Archive for the ‘Jon Reeve’ Category

IT outsourcing in the banking sector – what’s the big deal?

July 10, 2012

It is no surprise for those who work in the technology and banking sectors: banks often make large use of outsourcing and managed services for their IT. It is a cost-efficient solution that can help them remain competitive within the market with easy access to the best skills, technology and processes available. However, banks tend to be wary of announcing this practice to the world as they fear customers will think their personal and financial information may be put at risk, and won’t trust them with their money.

Since the NatWest/RBS/Ulster IT glitch became public there has been a lot of speculation around the origin of the issue. The banking group has tried to remain vague while focussing on reassuring their customers, while people took to online forums and social networks to make accusations towards the bank’s IT management and sourcing choices.

The banking giant was in fact accused of hiding the fact that the problem was possibly linked to their use of offshoring, as recent job ads for the support of one particular system which was thought to be the cause were found on recruitment websites in India.

But if the glitch had been caused by an in-house team member, would it have caused less of a reaction? What about an in-house IT Service Desk, but managed by an external service provider? Rather than pointing fingers at ‘outsourcing’, the real issue might be ‘bad sourcing’ or ‘bad IT management’. As this example might have shown, offshoring to save money might actually create more costs due to many factors, such as cultural differences, lack of control, different laws related to data security, and so on. A managed service, where IT is retained in-house and simply managed by a trusted third party, can be a much safer option.

Perhaps if there was more information on outsourcing, customer culture could change and they, too, could start to see outsourcing like a good thing, an improvement, a cost-efficient solution rather than a threat.

A recent survey by the National Outsourcing Association (NOA) found that 80 per cent of UK citizens believe ‘outsourcing hinders British businesses’. However, only 27 per cent of UK citizens associated ‘a local computer company providing IT support to small businesses’ with ‘outsourcing’, while 58 per cent thought ‘a bank opening a call centre in India’ was an example. This clearly means that outsourcing is mainly associated with offshoring, which is only one possible way to outsource a service or function. But there are many other, safer solutions that still use UK resources, such as managed services, co-sourcing and shared services – some even allow the organisation to keep staff in the same office.

So on one side, banks should probably be more transparent on their use of IT outsourcing, so that customers can get used to the fact that its use is quite common. It is important for bank customers to know where their data is stored, who has access to it and what the risks are.

On the other, it is important that people are being made aware of what outsourcing is, what types exist and what benefits this practice can bring. Banks should clearly explain what measures are in place to ensure their personal and financial information is not accessed, stolen or lost and why using an outsourced or managed service can be a benefit for them as well, improving their banking experience by maximising the skills and services of outsourcers.

 

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

This article appeared on Director Of Finance Online:

http://bit.ly/PAAeia

Advertisements

Legal IT: A New Model to Suit Changing Demands

June 6, 2012

As law firms change in structure and size, often expanding globally, their IT support model also has to evolve. With a great deal of growth expected to come from overseas countries, particularly from Asia, some alternative thinking is required to accommodate the scaling of IT support services to meet the increased, non-local, demand.

Current IT support delivery models are likely to be centred around a large centralised Service Desk providing all in-hours support and which is provided by an in-house team.  Out-of-hours and global support is then provided by any number of different configurations, often including complex rota systems utilising staff and/or contractors, or an externally provided shared service (perhaps even a combination of the two).  Such 24×7, or ‘follow-the-sun’, solutions do work and may be reasonably inexpensive but are frequently difficult to manage and do not provide a consistent level of good service across all locations.

Additionally, we’ve also recently witnessed a change in demand from end-users based in what have traditionally been outpost office locations.  These end-users, aware that they’re based in locations of new growth, now expect the same level of service as their counterparts in the more established offices.  This means receiving the same quality, response and availability of IT support services.  Arguably, these demands are reasonable and there should no longer be a difference in the IT support received, regardless of location.

To summarise – with growth predicted to come from abroad, and with a demand for a consistent delivery of services, regardless of office location, a revised approach to the provision of IT support services is needed.

An alternative concept of providing IT services may be to work to the ‘troughs’ in demand and not the ‘peaks’.  Let’s explain what is meant by this.

The bulk of an IT support service, perhaps 70 to 80% of it, is provided during a core period and is utterly predictable.  This portion of the service represents the ‘trough’ in demand, i.e. it is unmoving, consistent and therefore easy to plan a team around.  The ‘peaks’ in demand are portions that are prone to variations, e.g. the magnitude of spikes in demand, the volume of out-of-hours support activity, or the support demands from overseas offices.  It’s the smaller and less predictable portion of the service (the 20 to 30%) that consumes a disproportionate amount of management time, whilst still resulting in an imperfect service.

The trough and peak concept essentially shifts the main focus of in-house service provision to the larger and unchanging part of the service, where service excellence is the goal.  A more scalable approach is adopted for the peaks which strive to meet the same levels of excellence as the main portion of the service whilst easily being able to deal with the variations, however subtle, in demand.

Traditionally, an IT support service must align its own capacity model with its demand curve, i.e. when demand for support begins to build on a weekday morning, then the Service Desk opens.  As the demand curve increases during the morning (to its peak at around 11am) so does the number of support analysts that are available.  Then, later in the afternoon, as demand falls, so does the staffing on the Service Desk until, ultimately, it closes.  At this point, an out-of-hours function takes over until the cycle starts again in the morning.  With out-of-hours support activity, a measured amount of resource is available that can manage the anticipated out-of-hours, and/or global support requirements, until the main Service Desk reopens.

The single biggest issue with the traditional method is that resourcing for both the in-hours support needs, and the out-of-hours/global demands, is based upon meeting the peaks in demand.  If the service needs to be extended, all that can be done is to add analysts to the capacity model which will see significant step change in cost.

The following line graph shows a fairly typical weekday demand curve (i.e. ticket logging activity by hour of the day).  Demand builds in the morning and tails off at the end of the day.  The main peak is mid-morning with a smaller peak in the middle of the afternoon.  In this example, the bars represent a capacity model based on 7 analysts working 7.5-hour days, with staggered starts, and an hour for lunch, with Service Desk opening hours of 7am to 6pm.

On the face of it, it could be said the capacity model is a good fit for the demand curve.  But on closer inspection, the capacity model has failings:

1) Demand begins to build before the Service Desk opens.  These calls may be picked up by the out-of-hours service, but the people manning that service will soon be finishing their shift, so they may just ‘log and flog’ so that the support can be picked up by the in-hours team;

2) Resource does climb throughout the morning in line with the demand curve – however, the maximum available capacity isn’t quite enough to meet demand at the busiest time of the day.  This may well lead to an increase in abandoned calls at this time;

3) Then, due to staggered lunch breaks, resource again doesn’t quite keep in step with demand;

4)  The analysts’ shifts end slightly ahead of demand, and finally:

5) The Service Desk closes, switching to the out-of-hours service, just before the day’s demand has fully settled down.

By working to the peaks in demand, our well-considered capacity model doesn’t quite fit demand (and nor will it ever), and if we need to scale-up in line with business growth, all that can be done is to add extra analysts and attempt to further match the capacity model, as best as one can, with the demand curve.

Managing resource for an out-of-hours service has similar challenges.  A capacity model must be derived that meets maximum demand.  If the out-of-hours service is based on staff, equipped with phones and working to a rota, such a rota can be very difficult and onerous to manage.  If the service needs to be expanded, all that can be done is to add resource to where the gaps are emerging, even if it means that the resources will be underutilised.

If, however, an in-house core service is delivered to the troughs (which will still be the greater part of the service), and a suitable high-performing shared service is identified which can handle the peaks, i.e. the lower-volume out-of-hours activity, peak time overflow and variations in throughput, then an improved and scalable service model will be achieved.

The following diagram shows the same demand curve but with a reduced in-house capacity model.

In this example, the box represents 5 analysts, as opposed to 7 in the earlier diagram (a 28.6% reduction in headcount).  This team would still manage 71.4% of the in-hours call volumes and can spend its time focusing on delivering an excellent service.  The remaining support, i.e. the peaks, the increasing and decreasing demands at the start and end of the normal working day, and the out-of-hours piece, can be handled by a shared service which integrates with the main in-house service, but which can manage variations in demand with ease, scale up or down when required, and may demonstrate cost savings.

To use a term that I like to use, this model allows you to concentrate on the steak and not the peas.  Instead of working very hard to manage the smaller percentage of support activity at the edge of your service, focus on the bulk in the middle, and utilise the availability of a well suited outsourced service to manage the smaller, less predictable volume.  Savings can be made, the all-round service improves, you have a scalable model that’s less onerous to deliver and your customers (all of them) are happier.

It’s worth finishing with some guidance on how to transition from the current model to a new one.  The answer is found in the data contained within your IT Service Management tool.  It is essential that your existing service is fully profiled, from ticket origin through to logging, first-time-fix, escalation, and finishing at resolution.  An effective data analysis process needs to be conducted on your ticket management data so that your full service, and how it is used, is fully understood.  This kind of analysis is typically above-and-beyond the standard reports you might get from your ITSM tool, but instead is a data-mining exercise which performs a distillation of your service, against which a new model can be defined.  With such an analysis behind you, the decision of how much to keep in-house, versus what to outsource, is a reasonably straightforward piece of cost analysis.  Whilst adopting the trough and peak model may seem too greater a step to make, the required due-diligence to see if it’s viable won’t impact the delivery of your services at all.  So, at the very least, it would seem to be a prudent move to investigate it as an option.

 

 

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

 

This article appears on ITSM Portal: http://bit.ly/LzkyGG

Shared services: a problem shared is a problem halved

May 1, 2012

A problem shared is a problem halved’ – This idiom generally refers to a person feeling better simply by sharing their woes with another, and most of us would agree that this phase is more often than not, very true.  From an IT perspective, this common saying is profoundly relevant when applied to Shared Services, and in more ways than one.

To make my point, I would draw on three words from this old saying:

  • Problem
  • Shared
  • Halved

IT support typically addresses the day-to-day, on-going management of ‘problems’.  In fact, a more popular (best-practice aligned) word these days might be ‘incident’ or ‘fault’.  Whatever they’re called, IT problems are an inconvenience to all businesses, are a distraction from the business’ core competency and interrupt the effected users from their work.  Furthermore, such problems do not contribute to the successes of the business, and worst still, are a costly overhead.

In this context, ‘shared’ has a double meaning.  By engaging with another to share your troubles, the weight of that trouble is somewhat lifted.  This, in itself, is welcome relief.  But ‘shared’ can also form part of the solution if an IT Shared Serviced is properly considered as an alternative to managing problems, incidents or faults, in-house.

Halved’, not be taken literally, is a reference to the measure of gain achieved by sharing the problem.  Use of a shared service can (and should) lead to a measurable improvement in service and reductions is cost.

As a result of the recent economic downturn and period of unprecedented financial uncertainty, providers of shared IT services have had to become very, very good at what they do.  Without stepping up to the mark, and indeed, extending the mark, IT service providers would simply slip by the wayside (and many of them have).  It is, therefore, a good thing for businesses that IT service providers have been forced to compete so aggressively with one another because it has led to new levels of service excellence and reductions in cost.

So, by referencing (for one last time) the proverb – ‘A problem shared is a problem halved’, businesses do have a chance of sharing the burden of IT support with others who are better placed to manage it whilst at the same time improving on service and reducing cost, but only if they are willing to consider the possibility of outsourcing their IT support needs.

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

Visit Plan-Net‘s website and learn more about what we do and how we can help your business: http://www.plan-net.co.uk

Bring IT support back to the 1st line

March 27, 2012

In a time where cuts to organisations’ IT budget are often becoming a necessity, taking a good hard look at role redistribution and service desk management could definitely help organisations diminish support expenditure, and perhaps divert the IT budget towards new projects. Organisations can even potentially achieve more benefits by better managing incidents, gaining increased speed of resolution and improved service levels while they save money, creating even more cost-efficiencies. A way to achieve this is by bringing more support work back to the 1st line.

It is common knowledge that analysts working at 1st line level have a lower cost due to their lower skills, while 2nd and 3rd line resolvers – desk-side, network and server support staff – are more expensive, as their skills are higher and more specific. Incident resolution rates also vary: it is faster to resolve an incident at 1st line due to the simple nature of incidents that are taken care of at that level, while 2nd line analysts take longer to resolve issues as these tend to be more complex, or require physically moving to reach the user’s device.

Over time, 2nd and 3rd line resolver teams have been including support activities in their daily routines which, when analysed, often include frequently occurring and process driven tasks. These tasks probably sit where they do because at system or product implementation, all related support activities were adopted by the deploying team without any later thought as to whether some of the tasks can be moved elsewhere.

At the same time, 1st line teams have become more technical and able, with greater access to system tools and the permissions to use them. This has had a positive impact on first time resolution and we have seen the log-and-flog approach begin to decline.

Considering both of these evolutions, opportunities exist to release system specialist time, reduce the cost of service provision and increase first time fix at the Service Desk. By effectively using ticket closure category information from the service management tool, analysis can be undertaken of what 2nd and 3rd line resolver teams are actually resolving.  A likely outcome is that tasks will be identified which are process driven, and therefore can actually be performed by a more junior (or low cost) resource. As long as the process can be documented and the permissions to do it are provided, it’s more than likely that the 1st line Service Desk team can pick up the work.

As an output from some analysis, this may look like – x% of 2nd line resolutions are procedural and can move to 1st line, as a result, 1st line can increase their first line fix from y% to z%, and thereby improving the service to the user-base.

The cost savings of such an exercise could be considerable.  By moving tasks into the first line, the tasks are being moved into lower cost people. This may mean that the 1st line team grows and the other resolver groups reduce, the outcome of which will lead to a demonstrable cost saving.  Furthermore, with tasks having been removed away from the 2nd and 3rd line teams, opportunities will present themselves as a result of the increase in available time within these groups, e.g. resolver teams can improve their performance as they will have more time to work on the more complex problems, and team resource can be released more readily into project work and thereby decreasing the need for expensive contractors.

Such change, however, can’t quite happen overnight.  The analysis needs to be good, and the recommendations of tasks to be moved to 1st line need to be realistic.  Then, through the controls of a well-run project, tasks are tested as being viable duties that the 1st line team can assume, and when signed off, can permanently remain at first line.

The measures of a successful exercise will be ultimately visible in the reporting. The first line fix percentage will increase, the ticket resolution volumes at the resolver groups should reduce, and costs should reduce – perhaps by reducing staffing, project or contractor costs.

The perception of the overall quality of the IT service should also improve: frequent support activities will be completed faster, which improves customer satisfaction; and core systems will receive greater attention from their specialist support staff, leading to improved availability and functionality.

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

This article has been published on Director of Finance Online:

http://www.dofonline.co.uk/content/view/6131/118/

Just how much of a saving is the reduction of heads from an IT support team?

March 20, 2012

ImageIn a bid to meet the demands of an FD who needs to see cost savings across the organisation, often it’s a portion of an IT team that have to go.  On the face of it, it’s an easy choice.  Those within an IT team will often perform the same functions as one another, therefore, if one or more leave the team, it can still perform all its required tasks, albeit a bit slower than before.

But what might not have been considered in such decision making is the organisation’s profile of staff’s expected IT skills and the speed-of-service demands.  If the two are considered together, an optimal ratio of IT staff to company staff can be derived which can be used as a benchmark against any planned reductions in heads.

Definitions:

Staff’s expected IT skills – Some business environments may have a low expectation on its staff in terms of their IT skills.  A law firm is a good example as it’s more beneficial to the organisation if their legal teams are fee earning (by practicing law), instead of being able to clear their own printer jams.  Other organisations, perhaps a software house, will have employees who are more than capable of dealing with common IT issues.  In these examples, the law firm is clearly going to need a greater ratio of IT support people to staff members than the software house.

Speed-of-service demand – An investment bank, or indeed any organisation that is wholly reliant on IT to trade, will tolerate only the most minor of IT interruptions, whereas some business types might be able to suffer IT delays for hours, or even days, without any particular impact on their business.  Those with the need for greater speed of service, or even immediate need for service, will require a greater ratio of IT support people to staff members compared with those that don’t.

If these two aspects of a business’ IT culture are considered together, one can begin to determine the optimal number of IT support people to staff members.

For organisations with a low expectation of staff’s IT skills, but who need rapid IT support, a ratio of 1 support person to every 50 members of staff, might be appropriate.  The other extreme, high staff IT skills coupled with lower speeds of support, may lead to a ratio of 1 support person to every 200 members of staff.

Then, if there is a need to cut heads, a more informed choice may be made, i.e. just how many heads may be lost without: a) requiring the established IT culture to change, or b) having a detrimental impact of the organisation’s ability to trade?

Of course, this thought process and logic need not only apply to difficult times, when reducing costs is a priority.  It can apply to times of business success and be used as a means of determining the best IT support fit for the business.

Image

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

There are still opportunities to do more for less

February 3, 2012

A lot of talk right now revolves around IT projects in 2012 – which mainly means, deciding which projects to scrap due to lack of funds and how to invest the small budget available wisely, as well as use existing resources more efficiently. The problem is that with a restricted budget, it is difficult to truly understand what is essential and what is not and therefore where to invest the limited resources. But there are still many opportunities to achieve IT efficiencies at a small or no cost.

First of all, an effective way to improve productivity would be to follow the classic suggestion of making the best of what you have, but with particular focus on the human side, the people who run your IT. Invest time and effort in your staff to make them feel appreciated, motivate them to work better with incentives and listen to their issues as well as their suggestions on how to improve the IT department. People are a fundamental part of your business and investing in them will definitely have a tangible return on investment. It is easy for staff to get discouraged in tough times, and that is why improving morale and making people feel appreciated is so vital to improve business – a no-cost investment for a great ROI.

Likewise, there is still space to find other no or low-cost efficiencies by applying simple Service Management best practice principles. From processes to help speed up operations and software to deal with large amount of data effectively, to changing IT staff’s working patterns and hours, small changes can bring great results, all to the business’ advantage. Adopting metrics can also be a great way to improve the service and monitor efficiency. A small budget may be invested in consultancy – an experienced consultant can help by assessing the state of the Service Desk and suggesting ways to improve processes and put to better use the current resources that you have.

Another good move for a small budget can be gaining certifications. With limited resources and the inability to spend on large projects, it might be a good time to obtain an ITIL or ISO 27001 certification: the immediate investment is small but the results can become of great importance in the next few years. In fact, when the market will be strong and growing again, the company will already have that crucial certification that allows them to take part in bids and tenders, for instance, and therefore grow their business; these certifications are in fact becoming more and more crucial for companies issuing a bid or tender, and greatly influence the decision-making process. At the same time, they can guarantee more efficiency and security, which means that even in tough times, resources are exploited and managed in the best way possible, operations are carried out effectively and security incidents – with all their costly consequences – are reduced to the minimum.

The most important thing to keep in mind, in any case, is that any move has to focus on supporting the revenue-generating areas and functions. Money spent supporting non-essential parts of the organisation’s productivity might not have be a wise investment in the current financial situation. Any efforts must be directed at helping the business and its core functions, while the other aspects of the organisation will have to put on hold until the market is strong again.

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

Find this piece on ITSM Portal:

http://www.itsmportal.com/columns/there-are-still-opportunities-do-more-less

Can I have the Check, please?

November 15, 2011

The Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle is loved by all because it makes complete sense and couldn’t be simpler. Yet, through no fault of its own, it has two failings.

  1. Each of the 4 stages are likely to be well executed at the launch of a project or when executing significant change. Though, after successfully completing its first rotation of the cycle, the focus placed upon the process stages immediately wanes and soon after, PDCA becomes BAU. The reason for this can be understood though not condoned. Attention and effort, and therefore cost, will be centred on business priorities, whereas with completed projects there is an expectation that no further attention is needed for some time. Not so. Business changes and new developments are often introduced into fluid or dynamic business environments, and so by their nature, a cyclic approach to their maintenance is necessary, both for the sakes of business advantage and for the return on investment made in implementing the change.
  2. It is the Check stage of the process which lacks attention. The Plan stage is never a problem because it’s an obviously interesting stage for which there will be no shortage of strategist and project manager to pick up the baton. Do and Act are both production stages to which clear activities can be assigned. The Check stage, however, is often the most subjective of the stages and will typically receive the least focus, usually because it adopts a standard reporting model for which the audience is small. If it’s true that information is king, then it follows that the Check stage of the PDCA process is the most important as it fuels the other stages by introducing recommendations which will keep the cycle alive. If nothing of interest arises from the Check stage then the PDCA cycle will stop. If the goals are to maintain business advantage and to maximise investments made in implementing change, then the solution is to maintain the Plan, Do, Check, Act cycle as a valuable business tool, the success of which hinges on the quality of the Check stage.

A maximised Check stage should be considered in three parts:

  • Standard reporting – Whilst mentioned above as a poor contributor to the overall PDCA process, standard and periodic reporting of service levels and key performance indicators is an important first step in ensuring a fit for purpose service or system. It enables those working at the sharp end to make continual tweaks to ensure the work they do stays on the tracks.
  • Customer satisfaction – A periodic snap shot of what the users think, provides a relevant point of reference for the system or service. It provides management and those involved in delivery with an assurance that their efforts are working towards a common goal, and protect against the risk of the system or service simply working to its own ends. Any deviation from where the system or service is, to where it needs to be, can then be acted upon.
  • Assessment – A comprehensive analysis of the system or service, the business it operates in, the value it provides, the weaknesses it presents and the opportunities that may exist within it, should then be commissioned, with sufficient access to the business, and reported upon. Such an exercise needs to ‘look under the bonnet’ and provide an objective output with recommendations which are the consequence of balanced data analysis and inquisitive investigation.

Clearly, the three types of checking will be performed at varying and increasing frequencies. The correct combination of the three, however, will ensure that the cycle is maintained and will prevent systems or services from slipping into self-serving modes of operation, which really is what the Plan, Do, Check, Act process is all about.

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

Originally a column for ITSM Portal: http://www.itsmportal.com/columns/can-i-have-check-please

Brace for the feared double dip: IT planning can maximise mergers and acquisitions

October 28, 2011

As the business world lies in fear of a double-dip recession, companies are advised to ‘think smart’ and try to find a way to profit from further economic downturn and not to simply aim to survive it. Or, if they are struggling, to have a ‘rescue plan’ in place that will spare them from drowning in debt or sinking altogether. As a consequence, mergers and acquisitions flourish remarkably in times of financial difficulties, and can be a way to gain during a tough spell – either by buying or joining with another business and expanding or by selling up before collapsing completely.

Mergers and acquisitions, however, are not just the ‘combining of commercial companies into one’ (to quote the mini Oxford dictionary). Business leaders are missing a significant trick if the joining of two businesses is not maximised, i.e. that the market share of the new entity is greater than the sum of the two companies when operating on their own.

It is, however, an ever repeating trend that mergers and acquisitions do not address operational, cultural and technology considerations as part of the consolidation. These often remain ‘off the radar’ long after the legal part of the merger or acquisition is complete.

So, rather than just ‘think smart’, a better message is perhaps for companies to ‘think smarter during tight times and to make the most of these mergers and acquisitions right from the start, by ensuring that the fabric of the new bigger company is appropriately adapted so that it functions in a manner that maximises the now greater trading capabilities.

Those within the IT services industry will have experienced customer organisations that bear the signs of a merger or acquisition and, worst still, continue to tolerate them. The tell-tale signs are classic and include: performance issues; geographically separate and siloed support teams; a large list of supported applications; technical complexities; a high support staff headcount; a disproportionate number of managers; and complex organisational structures. None of these ‘features’ of an organisation can positively contribute to its on-going ability to compete and win in its market place. And if the cost of these inefficiencies could be demonstrated, senior management might just fall off their chairs.

The good news is that mergers and acquisitions can be conducted with a better overall outcome at low cost – through the use of some external aid. These are the kind of projects where the use of a consultancy can really make a difference. Employed during and soon after the merger to improve what is at heart of an improved approach to mergers and acquisitions, ‘people, process and technology’, the cost of a consultant will be a drop in the ocean compared with the overall cost of trying to fix all the possible IT-related faults and issues in the years following the merger or acquisition. The value of the work is likely to be recovered quickly by enabling the business to operate better and by making people’s working practices more efficient. Efficiencies will emerge during the analysis stage of consultancy by identifying opportunities for synergy which will have a positive impact on the on-going investment made by the business in people and systems. The outcome: doing more and doing it better, with less.

So far, all this sounds obvious and nothing more than common sense – so why is it that the ‘people, process and technology’ side of mergers and acquisitions isn’t dealt with early on? Speed, assumption and procrastination are usually the causes.

‘Speed’, because a merger or acquisition deal is usually time sensitive, and focus must be on closing the deal by a given date. ‘Assumption’ because aspects like company culture, people, processes and technology are assumed to be similar and therefore likely to gel. ‘Procrastination’ because activities required to streamline the new business are often planned post-deal, but with human nature being what it is, the plans take an age to implement or never happen at all.

So, if like the United States Army you want to ‘be all you can be’, it is important that people, processes and technology are properly considered and addressed as part of a possible merger or acquisition. You should ensure the IT planning and transformation work starts during the merger/acquisition process so that its importance is clear and understood, then follow it through post-deal before your people return to their normal mode of operation and their old working ways. And, if you are using a service provider for any or all of these steps, be sure to choose one that has a record for properly identifying synergies and efficiencies and who have successfully implemented these. As the recession will not be worsened by losses caused by a faulty or inefficient IT service, the outcome of a well-planned IT merge will surely make the difference.

 

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

IT consultants should drop the ITIL clichés to win clients over

October 14, 2011

Good sense and demonstrable results make a winning proposal

Things have significantly changed since the recession affected companies’ budgets and made them re-think their needs and priorities – something IT consultancies have to take into consideration when proposing their services.  ITIL, once a priority within many corporate IT strategies and individual’s personal development plans, is no longer regarded in quite the same way.

‘ITIL is dead’ and other similar statements have been circulated in past months within the IT press. But this is not exactly the case: it’s not that ITIL is dead – there’s plenty left in it yet; it’s simply that ITIL is now ubiquitous within IT and everyone’s had as much as they can take of ‘ITIL this’ and ‘ITIL that’.  IT Managers now want sensible solutions to their IT problems, where value can be demonstrated and which are based on sound thinking and good old common sense.

ITIL is therefore still important; it’s simply not the whole of the answer anymore.

When contributing to customer proposals, I’m finding it difficult to write lines such as ‘support the needs of your business’ or ‘align with best-practice’.  These rather out-of-date terms no longer need to be said. After all, who would buy IT services that weren’t these things?

With a growth in global IT spending this year predicted by analysts such as Gartner and Forrester, IT consultancies have to really think about what to offer clients.  The rest of this year and the next will see an increase in companies buying IT consulting services, which together with software and system integration services are expected to account for 44% of the global IT market.

But if we’re not paying homage to ITIL anymore, what is it that needs to be said when pitching for IT services work?  The answer is quite simple, though it does require credible and demonstrable qualities from those submitting their proposals.  The problem or requirement needs to be fully understood, preferably backed with supporting data that is undisputed.  The solution proposed has to make good sense and be achievable, and the cost of the exercise must clearly demonstrate value to the customer.

As a result, it is likely that IT services companies will need to invest more time in the requirement, supported with sound data analysis, ahead of writing the proposal.  This does mean a greater willingness to invest time before formally engaging with the customer, but, following this, they will have written a proposal which is specifically focused on what will be done (without all the gushing marketing speak).  If compared with proposals from a few years ago, it will lack the blurb and clichés that we’ve all endured for so long and will be clear, detailed and relevant.

Of course, this does mean that businesses needing help need to be a little more forthcoming with providing data, and even access to the business, ahead of receiving any proposal.  They will also need to avoid unnecessarily ‘playing the field’ with IT consultancies, because, by investing a greater amount of unpaid work ahead of submitting a proposal, consultancies will be less inclined to continue in their efforts for no return.  But the outcome of this fresher approach will be far more useful than has been experienced previously.

 

Jon Reeve, Principal Consultant

 

This column originally appeared on ITSM Portal: http://www.itsmportal.com/columns/it-consultants-should-drop-itil-clich%C3%A9s-win-clients-over