How much is that service bill?If computers are becoming easier to use and more reliable every year, why do support costs per machine keep going up? The standard reply is that computers and networks are becoming more complex, but I think the real reason is the conflict of interest inherent in most support contracts. This conflict was driven home to me a few months ago when I was contracted to evaluate competing bids for installation and support of a new LAN. It was clear that none of the bidders were making much money on the hardware, and one salesman stated outright that his company was willing to take a loss on the initial sale in order to win the support contract. As the soon-to-be IT manager nodded in approval at the bargain he was getting, I blurted out "But that means if your company sets up a reliable network, you'll lose money." I deduced from the awkward silence that followed that I had once again managed to offend everyone in the room. My point, however, remains quite valid. Most network support arrangements are based on rewarding undesirable behavior. The more problems a network has, the more money the support company earns. From a client's point of view, an ideal network is one that is stable. However, from a support company's point of view, an ideal network is one where there are enough problems to generate significant revenue, but not enough for the client to begin to suspect duplicity or incompetence. The following two steps will go a long way towards checking this conflict of interest and will help ensure that you get the support for which you pay. Documentation Thorough documentation is essential in maintaining a stable network. When your system is set up, you should receive system documentation that, at a minimum, describes the hardware purchased, the software installed on each machine, and the significant configuration settings. After installation is complete, the support provider should document every service call in a service log and record any significant changes made to the network. There should be a clear record of what problems were found and what actions were taken to rectify them. The documentation should be kept in electronic form, preferably a database, so that it can be easily maintained and searched. Lord knows documentation can be taken to extremes, and having non-technical managers decide what documentation is required of engineers is a proven recipe for frustration, resentment, and quite a few Dilbert cartoons. Service documentation should be kept brief. Documenting a three-hour service call should not take more than ten minutes. Documentation serves four main purposes. It reduces the time it takes to identify and fix problems, it makes it easier to train new engineers, it helps you evaluate the quality of support you are receiving, and reduces the cost of changing support providers if the need arises. Unless you are a network engineer yourself, however, evaluating quality of support is tricky business. It is not uncommon for problems to take hours to locate and only minutes to fix. Furthermore, even the best engineers agree that networking involves a bit of voodoo. Sometimes a problem really can be solved without identifying the underlying cause simply by rebooting the server or reinstalling a driver. These types of entries in the service documentation don't necessarily mean there is a problem. However, if you notice that the root causes of problems are rarely identified, or the same problem keeps occurring with the same "solution" being applied again and again, you will want to have a talk with your support company. Fixed Prices In my opinion, the way network support is billed needs to be fundamentally changed. Support companies should make their money by keeping networks stable, not by constantly fixing unstable systems. This can be achieved by contracting for support at fixed per-machine, per-month prices. With one simple step, keeping the network as stable as possible works for both the client's and the provider's best interests. Every time your network goes down, your support company will lose money. The more stable your network, the more money your support company makes. And that is how it should be. Since such an arrangement shifts all financial risks to the support provider, I expected strong industry resistance to the idea. Happily, I was wrong. Most companies I spoke to were quite open to the proposal. A few were already experimenting with it, and all but one said that they would be willing to consider providing support at fixed monthly prices. Obviously, there is much to be negotiated in such arrangements. Most support companies will want to limit maintenance that could be done by the client and evaluate all software for stability before it gets installed. The fixed-fee arrangement is clearly in the client's best interest, but it is not for everyone. It requires that both client and provider be accountable for their actions, and that is often politically difficult, particularly when dealing with Japanese client companies. Tim Romero, president of Vanguard Consulting, often writes and lectures on Internet and software development. He can be reached at t3@vanguardjp.com. |
