I spend most of my workday interacting with IT vendors on behalf of my Not for Profit clients. In a busy month, I could have 1-2 concurrent procurement processes in progress, with others projects being scoped and/or in the design phase.
While most IT vendors are as professional as you would expect, I’m constantly surprised to see some vendors behave badly during a procurement process. And unfortunately, it happens a lot more than people realise.
First, let me define BAD (as opposed to unethical – a different issue that should not be tolerated) from my perspective.
Vendors behave badly when they:
- Take a week+ to respond to emails;
- Refuse to interact during Australian work hours (beware of companies without Aus/NZ local support);
- Make it challenging to schedule client demos;
- Are unprepared for demos even when I provide detailed scenarios;
- Fail to answer clarification questions in a timely manner;
- Fail to use the client questions during the demo as information to scope the requirements for their proposal;
- Leave requirements off their proposal despite them being discussed earlier;
- Fail to mention (or gloss over) requirements for additional 3rd party plug-ins or applications to support the client’s requirements (for an additional fee);
- Have math mistakes in their proposal; or
- Have other mistakes in their proposal, like the client’s name (yes, this happens!)
- Try to work around me and directly with the client when the client has explicitly hired me to manage the procurement process.
I realise that vendors often deal with “kick the tires” inquiries from organisations. However, when I have an already-paying client asking to see a demo, you’d think they take the process more seriously.
So, how do we deal with these vendors behaving badly?
If they make it to the final round of a procurement process (many will be eliminated before we get this far), I usually include these observations and concerns as RISK in the evaluation.
We’ll tackle risk in two ways: through mitigation and by adding a price adjustment.
Here are a few examples of how risk may be applied:
If the vendor can’t provide an accurate proposal, we wonder what other things we missed. In this case, we’ll add a price contingency to their proposal based on our confidence level.
If the vendor is difficult to communicate with, we might consider using an implementation partner instead of going direct to the vendor – which may or may not cost more. We may also decide to add time to the schedule instead.
These additional risk adjustments to their proposals can quickly increase their proposed price and risk rating during the evaluation process.
So, a vendor that may appear to be the cheaper initially can quickly lose that position if they behave badly in the procurement process.
The reality is that you are going to use this software for years. So, if the vendor behaves badly during your “courtship,” beware of what the “marriage” might be like once the contract is signed.
P.S. I realise that sometimes a vendor behaving badly is a result of a bad salesperson rather than a bad company. However, they are a reflection of the company culture, and if the company tolerates such behaviour, beware.
P.S.S. Note to vendors – Depending on the behaviour, I may never short-list a badly behaving vendor again for a client.
I often help Not for Profits with the selection of IT vendors. Let me know if you need some help.
Tammy Ven Dange is a former charity CEO, Association President, Not for Profit Board Member and IT Executive. Today she helps NFPs with strategic IT decisions, especially around investments.
If you found this article helpful, you may want to read this one: 12 CRM vendor risks signs you should know before buying.