Procurement – Page 2 – Cooper Mann Consulting

April 19, 2017

Channel Partners: Selling Telephony With a Side of Remote Access and Cloud Hosted Applications

Channel agents and telephony resellers are facing stiff competition these days. Line access or voice service isn’t as easy to sell as it once was, and the convergence of digital voice and data has made things even less simple. Business customers demand comprehensive solutions that can address a variety of business problems, and they tend to seek out those solutions from the advisors they trust. The “advisor” could be a software reseller, an accounting professional, the local IT guy, or the professional that delivered great telco, voice or network access.

Convergence isn’t only for voice and data solutions; convergence is the combining and compressing of channels delivering those solutions. MSPs and “pure” IT resellers are also feeling the squeeze, finding telecom agents and channels among those challenging the VARs and MSPs operating today. Marketing budgets are increasing, but differentiation is not. Reselling is a crowded space and everyone has become a service provider. Having the right messages to win new customers and retain existing ones is essential not just for success, but for survival.

Once a channel partner or provider has established a solid customer relationship, it is important to capitalize on that goodwill (and develop even more) by delivering the other value-added services the customer needs. Access, connectivity and voice solutions are just a start when it comes to servicing small and growing business customers. Having come from an application hosting background, I am very aware of the demand for mobility and “always-on, always-available” computing services among businesses small and large. When the partner is working with the customer and is solving connectivity and telephony problems, the likelihood of successfully selling additional IT solutions to address mobility is quite high. The challenge has often been with the investment required for training and certification; development of new competencies which are viewed as diversions from the core business. Evolution of technology, markets and demand suggests that offering a broader base of solutions isn’t a diversion any longer, it has become a core requirement.

Secure remote access to on-premises systems, managed hosting on cloud servers delivering always-on service or disaster recovery, and collaboration tools that keep everyone on the same page – these are the solutions that savvy businesses are looking for, and which represent the additional value channel partners and service providers could be delivering to their valued customers. After all, if the customer can’t get what they need from their trusted reseller/advisor, they will find somewhere else to buy, removing their “advisor” from the mix. Most business owners would agree that it takes less to nurture and maintain existing customers than it takes to find new ones, so the investment in offering and delivering value-added solutions is well worth it.

The best way for channel partners to retain their customer relationships is to offer a full range of solutions and value-added services to meet the variety of needs of their business clientele. MyQuickCloud, for example, is a highly successful partner solution and add-on for resellers of IP telephony services and line access. MyQuickCloud offers very flexible and affordable secure remote access and cloud hosting solutions that do not require investments in training or certification to resell, giving channel partners and telecomm agents the right stuff to beat out the competition and keep small business and growing enterprise customers happy and coming back for more. Partners leverage their expertise and creativity in developing solutions with MyQuickCloud, resulting in cost-effective and powerful network, application and continuity services not previously available.

MyQuickCloud secure remote access creates a secure business cloud from on-premises systems, with hosted or co-located cloud servers, or any combination of on-prem or offsite hosts. The on-premises capability leverages investments in existing infrastructure and adds value and capability to locally installed systems, a benefit which is not available with traditional hosting models. Able to be positioned as simple remote access, managed hosting or complete disaster recovery, MyQuickCloud gives channel partners a simple yet comprehensive approach to meeting customer computing needs regardless of the applications in use or mobile devices to support. MyQuickCloud is also used by installers and support technicians, enabling remote access to client on-prem systems, turning service and support into a more streamlined and efficient effort and improving customer service and retention.

I wrote an article a while back about how it all comes down to 3 applications for small businesses… applications to address fundamental business requirements. Among those requirements is the need to communicate. Whether it be via voice or electronic mail or other means, every business communicates and every business needs communication tools. Chief among the communication tools is the voice service (telephone), whether it be on-premises or hosted, digital voice or IP (not much analog out there anymore) or some combination of all of the above. Extending telephone systems to service a remote and mobile workforce or to connect multiple business locations is a high demand business and has proven to be very lucrative for many partners. Adding value to these solutions by delivering remote access or hosting service simply increases the overall value of the system and allows business customers to take full advantage of mobile, connected and integrated working models.

Make Sense?

November 17, 2015

Payment Card Roll Call: “Not Present” fraud likely to increase as EMV takes hold

rollingball No retailer wants to become the next Target (pun intended). Payment card fraud costs businesses and consumers billions of dollars every year. What’s even more frightening, many of the breaches in the news are the result of innocent participants inadvertently granting access to the bad guys. The Target breach in 2013 exposed the data of 110 million payment cards. Hackers got into the network using perfectly good credentials of the HVAC company. Sometimes password security just isn’t enough, which might bring in to question the security of all those SaaS subscriptions and online shopping sites folks use these days.

EMV chip technology, the standard around the world which has just recently become a standard in the United States, has done a lot to stem the tide of credit card fraud in other countries. As it was implemented in various countries, guess where it pushed the fraudsters? Where the anti-fraud technology wasn’t, of course! The United States was among the laggards in requiring EMV chip technology for payment cards, opening the door for bad guys and turning the US into a veritable haven for credit card fraud, “accounting for nearly 50% of global fraud losses, according to the Nilson Report[1]”.

EMV chip (or chip and pin) technology will go a long way to prevent credit card fraud for businesses accepting payment cards… in-person and counterfeit card fraud, anyway. Online retail, on the other hand, not so much. A chip on the card doesn’t really help when the transaction is completed with the card not present (CNP). Some industry analysts suggest that CNP fraud losses will exceed $6 billion within the next few years, making e-commerce and online payment security a high stakes game for even the smallest of retailers. As it gets more difficult to hack the payment system when the card is presented, bad guys will fall back in even greater numbers to the card-not-present model to find their victims.

Online retailers and service providers must take additional steps to secure their systems and protect customers and business partners, and face the challenge with the understanding that effort must be ongoing as new threats emerge. Tokenization is a prime method of layering the system with security, making the merchant system somewhat less of a worthy target by not storing the card data in the system. Even if the system becomes compromised, the bad guys wouldn’t find customer payment card information. There are numerous other steps a business can take to secure the CNP sales, including applying behavioral analytics which might identify rogue activities, or using 3D Secure to authenticate a cardholder’s identity at the time of purchase. The point is that CNP fraud is likely to spike as EMV technology takes a firm hold in the US.

Card fraud is already escalating rapidly for ecommerce retailers and other card not present channels – it didn’t take EMV to start on that roll but it will surely give it a push. Paperless payment systems, SaaS subscription services and online application service usage are increasing dramatically and there’s no chip to get in the way of these transactions. Sellers of any and every service utilizing online payments need to now pay particular attention to system and information security. The risk has always been there, and EMV chips and other shifts in pay card technology simply give it a push.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?

[1] Chipping away at Credit Card Fraud with EMV; Information Week Tech Digest powered by Dark Reading, Nov 2015; NilsonReport http://www.nilsonreport.com/publication_newsletter_archive_issue.php?issue=1071

February 17, 2015

Confusing Value Propositions: Cloud Platforms and Hosted Applications

When a service provider is in the business of selling computing resources – like bandwidth, processors and memory, and disk storage – it makes a lot of sense to also leverage the value of software products and systems which drive consumption of computing resources. In short, they market and sell software that runs on the platform in order to get folks to buy the platform, no different from selling desktop and server software in order to sell the hardware to run it. It’s just that these days the hardware and networking components are often referred to as the “platform” or maybe “the cloud”.

Let’s face it… cloud computing platforms are just no fun if there’s nothing to run on them, and a hard drive has little value when there isn’t anything stored on it. Once there is something there – an application, data… something – then the part has actual value in terms of driving revenue. This is the difficulty and the basis for confusing value propositions when it comes to offering and delivering services in the form of a hosting platform. Once again: platforms are just no fun if there’s nothing to run on them. Is the value is really about the applications, not the platform? Or is the value in the platform, because it’s necessary for running the applications?

The truth is that both are essential parts of the entire “solution”, and the value of how the solution is packaged and offered is purely up to the purchaser to determine in terms of applicability to the business. When it comes to hosted application offerings for businesses, there isn’t a single one-size-fits-all approach that will work. Sometimes people want to purchase from different vendors and put their own solutions together, and sometimes folks want turnkey delivery of whatever they need. Even channel partners and value-added resellers are finding that, with diminishing margins and aggressive competition prevalent in the market, removing the time-consuming aspects of solution delivery becomes paramount to achieving some level of profitability on the work.

What this means is that providers are looking for ways to increase the overall value and usability of their solutions, and when it comes to platform services there are only two directions to look: automation to support self-service, and application software delivery to drive consumption and usage on the hosting platform.

So now we’re back to the applications again. There’s no way to avoid them, but there’s no great way for platform companies to engage with them, either. Working with business application software is sometimes complicated, often annoying, and can be exceptionally time-consuming and resource intensive. And there are few licensing models which make it really easy for hosts and ISVs (Independent Software Vendors) to work together. Then, of course, there is the desire for exclusivity on one side or the other.

Software companies don’t generally want to select a single platform provider for their software for a very simple reason: they don’t want to limit their potential user base. Now that Windows platform is available just about anywhere – on local computers, on mobile devices, from platform and infrastructure hosting providers – how does the ISV make a decision on a single delivery channel or model or provider?

Some lean towards working with hosting providers to create branded, point-deliveries of the application. Too often, however, this approach removes the ability for customers to benefit from other applications or integrations, eliminating some of the value of the solution and certainly curtailing benefits for integrating partners of the ISV.

Host it themselves? The last thing most software developers want is to be responsible for hosting and maintaining some other guys’ software products; they have enough to worry about with their own offerings. If the solution is standalone, maybe this approach works. But there are few solutions made for the desktop which don’t have some strange integration point with MS Office apps, Adobe reader, Internet browsers or other things prevalent on the user desktop.

There isn’t any proven or easy path for software developers, IT suppliers or small business customers looking to create mobility and managed subscription service around desktop and server applications, and there is likely never going to be a single story line that all will follow. This is among the reasons for the popularity of the “hybrid” cloud approach and growing importance of managed application hosting and ISV-authorized delivery models. Yet even key providers in those areas have a tough time really communicating what they do in a way that is meaningful to the buyer. Are they selling a platform, applications, or both? Folks in the industry know the jargon and how to use it, and are often skilled at adjusting their language in order to obfuscate or confuse certain sticky issues regarding software licensing in the cloud and other similar aspects of hosting. It’s no wonder that many customers remain confused as to what, exactly, they’re being asked to buy, and where the lines of flexibility and responsibility are drawn.

The applications justify the platform, and there are possibly multiple platform approaches to delivering the app. It is a confusing situation for business buyers of IT as well as for their resellers and suppliers, and the increasing number of options for how businesses approach purchasing and using information technology makes it unlikely that the process will become as simple as some suggest.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?

January 7, 2015October 9, 2017

Everything Old is New Again: Big Fat Phones and Desktop QuickBooks in the Cloud

Every year that passes leaves some reminder of the time – some person or occurrence which touches us and creates a lasting memory. 2014 delivered its share of memorable people and moments and proved again that social platforms such as Twitter and Instagram have become increasingly significant as people across the world organize, march or call for change. Yet even as change is demanded from us and often forced upon us, it is wise to remember that the pendulum eventually swings both ways. We want to have our cake and eat it, too, which is the ultimate no-win situation and causes us to constantly and consistently seek out the alternative. Like the puppy chasing his tail, we end up going round in circles. Harem pants and jeans torn from knee to thigh have come back in fashion, and even though they didn’t really work the first time, here they are again. It is inevitable.

Information technology trends follow similar patterns, and what was once in high fashion may now be considered as “legacy”. Perhaps the better word is “classic”, as these legacy solutions often represent the standards by which new solutions will be measured. Eventually, the properties of the classic or legacy solution wind up in the new breed, because this is what the market has come to expect and/or demand. Even when entirely new standards are believed to be adopted, the truth is that years of learning and experience will often find the path previously traveled by others to be the right path.

It seems like so long ago when some said “the desktop is dead” and that all applications would be used by every device via the web, but not run on the device. Well, there are quite a number of web-based applications and services delivered in just that manner, but there are also lots and lots of computers out there with software still installed on them, happily working away for their users (there’s an app for that, right?). The desktop isn’t dead at all, it seems, and what’s more – there are trends to extend the capability and reach of the desktop to the web rather than replacing the desktop with the web. Application integration, process integration, interoperability, functionality and modality – all these factors and more have become the underlying drivers for extension of and hosting for desktop applications, and are the areas where SaaS and web-based application service has not delivered as expected.

The idea of having no software on the computing device is kind of silly, when you think about it. Computers continue to get more powerful and have more capability than ever. Heck, even phones are getting fatter and bigger again. The best phones these days are the ones that rival tablets and laptops in size and have lots of apps to run.

Microsoft Office, too, hasn’t gone anywhere, really. It’s still firmly attached to most workstations whether they’re iPads or Macs or Windows systems. Web-based productivity tools are certainly gaining in use, but not nearly as widely as some would believe. Office productivity continues to live on the desktop, and ties many users to desktop computing for that very reason. Use CRM in the cloud? I’ll bet you still export data to Excel or Word on the PC. Use accounting in the cloud? A lot of reporting still goes through Excel, trial balance systems and the like. The universe of web-based and SaaS apps is getting larger, but it hasn’t yet become the center of the universe for most established businesses. Net-new customers and smaller businesses are adopting SaaS due largely to cost and to the success of the marketing message, but use and direct experience with the product applied in the business setting often demonstrates that adoption of a more flexible (malleable) or functionally rich solution is indicated. The business likes the mobility, remote access and managed service, but not the actual SaaS application. So, hosting becomes the better alternative and the business is able to use the software that works for the business, and use it in a manner that allows the business to take advantage of remote and mobile capability, subscription service, and more.

I really have no gripes with web-based and SaaS solutions. In fact, some of my best friends use SaaS 🙂 The message I’m trying to convey is simply that, regardless of what the media and marketing may tell you, things don’t always change as quickly as it seems. Yes, there is a movement towards cloud solutions and online working models. Yes, there is change in how information technology is obtained and used. And equally true is the reality that only a portion of the market has adopted these changes and new philosophies. By the time there is “complete” adoption, there will be a new standard or approach being marketed and we will be in this place once again. Is there wide recognition of the benefit for mobility and remote capability? Sure there is, but it is also accompanied by the understanding that tried and true solutions will continue to deliver the functionality and capability businesses rely upon, even as new models for delivering them come about.

Make Sense?

Here are some of the most popular articles from CooperMann.com in 2014. Surprisingly enough, the most popular were articles about QuickBooks and the Cloud, a subject I’ve been writing about for many years. In fact, some of the most popular of my QuickBooks/cloud articles are from 2013 and they remain among the most frequently viewed even today. Search and view metrics indicate that the topic’s popularity is not likely to diminish soon, so plan to hear more about how businesses are using QuickBooks (and other desktop and network applications) in the cloud, but aren’t using Online editions to make it work really well.

The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. CooperMann.com blog was viewed about 19,000 times in 2014. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 7 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.

August 18, 2014

My Love/Hate Relationship with Partner Programs

originally published on LinkedIn

I love Partner programs. You know, those business opportunities to get involved with a product or solution and earn revenue selling it to your customers. Particularly when the opportunity is attached to something you already do for a living, a partner program can represent a way to gain new competencies, new customers, and new revenue streams. Then again, I hate partner programs just a little bit, too.

When a business becomes a business partner, there’s an expectation that something will occur that benefits both participants (hence the word “partner”). Each side is supposed to benefit in some manner from the relationship. In the case of the partner program, the expectation is that the partner will sell the product or service to customers and gets compensation on sold deals in return. There may be marketing, lead generation, reseller pricing, training and other elements involved, but the relationship is generally one of “you sell my stuff and I’ll comp you for it”. The manufacturer gets more sales, and the partner gets products that customers buy, meaning revenue for the partner and the manufacturer. Sounds like a good deal.

Here’s why I hate partner programs at times: they tend to shift the focus from what a customer needs to what the partner can earn revenue on selling. For a product or solution-based business, this may not be a bad thing, as the business is in the business of selling product. For a consulting business, however, it can be quite problematic if the consulting team isn’t clearly focused on meeting the customer need rather than pushing product.

There’s an old saying that “if all you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail”. Some consulting firms inadvertently fall into this situation, where they have their favored solutions (perhaps solutions they earn revenue from selling), and they automatically try to apply that solution to each and every customer engagement, whether it makes sense or not.

This happens time and again and not just with consultants, but also with accounting and bookkeeping professionals. Having developed an understanding for, and processes and procedures for working with, a particular business accounting product, the firm tends to make that product a standard recommendation for all clients. In this case the firm may not be literally reselling the solution for revenue, but has certainly “partnered” with the solution in the context that their ability to earn revenue becomes directly tied to the solution they want their client to purchase.

Partner programs can be hugely valuable to both the manufacturer and to the partner channel, and the value of having skilled “feet in the street” supporting and promoting the solution has been proven many times over. But accounting professionals and business consultants should take care when considering their possible participation in these types of programs, and be realistic about how that relationship fits in to the nature and quality of the service delivered to customers. The program may fit well with the needs of the practice, driving new revenue opportunities in new or existing areas of business. On the other hand, it may end up being a distraction, turning the focus from providing great client service and satisfaction to selling a product or solution just to earn an additional buck on the deal.

jmbunnyfeet Make Sense?

June 24, 2014November 29, 2017

Justifying the IT Budget: the Cost of Not Spending

“Competitive and ever-increasingly sophisticated in the marketplace”[1] describes a company positioned for long term business survival. Complacency takes the business nowhere but into irrelevance-land, which I think we can all agree is not where most business owners wish to end up… it makes selling the company slightly more challenging. Even in markets which were once firmly held to be localized are now open to new – and new kinds of – competitors, due in most part to advancements the development of information technology (IT) as well as how it is applied. These days, competition is globally facilitated rather than locally, and it’s becoming the standard approach. Welcome to the cloud.

New paradigms in IT capability and use are spawning huge shifts in what were broadly recognized normal or traditional business approaches. This realization has created the need for businesses to radically change their view of IT investment and the value of IT within the organization and operation. Yet IT is rarely an area which gains a strategic focus for investment within most businesses, and is frequently considered to be like a pencil or a particular chair… something the business needs but which has little impact on the company’s ability to compete better. Au Contraire, Mon Frère: Information technology is at the heart of business competitiveness, but justifying the desired investment is the great challenge. Maybe it’s because the focus is always on the great benefits to be achieved with the spend, rather than looking realistically at the impact of not doing it well or at all. Especially with information technology, there is a large potential cost to be paid for not spending adequately.

While business operations are sustained through IT involvement, economic pressures continue to weigh down business interest in funding IT operations. (which is weird, as there is a lot of evidence that the good bet is on those who do just the opposite). This regular spending reduction and cost control plan has good intentions of reducing the overall cost of business operations. The unfortunate reality is that operations are less efficiently sustained and are even more frequently unable to create or manage any level of growth. Reducing all IT spending is only useful when profitability is also improved and quality is maintained, unless it is an effort to simply stay afloat as revenues decline (and it’s recognized that quality will decline as well). But reducing costs does not help the business seeking to remain competitive in a rapidly changing marketplace, and pulling the pins out of the department primarily responsible for at least keeping things currently in operation operating serves only to chip away at the once-solid foundation. It’s a real problem, this difficulty with increasing interest and justifying increased funding for business information technology. And it all stems from the inability of organizations to clearly and with tangible benefit cost justify the investment.

It is this justification – demonstrating IT investment as a strategic asset presenting an advantage over competitors and positioning the business for future success – which requires effort and analysis to fully describe. Information technology is not a set of servers and software, and it is not websites and portals. It’s not click thru rates or SEO scores. Well, it’s all of that, but it is none of that. There is so much to consider and incorporate, and there are many degrees of success which might be experienced along the way. Information technology is a fundamental requirement in each and every business, and dependency upon it is increasing at a startlingly rapid pace, yet we still can’t quite figure out how to put it all on paper with provable numbers.

It might be easier to forecast in little departmental or functional pieces, but that doesn’t provide a total picture of the enterprise. And it’s often really difficult to quantify the impact of not doing something, or doing it only OK rather than really well. When this data does present itself, it often comes too late and in the form of a comparison to the competition, revealing where the business just didn’t meet the mark as compared to others in the same space.

It all boils down to businesses coming to the realization that information technology investment must be made on a continuing basis. The justification for IT funding must be made, and that justification must necessarily be balanced against the potential implications and impacts of not implementing. This is the only formula which can ultimately describe the value of IT investment in the business.

Make Sense?