Tendering IT Contracts And Tendering Meat

September 2nd, 2010

Just this morning while shaving, I was thinking about the word and the concept of “tendering”.

In the late 80s, when I was laying the foundations of my English vocabulary, I knew one meaning of tendering.

And that was to make something, like meat, tender.

Later I learnt the other meaning that relates to contracts.

My distant ancestors, Attila and his Huns used to tender meat under their saddles. They would salt raw meat to prevent it from spoiling, and then put pieces of meat under their saddles.

Then they would ride on the meat for a few days, and the riding action and the heat from the horse would make the meat tender. Then they would spice the meat and eat it.

And from this method has evolved the Steak Tartar, which is raw beef tenderloin with all sorts of raw ingredients. I usually eat it on toast made of artisan bread.

But there is another meaning of tendering, and that relates to contracts.

The process is basically the same.

Buyers issue their RFPs and unsuspecting sellers respond to them. This is the equivalent of putting the meat under the saddle.

Then buyers sit on the submitted proposals for weeks searching for the lowest bidder. This is the tenderisation process, the equivalent of riding on the meat.

And after a good ride, the Huns would pull out the meat strips, spice them and eat them. In the contract world, after a few weeks, buyers would call the lowest bidder to discuss “some details” before awarding the contract.

Our unsuspecting seller goes to the meeting, and the buyer starts “spicing” him to make sure the contract tastes great for the buyer.

This is where buyers pressurise the lowest bidder to drop his fees and prices by another 10-20% to win the contract. And when the seller drops the price to the desired level and hopes for the signatures, the buyers brings in the next spice: You get paid net 120 days.

And just because this is not enough, the buyer brings in yet another spice: And you do the work as per our instructions.

Now, Steak Tartar is the closest equivalent of under-saddle tendered meat, and when you have good tenderloin (I almost always use organic free-range veal), it tastes amazing.

But unlike tendering for food, which is a good process, tendering for contract is a nasty process, and I believe IT companies should avoid it like the plague.

In my experience, top-notch buyers don’t tender because they are seeking top-notch experts not merely fungible vendors. They also know that only fungible vendors respond to tenders. Respected experts don’t.

The tendering process is in place to replace fair play between buyers and sellers. Buyers try to create an environment where they can pay as little as possible and treat sellers like some kind of servants. It’s a master slaver relationship.

Anyone who’s worked with government bureaucrats knows this.

So, on one side of tendering, go for it and try the Steak Tartar, but do your best to avoid the other kind of tendering. Tender-based contract work.

10 Ways IT Companies Screw Up Their Retainer Contracts

June 30th, 2010

There are not many things in life that are worse than being forced to listen to Rimberger Zuzupimple’s 1st vuvuzela Concerto in B-flat at full 127 decibels without earplugs, but one thing that is definitely worse is when IT companies make a pigs ear of their retainer engagements and turn those great opportunities into temporary manual labour jobs.

Yes, when you listen to vuvuzela music, it sure hurts your ears like hell, and you may even go as deaf as a cannon more quickly than you could say Jemima Puddle Duck, but when your company’s retainer contracts are set up incorrectly, you may equally go deaf by repeatedly yelling at yourself…

“You see, you raving bloody lunatic! What have you done!”

And while I can’t offer any remedy against eardrum-cracking vuvuzela music, in this month’s issue of Tomicide Solutions we discover some profit-leaking mistakes many IT companies make about their retainer services.

Many IT companies set up their retainer contracts incorrectly, often murdering their bottom lines in the process by positioning themselves as temporary day labourers and fungible vendors, as opposed to respected, recognised and in-demand industrial authorities.

There are probably more causes for this error, but over the years I’ve identified the following 10…

The Three Sides Of High Leverage IT Business Development

May 26th, 2010

Greetings on Sally Ride Day (26 May),

Sally Ride Day honours the first American woman in space, Dr. Sally Ride. She pulled this off as a mission specialist aboard STS-7, the second flight of the Space Shuttle Challenger on June 18, 1983.

And now for something completely different…

Do you know that blond people have the most hair? While the average human head has 100,000 hair follicles, blondes average 146,000 follicles. With about 86,000 follicles, nature is the stingiest to readheads, although, based on various psychological research studies, they make up for their follical shortcomings in temper.

While this is a bombastically splendiferous fact, especially considering that I’m a blond. Physically I used to be, in spirit I still am. Does that count? But the comforting part is that when it comes to business development, we have only three major aspects of business development to deal with, not thousands.

Yet, sometimes even these three aspects are too much to work on, and many IT companies choose to simply increase their raw efforts and leave the other factors alone. It’s like the fertility clinic encouraging the eunuch to gobble down more Viagra in order to start a family.

And while the clinic makes good money on the Viagra, the poor bastard’s resilient Viagra-munching keeps producing pretty soft results. And the soft results remain, even if he decides to attend a few personal development seminars with some of the best motivational speakers.

Similarly, when IT companies’ main strategy to beef up their business development is merely doing more of the same in a more resilient fashion, the end result can be pretty nasty.

And this is what we discuss this month’s stupefyingly exhilarating episode of Tomicide Solutions, entitled, The Three Sides Of High Leverage Business Development.

Enjoy the article and then come back here to discuss your thoughts.

14 Ways Information Technology Companies Waste Their Marketing Budgets

April 27th, 2010

Greetings on the National Prime Rib Day, the 27th April.

Just for one day, forget about your diet, cholesterol and mad cow disease, and enjoy a juicy slab of prime rib with some baked potato and some red wine.

But before we eat ourselves to death and get drunk as a skunk, let’s see what we have to discuss today under the aegis of business development.

What happens when many IT companies’ leaders realise that the competition is gaining on them?

In most cases, just to speed up the rate of the existing marketing activities and hope.

In the worst cases they hire more salespeople with atrocious compensation structures, and keep hoping.

What they fail to realise is that in many cases their marketing undermines their salespeople’s success.

It’s like the farmer who buys the best harvesting equipment and the best equipment operators, and send them out to the fields to harvest, although he’s never planted anything.

And when the people return and say there is nothing to harvest, our hero takes his anger out on the operators and fires them.

The dumb bastard doesn’t realise that he caused the problem in the first place by making some serious marketing mistakes.

And this is what we discuss this month’s brain-fryingly exciting episode of Tomicide Solutions, entitled, 14 Ways Information Technology Companies Waste Their Marketing Budgets.

And after reading it or listening to it, feel free to hop back here and discuss it.

Setting Marketing Budget For Optimised Client Acquisition

March 23rd, 2010

Do you know that more people are allergic to cow’s milk than any to other food?

The reason why I mention this hair-raisingly (your hair not mine) interesting fact is that in many small and medium-sized IT companies’ executives seem to be more allergic to setting their marketing budgets than anything else. Actually there is only one topic they are more allergic to: Setting their fees and prices.

Therefore budget-setting becomes guesswork, and very often this guesswork creates pathetically small marketing budgets, which, in turn create pathetic bottom lines in the following year.

Many small and medium-sized IT companies invest only a mere 1-3% of their gross revenues in marketing.

Why so little?

Hell knows?

But they do.

And this is what we discuss this month’s brain-fryingly exciting episode of Tomicide Solutions, entitled, Setting Marketing Budget For Optimised Client Acquisition.

So, go and and read it. You may even learn something new, or at lest have a good laugh.

Some Differences In Recruiting Business Development Folks

March 20th, 2010

The other day, while waiting for the programme I wanted to watch, I was watching a programme about a guy and his restaurant that he was about to open, and he was at the stage of hiring staff.

He had a major argument with his partner about how to hire staff.

She says…

“Let’s see what expertise candidates have and what value they can bring to the table, we adjust the compensation package accordingly.”

He says…

“I don’t care about expertise and this value bullshit. This is what I’m willing to pay. Take it or leave it.”

Many IT companies are paddling in the same boat.

In their career ads they call themselves industry leaders and are looking for high-calibre professionals with significant expertise and experience, but when it comes to compensation, they can’t even pay industrial averages.

The typical example of Dom Perignon taste and cheap warm beer budget.

And at this point recruiters fall into two categories:

One group are the forward thinkers. They plan for unknown outcomes with rigidly defined resources. Hence, it doesn’t matter what the person can help the company to achieve, the person’s compensation is carved in stone. They shrink their dreams according to their budget.

The other group is the backwards thinkers. They plan for specific outcomes and adjust their resources and tactics as necessary. They expand their budgets to accommodate their their dreams.

The forward thinkers hire competitive(ly cheap) marketing people for $15 per hour, and tell them that their job is to take the company from $20 million annual revenue to $40 million within one year. Of course, at the end of the year, the business owner gets rather disappointed.

The backwards thinkers hire real marketing professionals for real professional compensation and tell them about the company’s the company wants to achieve with the help and support of this person.

No, nothing is guaranteed in this world except death and taxes, but in my experience the backwards thinkers have a better chance to build high-performance organisations than forward thinkers. They simply have higher calibre people to do the work.

In his book, The Politically Incorrect Guide To Capitalism, Dr. Robert P. Murphy uses the example of slavery about compensation…

“According to liberal economist, Ludwig Von Miesses, the price paid for the purchase of a slave is determined by the net yield expected from his employment. Just like the price of a cow is determined by the net yield expected from her utilisation.

If you treat your people like cattle, you can’t expect anything but cattle-like performance. But guarding and feeding a slave is more expensive than guarding and feeding cattle. If you expect human performance, you have to provide human inducements.”

In the case of a business, the upfront investment in the person gives the business owner the right to expect anything of that person at all. Without upfront investment, the owner has the right only to hope but not to expect.

So, what sort of thinker are you?

A forward thinker shrinking your vision and objectives to your current budget?

Or a backward thinker expanding your budget according to your vision and objectives?

Quantifying IT Solutions For Optimum Value Pricing Strategy

February 25th, 2010

Many years ago Henry David Thoreau said…

“For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, there is only one hacking the roots.”

In terms of leaves and roots, this month I’d like to discuss with you how IT companies diagnose their clients’ problems, and how they those present solutions to those problems.

And now we’re back to Thoreau. Using his words, most IT companies are hacking at the leaves, that is, hammering their buyers mainly with technical features and sometimes with technical benefits.

They totally forget about hacking at the roots, that is, diagnosing the business problems caused by technology, and end up hacking at the leaves, that is, presenting technical solutions.

So, this month’s issue of Tomicide Solutions we discuss a process you can use to facilitate a value quantification process for qualified buyers.

Eight Ways Lowest Bidders Can Wreak Havoc In IT Companies

January 26th, 2010

We all know we should avoid lowest bidders like the plague, but when it comes to selecting external professionals, many IT companies still for the temptation of the low price, and end up hiring lowest bidders.

It seems the saying is correct…

There is no time and money to do it right but there is always time and money to do it again and again and again.

So many buyers select service companies based on price. They are seeking lowest bidders, and try to achieve breakthrough results using the cheapest help.

So, this month’s issue of Tomicide Solutions we discuss 9 ways (The title has gone through inflation)  IT companies can harm themselves by working with lowest bidders.

So, go and read or listen to the Eight Ways Lowest Bidders Can Wreak Havoc In IT Companies, and then come  back, and let’s discuss what you think about this issue.

Project Management And Long-Term Success

January 9th, 2010

It’s a pretty known fact that some 50% of projects come in over time and over budget.  And lots of them get stranded out there and don’t come in at all. In the IT industry this is around 73%.

Yet, somehow project management fails to receive due attention from executives as a key competence to achieve and sustain long-term organisational success.

In September 2009, The Economist Intelligence Unit, sponsored by Oracle, surveyed 213 senior managers and executives on project management.

Most respondent recognise the importance of project management, but for some reason, only some 33% believe they are good at it.

While companies know they have a problem, they don’;t know how to address it.

You can download the full report, entitled Closing The Gap: The Link Between Project Management Excellence And Long-Term Success.

Enjoy!

Marketing Guru Wanted

January 7th, 2010

The other day I read an interesting entry on Hungarian HR expert, Tamas Kelko’s blog.

He outlines a chronic illness that has penetrated small and medium sized organisations over the years. He refer to the situation in Hungary but the problem is more global.

He points out that in order to increase revenue, business owners must focus on marketing. Many years ago, Peter Drucker outlined the importance of marketing when he said…

“Because its purpose is to create a client, the business has two – and only two – functions… Marketing (you get paid for creating a customer) and innovation (you get paid for creating a new dimension of performance). Marketing and innovation produce results, all the rest are costs.”

So, our business owner hero knows he has to focus on marketing, but he doesn’t really know marketing. After all, he’s a subject matter expert, an IT guru.

So, he runs an ad in the local paper or even Craigslist, in which he’s looking for a marketing guru with a university degree in marketing (possibly MBA) and many years of experience.

No he doesn’t hire a copywriter to write the ad because he thinks any idiot can write a job advertisement. No big deal.

And the applications are flying in…

And since the ad is so vague, by the afternoon, he is knee-deep in applications.

By next morning he’s up to his balls with application printouts.

The applications were piling up so fast that he needs wings not to drown in them.

Then, based on whatever random criteria, he selects a guy with an MBA and four years of experience at an advertising agency and a couple of awards to his name.

“This is what I need.” – Our hero thinks.

He checks the guy’s references. The marketing guy checks out as a good guy.

What our hero neglects to ask is that if this guy has ever produced any revenue. He gets bamboozled by the guy’s awards and smooth and slick agency talk.

So, he offers him good salary, benefits, bonuses, amazing working conditions and even a company car.

Time is ticking by but by the end of the new marketing guy’s first year in the position, still nothing has happened.

What the hell is going on?

Our hero business owner thinks back to the interview process…

He remembers that the candidate was very quick to ask about the budget, but when he asked the candidate about how he had improved the bottom line at his previous employers, the candidate got rather confused…

  • I’m not sure what you mean
  • Well, I was in marketing not in sales, generating revenue wasn’t my job
  • Marketing cannot be measured with money
  • Why, was I supposed to generate revenue?

But our hero marketer used to work in an ad agency and his job was to spend the agency’s clients’ budgets to the last penny and win advertising awards.

Creativity and wards meant promotion. It wasn’t about helping clients to generate revenue.

The reality is that out of many applicants, only a few can make positive differences to their employers’ bottom lines. Most of them are lots of smoke and no fire. Big hat and no cattle.

Also, in most universities what they teach is business-to-consumer (B2C) marketing. That is, marketing commodities to the masses. There are only a very few (I know only three) universities in North America that teach business-to-business (B2B) marketing.

So, when most people with marketing MBAs (2 years of B2C Kottler therapy) land in the B2B world, they just stand there like a deer being caught in the headlights.

Here is the other problem.

Marketing, especially with the proliferation of the Internet, is changing very quickly.

But in academia, it can take years to get a new curriculum accepted for teaching. So, if you write a curriculum on Social media in 2009, it won’t be considered and accepted at least before 2012. So, in 2012 you start teaching something that is already obsolete because by 2012 social media won’t be the same as it is today (January 2010).

A few years ago Jeff Walker released his Product Launch Formula, but in academia it’s still not taught.

Social media has been around for a while but academia is still hesitating as to whether or not to recognise it at all.

A few weeks ago I was listening Jeffrey Krames’s audio book, Inside Drucker’s Brain. While Drucker was a guru and a guiding light to the entrepreneurial world (that produces the majority of GDP for most countries), he was a black sheep to academia. Only a very few textbooks refer to his name in the form of very short footnotes. But none of his 39 books is recommended reading at universities, accept at Claremont Graduate University (then known as Claremont Graduate School), where he developed the country’s first executive MBA programs for working professionals.

So What Can Business Owners Do

I suggest two actions.

1. Business owners must understand marketing pretty well. They don’t have to become marketing masters themselves, but must understand the principles, so when they hire marketing consultants for help, they can have intelligent conversations and the owner understands what the marketing consultants is talking about.

It’s hard to hire a competent marketer if you don’t speak marketing English. And this applies to any profession. How can a business owner hire an accountant if he doesn’t know what EBIDTA is?

Yes, the business owner must be a bit of everything. He has to have an oversight on everything, otherwise he gets screwed by unscrupulous “experts” and “gurus” whose number is growing rather fast.

2. Business owners must grow great marketers in-house. This is important because this way the marketer is developed in the company’s specific culture. Marketing knowledge is one thing but the company’s culture and values create the infrastructure within which marketing operates.

For instance, the car industry is famous for its bait and switch marketing methods and dirty, unethical sales practices. It’s not surprising if you consider that the car industry is a typical “cheat, lie, deceive and cover your arse” environment. The motto is to make money whatever (maybe short of murder) it takes.

The overall organisational strategy must be in alignment with marketing strategy. That’s why the business owner must be in charge.

Yes, it’s a good idea to discuss things with a marketing consultant to make the most of your marketing strategy, but the business owner must be in charge.

And once you and your consultant have developed a marketing strategy that is in alignment with your organisational strategy, then you can hire some implementers. Yes, it’s a good idea to keep your consultant on a retainer in case some questions come up around implementation, but you don’t need the consultant permanently on the project.

And for implementers hire good people with drive, energy, enthusiasm and passion for marketing.

Then you can organise an in-house marketing academy for your people.

Give them resources and put each of them on the path of individual professional development.

For instance…

  • Joe, by the end of 2010 you go through these materials and become a kick-arse copywriter.
  • Jen, by the end of 2010 you go through these materials and become a kick-arse SEO expert.
  • Jim, by the end of 2010 you go through these materials and become a kick-arse WordPress expert.

Remember, these people already have an innate talent and affinity to these topics, but you empower and enable them to become masters of their crafts WITHIN your company’s culture.

As they learn their crafts, they also absorb and experience the culture of your company. They become one with your vision and mission.

And these are the people who stay with you through thick and thin.