Why assessments matter before deploying applications.
Many companies implement new technologies with the promise of performance improvements, cost efficiencies, and risk reduction throughout the business. The typical process is that a stakeholder hears about new technology and gets excited about it. The excitement they have is passed on to management and executives urging the adoption of this new program. The project gets approved, the application is integrated, and fingers get crossed for that promise of improving performance. Let’s take a CRM; for example, many sales directors and managers take charge to spearhead the implementation of a CRM to increase visibility to sales people’s activities and allow more effective and efficient sales forecasting. This may be true; however, CRM’s can do a whole lot more than sales tracking and forecasting. The data they collect can inform other business strategies that typically need to be reported on. We find conflict with poor CRM implementations because the tool cannot do as promised or doesn’t integrate well with other company systems and applications. We often find that sales forecasting and reporting data need to be pulled into a central location – typically separate applications like an ERP. If the CRM does not integrate well with ERP, a considerable amount of time can be spent following up with sales obtaining data, and manually integrating it into the other systems. This day’s worth of effort quickly adds up over the year. What we find helps to alleviate scenarios like the above is entering into an assessment before implementation. Assessments review goals associated with the application in question, the overall strategy of using it throughout the company, and a review of required features within the tech. A market review analyzes available options. Cost-benefit analysis compares the various risks to the costs of the application. Going through an assessment allows organizations to make a more informed decision before moving forward on a new piece of technology. This article will review the overall assessment process, an example, and its impact on an organization.
What is involved when assessing applications?
The first step in evaluating new technology is to perform a project readiness assessment. This phase reviews what the overall business goals are related to the project. Here you also want to identify what problem you’re trying to solve with the project. And what impact these problems have on the organization. Finally, a project readiness assessment reviews requested features specific to the solution in mind. This sets the framework for evaluating available options throughout the market and identifies the risk associated with not moving forward, which is the basis of the cost-benefit analysis. Having your goals well defined is crucial. They should precisely define what improved performance means for your organization. Becoming more specific about your goals, needs, and rank will allow a more effective analysis and market review. Clearly identifying the problem and its impact validates that the problem is real and allows for a solid basis for the cost-benefit analysis.
After performing a project readiness assessment, the next stage is to review possible solutions in the market. This can include a Google search of the known technology required. It can also be going to associations, asking what they use for their clients, or recommending them for their clients. It can involve going to distribution vendors and asking what’s available or reaching out to your network and identifying their use. Finally, there are many government procurement sites that you can find listings of possible vendors to reach out to. When reviewing various options, important things to note are:
- the cost
- the features
- how it’s deployed
- different integrations or APIs available
- customer reviews
- the user interface of the tool
- set up charges or fees associated
When reviewing with potential proponents, you can share your business goals and needs and ask how each technology vendor can either meet, match or exceed them. You can also review the problems identified and have the vendor explained how they solve these problems. An important thing to note is that each supplier will have its own billing method. Be sure that you clearly articulate each billing method and understand how to break down those charges into a cost-benefit ratio.
Finally, there is the cost-benefit analysis. As mentioned, the billing models can complicate matters. So you must understand how the vendor charges and set a time frame for the full total costs associated with implementing the technology product. Obtain clarity on the one-time charges, the recurring charges, the total cost of it, or the course of X years. We typically use a three-to-five-year total. Then you divide that five-year total into the total benefits, which typically is the risk mitigated. Suppose you’ve done an excellent job identifying the problem the tool is trying to solve, the impact it will have, understanding how the impact exists (data), and validating its source. You should have a strong picture of what the risk mitigated would be a dollar value in that case. More often than not, the risk mitigation is time. For example, spending a day a week with CRM issues. In other cases, there’s downtime or hard cost like returns due to a failure in the process. Dividing the benefit into the cost will give you a ratio and whichever solution has the highest ratio is has the better cost-benefit. The cost-benefit ratio is not the only thing you should consider. Billing models, implementation process, customer support, feature set, interface, usability, how long the supplier has been in business, and support team are critical to understand and should influence the ultimate recommendation.
An example of the assessment process at solut.
Here’s an example of that process from start to finish. We had a client interested in an asset management tool. They were currently using an excel spreadsheet to track and record their various technology assets. They understood that there would be benefits towards implementing an asset management tool but could not identify what they needed or the true cost-benefit. Going through the project readiness assessment defined their overall business goals; to record assets into one place, seeing who has what, where, and is it the right thing for them to have. They wanted to see a list of scheduled maintenance for various technologies and manage old products out of their organization. They wanted the tool to help inform their budget. They were a smaller organization and didn’t want anything too complex. We often find it’s helpful to understand the culture of technology and how previous projects were implemented, and how it was received. They did mention some resistance to change, but they could mitigate the lack of adoption of new technology is adequately communicated. In terms of the problems that we’re trying to solve, they couldn’t see everything they have on-site and couldn’t match it to an individual. They had no clue what serial numbers associated with equipment were, which presented a security risk, a lack of cost management, and purchasing control. A lack of asset insight created delays with onboarding staff. They wanted their asset management tool to provide a better needs analysis before buying new assets. It is essential to understand what unique requirements exist; the clear one in this example was that it had to be cloud-based and could purchase it outright. One of the core features required by the asset management tool is to identify the upgrade and maintenance schedule of various technologies. Specifically, end-of-life operating systems that present a significant cybersecurity risk to the organization. The costs associated with ransomware averaged around $80,000. Mitigating this risk became the core of the cost-benefit analysis.
After the project readiness, we went to the market. We identified five different solutions, one of which was a custom build option. Each vendor had its own billing models. One billed per user, one had a flat charge for the year, one billed on the number of assets, and one was completely free to use. Beyond understanding the cost model, we went through a demo exercise to understand the usability of each individual tool. We ask questions about available features, integrations, customer support, and company history. Our ultimate recommendation was a custom-built option because the client wanted to purchase a toll outright and not pay a per-user or asset cost. It may seem like the free-to-use version would have been the most cost-beneficial. Still, there were concerns about customer service and their overall support model in the interview process for that tool, which ruled them out.
Going through this process, the organization had its needs and the problem clearly identified. They could make an informed decision on how to proceed. Without this assessment, they may have been tempted to go for the free version. Still, the free version’s lack of features and the concerns about customer support would have caused significant problems in using the asset management tool day-to-day.
Our vCIO consultants perform these assessments on all sorts of different techniques and applications. From hardware upgrades to CRM’s, asset management tools, ERP’s, accounting software, HR software, and the list goes on. These assessments feed into the overall business strategy for an organization and allow executives, business managers, and other stakeholders to be informed. The result is finding the true great fit of technology to their needs. We are happy to help if you have any questions or would like us to move you through the assessment process.