EMC GLOBAL DATA PROTECTION INDEX STUDY KEY FINDINGS & RESULTS FOR THE NETHERLANDS

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "EMC GLOBAL DATA PROTECTION INDEX STUDY KEY FINDINGS & RESULTS FOR THE NETHERLANDS"

Moses Bradley
5 years ago
Views:

1 EMC GLOBAL DATA PROTECTION INDEX STUDY KEY FINDINGS & RESULTS FOR THE NETHERLANDS 1

2 THE DATA PROTECTION LANDSCAPE ARE YOU ON SOLID GROUND? 2

3 GLOBAL KEY FINDINGS GLOBALLY, ENTERPRISES ARE LOSING AS MUCH AS $1.7 TRILLION THROUGH DATA LOSS AND UNPLANNED DOWNTIME 62% of respondents said at least one of the following: big data, hybrid cloud, mobile devices, is difficult or very difficult to protect Adopting advanced data protection tools leads to reduced data loss 87% of businesses are behind the curve for data protection maturity and 71% of businesses are not fully confident of restoring their data 3

IT decision-makers in the Netherlands 24 COUNTRIES TOTAL ORGANIZATIONS OF 250 OR

4 DEMOGRAPHICS INTERVIEWED 3,300 IT DECISION-MAKERS IN 3 REGIONS: Americas (575) Europe, Middle East, and Africa (1,475) Asia Pacific Japan (1,250) Interviewed 125 IT decision-makers in the Netherlands 24 COUNTRIES TOTAL ORGANIZATIONS OF 250 OR MORE EMPLOYEES BOTH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS INDEPENDENT RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS 4

5 DATA PROTECTION MATURITY 5

6 MATURITY INDEX Points awarded to respondents based on the maturity of their data protection strategy Maturity scored between points* More points awarded to those that: Have shorter recovery times Have confidence in their infrastructure Use modern backup systems such as active-active application Replicate data off-site * Exact scoring included in appendix questions show points used for the original model with a maximum score of 68. All scores multiplied by a factor of 1.47 to create a model of 100 points 6

7 WHO IS LEADING THE WAY? Global Results Netherlands Results Leaders 2.4% Leaders 2.4% Adopters 11.3% Adopters 18.4% Evaluators 49.5% Evaluators 54.4% Laggards 36.8% Laggards 24.8% Leaders (scored points) Adopters (scored points) AHEAD OF MATURITY CURVE Evaluators (scored points) Laggards (scored 1-25 points) Figure 1: Analysis of maturity Base: all respondents (3,300) Figure 2: Analysis of maturity Base: all respondents from Netherlands (125) 7

8 GLOBAL IT MATURITY SHOWING FREQUENCY OF POINTS SCORED AHEAD OF THE CURVE 700 Laggards 37% (1,214 Companies) Evaluators 50% (1,635 Companies) Adopters 11% (372 Companies) Leaders 2% (79 Companies) 600 NUMBER OF COMPANIES NETHERLANDS MATURITY POINTS SCORED Figure 3: Analysis of maturity showing frequency of points scored Base: all respondents (3300) 8

time 2 5 hours Moderately confident of ability to restore Active-active instances are core component of strategy Archive to tape Bac kup to tape LAGGARDS Archive to disk Bac kup to disk Recovery

9 PROFILE CHARACTERISTICS Use archiving application with retention policies Use archiving application with offsite replication Disaster tolerant replication with near-zero RPO/RTO Backup with deduplication & offsite replication Recovery time one hour or less Very confident of ability to restore Standby or virtualised servers are core component of strategy LEADERS ADOPTERS Recovery time 2 5 hours Moderately confident of ability to restore Active-active instances are core component of strategy Archive to tape Bac kup to tape LAGGARDS Archive to disk Bac kup to disk Recovery time more than one day Not confident in ability to restore EVALUATORS Recovery time 6 24 hours Doubtful of ability to restore Bac kup is core component of strategy Replication is core component of strategy 9

10 WHERE ARE THE MOST MATURE ORGANIZATIONS? AVERAGE SCORE ON THE MATURITY MATRIX AMERICAS: 33.7 EMEA: 32.2 APJ: Figure 4: Analysis of average maturity score by region and country Base: all respondents (3300) 10

11 MATURITY RANK WHICH MARKETS ARE AHEAD? Businesses in China and Hong Kong most likely to be ahead of the curve Outside of Asia, the US and the Netherlands most likely to be ahead of the curve UAE, Turkey and Switzerland and least likely to be ahead of maturity curve RANK COUNTRY % OF BUSINESSES AHEAD OF MATURITY CURVE* 1 China 29.6% 2 Hong Kong 27.2% 3 Netherlands 20.8% 4 Singapore 20.0% 5 USA 19.5% 6 India 19.2% 7 South Africa 18.4% 8 Indonesia 18.4% 9 Mexico 17.6% 10 Germany 15.5% 11 Australia 14.4% 12 UK 13.0% 13 The Philippines 11.2% 14 Thailand 11.2% 15 Canada 9.6% 16 Russia 9.6% 17 Italy 9.6% 18 Brazil 8.8% 19 Japan 8.0% 20 South Korea 8.0% 21 France 6.5% 22 Switzerland 6.4% 23 Turkey 5.6% 24 UAE 0.0% *Please note that the percentages have been rounded to one decimal place 11

12 THE IMPORTANCE OF DATA PROTECTION 12

13 THE CRITICALITY OF DATA PROTECTION DO YOU CONSIDER DATA PROTECTION CRITICAL TO THE SUCCESS OF YOUR ORGANIZATION? Not very import ant Very Important But Not Critical 28% 6% 1% Totally critical 65% Plays no role in our success The majority (65%) of respondents consider data protection to be totally critical to their organization s success 89% from the financial services sector see data protection as totally critical, compared to only one third (33%) in the retail sector Figure 5: Do you consider data protection to be totally critical to the ongoing success of your organization? Base: all respondents (125) 13

14 SPENDING ON DATA PROTECTION 7.48% Average percentage of annual IT budget that is spent on data protection 7.61% Average percentage of domestic annual revenue that is spent annually on IT Average company spend: $158 million on IT $12 million on data protection Telecoms, media and entertain sector spend the most on data protection (12.40%) while retail spend the least (4.25%) Figure 6: Analysis of average spend of revenue on IT, and of IT budget on data protection Base: all respondents (125) 14

Only 42% from manufacturing do 25% Have one vendor 10% Have no specific vendor 65% Have more than one

15 THE NUMBER OF DATA PROTECTION VENDORS 65% have more than one data protection vendor Two vendors on average 89% from the financial services sector have more than one vendor. Only 42% from manufacturing do 25% Have one vendor 10% Have no specific vendor 65% Have more than one vendor Figure 7: Is your data protection infrastructure built on technology from more than one vendor? Base: all respondents (125) 15

THE EFFECT OF NUMBER OF VENDORS ON SPEND SHARE OF ANNUAL IT BUDGET SPENT ON DATA

spend of IT budget on data protection In the Netherlands, those with two vendors are

16 THE EFFECT OF NUMBER OF VENDORS ON SPEND SHARE OF ANNUAL IT BUDGET SPENT ON DATA PROTECTION Businesses that have more than one vendor have a greater proportional spend of IT budget on data protection In the Netherlands, those with two vendors are spending the most 6.31% One data protection vendor 8.52% Two data protection vendors 7.64% Three or more data protection vendors Figure 8: Analysis of average spend of IT budget on data protection, cut by number of data protection vendors Base: all respondents (125) 16

SUFFERING DISRUPTIONS DISRUPTIONS SUFFERED IN LAST 12 MONTHS 58% have suffered disruptions in the last 12

have suffered disruptions (78%) compared to 48% from 5,000+ businesses 58% Suffered data loss or unplanned

hours were lost on average in the last 12 months due to unplanned downtime, costing $0.

17 SUFFERING DISRUPTIONS DISRUPTIONS SUFFERED IN LAST 12 MONTHS 58% have suffered disruptions in the last 12 months 75% public sector 67% of retail 61% telecoms Organizations with employees are most likely to have suffered disruptions (78%) compared to 48% from 5,000+ businesses 58% Suffered data loss or unplanned downt ime 48% Suffered unplanned downt ime 23% Suffered data loss 14% Suffered data loss and downt ime 25 hours were lost on average in the last 12 months due to unplanned downtime, costing $0.20m Figure 9: Has your organization suffered from either unplanned systems downtime or data loss in the last 12 months? Base: all respondents (125) 17

18 THE EFFECT OF THE NUMBER OF VENDORS ON DISRUPTIONS 13% DISRUPTIONS SUFFERED (BY NUMBER OF VENDORS) 47% 47% 31% 45% 18% Data loss Unplanned systems downtime The more vendors a business has, the more likely it is to experience unplanned systems downtime Three in ten (31%) of those with two vendors have experienced data loss One data protection vendor Two data protection vendors Three or more data protection vendors Figure 10: Analysis of the organizations suffering disruptions, cut by the number of data protection vendors Base: all respondents (125) 18

19 DATA LOSS AVERAGE DATA LOSS IN TERABYTES (TB) Average annual loss per company 0.36TB of data Equivalent to around 4 million e- mails Costs $0.17 million Businesses with one data protection vendor lost the least data Total No external data protection vendors One data protection vendor Two data protection vendors Three or more data protection vendors Figure 11: Analysis of the average data loss over the last 12 months, cut by number of data protection vendors Base: respondents whose organization has suffered data loss (29) 19

20 ESTIMATED ANNUAL COST FOR DISRUPTIONS Data loss $364 Million $4.3 BILLION TOTAL Downtime $3.9 Billion 20

21 FREQUENCY OF CONTINUOUS BACKUP PERCENTAGE OF DATA BACKED UP CONTINUOUSLY BY BUSINESSES 4% 2% 0% 66% 6% 22% 0% of data backed up continuously 1% - 25% of data backed up continuously 25% - 50% of data backed up continuously 50%- 75% of data backed up continuously 75% - 99% of data backed up continuously 100% of data backed up continuously Around a tenth (11.06%) of data is backed up continuously, with around 40% backed up daily Two thirds of organizations do not back up anything continuously & suffer 30 hours downtime (vs. 25 hour downtime average) 54% of those ahead of the curve back up some data continuously, compared to 16% of Laggards Figure 12: Analysis of those that backup data continuously Base: all respondents (125) 21

22 WHAT IS CAUSING THESE DISRUPTIONS? Hardware failure Loss of power Accidental user error 47% 47% 46% Software failure Data corruption Security breach (e.g. malware, spyware, viruses, botnets or cyber-terrorism) Loss of backup power 18% 22% 32% 31% The fault of service/cloud providers Physical security (e.g. loss/theft of equipment) 11% 14% Deliberate employee sabotage Natural disaster (e.g. tsunami, hurricane, earthquake) 4% 3% Figure 13: What were the causes of your data loss and/or systems downtime? Base: respondents whose organization suffered data loss or downtime (72) 22

THE CONSEQUENCES OF DISRUPTION Loss of employee productivity 49% Delay in product/service development 29% Loss of revenue 25% Delay in getting products/services to

Loss of business to a competitor Loss of an incremental business opportunity 21% 18% 15% 13% 10% 8% 8% 7% Figure 14: Have any of the above been commercial

23 THE CONSEQUENCES OF DISRUPTION Loss of employee productivity 49% Delay in product/service development 29% Loss of revenue 25% Delay in getting products/services to market Loss of a new business opportunity Loss of customer confidence/loyalty There have been no commercial consequences Loss of customers Loss of repeat business Loss of business to a competitor Loss of an incremental business opportunity 21% 18% 15% 13% 10% 8% 8% 7% Figure 14: Have any of the above been commercial consequences of the data loss and/or systems downtime you have experienced over the last 12 months? Base: respondents whose organization suffered data loss or downtime (72) 23

24 ARE ORGANIZATIONS CONFIDENT? Not very confident 72% Very confident 28% 72% not fully confident that they can recover systems/data today from all platforms Only 17% in the telecoms and the retail sectors are very confident. 39% in the financial services sector are confident Figure 15: How confident are you that, in the event of a data loss incident, you can fully recover systems/data today from all platforms, on-premise and off-premise, in order to meet business service level agreements? Base: all respondents (125) Used for maturity matrix 24

25 DATA PROTECTION METHODS 25

26 WHAT STRATEGIES ARE IN PLACE? V irtual servers with restart capabilities (including cloud) are the main components of our availability strategy Standby servers on a remote site are the main components of our availability strategy Backup is the main component of our availability strategy A c tive-active instances of applications (including cloud) are key component of our availability strategy 15% 14% 26% 36% More than one third (36%) use virtual servers with restart capabilities, and a quarter (26%) use standby servers on a remote site as part of their availability strategy 14% use active-active as a key component Replication is the main component of our availability strategy 10% Those with active-active as a key component suffered less data loss than those with backup 6% active-active vs. 26% backup Figure 16: Which of the above best characterises your organization's current data protection environment infrastructure? Base: all respondents (125) Used for maturity matrix 26

27 WHAT OTHER STRATEGIES ARE IN PLACE? THERE IS NO CONSENSUS ON THE TECHNOLOGY IN PLACE FOR AVAILABILITY, ALTHOUGH AN AVERAGE OF THREE STRATEGIES SHOWS A VARIED APPROACH ACROSS ALL ORGANISATIONS STRATEGIES TO HELP MANAGE AVAILABILITY OF APPLICATIONS, SYSTEMS & DATA Automatic backup to the cloud 49% Replication of both applications and data (such as virtual machine images) WAN-based replication of backup and recovery images to second site 35% 34% Tape backup and tapes are kept off site (on 3rd party premises) Disk-based backup and recovery including clones/snaps 30% 29% Tape backup and tapes are kept off site (on own premises) Replication to a second site with restart capabilities (active/passive) 25% 24% Backup appliance with deduplication 18% Dynamic mobility of virtual applications between data centres Disaster tolerant replication (active/active) with near zero RPO and RTO 14% 12% Tape backup and tapes go home with employees 4% Figure 17: Which technologies/strategies are in place to help you manage the availability of your applications, systems, and data? Base: all respondents (125) Used for maturity matrix 27

28 WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THE CLOUD? RESPONSIBILITY FOR DATA PROTECTION FOR PUBLIC CLOUD-BASED APPLICATIONS DESIRE HAVE VISIBILITY/CONTROL OVER DATA PROTECTION (ON-PREMISE & IN CLOUD) My IT department as a whole 62% Yes I want to have to visibility of how the organization's on-premise and off-premise data is being protected 54% The cloud service provider 47% Yes - I want to have to control of how the organization's on-premise and off-premise data is being protected 43% Each department in my organization, dependent on their use of the application in question 37% No I only want to manage my local data; the cloud service provider should manage offpremise data 24% Figure 18: For public cloud based applications, which organizations are responsible for data protection? Base: respondents whose organization is using a type of cloud as a platform for infrastructure (92) Figure 19: Do you want to have visibility and/or control over how your data is being protected both on-premise and in the cloud? Base: respondents whose organization is using a type of cloud as a platform for infrastructure (92) 28

23% Mainframe 15% On-premise (private cloud) 10% Desktop/laptop 8% Hybrid cloud

29 WHERE IS DATA STORED? PRIMARY DATA On-premise (virtualized servers) 28% On-premise (physical servers) 23% Mainframe 15% On-premise (private cloud) 10% Desktop/laptop 8% Hybrid cloud 7% Public cloud 6% Mobile devices 2% Figure 20: Analysis of average amount of primary data on different platforms Base: all respondents (125) 29

30 WHAT IS HARDEST TO PROTECT? APPLICATIONS/PLATFORMS WITHOUT A RECOVERY PLAN MOST DIFFICULT APPLICATIONS/PLATFORMS TO PROTECT Mobile devices 84% Mobile devices 60% Big data/data lakes 72% Big data 31% Figure 21: Analysis of applications/platforms that do not have disaster recovery plans Base: all respondents (125) Figure 22: Analysis of applications/platforms that are difficult to protect Base: all respondents (125) 30

FUTURE STRATEGIES DATA PROTECTION CLOUD SERVICES 58% Backup-as-a-Service 31% 17% Archive-as-a-Service 58% 30% Data recovery-as-a-service 49% Currently using 58% currently using Backupas-a-Service;

31 FUTURE STRATEGIES DATA PROTECTION CLOUD SERVICES 58% Backup-as-a-Service 31% 17% Archive-as-a-Service 58% 30% Data recovery-as-a-service 49% Currently using 58% currently using Backupas-a-Service; further 31% plan to in the future 58% plan to use archive as a service and 49% plan to use data recovery as a service in the future Plan to adopt at some point Figure 23: Are you currently, using or looking to adopt, any of the above data protection cloud services in the next 12 months? Base: all respondents (125) 31

32 SUMMARY FOR THE NETHERLANDS ENTERPRISES ARE LOSING AS MUCH AS $4.3 BILLION THROUGH DATA LOSS AND UNPLANNED DOWNTIME 65% consider data protection to be totally critical to their organization s success, still 58% suffered downtime or data loss in last 12 months More than one data protection vendor means more data loss and more spending on data protection 80% of businesses are behind the curve for data protection maturity and 72% of businesses are not fully confident in their ability to restore apps/data 32

CONCLUSION Most companies globally are behind the curve and feeling pain Newer workloads and exploding data volumes will continue to put pressure on data protection Data loss and downtime are

33 CONCLUSION Most companies globally are behind the curve and feeling pain Newer workloads and exploding data volumes will continue to put pressure on data protection Data loss and downtime are expensive This can t be fixed in silos isolated solutions by different vendors increase cost and risk A continuum of technologies supports availability and protection requirements for different tiers of apps/data 33

34 EMC RECOMMENDATIONS Make sure there s an appropriate data protection solution in place for all of your critical data no matter where it is or how it is generated Manage an integrated data protection strategy and maintain a level of visibility and control for application owners Evaluate the gaps in your protection strategy that may emerge from disparate vendor solutions Match your data protection approach with the availability and protection requirements for your tiers of applications/data Understand who owns data protection especially in the cloud 34

35 APPENDIX (i) MATURITY SCORING Which of the following best characterises your organization's current data protection environment infrastructure? Backup is the main component of our availability strategy (1pt.) Replication is the main component of our availability strategy (3pts.) Standby servers on a remote site are the main components of our availability strategy (4pts.) Virtual servers with restart capabilities (including cloud) are the main components of our availability strategy - (5pts.) Active-active (two or more production data centres that are always on, 24/7 with no downtime) instances of applications (including cloud) are key component of our availability strategy (6pts.) What best describes your organization's archiving strategy? We don t have an archiving strategy (0pt.) We use a backup application to archive data onto tape (1pt.) We use an archiving application to archive data online (e.g. onto disk) (3pts.) We use an archiving application to archive data to appliances that provide retention locking, litigation hold etc. (5pts.) We use an archiving application to archive data to appliances that provide retention locking, litigation hold etc. and replicate/keep a copy off site - (7pts.) 35

36 APPENDIX (ii) MATURITY SCORING Which technologies/strategies are in place to help you manage the availability of your applications, systems, and data? (Please select all that apply) Tape backup and tapes go home with employees (1pt.) Tape backup and tapes are kept off site (on own premises) (2pts.) Tape backup and tapes are kept off site (on 3rd party premises) (2pts.) Automatic backup to the Cloud (2pts.) Disk-based backup and recovery including clones/snaps (3pts.) Backup appliance with deduplication (4pts.) WAN-based replication of backup and recovery images to second site (4pts.) Replication of both applications and data (such as virtual machine images) (5pts.) Replication to a second site with restart capabilities (active/passive) (5pts.) Dynamic mobility of virtual applications between data centres (7pts.) Disaster tolerant replication (active/active) with near zero RPO and RTO (8pts.) 36

37 APPENDIX (iii) MATURITY SCORING During an unexpected event causing downtime to our most critical applications, how long is your recovery time? Our recovery time is more than one working day (please specify) (0pt.) Our recovery time is 12-24hours (1pt.) Our recovery time is 6-12 hours (2pts) Our recovery time is 3 6 hours (3pts) Our recovery time is 2 3 hours (4pts) Our recovery time is 1 2 hours (5pts.) How confident are you that, in the event of a data loss incident, you can fully recover systems/data today from all platforms, on premise and off premise, in order to meet business service level agreements? Very confident (6pts.) Moderately confident (4pts.) Some doubt (3pts.) Not very confident (1pts.) Not at all confident (0pts.) Our recovery time is less than an hour (6pts.) Our recovery time is zero (7pts.) I do not know (0pt.) 37

EMC GLOBAL DATA PROTECTION INDEX KEY FINDINGS & RESULTS FOR TURKEY

EMC GLOBAL DATA PROTECTION INDEX KEY FINDINGS & RESULTS FOR TURKEY 1 THE DATA PROTECTION LANDSCAPE ARE YOU ON SOLID GROUND? 2 GLOBAL KEY FINDINGS GLOBALLY, ENTERPRISES ARE LOSING AS MUCH AS $1.7 TRILLION