Compensation Plan Design

Tag Archive for 'SPM Vendor Selection'

SPM Vendor Selection Part 4: Vendor Demos / Interviews

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

In my opinion, this is the most important and valuable part of the sales performance management vendor selection process.  The demos can take different forms; for a small on-demand project, these demos are often performed online.  For a large implementation, the remaining competing vendors will usually send a team on-site to present.  This is the first opportunity to really see the look and feel of the solution. The RFP scores of the invited vendors could be very close, so this is where they get the chance to distinguish themselves.  A job candidate is rarely hired without a face-to-face interview; this is it!

How long should the demo last?
A small SaaS solution such as Xactly or Centive could be presented in a few hours, but it really depends on the complexity of the solution.  The length of the demo also depends on how much time you have and how much time the vendor is willing to invest in trying to win the bid.  My advice is that for a large implementation (Callidus, Varicent, Merced, etc) half a day could be enough for an overview of the application, and a full day is not too much to go a bit more in details.

What questions should be asked?
SPM Vendor should be given specific instructions on what they should be demonstrating, which could vary depending on the audience.  Ask yourself what is of interest to the evaluators; the plan configuration and administration?  Reports?  Analytics?  If the evaluators are managers / directors, showing how the configuration plan elements is done may not be necessary.

Demo Scripts
The best way to find out that an SPM solution can do what you would like it to do, is to ask the vendors to configure a few plans.  Don’t only provide the plan details, also provide some sample data.  The sample data only needs to be a few transactions, there is no point in providing hundreds of them.  When the vendors walk you through their solution and results, it will provide a good overview of how their solution works.  If you choose to ask the vendors to implement a few things for the demo, provide them with at least a week to work on them to ensure they have the time to complete the activity.  It’s fair to ask them to create simple rules “on the spot”, or to modify some of their plans, but if you ask them to implement several plans during the demo, valuable time will be wasted.  Also, keep in mind that the goal is to review the solution, and not the ability of the sales engineer to work under high pressure.

Demo Evaluation
Just like for the RFP, a scoring grid should be created ahead of time and distributed to all the evaluators.  Another tip; leave a lot of space for comments.  If the evaluators have laptops, they could even fill the evaluation in a spreadsheet.  It’s never fun to do manual data entry if it can be avoided.  A question I often get is how much should the demo evaluation be worth compared to the RFP.  This is another “it depends” answer.  Typically, I recommend that the evaluation be worth at least 50% of the total score; if it’s a full day demonstration, probably more…  for a short online demonstration, probably less.

When evaluating the different demos, beware of evaluating the quality of the presentation rather than the quality of the solution.  As we know, some people are very good at presenting, and some are not quite as good.  You would think that sales engineers have all mastered the art of the presentation, but they are not all made equal and some can be better than others.  Try to evaluate the actual solution and not how good the SE is (and that can be hard to do!).

One last note about the demo evaluation:  if the vendor is now showing you what you want to see (even if this should have been made clear before the presentation begins), make sure to let them know, and they can probably adjust the focus of their presentation.

Logistics
If the vendors are coming for an on-site visit, find out of they need an Internet connection.  Also make sure you have a working projector!

A Note for the Vendors Reading This
Don’t rely on the internet connection mentioned above.  Bring your solution installed on a laptop, or even bring a server with you if you need it, but don’t count on this connection to work or to be stable!

Adding the Scores
We now have scores for the RFPs and the demos.  Adding them should reflect who the winner should be.  There are a few more steps before selecting this winner, but once the demos are completed, you should have a good idea of who the preferred vendor is.  Just as with the RFP, I would recommend a debrief following the demos to discuss impressions, strengths, weaknesses, likes, dislikes, etc.  If you had more than 2 vendors presenting, I would recommend selecting the top two vendors for the next steps.

Next Steps
We’re almost there…  we still have to do our due diligence and perform reference checks before we start contract negotiations. I will discuss this in my next post.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Related Posts:
Resource Center
SPM Vendor Selection Part 5: Reference Calls

Come on SPM Vendors… Grow up!

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (22 votes, average: 4.05 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...

Bashing competition is hardly a new “concept”; we see politicians lashing at each other, well known companies such as Google and Apple bashing Microsoft, but even some smaller sales performance management companies feeling compelled to slander their competition.

Two recent press releases illustrate what I mean by the unethical practice of defaming competition and spreading lies in the media:

Press Release 1

Synygy created the TrueReplacement offer in response to feedback provided by current and former customers of Callidus Software, namely that some customers have found:

  • Project implementations can stretch to more than a year and come in significantly over budget.
  • Implementations are typically riddled with custom code, which causes subsequent changes to be expensive and time consuming.
  • Unmet promises have led to undesired outcomes.
  • Ongoing IT and other costs associated are higher than expected.
  • Business users are unable to make changes to data, plans, and reports-exacerbating the problems of inflexibility and excessive costs.

Press Release 2

Synygy has found that not all such companies are as independent and unbiased as they claim. Instead, Synygy has encountered situations where such companies have alliances with the very vendors about whom they are supposedly providing unbiased advice, are providing implementation and other services to the vendor or the vendor’s customers after helping a vendor win business, and are providing inaccurate and misleading information about the vendors with whom they do not have such arrangements.
Companies providing or that have provided SCM vendor evaluation services include:

  • OpenSymmetry (which has performed vendor evaluations and follow-on implementations of Callidus Software, and has alliances with other vendors)
  • Arcadia Solutions (which has done vendor evaluations followed by implementations of Callidus and other systems)
  • Compensation Technologies (which formed alliances with Callidus, Oracle, and others, and is now owned by Callidus, but which still has management in common with The Alexander Group)
  • Business users are unable to make changes to data, plans, and reports-exacerbating the problems of inflexibility and excessive costs
  • Ongoing IT and other costs associated are higher than expected.
  • Iconixx (formerly an alliance partner with Callidus, Oracle, and others, and now is owned by nGenera)

As an example of the questionable practices of these companies, OpenSymmetry repeatedly uses the words “independent” and “unbiased” on its website and yet in a press release yesterday stated: “OpenSymmetry will deploy and implement Callidus On-Demand and on-premise solutions.”

In both examples, the attempt is obviously to capture current or potential clients from the competition, by attempting to make them believe in lies and distorted facts.

I searched the web for material supporting my view that this is not the best strategy, and found a recent article reflecting what I was thinking:

Most companies out there are trying to solve problems for customers.  They may be doing it in a different way from you - but most honestly believe in their method and how it will help those customers.  Recognizing your customer’s strengths is key to making your own pitch something that resonates well with your customer.  You need to recognize that your customer often has a difficult choice about what product to select - perhaps putting their own job on the line for it.  So, if you can help them with a convincing argument why your product serves them better AND build the argument why the other product doesn’t fit - even though it TOO is a great product - then you are more likely to get the sale.

For example, in a simplistic approach if I were selling you apples and someone else were trying to sell you oranges, I could bash my competition and tell you that my apples are sweet and his oranges are citris, and that citris sucks and causes acid in your stomach.  Or the better pitch might be to say, “While oranges are indeed a great fruit and have amazing benefits like Vitamin C, I know that someone who is as on-the-go like you will appreciate the tremendous benefit that a fruit like an apple can bring such as portability (no need to peel it), cleanliness (no juice running down your arm), and the perfect balance of sweet and nutrition.”   Your prospect knows that you have pluses and minuses, and that your competition has pluses and minuses and when you point out the pluses in your competition, it adds significant credibility to your entire pitch.  Your prospect is going to go through this exercise of weighing the pluses and minuses after you leave - so you are helping him/her by going through it with him/her and planting just what you want them to think about you vs them is a perfect tactic to bring your product to the top.

Bad-mouthing competition never works, and if a vendor truly has a superior product, let the product speak for itself and make an argument for the product’s superiority rather than for the inferiority of the competition.  This is a concept I would have at least expected companies focusing on incentives and rewards to understand!

Almost everyone faced a situation where some people try to make others look bad to make themselves look better, or where a bully needs to harass people to feel better.  Fortunately, this behavior rarely pays off.

The question organizations really need to ask themselves is, do you really want to do business with a vendor with a lack of professionalism and business ethics, who will lower themselves by “playing dirty”?  Can you really trust such a vendor, and depend on them to deliver a mission-critical solution?

Come on SPM Vendors…  Grow up!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Related Posts:
It’s my first birthday!
SPM Vendor Selection Part 2: Shortlisting SPM Vendors