Software Evaluation and Software Selection

December 17 from TEC – “It is daunting for corporate IT buyers to discern the true capabilities, strengths, and weaknesses of a given enterprise application suite. Buyers’ project teams are inundated with marketing information from vendors struggling to differentiate themselves. Functional cross-over and software integration have caused product overlap and a lot of confusion in the market. Mergers and acquisitions are also creating problems, as companies cannibalize the competition to gain access to a client base or functionality, which may result in solution overlap or forced migration. As a result, organizations are surrounded by ambiguity when making their implementation decisions.

Evaluating and selecting enterprise software is a complex process characterized by both striking potential and dramatic risks. Executed properly, this process and its outcomes can deliver exceptional benefits. If executed poorly, however, the results can range from disappointing to devastating. Organizations that select the wrong hardware, middleware, or software will learn the hard way that the money they’ve lost is a result of inadequate vendor information and evaluation processes. Such losses are increasingly apparent within price-sensitive, small and medium enterprises, which require accurate IT information to be collected quickly and cost-effectively during the software evaluation process. Vendor’s hype, consultants’ conflicts of interest, user doubt, tediously long selection processes, and unclear decision rationale are some of the unfortunate watchwords for most selection processes.”

180 View – The article is clearly self serving to TEC in that they offer a potential solution to avoid the problems that they describe in the article. “TEC’s evaluation centers (online decision support tool) support the analysis and comparison of thousands of criteria on hundreds of vendor solutions that have been vetted by TEC’s analysts, using industry standards and benchmarks. Because vendors respond to TEC’s RFIs without a project in mind, the responses are more typical of their capabilities.” TEC also lets users “prioritize their needs in a manner that gives greater priority to criteria that are considered more important.”

You should know that TEC is in some ways a competitor of 180 Systems. We have not spoken to any of their customers about the usefulness of their services or used it ourselves. Our first impressions are that we find it hard to believe that they have vetted thousands of criteria on hundreds of vendors. Second we don’t think that the vendor’s responses will be more typical of their capabilities because they are responding to TEC's RFI. Rather, we think the vendor will be more forthright when respondong directly to a customer RFP if the questions are specific. The vendor must be honest or trust will be lost, and the decision in the end is mostly about trust. We also note that their priority system is at a very high level – for example financial systems rather than at a more detailed level, which we believe could lead to misleading results. Nevertheless, we recognize that TEC may have a useful role to play in a selection project even if it means that a potential client would use their services rather than the services of 180 Systems.

Lately we have been thinking that we should also provide a similar service to TEC based on our extensive knowledge base. We would like to hear from our readers about their experience with TEC and whether we should offer something similar.