Should SAP seek out "negative" business cases from knowledgeable SCN'ers

[Former Member]

A few years ago, I had the privilege of contributing a "positive" SAP business case to Mark Yolton's dossier (it had to do with the help that SCN'ers gave me during two real development crises caused by my client's HQ getting nosy in a way that the client didn't expect.)

My question now is the following.

By fortunate or unfortunate coincidence, I currently have a ringside seat to an amazing drama in which an upstart "agile nimble" product is beating the pants off a less-than-agile/less-than-nimble product that SAP recently acquired. This drama is unfolding at a major US organization, and involves the organization site-licensing the "agile nimble" product for units of the organization to develop stuff on their own that they would literally have to wait months or years to get if they asked the organization's IT team to try and create the same stuff with the "dinosaur" product. (Plus, believe it or not, SAP's dinosaur is actually lacking many features that come "standard" with the new upstart product.)

This situation is not pleasant to watch ... I am not only professionally committed to SAP, but think very highly of the company (with some relatively minor differences of opinion), and I hate to see the SAP product trounced at this organization because SAP apparently can't see the writing on the wall (or which way the wind is blowing, if you prefer a '60's metaphor from the last century.)

So - I am sure that I'm not the only SCN'er who's in this situation - i.e. not the only SCN'er who has the opportunity to be a first-hand witness to a business case that isn't working out well for SAP.

And if this is the case, shouldn't SAP be seeking out SCN'ers who can provide first-hand accounts of why and how an SAP product is doing poorly rather than well? (Think here of the model of the Weather Channel, with its network of committed viewers who send in bulletins, photos, etc, in severe weather emergency situations.)

Or should SAP emulate the ostrich (i.e., stick its head in the sand) and choose not to obtain "early warning signals" from SCN "eyewitnesses"?

Is that question "loaded" enough for everyone? I hope so, because SCN'ers could provide a valuable source of free valuable information that SAP would have to pay marketing consulting firms some pretty hefty fees to otherwise obtain.

djh

[Jelena_Perfiljeva]

David,

It's a good question and very interesting post. I wish I had more time for a reply, but we're in "hire freeze", "spending freeze" situation (just like many other businesses in this economy) yet our management has many projects in mind for our SAP system, which our ridiculously small team needs to support. Therefore I'll have to go with random bulletpoints.

- SAP should listen to both negative and positive feedback about their products. But it seems to me that problem is not with lack of tools or communication channels, the problem that "Mordors", just like you describe, do not really want or are not ready to listen. SCN has existed for how many years? Go to any forum and you'll quickly see some questions being repeated over and over and it's not because it's a failed search but because there is no solution in SAP. For example, in SD why does authorization check for pricing conditions need to be a modification with a note? It's many simple things like that in every module.

- To the same point - is anyone at SAP reading the 'positive call closure' surveys that we dutyfully fill in after closing a message with SAP? I'm still not sure why it's called 'positive' since in many cases every problem we encounter seems to be there "by design".

- I'm not sure how Ideas place is doing right now, but at least that was set up a couple of years (?) ago. That's where I send our pesky users when they complaint that something in SAP is not to their liking.

- It's not just with SAP - overall the problem is that when a software choice is being made it is sometimes made by the people who do not understand the business needs well and do not understand what impact it'll have on daily lives of the company's workforce. They're high in their ivory towers and out of touch with reality. Or sometimes I suspect there is certain financial interest involved, if you know what I mean.

[former_member181923]

Hi Jelena -

Thanks for taking the time to compose such a thoughtful reply.

But I think we have to distinguish between two kinds of cases:

a) cases such as those you describe, where the problems that need fixing are not at the level that would drive a customer to use an alternative to SAP - basically, the customer in your case just wants SAP to wake up and fix some stuff that needs fixing.

b) cases such as the one that I brought up, where the pre-eminence of an SAP product is being threatened by the existence of an alternative product which simply does better than SAP's product in certain respects that are critical to certain customers.

In the first kind of case, the problem is "endocentric" and can be solved at a relatively low level in the SAP product management hierarchy.

In the second kind of case, the problem is "exocentric", and needs to be solved at a much higher level in the SAP product management hierarchy.

But I do certainly agree with you that there are probably SAP-internal "Mordor's" to deal with in both kinds of cases - they're just different Mordors.

Best

djh

[Jelena_Perfiljeva]

David, to clarify my point - I think that outlets for gathering business cases (or any other information/feedback either negative or positive) already exist. Since it seems that they're not being utilized to their full extent, one would have to assume that SAP management is not really interested in their utilization. Should they be interested? I think so.

Also having information and chosing to act (or not to act) upon it - is another factor. I was pointing out the examples where information is already available to SAP, but there seems to be no follow-up action.

For example, my husband frequently complains when I try to add more vegetables to our diet. But I believe that they are good for both of us and I want us to live long, healthy lives, so I just continue doing that. Maybe SAP thinks that they're just "good for us" too, I don't know.

[Former Member]

Great idea. I think the only way to get better is to understand where you're going wrong. It's tough to invite negative feedback, but it really does pay off in the long run. And it shows your customers you care about fixing things!

[former_member181923]

Hi ArenaSol -

Although I'm glad you agree with the proposition, at the same time I feel obliged to observe that some here may deem your choice of "nic" to border on impropriety. It's one thing to want to use SCN to better SAP ... it's entirely another to use SCN for what might appear to some as the suggestion of alternatives to SAP ...

Just a thought ...

Best

djh

[marilyn_pratt]

I'll agree with Olivier on this one. Especially as you, David, have the privledge of access to various resources that would listen and take your observations and share them with appropriate resources. If someone's intentions are pure (and not purely mercenary), why wouldn't they attempt to contact the SAP employees or experts they know and share with them. Many of our experts and employees make their personal email addresses transparent here on the business cards. I would go that route first. Public shaming might give some a charge, but using discretion to accomplish the goal of highlighting issues seems more elegant and effective to my way of thinking.

Unless one is all about retribution and revenge. See: [United Breaks Guitars|http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YGc4zOqozo]

[former_member181923]

An odd response, Marilyn, for two reasons.

First, your response entirely begs the question asked in the title of the top-post.

This question had nothing to do with whether I or any other SCN'er should or shouldn't do something.

The question asked was about whether SAP should or shouldn't do something.

In particular, whether SAP should find a way to formally institutionalize the use of SCN as its eyes and ears for the purposes of learning about negative business cases that could help shape SAP strategies and tactics (rather than relying on individual SCN'ers to take the initiative and informally bring such cases to the attention of SAP via "back-channels", in the manner you suggest.)

Second, your response raises questions of discretion and motive which are entirely inappropriate. Nothing in the top-post suggested that SCN'ers should do anything indiscreet, or do anything in the hope of mercenary reward, or do anything out of a desire for "retribution or revenge"..

The proposition to SAP was really quite simple: since SAP has long made public its desire to collect positive business cases through SCN, why not negative business cases as well?

And again, just to make sure the point is crystal-clear, I am of course NOT suggesting that SAP should publicize any such negative cases which it collects from SCN'ers in the same way that it publicizes positive business cases.

Just the opposite. Once such negative information is collected from SCN'ers, it strikes me that SAP could not possibly make effective use of this kind of information except in an entirely "off-line" (i.e. "non-public") manner.

The only thing that should be "public" here is an institutionalized program in which SCN'ers can participate, if they are so inclined.

[jbrotto]

The problem with older software companies is that they can not adopt agile methodoligies and hope it would solve their problem. Legacy will be an issue and since many pieces of software written in languages that were not designed for large projects it becomes hard to manage and solve the negatives of a particular software. It helps that they would seek out negative cases but it will take time to solve the issues.

[former_member181923]

Hi jbrotto - thanks for taking the time to respond.

Yes - you're quite right about large software companies being like large battleships or oil tankers - they can turn around, but only very slowly.

An interesting example of this may be one that you're too young to remember - IBM's introduction of CMS with its VM operating system.

For years, IBM simply denied that any "worthwhile" customer would possibly want the kind of interactivity with the machine that DEC was providing - in IBM's Weltanschauung, JCL should have been more than enough for anyone.

And when IBM finally had to face the music and realize that it had to let customers talk to the machine in a reasonable way, it went out and purchased a third-party solution (CMS - Cambridge Monitoring System) in order to let people do so. It never tried to develop a "CMS" internally.

Actually, come to think of it, I believe that the famous IBM CICS was also purchased from a third-party ... Chicago Electric, if I'm not mistaken ...

Best

djh

[OttoGold]

Things are slowly getting better. Unfortunately one can still recognize the time (delay) when SAP was not listening and acting.

It is not an exceuse or a valid reason for being happy, but too many companies rely on SAP... so it`s like those stupid banks out there: too big to fall and I am glad for that. It gives me a job.

Otto

[former_member181923]

I think the problem may be, Otto, that software companies are like generals, in the sense of the old saying that generals always fight the last war, not the current war ...

[ThomasZloch]

Sounds simple, yes, SAP should be very interested in such feedback about their products and services (even more so if it is free), like any shop that wants to be successful in the long run.

Any chance you could name the products to make this example more transparent?

Thomas

[Former Member]

I think SAP would be interested but not publicly...

Olivier

[former_member181923]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, TZ. Glad you agree on the general principle.

Regarding specific product names ... not really necessary if readers of the post are grasping the situation in general.

Best

djh

[former_member181923]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Oliver.

I will let you know if anyone from SAP calls or emails me. But I'm not holding my breath while waiting for this to happen.

Best

djh

[stephenjohannes]

David,

I thought SAP already pays for this information in terms of "research analysts". I think however having another way to obtain this market day from "friendly/neutral" faces to get this insight would be valuable.

The only problems I can think is how does a company know that the person reporting it, is not a competitor trying to throw you off course or some other person with less than pure intentions than reporting what they have seen.

On the other hand as part of my selling process I would try to ask those customers who don't purchase/replace my product their reasons, so that I can learn from those. That of course implies a willingness to share from the party who didn't purchase, but sometimes it's pretty easy to get response back.

Take care,

Stephen

[former_member181923]

Stephen - you wrote:

The only problems I can think is how does a company know that the person reporting it, is not a competitor trying to throw you off course or some other person with less than pure intentions than reporting what they have seen.

And it's funny that you see the problem in that direction, but not the problem in the other direction, i.e. the problem with relying on info directly from clients.

Here's just one of many reasons why SAP can't really rely on info directly from clients.

Assume some outfit has been using a certain SAP product for many years, and furthermore, that the champions of this SAP product within the outfit are all relatives of Dilbert's famous character Mordor ("Preventor of Information Technology)".

Assume also that one important reason these Mordors like the SAP product is because they know it will help them keep their own locked-down centralized control of IT (relative to both data access and new development).

Finally, assume also that there are champions of some new upstart "nimble/agile" competitor to SAP's product within the same outfit. i.e. a group of folks who have actually used the new upstart product to jumpstart IT development that the Mordors would either never do, or take years to do.

Who do you think SAP is going to be able to talk to if it approaches this outfit for feed-back?

Do you really think the Mordors will ever let SAP near the champions of the new upstart product?

If you do, I've got the proverbial ocean-front property in AZ and the Brooklyn Bridge to sell you.

What SAP should be doing in this case is licensing the nimble upstart as a reseller and figuring out how to feed this upstart from the SAP "centralizing" product, i.e. let each product do what it does best.

But SAP will never ever learn that this is what it should do if it listens to the "client" in this case.

Because all it will hear is the chant of the Mordors.

Best

djh

PS - and remember also the classic Cold War scenario, where the Soviet military had much in common with the US military in the sense that they both wanted to maximize their shares of the overall national budgets. In the same sense, there are probably plenty of Mordors inside SAP who are only too happy that SAP will only hear from the Mordors at the client in the above case. The internal SAP Mordors don't want to have to rethink their Weltanschauung, do they ?