UC – Is it Time for a Name Change to Collaboration?

UC – Is it Time for a Name Change to Collaboration?

By Stephen Leaden October 31, 2013 9 Comments
Stephen Leaden PNG
UC – Is it Time for a Name Change to Collaboration? by Stephen Leaden


Unified Communications (UC) has been a term in use for close to 7+ years now, and elements of it back to the 1990s. At a high level it’s “communications integrated to optimize business processes.” My colleague Marty Parker provides “A Short History of UC" in his article of that name.

By Gartner definition standards, UC is defined as “those products that facilitate the interactive use of multiple enterprise communications methods. This can include control, management and integration of these methods. UC products integrate communications channels (media), networks and systems, as well as IT business applications and, in some cases, consumer applications and devices.”

From a basic toolset point of view, I see UC to include IM/chat, presence friends list, adhoc audio conferencing, adhoc videoconferencing, document sharing, (Web) collaboration, softphone, corporate directory, and Unified Messaging to start. A few years ago Cisco added other core telephony components to be inclusive of Unified Communications, which now includes Telephony, Voice Mail, and Contact Center components.

Recently I had the opportunity to meet with executives from both Cisco and Unify (formerly Siemens Enterprise Networks). They told an interestingly similar story. In the presentations there was little mention of UC, instead, the word “Collaboration” became the buzz word in most of our conversations throughout both meetings. In fact, many of the Cisco executives I met had “Collaboration” somewhere in their title on their business card.

Collaboration, according to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, is “to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor.” This definition is broad, however, I believe the key words are “to work jointly with others or together.” This also speaks to the essence of Unified Communications.

Collaboration I believe entails components to provide an environment that is “anytime, anywhere, any device, and anyone.” In short, collaboration is about device irrelevance. The device is no longer important for collaboration purposes – any device can be used including a desktop phone, mobile device, tablet, videoconferencing unit, a laptop – it simply doesn't matter anymore. This is about the delivery of Unified Communications in an anytime, anywhere world.

Two Manufacturers – Similar Yet Different Strategies

Unify - Siemens’ agreement with the Gores group, a venture capital firm owning 51 percent of Siemens Enterprise Networks, had the option to exercise a change of the company name at month 61 of their engagement. They recently announced that name change and that new name of course is “Unify.” The word Unify in my opinion really hits at the essence of where the market is actually headed, or by definition “make or become united, uniform, or whole.” I think Unify is looking to rebrand the company as a total collaborative solution – in my opinion that’s smart.

According to Chris Hummel, President of Unify, Inc., UC has been around for close to 10 years and has really not been adapted by the market as originally expected. And Gartner Group recently stated in their latest “Magic Quadrant for Unified Communications” by saying, “The enterprise UC market is now considered to be entering the early mainstream adoption phase. Products and best practices both for deployment and increasing end-user adoption will continue to mature during the next several years.”

Cisco announced new Collaboration solutions for the enterprise at its recent Collaboration Summit. It included (1) Cisco Expressway, a gateway that enables secure collaboration minus the need for setting up accounts passwords and device level registrations, (2) Jabber Express, making it possible to have guest access functionality when communicating with business partners, taking Federation to the next level, (3) Enhanced Telepresence MX300 a room-based telepresence unit which Cisco claims can be auto provisioned in roughly only 15 minutes (general availability December 2013), and (4) Intelligent Proximity which is a range of capabilities that enables users to connect their personal mobile devices to the on-premise collaboration equipment in the office.

Project Ansible from Unify was announced back in July 2013 with a plan for general availability of mid 2014. I see Project Ansible as “a next-generation collaboration platform that brings together the way an organization works natively into a cohesive, ubiquitous environment.” With the latest Unify rebranding will come, I think, increased interest in it as integration with Ansible and with Unify’s Openscape Voice product as well as non-Unify Telephony systems (Ansible does not require Openscape Voice to work in a collaborative environment). Ansible’s promise is to, in essence, offer the five key characteristics Gartner cites as key to a successful UC environment, including user experience, mobility integration, interoperability, cloud and hybrid, and broad solution appeal. Some of Ansible’s appeal includes features and functions such as search across multiple platforms (e-mail, IM/chat, voice mail among others), device awareness, geo-location presence, rich content (integrated to Salesforce, Google among others), identical user experience across multiple devices, strong APIs and SDKs, and contextual analytics.

As both vendors’ lists of announcements and feature-functionality were reviewed at each meeting, I couldn’t help but walk away with a “wow” factor regarding some of elements in both of them. The beginning of the next generation of UC is here.

UC vs. Collaboration

From the vendor's perspective, in order to gain new market acceptance, it’s time put a new “spin” on Unified Communications to create renewed interest. It’s now less about the device end points, it’s now more about the user experience.

Until recently, many organizations were forced to change the way they do business in order to make UC work. In this new world of announcements, collaboration will begin to reintroduce Unified Communications as a ubiquitous, fully functional, next generation Unified Communications platform. It will, in essence, move Unified Communications towards a true virtualized organization environment.

So will the new word “collaboration” compel the industry forward towards adoption? In my opinion, by itself, no, but coupled with these new announcements and next-generation technologies and with a real interest towards adapting the technology towards how enterprises work will bring a renewed, even new interest of Unified Communications on a much greater level.


So you make the choice – UC, UCC or Collaboration. The name in the end becomes far less relevant, while adapting and integrating UC into your enterprise as a set of tools to enable your enterprise to be far more productive is the key for your enterprise going forward. As a channel partner speak the speak, promote UC adoption based on value delivered. And let's take UC and all of its components into the generation towards a “Star Trek” universe.


9 Responses to "UC – Is it Time for a Name Change to Collaboration?" - Add Yours

Blair Pleasant 10/31/2013 10:37:06 PM

Steve: not everyone needs to collaborate - you have to communicate to collaborate, but you don't have to collaborate to communicate.
Roberta J. Fox 11/1/2013 8:23:12 AM

Touche Blair regarding collaboration.

At FOX GROUP, we define UC as the ability to communicate across voice, data, networks, computing devices sharing common information between multiple applications delivered over wired and wireless networks; to and from wherever people work. We also define UC 3.0 as the ability to integrate into current and future business applications and processes.

Stephen - great job on summarizing the vendor events you attended.
Matthew Collier 11/1/2013 9:01:39 AM


Thank you for the great product summaries for these two companies. I like what Unify has done with Ansible and look forward to its successful launch. As you know, conferencing capabilities have been an integrated feature in S/W and H/W PBX infrastructure for a long time, with little fanfare. The interesting thing, I believe that's changing the UC market is the addition of private social circles. Take for instance Bloomfire, SocialSpring and Yammer. The offerings from these companies allow enterprises to create their own social networks and to support a wide field of applications like, tech and sales training and expanded knowledge awareness within the enterprise. If you take a closer look at Ansible I believe what you are seeing is the weaving together of UC, Collaboration with Enterprise Social Networking as the glue to bring it all together.
Steve Leaden 11/1/2013 9:41:25 AM

Blair - Yes totally agree with your comments here. I think from the manufacturers’ point of view, it’s about using ‘Collaboration’ as a word to help rally the industry towards a next generation UC platform and growing in UC adoption, which to date has been less than expected by most. I agree with your comments on communicating and Unified Communications is a defacto standard term accepted in the industry. In one sense, communicating is a necessity and has been around ‘forever’, while collaboration an option that offers new enhanced and exciting tools, thus the emphasis from both manufacturers on the word ‘Collaborate’.

So is it just emphasis on words – I think so. Standard terms are established and in my opinion will stay.
Steve Leaden 11/1/2013 2:01:16 PM


Great points on UC 3.0 - like it! And appreciate your comments.

Cid Isbell 11/1/2013 2:36:07 PM

Blair, thanks for keeping it short and sweet. I agree with you one hundred percent.
Steve Leaden 11/1/2013 3:26:57 PM

Matthew -

Excellent points and comments - yes we have seen social integration in the Contact Center for some time now, which is 'front line' for many newer technologies, and so it does makes sense to witness the weaving of UC, Collaboration with Enterprise Social Networking into a cohesive solution, especially in private social circles.

This is an exciting time to see the advent of these next-gen solutions and help clients and the market leverage the opportunities to use these tools for the enterprise.

Thanks for your great points Matthew.

Art Rosenberg 11/2/2013 1:01:26 PM


Good comments all around, but we do need to avoid confusing the end users of the technologies involved with terms like "unified" or "collaboration." I would focus on "what" those end users see functionally, not "how" the technology is implemented.

"Communication" technology focuses on two key aspects - connections between user endpoint devices and the medium/mode user interfaces of contact between people. As Blair pointed out, you don't have to collaborate to communicate, but there are now many modes of communication that can be selectively used over the same IP connection. I like to particularly cite the increasing role of customer services where the mobile customer doesn't deal with someone they know, but anyone who is qualified and available to help them across a variety of "channels.".

The big challenge for customer service, however, is not so much the cost of connecting to live assistance asynchronously or in in real time, although the PSTN and 'toll-free" numbers have always been an expense for the business and a chore for the caller, but the cost of skilled labor to respond efficiently and effectively in real-time to customer service traffic. That factor has always been a driver for self-services, initially limited IVR applications for short and simple information needs, but now is being expanded with more flexible and efficient online "mobile apps" that can more efficiently and selectively service the rapidly growing population of multi-modal ("multi-channel," "omni-channel") smartphone and tablet users.

However, expanding the many direct ways that a consumer can initiate contact with customer services is not going to reduce that traffic demand for live assistance, but will probably increase it. Unless, there is a way to shift that demand to using online self-services as a starting point, from which more contextual and flexible
Kevin Kieller 11/3/2013 5:36:47 AM

Good summary and historical perspective Steve and a good question.

For me, "unified communications" was always a less than ideal name because it spoke to the technical desire to put things together as opposed to a business outcome such as "effective communications" or "efficient communications".

"Collaboration" on the other hand speaks to a positive business outcome without indicating how we will achieve this.

Communications and Collaboration however are different things, to Blair's point.

For me then, we should be seeking out "Effective Communications" tools along with "Collaboration" tools.

To Leave a Comment, Please Login or Register

UC Alerts
UC Blogs
UC ROI Tool RSS Feeds

Related UC Vendors

See all UC Vendors»