A note to Enterprise Software Vendors, FWIW

I don’t focus on product launches or ‘breaking news’ here on Pretzel Logic. I have a full plate on the work front.

The two exceptions when I not only cover but downright celebrate product innovation are:

  • If I see traditional application or enterprise 2.0/social software vendors having the chutzpah to even attempt performance acceleration via the combination of process + social. You still need a strategy and plan but it makes execution a hell of a lot easier if the software is designed to account for context. See this on Chatter, for size.
  • When enterprise 2.0 products take existing business functions in the enterprise and improve insight and diagnostics for managers to improve decision making and reduce business risk. See this on new opportunities that social software bring to improve Employee Performance Management.

That said, I’m fortunate to see plenty of demos and hear how the product does in fact accelerate organizational performance and why my readers or clients should care.

I’ve only recently taken to getting briefed by vendors but I spent many years in technology sourcing starting with my days as the practice lead of west coast tech strategy consulting group at marchFIRST (USWeb/CKS) and that continues until today. And our firm(s) remained retained through system deployment so we couldn’t skip town after presenting a vendor recommendation in a pretty PowerPoint to the customer. As a result, separating wheat from chaff when a vendor is presenting is second nature to me.

After sitting through presentations and demo after demo here’s one situation that I see over and over again. To the degree that you are doing this, I hope you consider this as constructive feedback. Here goes…

Stop raving about your product in the context of it’s last incarnation.

Over exuberant product managers, often weighed down by the baggage of the last version get very excited about why this version is better. And how it does so much that the previous version did not do. And quickly proceed to declare it as ‘game changing’.

If it’s game changing, it better be game changing in the context of:

  • first, performance objectives that are keeping customers in your target market up at night
  • second, the competitive landscape and installed base at the customer and in that context, how compelling your offering is to successfully overcome the switching cost of moving to your application. Hard cost as well as soft costs (culture & change management)

Your last release or update is already obsolete in technology years and for the most part, its a pretty weak baseline to benchmark against. Whilst its tempting and human nature to realize “how far you’ve come”, customers don’t buy based on that. They might appreciate the progress. But its not enough to cut the check. Same goes for influencers and analysts that can spread the word for you.

What’s ironic is that good product managers in fact start with market and competitive research to build a business case. Then move on to understanding how new features and capabilities change the existing release. But when they present and showcase, they forget all that hard work done to assess the opportunity and gaps in the market. And proceed to do a feature shoot out with their previous version.

After a decade of buying big ticket software and not necessarily seeing the ROI, buyers are more sensitive to ensuring stringent vendor evaluations than ever. This is one simple but very rectifiable measure. 

Subscribe to this Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


Tags:
6 Comments
Post Details

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow

Get every new post on this blog delivered to your Inbox.

Join other followers: