It happens in the best relationships: One of the two partners simply lose interest. Service providers are actually interested in long-term contracts with their customers, because they only achieve good profit. If this profit but in the distant future, it is critical – for the customer. For large; IT provider; sometimes establish programs in order to separate from the 10 percent of the least profitable customers.
But the separation is often difficult, because the contracts are anagelegt for a long time, therefore, a unilateral withdrawal is expensive. So the provider remains only to bring the customers in a subtle way to terminate or to improve its margins – or both. How do you know now whether one belongs to the problem customers? The author Stephanie Overby of our US sister publication, CIO.com, has identified 10 signs, which indicate an early end to the relationship.
If a customer in the dregs of the least profitable customers, as a provider is rarely so shy, not to let him feel. Rather, the provider will begin to express his concerns and changes over; to envisage, rather than to develop Immediately subtle dismissal plans; standard governance processes. Your counterpart could also try the Treaty to renegotiate or wade in meetings at decision-making level through a lot of critical points.
Be vigilant with a provider who is always on a technical level, extremely it sees what is included in the scope of the contract and discussed about permanently. In the US, the “Death by change order” called. It is a sure sign that your provider is no longer inclined towards them. A listless seller could also refuse to respond to new technological requests or feature requests, to another part of the existing business is newly fixed.
All leading service providers today are focused on a growing business with existing customers. Because from a sales perspective, it is cheaper and more efficient to create a close relationship. Often therefrom give also scope for strategic work. Makes her outsourcers so few attempts; additional services; to sell or to develop a long-term roadmap, the probability is high that he wants to get out.
Even the best business relationship may require one to hire a lawyer for advice. But if they are suddenly ubiquitous with the smallest problems, you know that there is a problem.
If the fluctuation in the account team too strong and pulls the provider especially the more experienced members from, are also bad signs. Especially when he announces changes only briefly.
Allows the contract, a dissatisfied; outsourcers its onshore resources; replaced by cheaper offshore staff. Sometimes it is not even necessary to notify the customer.
Listening to the team members to seek operational solutions to problems and push each other to omissions, this is a sure sign that something is wrong. The problem: Such a behavior can be hard to reverse – even if the management of both companies ultimately decides to continue to cooperate. Can the project on both sides no longer together and sets the provider does not own a new manager, you have probably reached the bottom.
You have the executives of your provider last seen at the signing ceremony? Then the relationship is on the line. Good managers spend a lot of time with the highest priority customers. See long time no leaders, which could be a sign that your company is much less important for the provider.
Repeated delays before all development projects or rollouts of new technologies indicate fundamental difficulties. Long delays are a popular way to “fulfill the contract” – with half of the required resources. The seller can always claim there had been unforeseen technical difficulties. In fact, he desperately tries to keep its return target with strongly crossed resources.
Most vendors have a classification system for its major customers. Where are they standing? In silver, gold or platinum? Some criteria are contract price, brand status or a key figure for future growth and investment. If you are not out in the ranking, which could be a sign of problems or at least for a low perceived value in the relationship.
This article is based on a contribution from the CW-sister publication CIO.de. (Mhr)