|
|
|

IssueAlert Emerging Technologies ~ June,
2004
Consider Tomorrow
By Gary Weseloh, Vice President, TMG Consulting, Inc.
Selecting a new customer care system is an arduous task. You have
to define your needs and communicate them through a RFP. You have
to then match your needs against the functionality and technology
of each vendor's product. You have to compare prices, and make sure
that each vendor's prices are complete, and that one or more of
the vendors are not low-balling you or have not included prices
for essential elements of the system. You have to call and/or visit
the vendor's established clients who are using the system to ensure
that it works as stated and demonstrated, and determine the extent
of each client's satisfaction with the system. Finally you are able
to select the system, execute the contracts and begin the implementation
process.
It is important to remember, however, that you are buying more
than just the system. You are buying a relationship with the vendor.
It surprises me how many times we hear of utilities and municipalities
who go through the procurement process and select a CIS without
considering their long-term relationship with the vendor. If you
choose a system which is installed by a third party or system integrator,
you could actually be purchasing a relationship with two different
parties.
There is an old saying which goes: “beauty is only skin deep”.
This, of course, is not always true, but it can be said about some
CIS vendors and their products. A good sales team can do a lot to
influence the sale of their product. They can build rapport with
the utility team to the point where the utility is eagerly anticipating
working through the implementation and subsequent go-live period
with the vendor. However, as soon as the contract is signed, typically
the sales team transitions out of the relationship and the utility
now has to deal with a whole new implementation team. Then, after
go-live, the implementation department transitions out and the utility
is turned over to the vendor's customer support organization. There
is nothing wrong with this process, and in fact many times it can
be very beneficial for both the utility and the vendor. But it is
important to “look under the hood” during the procurement
process and really understand that what looks great initially may
be slightly different as time goes by.
One of the things that TMG Consulting tries to stress during the
selection process is for the utility to attempt to determine how
the vendor's existing clients would rate the vendor's transitional
process, the implementation staff, the customer care organization
and all other aspects of the long-term relationship between them
and the vendor. Many times these additional drilling questions have
made a difference in which vendor has been selected. After all,
if the vendor doesn't take care of its existing customers, what
makes you think that the vendor would take better care of you?
The opposite can certainly be true as well. The Kansas City Board
of Public Utilities has had an extremely positive relationship with
their CIS vendor. The “looking under the hood” was a
factor in their selection. Interestingly, this utility was more
pleased and has a much better relationship with the implementation
team and the customer support organization than it did with the
sales team. They have been live on the new system for over a year,
and the vendor has always been there to help them when they needed
it. This vendor has gone over and above what this utility expected
in terms of its long-term relationship.
Other utilities have not faired as well. When a utility is looking
to replace a system that is only a few years old, most of the time
we find that this is either due to either a poor implementation
or to vendor support issues. It is rare that this is due to a functionality
issue, unless of course the utility is requiring new functionality
and the vendor is either unable or unwilling to accommodate the
utility. We recently assisted a utility that was looking to replace
their system that was installed in 1999. The primary reason they
needed a new system was the lack of vendor support and the vendor's
inability to add new functionality. They also had some concerns
with the technology of their current system. Another utility issued
an RFP for a new system after becoming fed up with the vendor's
unresponsiveness to their support issues. Both of these utilities
specifically excluded their current vendors from their RFP process.
Another utility had very similar support issues with their vendor,
but decided to include their vendor in their RFP process. Interestingly,
they chose their current vendor and decided to upgrade to the vendor's
current version. They are now attempting to rebuild their relationship
with the vendor.
Another related aspect of the ongoing relationship with your vendor
has to do with the annual maintenance fees charged by all vendors.
Typically, for a licensed product that the utility maintains, vendors
charge in the neighborhood of 20 percent of the license fees each
year. And, this fee can escalate anywhere from 2 percent to 7 percent
per year. But, there can be big differences between vendors as to
what all is included and what the utility gets for this annual fee.
Are software releases including upgrades to new version included,
or is the fee just for a designated number of hours of telephone
support? Does the fee cover any onsite assistance, or things like
registration at the vendor's annual users' conference? Does the
vendor provide any system monitoring as a part of this service,
or is this all over and above the 20% annual fee? It is important
that you understand what is included and what is not included in
this fee before the contracts are signed. The lack of understanding
or communication on this can lead to a very negative relationship
between the utility and the vendor. One utility felt that they were
getting very little from the vendor for the price they were paying
for their annual maintenance. Therefore, they dropped the ongoing
support agreement and have contracted with a third party to support
their system, make modifications, etc. So far this is working well
for them, but time will tell.
An investment in a new customer system should last a utility for
five to seven or more years. Therefore, don't just pick the system
with the best bells and whistles, but think also about tomorrow.
Add the strategic element and make sure that you can live with the
vendor, its implementation team and support staff, and the financial
aspects of the ongoing relationship.
Gary Weseloh is a Vice President and Senior Consultant
with TMG Consulting. He has over 30 years of utility experience,
including the management of customer systems (CIS, meter reading,
remittance processing, complex billing) at a large combination utility,
consulting on mobile computing/field work automation, and extensive
selection, evaluation and installation oversight projects with TMG
Consulting. He can be reached at garyw@tmgconsulting.com.

UtiliPoint's Emerging Technologies IssueAlert articles are compiled
based on the independent analysis of UtiliPoint consultants, researchers,
and analysts. The opinions expressed in UtiliPoint's Emerging Technologies
IssueAlert articles are not intended to predict financial performance
of companies discussed, or to be the basis for investment decisions
of any kind. UtiliPoint's sole purpose in publishing its Emerging
Technologies IssueAlert articles is to Offer an independent perspective
regarding the key events occurring in the energy industry, based on
its long-standing reputation as an expert on energy issues.
©2004, UtiliPoint International, Inc. All rights reserved.
This article is protected by United States copyright and other intellectual
property laws and may not be reproduced, rewritten, distributed,
redisseminated, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast,
directly or indirectly, in any medium without the prior written
permission of UtiliPoint, Inc.
|
|