For many this debate is a philosophical versus empirical one, but it is worth a discussion I think. It is almost impossible to set aside the philosophical side of the debate (i.e. those that hate strongly dislike big business), but I'm going to do my best based on my experiential side of the debate. In starting this post off lets take a moment and clarify what we are talking about.
best-of-breed
"Best-of-breed" vendors generally provide one or two technology solutions. They are 100% focused on these products and are thus considered to have more expertise in the needs of their customer (a debatable concept). Generally they are also considered to be more agile because of this focus (or so they say), allowing them to respond to development requests in a shorter time frame or at least with a more predictable software release schedule.
one-stop-shop (aka integrated systems)
(Pretty self explanatory I think) The Wal-Mart of technology vendors. They can fulfill most of your major technology needs and some of your minor ones as well (or so they claim). Generally they are very large organizations that offer products to a wide range of vertical markets. For this reason they are considered to have less knowledge of your specific operation (a debatable concept). Their release schedules tend to be further apart, but they also tend to perform custom work more willingly (possibly because of a larger resource pool) (also a debatable concept).
Now that we are all on the same page lets talk about how to sort through the question, "What's best for me?" First, for the purposes of your time and my own sanity I'm not going to attempt to categorize all the vendors for every technology solution. It's almost impossible given the new companies that pop up semi-regularly and more importantly with the disappearing act by many of the formerly named best-of-breeds recently gobbled up by the one-stop-shops. And that quickly then brings me to the point...best-of-breed or one-stop-shop labels are a useless and very stupid business requirement when selecting your technology solution. It might have been a semi-meaningful requirement five years ago (of even two years ago), but not anymore.
Now, I'd like to just end here and have you believe me because I say so...but the probability is some of you reading this are staunch believers that best-of-breed or one-stop-shop is an important requirement when selecting a technology vendor. The rest of this post is dedicated to you. If you agree with me I'd love you to post a comment on what experience led you to the same conclusion. Below are some of points based on my experience, and why they are pointless when made as general statements.
ease of integration
This is one of the biggest points in the debate, and is often touted by the one-stop-shop as a major reason to chose them. But before you buy look closer, talk to existing customers, and make sure that this is really true. As with anything in technology your plug-and-play solution may leave you hanging. At face value it seems logical.
A single company can get their products to interface and integrate easier/better than different companies.
Most one-stop-shops did not start development of their products at the same time, which can mean the technology platform between the solutions is different (sometimes drastically). This can lead to some interface challenges that are often only overcome with limitations (and you end up with multiple technology platforms). The number of products gained through acquisition and the time frame of those acquisitions is also a good identifier for how seamlessly integrated a one-stop-shop is. My experience has led to the conclusion that the integration capabilities post acquisition is about the same as when they were different companies. Existing customers have lived with the limitations before the acquisition for years, so it is easy for a vendor to rationalize not making it a priority to enhance integration.
The willingness of one-stop-shops to work with other vendors is also a point to consider here. Where generally best-of-breed vendors thrive off partnerships with other vendors, the one-stop-shop may create integration road blocks. After all, it is in their best interest for you to purchase all of their products.
Now in fairness to the one-stop-shop I suppose I also need to point out that best-of-breed vendors also make this claim by touting their agility to enhance the product quickly. In some cases this is probably true. But do not be easily mislead. As a customer you want to be wary of this promise, because if it is being made to you it is also being made to someone else. You want a vendor that has a well established software development life cycle (SDLC) so they already (or at least should) have the next two to three versions of the product planned out. First, this means that new development probably cannot make it into the next scheduled version. Second, it means that your requested enhancement can easily be trumped by promises to the next customer. The temptation for best-of-breeds to "follow the money" is often too tempting and promises become easy to break.
Rather than basing your decision on claims to ease of integration do your research to document your requirements with order of priority. Select a technology solution based on your clearly defined and documented integration requirements versus claims to ease of integration.
small size = better relationship
I'm going to pick on best-of-breed vendors here. One of the claims made by best-of-breed vendors is their smaller size lends to a better vendor-client relationship. They claim to support their product(s) better and establish better relationships with their customers because of their size. Who made the rule that to be nice to work with you have to be small? In my experience a good vendor relationship is grounded in the type of people versus the size of the company.
As a side note it is too easy when choosing a technology solution to let your sales person do all the selling. And that seems logical...but your sales person is not who you will be talking to on a daily basis. You should be meeting with the group of people you will be working with regularly. If you will be assigned an account manager then meet that person. You should also speak with installation, support, and the person that handles billing disputes. Interview them because how they respond will give you a very good idea of what it will be like to be a customer. This group will often not have the skill or desire to "sell you", so they will act just how they act every day.
Nice dinners and golf outings are great, but I bet you would give that up for a support team that is knowledgeable on the product and a finance team that is pleasant to work with. Select a vendor based on their reputation in the industry and the people that you meet, not on the assumption because they are smaller they will be better to work with.
single support entity (aka one person to yell at)
The "one person to yell at" claim is generally made by one-stop-shops and it has some validity. It can be very useful to have a single point of contact for resolving problems with your technology solutions. But this is only a reasonable point if the vendor is responsive and helpful when you yell. If you already read the comments under ease of integration and small size - better relationship you should foresee the coming point.Having multiple vendors that are very helpful and nice to do business with will always be better than a single vendor that is difficult to do business with. Base your technology decision on who you believe will offer the better support not based on the number of 800 numbers you have to tape by the phone.
in your back yard
This is one of those funny requirements that venues seem to think is a great benefit when choosing a technology vendor, and that technology vendors tout as a major benefit to the venue.
The vendor is not staffed to be at your beacon call and you will often get the freest resource (read least experienced) when you do need someone. If there is a big enough problem they will send someone regardless of where you are. In my experience your vendor's proximity to your physical location has very little to do with the quality of support you will receive.
Additionally, as a venue be wary of the in my backyard vendor. You have expectations but so will your vendor. You're site will become a frequent stop for sales calls, sales meetings, prospective customers, prospective partners, and bleeding edge technology solutions.
In summary if you choose to do business with a technology vendor because they refer to themselves as best-of-breed or one-stop-shop you will stand to be disappointed at some point in the future. It is naive to assume that your best-of-breed company is not looking to expand their product suite through "build it' or "buy it" plans. Even more likely your best-of-breed company is continuously being courted by one-stop-shops and will eventually marry for money (a poor relationship foundation by the way...in life and business). But for many that is goal. Build a company so that it is attractive enough to a potential suitor to sell and retire in the Caymans? Can you really blame the owner(s) for doing what almost every entrepreneur dreams of doing? I think not, so stop treating your vendors as if they were different than any other company with a different goal than your company. And for the one-stop-shop vendor the reality is they are generally not quite as seamlessly integrated as they proclaim.
The bottom line is hospitality venues did not coin the terms best-of-breed or one-stop-shop. They are terms creating by the vendor's marketing departments and ultimately should have little bearing on your technology decision.
Pictures courtesy of DWQ, Crawfishpie, Dzwjedziak, Extra Medium, katiebate
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment