difficult period without sacrificing IT continuity. 2. Your company is doing well and wants to accelerate Objective : Reach a new level of technological maturity. Your executive leadership supports innovation, and your IT teams are strong. You can turn the SAP migration into a lever for overall modernization. The right approach : Migrate to RISE with SAP Activate the Business Technology Platform (BTP) for data and extensions Leverage SAP Joule for generative AI and automation The benefits : Become an early adopter of SAP innovations Integrate AI at the core of your business processes Modernize finance, supply chain, and talent management It is essential to negotiate a strategic partnership with SAP, backed at the highest level of the organization. As an early adopter, you represent a reference client, a showcase for SAP whose success directly enhances the company’s credibility and communication around its cloud offerings. SAP therefore has every interest in offering you favorable financial conditions and enhanced support. This is probably the best time to negotiate. But be cautious : Operating expenses will increase You must build a solid business case with the executive team Value creation must be monitored over time In summary : an ambitious option for organizations that want to make SAP a true driver of competitiveness. 3. Your resources are limited and your IT team is small Objective : Stay up to date without adding complexity to your organization. Your company cannot invest heavily, and your IT teams are small. Your priorities are security, reliability, and simplicity. The right approach : Move to SAP Public Cloud Take advantage of automatic updates and native support Unlock a few key features without a full system overhaul The advantages : A modern and compliant environment Simplified maintenance Reduced internal workload for operations The limitations : Limited room for innovation Strong dependence on SAP’s roadmap Limited customization capabilities In summary : the simple

L’article The end of ECC support reshuffles the SAP model and IT governance landscape. est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

SAP ECC : end of support… What attitude should you adopt based on your context ?

January 2026 will mark, for many companies, the end of official support for SAP ECC, and for the most recent versions, 2027 will mark the end of standard maintenance. Beyond a simple technical deadline, this represents a paradigm shift for CIOs.

SAP is continuing its shift toward the cloud and subscription model, leading to the gradual disappearance of perpetual licenses and on-premises environments.

Behind this evolution lies a clear reality:

  • CIOs no longer buy a product, they rent a service,
  • they no longer control updates, they follow the pace set by the vendor,
  • and costs have become recurring, variable, and difficult to predict.

In an uncertain economic context, this shift raises key questions :

How can organizations adapt to this transformation without simply enduring it ?

  • Should they migrate now to S/4HANA Cloud ?

  • Postpone the decision through third-party maintenance ?

  • Or take advantage of this transition to rethink their IT model more broadly ?

     

At Hubadviser, we support CIOs every week as they face these choices. Some aim to reduce costs, others want to accelerate their transformation. But all are questioning what attitude to adopt in response to this structural shift.

With this in mind, we present four typical scenarios, based on :

  • the findings of the Rimini Street survey conducted among nearly 500 North American CIOs,
  • and Gartner’s analyses, particularly those of Mike Tucciarone, to help each CIO identify the strategy best suited to their context.

A key finding : SAP customers remain loyal but concerned

Before discussing possible trajectories, it is essential to understand the starting point. The survey conducted by Rimini Street among 455 organizations reveals a paradox : SAP customers are generally satisfied, yet concerned about the future economic model.

Here are the main insights :

  • 79% of the CIOs surveyed said they were satisfied with SAP, including 27% “completely satisfied” and 52% “generally satisfied.”
  • Among ECC users, this rate rises to 82%.
  • However, 9 out of 10 customers are worried about the increase and unpredictability of subscription costs.
  • 95% acknowledge that it is difficult to demonstrate a clear ROI for migration to S/4HANA.
  • Finally, 67% of companies holding a perpetual license do not wish to move to a subscription model.

The distribution of SAP environments illustrates this diversity :

  • 30 % → S/4HANA On-Premises 
  • 20 % → S/4HANA Cloud 
  • 34 % → ECC 6.0 
  • 18 % → ECC 5.0 
  • 13 % → R/3 or previous version

In summary, the vast majority of SAP customers do not plan to leave the ecosystem, but they seek to better control their costs, their pace, and the value they generate.

As Mike Tucciarone (Gartner) points out : “SAP ERP remains a trusted solution. Even though the modular approach is gaining ground, we are not yet seeing a massive exodus from the SAP ecosystem.” 

Since a large-scale departure from SAP seems unlikely in the short term, the question is no longer “Should we stay or leave ?”

but rather :

“What stance should we adopt toward SAP, given our strategy, resources, and IT maturity ?” 

It is precisely with this in mind that we propose four typical scenarios. Each corresponds to a different company profile and highlights the key factors to consider before making a structural decision about your ERP strategy.

A key finding : SAP customers remain loyal but concerned

1. Your priority is cost reduction

Objective : Navigate a challenging period without disrupting your IT landscape.

Your company is facing strong pressure on IT budgets. Your main goal is to stabilize existing systems and reduce recurring expenses without compromising operations.

The right approach :

  • Stay on ECC

  • End official SAP maintenance

  • Switch to third-party support (e.g., Rimini Street, Spinnaker Support, Support Revolution)

This strategy allows you to :

  • Cut maintenance costs by up to 50%

  • Gain 5 to 7 years of breathing room

  • Preserve system stability

Keep in mind :

  • Innovation capabilities will be limited

  • This is a temporary approach

  • A medium-term reinvestment must be planned

In summary : a pragmatic waiting strategy to weather a difficult period without sacrificing IT continuity.

2. Your company is doing well and wants to accelerate

Objective : Reach a new level of technological maturity.

Your executive leadership supports innovation, and your IT teams are strong. You can turn the SAP migration into a lever for overall modernization.

The right approach :

  • Migrate to RISE with SAP

  • Activate the Business Technology Platform (BTP) for data and extensions

  • Leverage SAP Joule for generative AI and automation

The benefits :

  • Become an early adopter of SAP innovations

  • Integrate AI at the core of your business processes

  • Modernize finance, supply chain, and talent management

It is essential to negotiate a strategic partnership with SAP, backed at the highest level of the organization. As an early adopter, you represent a reference client, a showcase for SAP whose success directly enhances the company’s credibility and communication around its cloud offerings. SAP therefore has every interest in offering you favorable financial conditions and enhanced support. This is probably the best time to negotiate.

But be cautious :

  • Operating expenses will increase

  • You must build a solid business case with the executive team

  • Value creation must be monitored over time

In summary : an ambitious option for organizations that want to make SAP a true driver of competitiveness.

3. Your resources are limited and your IT team is small

Objective : Stay up to date without adding complexity to your organization.

Your company cannot invest heavily, and your IT teams are small. Your priorities are security, reliability, and simplicity.

The right approach :

  • Move to SAP Public Cloud

  • Take advantage of automatic updates and native support

  • Unlock a few key features without a full system overhaul

The advantages :

  • A modern and compliant environment

  • Simplified maintenance

  • Reduced internal workload for operations

The limitations :

  • Limited room for innovation

  • Strong dependence on SAP’s roadmap

  • Limited customization capabilities

In summary : the simple and secure solution to keep your system up to date and functional, without aiming for a deep transformation.

4. Your resources are limited but your IT team is experienced

Objective : Reduce dependence on SAP and gain agility.

Your budget is constrained, but your teams are technically strong and autonomous. You have the skills to take back control of your architecture.

The right approach :

  • Move to the SAP Cloud version for key modules (Finance, Supply, etc.)

  • Gradually de-SAP other domains :

    • Procurement → Ivalua, Coupa
    • HR → Workday, Lucca
    • Maintenance → ServiceNow, Infor EAM
    • Planning → OMP, Kinaxis

The benefits :

  • Reduced dependence on SAP

  • More flexible architecture

  • Ability to innovate (AI, automation) without waiting for Joule

Conditions for success :

  • Strong interoperability management

  • Solid technical governance

  • High trust in IT teams

In summary : the path for agile CIOs who turn SAP constraints into a lever for independence and innovation.

In conclusion : it is not about leaving SAP, but redefining the relationship

The end of ECC support does not mark the end of SAP. It marks the end of an era when CIOs could still choose their own pace, model, and rules of the game.

From now on, every organization faces a strategic choice :

To endure the transformation imposed by the vendor, or to turn it to its advantage.

This shift should not be seen as a constraint, but as an opportunity for repositioning :

  • an opportunity to regain control of the technological trajectory,
  • to rebalance the client-vendor relationship,

  • and to rethink IT governance around value, flexibility, and sovereignty.

“At Hubadviser, we help CIOs assess their context, identify the most suitable trajectory, and build a realistic and sustainable roadmap, combining strategic vision, technology benchmarking, and field experience.“

Because true transformation is not simply about migrating to S/4HANA. It is about regaining control of your IT model and making the CIO function more strategic.

About the author

Ismail has 15 years of experience in IT and digital consulting. He spent nearly 7 years at Gartner. He has supported innovative startups in their growth strategy and worked with CIOs of large groups on their digital transformation. In 2021, Ismail founded Hubadviser to help CIOs challenge their vision with top-level experts.

L’article The end of ECC support reshuffles the SAP model and IT governance landscape. est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> https://hubadviser.com/en/the-end-of-ecc-support-reshuffles-the-sap-model-and-it-governance-landscape/feed/ 0 30129 Almost three years after the hype : where is the adoption of AI in business? https://hubadviser.com/en/almost-three-years-after-the-hype-where-is-the-adoption-of-ai-in-business/ https://hubadviser.com/en/almost-three-years-after-the-hype-where-is-the-adoption-of-ai-in-business/#respond Thu, 02 Oct 2025 10:16:17 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=29432 AI : Between dazzling promises and strategic uncertainties Since the emergence of ChatGPT at the end of 2022, artificial intelligence has become an obsession for boards of directors. CEOs are demanding that CIOs “integrate AI into processes,” “assist business lines in their AI efforts,” and “quickly deliver value.” Generative AI is no longer an innovation gimmick, but a symbol of competitiveness. In a climate of economic slowdown, it is seen as an essential… and immediate lever. For CIOs, the pressure is immense : adopting AI can make or break their careers within the company. Like the web twenty years ago, it is emerging as an unavoidable revolution, with this difference: expectations are much higher and the timeframes for delivering results are much shorter. Three years later, the time has come to ask ourselves: Is AI truly delivering on its promise for the company? Are the costs incurred sustainable and justified by a tangible return on investment? Should we build our own AI internally or rely on market solutions ? How far can we go with sensitive data without compromising the organization’s sovereignty? And finally, how should we manage this adoption: centralize or let business lines experiment, regulate shadow AI or encourage it? In this article, we will cover : Key figures from MIT and Gartner, which measure the gap between expectations and reality. The main obstacles to adoption: costs, lack of ROI, reliability, organizational integration. The dilemma of in-house AI versus market solutions, and its implications for CIOs. Possible attitudes toward this revolution: strategic partnerships, governance, shadow AI, composite AI, and the role of professions. Figures that dampen enthusiasm Three years after the hype began, the results are far more nuanced than the initial promises. Two major studies allow us to measure the gap. According to MIT (NANDA Initiative, 2025) : Only 5% of AI projects generate real revenue acceleration. 95% stagnate or fail, with no tangible impact on the income statement. Success stories are concentrated in young, agile startups that choose a specific problem, execute quickly, and rely on strategic partnerships. According to Gartner : Generative AI has moved from the peak of inflated expectations to the pit of disillusionment of its hype cycle. The main obstacles : hallucinations, unreliability, and exorbitant energy costs. Gartner estimates that it will take two to five years to reach the “slope of enlightenment” and create value at scale.  Massive obstacles : exorbitant costs and lack of ROI The major obstacle to AI adoption today is economic. The costs associated with AI are colossal, and the returns on investment are still very uncertain. Infrastructure costs : Training and running advanced models requires enormous energy and computing resources. Some companies report multi-million dollar bills for applications that are still experimental. Human costs : Building an in-house team of data scientists, AI engineers, and specialized architects has become a luxury reserved for giants. Lack of ROI : Most pilot projects fail to prove their financial value, creating growing frustration among management committees. The example of OpenAI illustrates this reality : despite global adoption and global recognition, the company is still recording abysmal financial losses. If the iconic industry leader is struggling to achieve profitability, how can we expect its corporate clients to quickly generate a measurable return? This equation calls into question not only the viability of providers’ business models, but also the sustainability of the technology itself in its mass adoption. Another obstacle : reliability and organizational integration Beyond costs, another major obstacle lies in the reliability of the models and their integration into the company. Hallucinations and inconsistent results : Generative AI remains capricious and cannot yet be deployed in environments where precision is critical. Luc Julia, Chief AI Officer at Renault and co-creator of Siri while working at Apple, provides a striking demonstration: when a model is asked the binary question of Victor Hugo’s date of birth, it receives different answers depending on the day. This simple example raises profound questions about the degree of veracity and reliability that can be expected from these systems. Shadow AI : Uncontrolled use of tools like ChatGPT by employees exposes organizations to compliance, privacy, and cybersecurity risks. Workflow rigidity : While ChatGPT is effective for individual use, its integration into complex business processes faces structural limitations.. Poor budget targeting : More than half of AI budgets are still directed toward sales and marketing, while MIT observes that the real ROI lies in back-office automation and streamlining operations. Homegrown AI versus market solutions : two approaches, two results The MIT survey highlights a stark contrast. Companies that have attempted to develop their own “homegrown” AI (often an internal ChatGPT trained on their data) have, by and large, failed. Infrastructure, labor, and R&D costs have proven prohibitive, and results have rarely been forthcoming. Conversely, those that have adopted off-the-shelf solutions are achieving far greater success. This choice sometimes means giving up some data sovereignty, but it quickly yields tangible gains. To summarize : CIOs that succeed in adopting AI will be, above all, very good buyers (capable of identifying the right suppliers and negotiating the right terms) rather than very good builders building sophisticated tools from scratch. In this context, a rule of caution is essential: avoid at this stage conducting AI projects on highly sensitive data, which expose the company’s sovereignty and security. Until the organization has built solid experience with less critical use cases, priority should be given to areas where the risk is manageable and the benefits quickly measurable. What attitude should you adopt ? To succeed in this context, CIOs must adopt a lucid, methodical and strategic stance. Prioritize pragmatic use cases : back-office automation, reducing the need for outsourcing and streamlining administrative processes remain the most likely areas for rapidly generating value. Exploring “AI composite” : It is not a question of betting everything on a single model, but of orchestrating several technological building blocks (LLM (language models), traditional machine learning, computer vision, autonomous agents) in order to compensate for the weaknesses of each isolated approach.Concretely,

L’article Almost three years after the hype : where is the adoption of AI in business? est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

AI : Between dazzling promises and strategic uncertainties

Since the emergence of ChatGPT at the end of 2022, artificial intelligence has become an obsession for boards of directors. CEOs are demanding that CIOs “integrate AI into processes,” “assist business lines in their AI efforts,” and “quickly deliver value.” Generative AI is no longer an innovation gimmick, but a symbol of competitiveness. In a climate of economic slowdown, it is seen as an essential… and immediate lever.

For CIOs, the pressure is immense : adopting AI can make or break their careers within the company. Like the web twenty years ago, it is emerging as an unavoidable revolution, with this difference: expectations are much higher and the timeframes for delivering results are much shorter.

Three years later, the time has come to ask ourselves: Is AI truly delivering on its promise for the company? Are the costs incurred sustainable and justified by a tangible return on investment? Should we build our own AI internally or rely on market solutions ? How far can we go with sensitive data without compromising the organization’s sovereignty? And finally, how should we manage this adoption: centralize or let business lines experiment, regulate shadow AI or encourage it?

In this article, we will cover :

  • Key figures from MIT and Gartner, which measure the gap between expectations and reality.
  • The main obstacles to adoption: costs, lack of ROI, reliability, organizational integration.
  • The dilemma of in-house AI versus market solutions, and its implications for CIOs.
  • Possible attitudes toward this revolution: strategic partnerships, governance, shadow AI, composite AI, and the role of professions.

Figures that dampen enthusiasm

Three years after the hype began, the results are far more nuanced than the initial promises. Two major studies allow us to measure the gap.

  • According to MIT (NANDA Initiative, 2025) :
    • Only 5% of AI projects generate real revenue acceleration.
    • 95% stagnate or fail, with no tangible impact on the income statement.
    • Success stories are concentrated in young, agile startups that choose a specific problem, execute quickly, and rely on strategic partnerships.
  • According to Gartner :
    • Generative AI has moved from the peak of inflated expectations to the pit of disillusionment of its hype cycle.
    • The main obstacles : hallucinations, unreliability, and exorbitant energy costs.
    • Gartner estimates that it will take two to five years to reach the “slope of enlightenment” and create value at scale. 

Massive obstacles : exorbitant costs and lack of ROI

The major obstacle to AI adoption today is economic. The costs associated with AI are colossal, and the returns on investment are still very uncertain.

  • Infrastructure costs : Training and running advanced models requires enormous energy and computing resources. Some companies report multi-million dollar bills for applications that are still experimental.
  • Human costs : Building an in-house team of data scientists, AI engineers, and specialized architects has become a luxury reserved for giants.
  • Lack of ROI : Most pilot projects fail to prove their financial value, creating growing frustration among management committees.

The example of OpenAI illustrates this reality : despite global adoption and global recognition, the company is still recording abysmal financial losses. If the iconic industry leader is struggling to achieve profitability, how can we expect its corporate clients to quickly generate a measurable return? This equation calls into question not only the viability of providers’ business models, but also the sustainability of the technology itself in its mass adoption.

Another obstacle : reliability and organizational integration

Beyond costs, another major obstacle lies in the reliability of the models and their integration into the company.

  • Hallucinations and inconsistent results : Generative AI remains capricious and cannot yet be deployed in environments where precision is critical. Luc Julia, Chief AI Officer at Renault and co-creator of Siri while working at Apple, provides a striking demonstration: when a model is asked the binary question of Victor Hugo’s date of birth, it receives different answers depending on the day. This simple example raises profound questions about the degree of veracity and reliability that can be expected from these systems.
  • Shadow AI : Uncontrolled use of tools like ChatGPT by employees exposes organizations to compliance, privacy, and cybersecurity risks.
  • Workflow rigidity : While ChatGPT is effective for individual use, its integration into complex business processes faces structural limitations..
  • Poor budget targeting : More than half of AI budgets are still directed toward sales and marketing, while MIT observes that the real ROI lies in back-office automation and streamlining operations.

Homegrown AI versus market solutions : two approaches, two results

The MIT survey highlights a stark contrast. Companies that have attempted to develop their own “homegrown” AI (often an internal ChatGPT trained on their data) have, by and large, failed. Infrastructure, labor, and R&D costs have proven prohibitive, and results have rarely been forthcoming.

Conversely, those that have adopted off-the-shelf solutions are achieving far greater success. This choice sometimes means giving up some data sovereignty, but it quickly yields tangible gains.

To summarize : CIOs that succeed in adopting AI will be, above all, very good buyers (capable of identifying the right suppliers and negotiating the right terms) rather than very good builders building sophisticated tools from scratch.

In this context, a rule of caution is essential: avoid at this stage conducting AI projects on highly sensitive data, which expose the company’s sovereignty and security. Until the organization has built solid experience with less critical use cases, priority should be given to areas where the risk is manageable and the benefits quickly measurable.

What attitude should you adopt ?

To succeed in this context, CIOs must adopt a lucid, methodical and strategic stance.

  • Prioritize pragmatic use cases : back-office automation, reducing the need for outsourcing and streamlining administrative processes remain the most likely areas for rapidly generating value.
  • Exploring “AI composite” : It is not a question of betting everything on a single model, but of orchestrating several technological building blocks (LLM (language models), traditional machine learning, computer vision, autonomous agents) in order to compensate for the weaknesses of each isolated approach.
    Concretely, composite AI is based on a simple idea: no AI technology is perfect in and of itself. LLMs excel at text generation but suffer from hallucinations. Machine learning is robust at prediction but limited in contextual understanding. Computer vision is very effective at image recognition, but lacks reasoning capabilities. Finally, agents provide autonomy but still lack reliability. By combining these techniques in a composite architecture, companies are able to leverage the strengths of each while minimizing their weaknesses.
    Many companies are already switching to this multi-technology approach. In retail, an internal search engine can combine an LLM (to understand the query) with an ML algorithm (to recommend products) and a vision module (to identify an item in a photo). In the supply chain, warehouse optimization can rely on forecasting models, logistics algorithms, and a chatbot to assist operators.
    Relying on a single building block is a strategic dead end. Composite AI provides robustness, adaptability, cost control, and scalability. This is the key to moving beyond the “permanent POC” and industrializing AI.
  • Building through strategic partnerships : choosing a key vendor (whether Mistral AI, Anthropic, Google, or other strategic players) cannot be treated as a simple IT decision. It is a corporate governance issue. The selection of an AI partner must be negotiated with senior management, integrated into the overall strategy, and validated by the legal department to anticipate the implications of sovereignty, confidentiality, and technological dependency.
  • Decentralize adoption : AI should not remain confined to a central “AI Lab.” It must be driven by the businesses themselves. Field managers know their processes and their challenges better than anyone : giving them control over experimentation is the best way to prevent AI from remaining an off-the-ground innovation.
  • Managing Shadow AI intelligently : It would be unrealistic (and counterproductive) to try to completely ban employees from using tools like ChatGPT or Claude. Shadow AI is often the first driver of adoption: it reveals curiosity, creativity, and the real needs of businesses. The role of the CIO is not to block these uses, but to channel them, establish safeguards, and create a secure framework that allows these individual experiments to be transformed into collective practices.
  • Strengthen governance and cost control : AI must be framed as a strategic resource. Who can use it, on what data, with what limits, and at what cost? These decisions require governance committees bringing together IT, legal, business, and senior management to steer the transformation in a responsible and sustainable manner.

Untouched potential, but not at the cost of illusion

Both MIT and Gartner emphasize that despite the current disillusionment, the potential of AI remains immense. With more reliable models, better prepared data, and more rigorous evaluation frameworks, generative AI will permanently transform productivity and innovation.

But we must put an end to the illusion of immediate profitability. AI is an expensive, demanding, and uncertain technology. For CIOs, the real challenge is not to “do like everyone else” but to transform an exciting but capricious promise into a sustainable performance driver. Those who can orchestrate AI with discernment, patience, and method will be the real winners in the coming years.

About the author

Ismail has 15 years of experience in IT and digital consulting. He spent nearly 7 years at Gartner. He has supported innovative startups in their growth strategy and worked with CIOs of large groups on their digital transformation. In 2021, Ismail founded Hubadviser to help CIOs challenge their vision with top-level experts.

L’article Almost three years after the hype : where is the adoption of AI in business? est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> https://hubadviser.com/en/almost-three-years-after-the-hype-where-is-the-adoption-of-ai-in-business/feed/ 0 29432 Benoît and the mirage of digital transformation https://hubadviser.com/en/benoit-and-the-mirage-of-digital-transformation/ https://hubadviser.com/en/benoit-and-the-mirage-of-digital-transformation/#respond Tue, 02 Sep 2025 15:10:15 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=28223 Welcome to Ribard, a strong industrial company that produces equipment for trucks and coaches. A family-owned business that grew through hard work, with factories, know-how passed down through generations, and loyal customers across Europe. For decades, the continent was enough : profits were strong, people were hired, and modernization came in small steps. Then the market slowed. Market shares froze, competition became organized, and growth opportunities here grew scarce. Optimization was possible, yes. But to grow, one had to look elsewhere. That was when the family holding made a decision it had postponed for a long time: to open up the capital. Not to make a quick move, but to finance a real leap. The goal was clear : international expansion. To build factories in Asia and North America, to enter the most promising markets, to secure supply chains, to get closer to customers and local logistics networks. A transformation that was not just about the executive committee: it involved the very future of the company. Its survival, even. The new shareholder is an American investment fund, which took a 40% stake. The family remains majority at 51%: it keeps control and the culture. The fund, on the other hand, brings the fuel and… the clock. It wants returns, fast. It thinks in terms of “capex, ramp-up, payback”, it looks at margins, cash, speed of execution. It pushes for sharp decisions, firm schedules, milestones that are met. Governance adapts: a tighter board, denser reporting, faster arbitration. Very quickly, one thing became clear to both sides of the table: to succeed in this shift, key resources were needed that had not been there before. Not just project managers or integrators. A leader was required, someone able to align factories, systems, AI, data, cybersecurity, suppliers, and bring the business teams on board. A transformation CIO. It was in this context that Benoît appeared. A headhunting firm had spotted him, with a “bankable” profile: a mixed background in consulting, then program management in a large group. He knows how to speak about performance, delivery, change management, scaled agility, and he has already worked in multicultural environments. The firm painted a clear picture for him: “You are going to transform a business model, not just redo an ERP.” They spoke of Manufacturing 4.0, AI, agility. They mentioned factory sensors, MES, traceability, digital twins, data to optimize production and maintenance, setting up a more responsive supply chain, and improving the customer experience. All the keywords that light up the eyes of any serious professional… provided there is the scope and the means. A few weeks later it was the CEO who welcomed him, a vigorous and determined man in his fifties, with a fair a mount of charisma. He did not beat around the bush : “Europe is a slowing market. To grow, we must expand. Our target: +30% revenue in five years. We will open sites in Asia and North America. I want connected factories, IT serving the business, and a shorter time-to-market.” The message was straightforward, the vision clear. He pressed further on the expectations of value creation and on the milestones. He also insisted strongly on the company’s culture and DNA: “we must succeed without losing who we are.” Benoît listened, asked questions, and framed the discussion. He saw the potential: a solid company, reliable products, a clear ambition, and a transformation where IT was not a support function but a lever. He was told about prioritizing international expansion, standardizing what needed to be standardized, equipping decision-making with data, and securing the information system against growing risks. He was promised a clear mandate, strong sponsorship, and direct access to decision-makers. At the end of the process, the equation seemed workable: a clear business vision, dedicated resources, and tighter governance. Above all, a mission that felt right: to make technology a multiplier of growth. He accepted. It was a great step in his career, he celebrated his appointment, he had truly reached a new level. Three months later, it was Benoît’s first day. He walked into the wood-paneled lobby of headquarters, under the watchful eyes of the founders’ portraits. On the table, a badge and a laptop still wrapped in plastic. In his agenda, the first meetings: CEO, finance, operations, industrial teams, then a tour of the sites. International expansion in sight. Benoît took a breath. The stage was set. The transformation was about to begin. Four months later But only four months later, the reality was very different from what he had imagined. In fact, Benoît had inherited a situation far more complicated than expected. The OPEX budget had already blown up. In fact, there was no real consolidated budget at all, only a patchwork of scattered expenses. The company was running on 7 different ERPs, inherited from acquisitions. An unmanageable mosaic that blocked any ambition of scalability. The team was friendly, but the CTO and the CISO were not up to the task. As soon as microservices or Zero Trust were mentioned, silence fell. They were lost. Work was done in business silos, everything was custom-built each time, and the technical debt was immense. Meetings were… peculiar. People came unprepared, spoke about topics as they came to mind, with no supporting material. As for project methodology, it was close to nonexistent. External vendors carried everything, and it was their metrics and their reports that served as the compass. The few internal talents (mostly developers) were asking to switch to freelance status or threatening to leave. As for cyber risk, it did not seem to be under control at all. Benoît understood the scale of the misunderstanding. He had been recruited to lead digital transformation, drive international expansion, speak about AI and innovation. But before planting the flag in Asia, he would first need… to lay down serious foundations. Benoît’s dilemmas Faced with all these challenges, Benoît felt lost, standing before a puzzle for which he had not yet found all the pieces. So, where should he begin ? Should his

L’article Benoît and the mirage of digital transformation est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

Welcome to Ribard, a strong industrial company that produces equipment for trucks and coaches. A family-owned business that grew through hard work, with factories, know-how passed down through generations, and loyal customers across Europe.

For decades, the continent was enough : profits were strong, people were hired, and modernization came in small steps. Then the market slowed. Market shares froze, competition became organized, and growth opportunities here grew scarce. Optimization was possible, yes. But to grow, one had to look elsewhere.

That was when the family holding made a decision it had postponed for a long time: to open up the capital. Not to make a quick move, but to finance a real leap. The goal was clear : international expansion. To build factories in Asia and North America, to enter the most promising markets, to secure supply chains, to get closer to customers and local logistics networks. A transformation that was not just about the executive committee: it involved the very future of the company. Its survival, even.

The new shareholder is an American investment fund, which took a 40% stake. The family remains majority at 51%: it keeps control and the culture. The fund, on the other hand, brings the fuel and… the clock. It wants returns, fast. It thinks in terms of “capex, ramp-up, payback”, it looks at margins, cash, speed of execution. It pushes for sharp decisions, firm schedules, milestones that are met. Governance adapts: a tighter board, denser reporting, faster arbitration.

Very quickly, one thing became clear to both sides of the table: to succeed in this shift, key resources were needed that had not been there before. Not just project managers or integrators. A leader was required, someone able to align factories, systems, AI, data, cybersecurity, suppliers, and bring the business teams on board. A transformation CIO.

It was in this context that Benoît appeared. A headhunting firm had spotted him, with a “bankable” profile: a mixed background in consulting, then program management in a large group. He knows how to speak about performance, delivery, change management, scaled agility, and he has already worked in multicultural environments.

The firm painted a clear picture for him: “You are going to transform a business model, not just redo an ERP.” They spoke of Manufacturing 4.0, AI, agility. They mentioned factory sensors, MES, traceability, digital twins, data to optimize production and maintenance, setting up a more responsive supply chain, and improving the customer experience. All the keywords that light up the eyes of any serious professional… provided there is the scope and the means.

A few weeks later it was the CEO who welcomed him, a vigorous and determined man in his fifties, with a fair a mount of charisma. He did not beat around the bush :

“Europe is a slowing market. To grow, we must expand. Our target: +30% revenue in five years. We will open sites in Asia and North America. I want connected factories, IT serving the business, and a shorter time-to-market.” The message was straightforward, the vision clear. He pressed further on the expectations of value creation and on the milestones. He also insisted strongly on the company’s culture and DNA: “we must succeed without losing who we are.”

Benoît listened, asked questions, and framed the discussion. He saw the potential: a solid company, reliable products, a clear ambition, and a transformation where IT was not a support function but a lever. He was told about prioritizing international expansion, standardizing what needed to be standardized, equipping decision-making with data, and securing the information system against growing risks. He was promised a clear mandate, strong sponsorship, and direct access to decision-makers.

At the end of the process, the equation seemed workable: a clear business vision, dedicated resources, and tighter governance. Above all, a mission that felt right: to make technology a multiplier of growth. He accepted. It was a great step in his career, he celebrated his appointment, he had truly reached a new level.

Three months later, it was Benoît’s first day. He walked into the wood-paneled lobby of headquarters, under the watchful eyes of the founders’ portraits. On the table, a badge and a laptop still wrapped in plastic. In his agenda, the first meetings: CEO, finance, operations, industrial teams, then a tour of the sites. International expansion in sight. Benoît took a breath. The stage was set. The transformation was about to begin.

Four months later

But only four months later, the reality was very different from what he had imagined. In fact, Benoît had inherited a situation far more complicated than expected.

  • The OPEX budget had already blown up. In fact, there was no real consolidated budget at all, only a patchwork of scattered expenses.
  • The company was running on 7 different ERPs, inherited from acquisitions. An unmanageable mosaic that blocked any ambition of scalability.
  • The team was friendly, but the CTO and the CISO were not up to the task. As soon as microservices or Zero Trust were mentioned, silence fell. They were lost.
  • Work was done in business silos, everything was custom-built each time, and the technical debt was immense.
  • Meetings were… peculiar. People came unprepared, spoke about topics as they came to mind, with no supporting material.
  • As for project methodology, it was close to nonexistent. External vendors carried everything, and it was their metrics and their reports that served as the compass.
  • The few internal talents (mostly developers) were asking to switch to freelance status or threatening to leave.
  • As for cyber risk, it did not seem to be under control at all.

Benoît understood the scale of the misunderstanding. He had been recruited to lead digital transformation, drive international expansion, speak about AI and innovation. But before planting the flag in Asia, he would first need… to lay down serious foundations.

Benoît’s dilemmas

Faced with all these challenges, Benoît felt lost, standing before a puzzle for which he had not yet found all the pieces. So, where should he begin ?

Should his priority be to put in place the fundamentals of a real IT department ?

  • A consolidated, clear, and defensible budget.
  • An IT leadership committee that prepares its meetings, coming in with numbers, supporting materials, and facts.
  • Recruitments to replace the CTO and the CISO.

In short, rebuild a solid house. But by investing time in laying the foundations, wouldn’t he risk drifting too far from the business ?

Because in this kind of transformation, the business expects quick proof. The famous “quick win.” The small project that, in just a few months, eases a CFO’s reporting, an industrial director’s production, or a supply chain director’s forecasting. It is this kind of victory that gives a new CIO credibility.

Yes, but how can he achieve that quick win if the fundamentals are not in place? How can he launch a visible project without a clear budget, solid skills, and proper governance? And what if instead of a quick win, he delivered nothing more than an epic fail?

The dilemma is cruel.

  • Should he try to impress quickly, at the risk of patching things up on an unstable foundation?
  • Or should he reform in depth, at the cost of months (or even years) without tangible results for the business?

And then there is the question of transparency.

  • Should he present this reality as it is to the CEO? Say clearly that the situation is worse than expected, that IT does not have the means to match its ambitions, that the announced timelines make no sense ?
  • Isn’t there a risk that the CEO, or worse still the family and the fund, might see him as a defeatist CIO, a man looking for excuses before having delivered anything ?

And what should he say to the teams ?

  • They are willing, quite friendly, but some are not up to the task. Should he say it bluntly? Risk breaking the dynamic, damaging trust, creating stress ?
  • Or should he pretend to believe that everything will be fine, at the cost of a collective illusion ?

Every day, Benoît weighed the pros and cons. He swung between lucidity and diplomacy, between urgency and patience.

In reality, his dilemma is the same as that of many CIOs :

  • Should he chase quick wins to win over the business, even if it means sacrificing the long term ?
  • Or build a deep reform, at the risk of being seen as a slow and abstract manager ?
  • Should he tell the shareholders and the teams the unvarnished truth, or smooth things over to protect the momentum of the transformation ?

Many questions, no obvious answers. And that is, without doubt, the real weight of the role: not technical expertise, but the solitude of choices.

Long reflections

These questions never left Benoît. They followed him through his days, but also into his evenings, sometimes into his nights, like a constant background noise. That feeling of having to decide quickly, while every option seemed like a gamble.

He often thought back to the image of a sandcastle.
Each time he believed he was laying a solid brick (a process, a budget, a hire), a wave came to erode it. An overlooked expense, a failed meeting, or a sudden departure. Everything seemed fragile and unstable.

His indecision was not weakness, but the reflection of a complex situation. In every scenario, he saw as many risks as opportunities. Move too fast, and he might stumble. Move too slowly, and he might lose the support of the shareholders. He weighed and reweighed, reviewed his notes, drafted emails only to cross them out ten times before sending.

And this stress did not stay at the office. It crept into everything else: during dinner, while putting his phone away, at the moment of falling asleep.

Conclusion

Benoît’s reality is that of many CIOs: a role presented as strategic and forward-looking, but one that quickly turns into an unstable balance between short term and long term, truth and diplomacy, ambition and reality.

The complexity of the job is not only technical, it is also human, political, and at times existential. And in the end, perhaps the most outdated belief of all is thinking that a CIO can still face it all… alone.

About the author

Ismail has 15 years of experience in IT and digital consulting. He spent nearly 7 years at Gartner. He has supported innovative startups in their growth strategy and worked with CIOs of large groups on their digital transformation. In 2021, Ismail founded Hubadviser to help CIOs challenge their vision with top-level experts.

L’article Benoît and the mirage of digital transformation est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> https://hubadviser.com/en/benoit-and-the-mirage-of-digital-transformation/feed/ 0 28223 Sophie and the three CIOs – Chronicle of an impossible (or almost) alignment https://hubadviser.com/en/sophie-and-the-three-cios-chronicle-of-an-impossible-or-almost-alignment/ Mon, 01 Sep 2025 15:58:29 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=27973 🕗 It’s 8:14 a.m. in Bordeaux. Sophie stares at her screen, a black coffee in hand, her expression a little harsher than usual. Three one to one meetings in forty eight hours with her regional lieutenants. Three conversations. Three worlds. And the same question pounding in her head : how can anyone still talk about an “information system” in the singular? As Group CIO of a French aeronautics company operating in about ten countries, Sophie is marking her first year in the role. Her career path is anything but typical. She first rose through the supply chain, learning to manage flows, inventories and emergencies. She became a project manager, then went on to lead local operations in Asia, particularly in China, where she spent several years. It was only after joining the operations department at headquarters that she was propelled into the CIO position. Her mandate ? Simple on paper : align IT strategy with the group’s overall strategy. A great mission. And strong sponsorship within the executive committee. But now that the appointment festivities are over, the real challenge begins, one of power plays, turf wars, and egos. The North American CIO repeated it again yesterday, in an almost condescending tone: “My region is growing by 15%. The CEO is delighted. Why should I waste time coordinating my actions with the group?” The Asia CIO, on the other hand, seems to be living on another planet, absorbed by his own local innovation challenges. As for the French CIO, he’s playing along, but reluctantly, as if each global standard were another threat to his room for maneuver. Sophie knows: there are three information systems in the same company. Three cultures. Three decision-making chains. Three ways of understanding IT value. But Sophie is resilient. She doesn’t intend to give up and will show that she, too, can make her mark for the good of the group, despite the pitfalls. Let’s dive into her reality and her strategy. 1) Underestimated difficulties The most frustrating thing for Sophie isn’t the chaos. It’s that it’s invisible to others. Take the IT budget, for example. A basic mechanism in any structured group. Well, here, each region builds its own. In the United States, everything is grouped into a single budget that combines infrastructure, licenses, cybersecurity, and even the IT team’s canteen. In France, OPEX and CAPEX are carefully distinguished, but outsourced HR costs are forgotten. In Asia, each subsidiary uploads its data to an Excel spreadsheet sent at midnight on December 28th. So yes, of course, there are different local realities. Labor costs in India are nothing like those in Belgium. But without a common budget framework, how can we compare? How can we measure performance? How can we manage? Last week, the French CIO presented her with contagious enthusiasm a new Industry 4.0 program. An ambitious project. Technically interesting. But also… solitary. No formal connection to the group’s roadmap. No shared perspective with other regions. Sophie asked: “Have we looked at what’s already being done elsewhere in the group?” An embarrassed silence. He hadn’t taken the time. And when she began to set conditions: governance, pooling, methodological framework, the tone became tense. The French CIO had a sponsor: the head of Manufacturing Europe and Manufacturing France. Very influential. And, incidentally, the CEO’s golf partner. And the service catalog ? A wasteland. The last time she dared to ask the Asia CIO how many applications were running within her scope, he shrugged: “Between 200 and 300? Maybe 400?”It’s impossible to have a clear map. Even less so an application lifecycle. And when she started talking about technical debt, he smiled politely, then moved on to the urgent demands of the business. “We can’t say no, you understand.” No, actually, she doesn’t understand. Or rather, she understands only too well: we let it happen for years, without guidelines, without a framework, without governance. And today, she, Sophie, has to lay the foundations… in a group worth billions of euros. 2) Impose yourself without imposing The dilemma is subtle, but omnipresent: how to establish a framework without stifling initiative?How to talk about global alignment without giving the impression of wanting to govern from an ivory tower in Bordeaux? Sophie doesn’t want to create a technocratic, cold, centralizing IT department. But she also knows that total autonomy means guaranteed anarchy. Projects launched without visibility, duplicate purchases, critical security breaches, and silent waste under the guise of “local agility.” The key, she now knows, isn’t to control everything. It’s to create a clear, shared, and understood framework. She calls it her “constitution.”A sober, readable document, halfway between a code of conduct and a trust pact.Officially: the Rules of Engagement. This document sets out the rules of the game : What budget should a project be submitted to the group before approval? What are the minimum requirements to meet before issuing a call for tenders? What are the mandatory safety standards, regardless of region or sector? Not to police. To empower. So that everyone knows where their freedom begins… and where collective responsibility begins. But Sophie knows that the text isn’t enough. We need appropriate governance.Not uniform governance. Multi-layered governance, like a well-thought-out mille-feuille : Global, for structuring issues: infrastructure, digital workplace, ERP. Regional, for support, local services, and operational management. Lastly, local, for purely application-related issues or business innovation projects. We don’t impose the same thing on a country hosting a data center as we do on a local development team wanting to test a low-code tool. And above all, we must establish solid standards on sovereign issues.There can be no management without a common foundation. Sophie therefore launched a project to standardize three pillars : Demand management : How projects emerge, are prioritized, and arbitrated. The service catalog : What the IT department officially offers worldwide. Incident management : Same approach, same tool, same requirements, regardless of the region. His dream? That an IT employee moving from Atlanta to Paris, then to Singapore, doesn’t feel like they’re

L’article Sophie and the three CIOs – Chronicle of an impossible (or almost) alignment est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

🕗 It’s 8:14 a.m. in Bordeaux.

Sophie stares at her screen, a black coffee in hand, her expression a little harsher than usual. Three one to one meetings in forty eight hours with her regional lieutenants. Three conversations. Three worlds. And the same question pounding in her head : how can anyone still talk about an “information system” in the singular?

As Group CIO of a French aeronautics company operating in about ten countries, Sophie is marking her first year in the role. Her career path is anything but typical. She first rose through the supply chain, learning to manage flows, inventories and emergencies. She became a project manager, then went on to lead local operations in Asia, particularly in China, where she spent several years. It was only after joining the operations department at headquarters that she was propelled into the CIO position.

Her mandate ? Simple on paper : align IT strategy with the group’s overall strategy. A great mission. And strong sponsorship within the executive committee. But now that the appointment festivities are over, the real challenge begins, one of power plays, turf wars, and egos.

The North American CIO repeated it again yesterday, in an almost condescending tone:

“My region is growing by 15%. The CEO is delighted. Why should I waste time coordinating my actions with the group?”

The Asia CIO, on the other hand, seems to be living on another planet, absorbed by his own local innovation challenges.

As for the French CIO, he’s playing along, but reluctantly, as if each global standard were another threat to his room for maneuver.

Sophie knows: there are three information systems in the same company. Three cultures. Three decision-making chains. Three ways of understanding IT value.

But Sophie is resilient. She doesn’t intend to give up and will show that she, too, can make her mark for the good of the group, despite the pitfalls.

Let’s dive into her reality and her strategy.

1) Underestimated difficulties

The most frustrating thing for Sophie isn’t the chaos. It’s that it’s invisible to others.

Take the IT budget, for example. A basic mechanism in any structured group. Well, here, each region builds its own. In the United States, everything is grouped into a single budget that combines infrastructure, licenses, cybersecurity, and even the IT team’s canteen. In France, OPEX and CAPEX are carefully distinguished, but outsourced HR costs are forgotten. In Asia, each subsidiary uploads its data to an Excel spreadsheet sent at midnight on December 28th.

So yes, of course, there are different local realities. Labor costs in India are nothing like those in Belgium. But without a common budget framework, how can we compare? How can we measure performance? How can we manage?

Last week, the French CIO presented her with contagious enthusiasm a new Industry 4.0 program. An ambitious project. Technically interesting. But also… solitary. No formal connection to the group’s roadmap. No shared perspective with other regions. Sophie asked: “Have we looked at what’s already being done elsewhere in the group?” An embarrassed silence. He hadn’t taken the time.

And when she began to set conditions: governance, pooling, methodological framework, the tone became tense. The French CIO had a sponsor: the head of Manufacturing Europe and Manufacturing France. Very influential. And, incidentally, the CEO’s golf partner.

And the service catalog ? A wasteland. The last time she dared to ask the Asia CIO how many applications were running within her scope, he shrugged: “Between 200 and 300? Maybe 400?”
It’s impossible to have a clear map. Even less so an application lifecycle.

And when she started talking about technical debt, he smiled politely, then moved on to the urgent demands of the business.

“We can’t say no, you understand.” No, actually, she doesn’t understand. Or rather, she understands only too well: we let it happen for years, without guidelines, without a framework, without governance. And today, she, Sophie, has to lay the foundations… in a group worth billions of euros.

2) Impose yourself without imposing

The dilemma is subtle, but omnipresent: how to establish a framework without stifling initiative?
How to talk about global alignment without giving the impression of wanting to govern from an ivory tower in Bordeaux?

Sophie doesn’t want to create a technocratic, cold, centralizing IT department. But she also knows that total autonomy means guaranteed anarchy. Projects launched without visibility, duplicate purchases, critical security breaches, and silent waste under the guise of “local agility.”

The key, she now knows, isn’t to control everything. It’s to create a clear, shared, and understood framework.

She calls it her “constitution.”
A sober, readable document, halfway between a code of conduct and a trust pact.
Officially: the Rules of Engagement.

This document sets out the rules of the game :

  • What budget should a project be submitted to the group before approval?
  • What are the minimum requirements to meet before issuing a call for tenders?
  • What are the mandatory safety standards, regardless of region or sector?

Not to police. To empower. So that everyone knows where their freedom begins… and where collective responsibility begins.

But Sophie knows that the text isn’t enough. We need appropriate governance.
Not uniform governance. Multi-layered governance, like a well-thought-out mille-feuille :

  • Global, for structuring issues: infrastructure, digital workplace, ERP.
  • Regional, for support, local services, and operational management.
  • Lastly, local, for purely application-related issues or business innovation projects.

We don’t impose the same thing on a country hosting a data center as we do on a local development team wanting to test a low-code tool.

And above all, we must establish solid standards on sovereign issues.
There can be no management without a common foundation.

Sophie therefore launched a project to standardize three pillars :

  • Demand management : How projects emerge, are prioritized, and arbitrated.
  • The service catalog : What the IT department officially offers worldwide.
  • Incident management : Same approach, same tool, same requirements, regardless of the region.

His dream? That an IT employee moving from Atlanta to Paris, then to Singapore, doesn’t feel like they’re moving to a new company every time.

3) Political courage

In her office, Sophie scribbled a sentence in capital letters on a post-it stuck to the screen :

“Choose your battles.”

She often repeats this to herself. Because as a Group CIO, wanting to change everything, right away, everywhere, is a surefire way to hit a wall.

She’s learned to make smart deals. She can ease up on a local application if it helps secure the adoption of a security standard. She can turn a blind eye to a Swedish-specific HR tool, as long as the ERP core model is respected. And above all: never lose sight of what’s important.
The important thing is that the IT department shouldn’t be a support service for the support team. It must be involved in decision-making. And that starts with having a say in the career paths of IT talent, even when they don’t report to her.

Sophie doesn’t want to simply impose rules. She wants to build a culture. And that starts with people. With connections. With recognition.

So she launched a somewhat atypical project :

  • Make the relationship with the Group a performance indicator for regional IT departments.
  • Get involved in their careers, and communicate regularly with HR to recognize those who actively collaborate.
  • To play a mentoring role, even informally, for those who want to progress. To be a sparring partner, not a controller.

And beyond processes, KPIs, and architectures, she wants to rekindle the flame.

She dreams of bringing together regional IT departments once a year in Bordeaux, at the headquarters, in this beautiful industrial company that will soon celebrate its 60th anniversary. Not for yet another PowerPoint presentation. To experience a powerful, inspiring, and human experience.

To remind them why they do this job.
To give them an overview, bring them together, and create connections.
And make them feel that they are not isolated IT departments in their own corner of the world… but key leaders of a shared project.

Why she fights

Sophie isn’t doing this for her ego. Nor to assert an authority whose limits she knows only too well. She’s doing it because she’s convinced. Convinced that it’s the only way to achieve the goal that ultimately justifies all her efforts: the group’s performance.

In an ultra-competitive industrial world, where every month of delay, every duplicated cost, every flaw in execution can jeopardize a contract or weaken a factory, the quest for productivity is not a luxury. It’s a vital necessity.

And those 15%, those 10%, those 5% additional performance gains… they’re no longer found in major revolutions. They’re found in consistency, in operational excellence, in the ability to pool resources, to capitalize, to speak a common language.

Sophie is convinced: we can’t continue to play it alone in a world that demands teamwork. Without harmonization, without pooling, without governance, the group fragments, slows down, weakens.

And that is the true value of a Group CIO: Sometimes criticized, often misunderstood, but absolutely essential when it comes to ensuring the strength, cohesion, and competitiveness of a global organization.

Conclusion

That morning, at 8:14 a.m. in Bordeaux, Sophie wasn’t dreaming of a revolution. She simply dreamed of a company that was more aligned, more efficient, and prouder of itself.

She knew it wouldn’t be quick or easy. But she also knew she wasn’t alone. And that in the shadow of KPIs, roadmaps, and steering committees, every decision made, every discussion initiated, every connection forged contributed to something bigger than herself: the lasting success of a French industrial group, firmly anchored in the world.

Sophie also knows she won’t be able to escape certain imperatives:

  • (Re)defining clear Rules of Engagement,

  • Enforcing standards through her CIO Office,

  • Picking her battles wisely,

  • Organizing a high-impact IT Day to showcase her teams, foster connection… and above all, retain talent.

And fortunately, she knows she can count on a demanding yet supportive sparring partner to help lead these many efforts:
Hubadviser! (shameless plug 😉)

About the author

Ismail has 15 years of experience in IT and digital consulting. He spent nearly 7 years at Gartner. He has supported innovative startups in their growth strategy and worked with CIOs of large groups on their digital transformation. In 2021, Ismail founded Hubadviser to help CIOs challenge their vision with top-level experts.

L’article Sophie and the three CIOs – Chronicle of an impossible (or almost) alignment est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> 27973 Use Case – IT Systems Merger at Rive de Seine Habitat​ https://hubadviser.com/en/use-case-it-systems-merger-at-rive-de-seine-habitat/ Fri, 11 Jul 2025 09:28:25 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=25538 Use Case – IT systems merger at Rive de Seine Habitat Context Following the merger of the Public Housing Offices (OPH) of Levallois, Puteaux, and Courbevoie, Rive de Seine Habitat had to unify its information systems while ensuring service continuity. The challenges were significant: Heterogeneous IT systems inherited from the three OPHs, increasing the risk of service disruptions Fragmented IT governance with misaligned tools and processes Unoptimized IT spending due to redundant contracts and multiple vendors The goal was to build a unified, secure, and high-performing IT system, while streamlining costs and improving IT governance. Our Intervention To support this transformation, we engaged a senior expert in IT system integration and public sector IT governance, with deep experience in OPH environments. Our mission focused on four key levers: IT Organization Review Proposed a new, consolidated org chart with clearly defined roles and responsibilities Established a new IT governance model to steer the merger and oversee priority projects IT Master Plan Development Mapped existing systems and identified redundancies Defined a structured integration roadmap to unify critical infrastructure and applications Vendor Relationship Optimization Audited existing contracts to identify cost-saving opportunities Renegotiated key contracts (infrastructure, software, maintenance) to reduce spending Results Thanks to our intervention, Rive de Seine Habitat was able to: Secure the IT merger without any service disruption Rationalize the IT landscape by eliminating redundancies and standardizing tools Achieve significant cost savings through contract optimization Build a more agile IT team aligned with the group’s strategic priorities This transformation gave Rive de Seine Habitat a unified, high-performing, and well-managed IT system, while strengthening its capacity for innovation in a post-merger context. Ready to discuss your IT challenges? Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges! Book a free consultation

L’article Use Case – IT Systems Merger at Rive de Seine Habitat​ est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

Use Case – IT systems merger at Rive de Seine Habitat

Context

Following the merger of the Public Housing Offices (OPH) of Levallois, Puteaux, and Courbevoie, Rive de Seine Habitat had to unify its information systems while ensuring service continuity. The challenges were significant:

  • Heterogeneous IT systems inherited from the three OPHs, increasing the risk of service disruptions

  • Fragmented IT governance with misaligned tools and processes

  • Unoptimized IT spending due to redundant contracts and multiple vendors

The goal was to build a unified, secure, and high-performing IT system, while streamlining costs and improving IT governance.

Our Intervention

To support this transformation, we engaged a senior expert in IT system integration and public sector IT governance, with deep experience in OPH environments.

Our mission focused on four key levers:

IT Organization Review

  • Proposed a new, consolidated org chart with clearly defined roles and responsibilities
  • Established a new IT governance model to steer the merger and oversee priority projects

IT Master Plan Development

  • Mapped existing systems and identified redundancies
  • Defined a structured integration roadmap to unify critical infrastructure and applications

Vendor Relationship Optimization

  • Audited existing contracts to identify cost-saving opportunities
  • Renegotiated key contracts (infrastructure, software, maintenance) to reduce spending

Results

Thanks to our intervention, Rive de Seine Habitat was able to:

  • Secure the IT merger without any service disruption
  • Rationalize the IT landscape by eliminating redundancies and standardizing tools
  • Achieve significant cost savings through contract optimization
  • Build a more agile IT team aligned with the group’s strategic priorities

This transformation gave Rive de Seine Habitat a unified, high-performing, and well-managed IT system, while strengthening its capacity for innovation in a post-merger context.

Ready to discuss your IT challenges?

Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges!

Book a free consultation

L’article Use Case – IT Systems Merger at Rive de Seine Habitat​ est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> 25538 Use case – AI upskilling for the Paris Île-de-France chamber of commerce https://hubadviser.com/en/use-case-ai-upskilling-for-the-paris-ile-de-france-chamber-of-commerce/ Fri, 11 Jul 2025 09:21:55 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=25532 Use case – AI upskilling for the Paris Île-de-France chamber of commerce Context The Paris Île-de-France Chamber of Commerce (CCI) wanted to modernize the support provided by its digital advisors to businesses across the region. With the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), the challenge was twofold: Raise awareness and train advisors on accessible AI tools Equip them with concrete use cases to help SMEs and microbusinesses integrate AI into their processes, boosting both revenue and operational efficiency Our Intervention We rolled out a tailored program combining strategic consulting, hands-on workshops, and operational support, led by two experts in AI and digital transformation. Diagnosis & Scoping Assessment of the digital maturity level of CCI advisors Identification of key business needs among supported companies (lead generation, automation, data analysis, etc.) Training & Skill Building Introduction to AI fundamentals (machine learning, ChatGPT, no-code tools, etc.) Hands-on workshops using accessible tools: ChatGPT, Midjourney, Make/Zapier, Power Automate, and more Industry-specific use cases (retail, craft, services) to demonstrate how AI can automate tasks, personalize customer experience, or optimize prospecting Results Thanks to this mission, CCI Île-de-France was able to: Train 100% of its digital advisors on AI challenges and tools Provide local SMEs and microbusinesses with practical levers to boost productivity and revenue Launch a new, high-value support offering: “AI for Businesses” Business impact: Several companies supported have already automated critical processes (e.g., automated FAQ replies, commercial content generation) and increased their conversion rates thanks to AI. Ready to discuss your IT challenges? Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges! Book a free consultation

L’article Use case – AI upskilling for the Paris Île-de-France chamber of commerce est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

Use case – AI upskilling for the Paris Île-de-France chamber of commerce

Context

The Paris Île-de-France Chamber of Commerce (CCI) wanted to modernize the support provided by its digital advisors to businesses across the region. With the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), the challenge was twofold:

  • Raise awareness and train advisors on accessible AI tools

  • Equip them with concrete use cases to help SMEs and microbusinesses integrate AI into their processes, boosting both revenue and operational efficiency

Our Intervention

We rolled out a tailored program combining strategic consulting, hands-on workshops, and operational support, led by two experts in AI and digital transformation.

Diagnosis & Scoping

  • Assessment of the digital maturity level of CCI advisors
  • Identification of key business needs among supported companies (lead generation, automation, data analysis, etc.)

Training & Skill Building

  • Introduction to AI fundamentals (machine learning, ChatGPT, no-code tools, etc.)
  • Hands-on workshops using accessible tools: ChatGPT, Midjourney, Make/Zapier, Power Automate, and more
  • Industry-specific use cases (retail, craft, services) to demonstrate how AI can automate tasks, personalize customer experience, or optimize prospecting

Results

Thanks to this mission, CCI Île-de-France was able to:

  • Train 100% of its digital advisors on AI challenges and tools
  • Provide local SMEs and microbusinesses with practical levers to boost productivity and revenue
  • Launch a new, high-value support offering: “AI for Businesses”

Business impact: Several companies supported have already automated critical processes (e.g., automated FAQ replies, commercial content generation) and increased their conversion rates thanks to AI.

Ready to discuss your IT challenges?

Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges!

Book a free consultation

L’article Use case – AI upskilling for the Paris Île-de-France chamber of commerce est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> 25532 Use case – Deploying electronic invoicing at APAS BTP https://hubadviser.com/en/use-case-deploying-electronic-invoicing-at-apas-btp/ Fri, 11 Jul 2025 09:13:02 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=25526 Use Case – Deploying Electronic Invoicing at APAS BTP Context APAS BTP, a professional association in the construction sector, needed to comply with France’s new mandatory electronic invoicing regulations (2024–2025). Facing this major regulatory shift, the organization encountered several challenges: No internal expertise on e-invoicing or technical solutions Complex scope (inbound/outbound flows, exception handling, ERP integration) Risk of non-compliance and operational disruption The objective was clear : deploy a robust, sustainable solution while preparing the teams for a smooth transition. Our Intervention To support APAS BTP, we engaged Pascal Bayet, an expert in digital transformation and IT financial management, in a part-time CIO model over several months. Our mission was structured around four key pillars: Audit & Scoping Analysis of existing processes (issuance/reception, validation workflows, current tools) Evaluation of available solutions (Chorus Pro, EDI partners, private platforms) Definition of a deployment strategy tailored to the nonprofit context Technical Implementation Solution selection and configuration (integration with accounting systems) Setup of technical connectors to automate invoice flows Management of special cases (hybrid invoices, corrections, rejections) Training & Change Management Practical sessions for finance and admin teams Creation of user guides and contingency procedures One-on-one coaching for accounting managers Process Security Compliance controls (electronic signature, archiving protocols) Business continuity plan to avoid flow interruptions Results Thanks to this mission, APAS BTP was able to: Implement electronic invoicing within regulatory deadlines Automate 90% of invoice flows, reducing manual errors and processing times Train all staff for full operational autonomy Benefit from expert guidance without needing internal recruitment Ready to discuss your IT challenges? Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges! Book a free consultation

L’article Use case – Deploying electronic invoicing at APAS BTP est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

Use Case – Deploying Electronic Invoicing at APAS BTP

Context

APAS BTP, a professional association in the construction sector, needed to comply with France’s new mandatory electronic invoicing regulations (2024–2025). Facing this major regulatory shift, the organization encountered several challenges:

  • No internal expertise on e-invoicing or technical solutions

  • Complex scope (inbound/outbound flows, exception handling, ERP integration)

  • Risk of non-compliance and operational disruption

The objective was clear : deploy a robust, sustainable solution while preparing the teams for a smooth transition.

Our Intervention

To support APAS BTP, we engaged Pascal Bayet, an expert in digital transformation and IT financial management, in a part-time CIO model over several months.

Our mission was structured around four key pillars:

Audit & Scoping

  • Analysis of existing processes (issuance/reception, validation workflows, current tools)
  • Evaluation of available solutions (Chorus Pro, EDI partners, private platforms)
  • Definition of a deployment strategy tailored to the nonprofit context

Technical Implementation

  • Solution selection and configuration (integration with accounting systems)
  • Setup of technical connectors to automate invoice flows
  • Management of special cases (hybrid invoices, corrections, rejections)

Training & Change Management

  • Practical sessions for finance and admin teams
  • Creation of user guides and contingency procedures
  • One-on-one coaching for accounting managers

Process Security

  • Compliance controls (electronic signature, archiving protocols)
  • Business continuity plan to avoid flow interruptions

Results

Thanks to this mission, APAS BTP was able to:

  • Implement electronic invoicing within regulatory deadlines
  • Automate 90% of invoice flows, reducing manual errors and processing times
  • Train all staff for full operational autonomy
  • Benefit from expert guidance without needing internal recruitment

Ready to discuss your IT challenges?

Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges!

Book a free consultation

L’article Use case – Deploying electronic invoicing at APAS BTP est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> 25526 Use case – Reducing application integration complexity with Event Streaming https://hubadviser.com/en/use-case-reducing-application-integration-complexity-with-event-streaming/ Fri, 11 Jul 2025 08:55:34 +0000 https://hubadviser.com/?p=25517 Use Case – Reducing application integration complexity with Event Streaming Context The IT department of a multi-site industrial group was dealing with a fragmented information system : MES, ERP, CRM, and various business-specific applications… most of them connected through outdated point-to-point interfaces. Key challenges reported by teams: Rigid and unreliable inter-application communication Data duplication and synchronization issues Delayed time-to-market due to heavy integration projects Rising costs of maintaining legacy interfaces The goal was clear: find a smoother, more scalable, and resilient approach to connect applications—without rebuilding everything from scratch. Our approach – A hubadviser consultation with a real-world success story We organized a strategic session with Pierre Le Stunff, CTO at Fortuneo, around a central question: “How can we streamline inter-application communication without adding more complexity to the IT system ?“ Discussion highlights : Introduction to event-driven architecture principles Real-world case study of event streaming at Fortuneo Exploration of the relevance and applicability of this approach in an industrial setting Key takeaways from the experience shared : Event streaming decouples systems and ensures reliable real-time communication Business events (e.g., customer orders, production completion, anomaly detection) can be managed as continuous flows This approach allows for progressive modernization of the IT system without disrupting existing infrastructure It also lays the foundation for more advanced data use cases such as real-time monitoring and AI Ready to discuss your IT challenges? Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges! Book a free consultation

L’article Use case – Reducing application integration complexity with Event Streaming est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]>

Use Case – Reducing application integration complexity with Event Streaming

Context

The IT department of a multi-site industrial group was dealing with a fragmented information system : MES, ERP, CRM, and various business-specific applications… most of them connected through outdated point-to-point interfaces.

Key challenges reported by teams:

  • Rigid and unreliable inter-application communication

  • Data duplication and synchronization issues

  • Delayed time-to-market due to heavy integration projects

  • Rising costs of maintaining legacy interfaces

The goal was clear: find a smoother, more scalable, and resilient approach to connect applications—without rebuilding everything from scratch.

Our approach – A hubadviser consultation with a real-world success story

We organized a strategic session with Pierre Le Stunff, CTO at Fortuneo, around a central question: “How can we streamline inter-application communication without adding more complexity to the IT system ?“

Discussion highlights :

  • Introduction to event-driven architecture principles
  • Real-world case study of event streaming at Fortuneo
  • Exploration of the relevance and applicability of this approach in an industrial setting

Key takeaways from the experience shared :

  • Event streaming decouples systems and ensures reliable real-time communication
  • Business events (e.g., customer orders, production completion, anomaly detection) can be managed as continuous flows
  • This approach allows for progressive modernization of the IT system without disrupting existing infrastructure
  • It also lays the foundation for more advanced data use cases such as real-time monitoring and AI

Ready to discuss your IT challenges?

Schedule a strategic call with our experts and discover how we can help you optimize your IT, accelerate your projects, and tackle your technology challenges!

Book a free consultation

L’article Use case – Reducing application integration complexity with Event Streaming est apparu en premier sur Hubadviser.

]]> 25517