Understand, I'm not discounting it. ROI is a key factor in most decisions. Whether business or personal. I am not saying ROI is not important. What I'm saying is, ROI is not the focus in life. It's there, but sometimes the metrics or data is... differently focused...
IOW, some might say the ROI in life is to travel to many different countries. Where someone else might say the ROI in life is to eat the food in many different countries. The result is the same, the focus is different.
ie. In my LOB, we do not bill on data, we simply assume large(r averaged) data transfer and adjust billing on a more abstract framework in order to achieve (a pre-defined) ROI. I could say we have a higher level of focus, when the reality is we have a DIFFERENT level of focus.
Does that make sense?
We all know that data can be translated in many different ways, often specifically intended to loft our own POV.
Having said that, I am completely aware that your data, and your presentation of such, is intended to loft your own POV.
As I know that, and you know that of me... I dig deeper... That's the job of the SA.
I KNOW that you are attempting to measure your ROI... It has been very clear from the very beginning... That is very common with a WAS. And I will be so bold as it becomes very common with the LBS, as well. You will see as many of the LBS here go through the process, once they stop being sad, they start finding reasons to move on. They start lofting themselves up on reasons such as yours... that the ROI makes it not worth pursuing, any further.
So, I'm digging...
Because at some point, business needs to assume the ROI is worth it. It can be propped up by a bunch of data and quantifications suggesting that the ROI is worth it. But as it is, no one can predict a future, and so a business has to eventually make a choice to move forward, or stop doing business. If it gets stuck in quantifying the ROI, it will not conduct business, and therefore is pre-disposed to fail.
Many businesses do one of two things. They set a poison pill, or they set up a condition that allows them to restructure. One could suggest they are the same thing, they really are different. The poison pill is very black and white. IF (not ROI) THEN fail the business. Whereas restructuring is IF (not ROI) THEN change LOB to meet ROI.
AS an SA, I can tell you one thing for certain:
You are stuck.
How's that for stating the obvious?
You are trying to make binary reason translate abstract data.
That simply is not going to work.
Your application is set to capture data to prove failure. You haven't set the trigger to be number of failures, you've set the trigger to be a time frame.
What is painfully obvious is, you are not capturing data for successes.
Ergo, your application is not set to determine ROI. It is set to simply measure how bad the failure ultimately is, after a given time period.
So, here's the thing...
You are first and foremost the one who needs to determine clarity.
CV, you are not clear, because you BELIEVE you want out, yet you THINK you want to stay in.
If... and ONLY if... you want to measure ROI...
You need to capture data of success as well as failure.
But...
You don't know what success looks like. If you did, you wouldn't be posting here. You definitely know what failure looks like, as you keep measuring it.
And further, but...
Here's the rub...
You've opened the wrong data stream, to determine ROI...
That is very common with a WAS. And I will be so bold as it becomes very common with the LBS, as well. You will see as many of the LBS here go through the process, once they stop being sad, they start finding reasons to move on. They start lofting themselves up on reasons such as yours... that the ROI makes it not worth pursuing, any further.
