When to say NO to a customer/sales person

Marije_Brummel

This discussion is started in this tread.

http://www.mibuso.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... highlight=

I am curious about experiences from others about this.

I know I've made some mistakes in the past about this. I wanted to be the guy who can fix anything; this has gotten me in troubles a couple of times, for example trying to build drag and drop in navision.

The question is; what questions did you get from your customers you had to say no to.

Luc_VanDyck

Mark Brummel wrote:

The question is; what questions did you get from your customers you had to say no to.

"Can I get a refund" ;-)

Marije_Brummel

Luc Van Dyck wrote:

"Can I get a refund" ;-)

=D>

I mean technical issues :!:

kriki

e.g.: I want that Navision does everything for me!

Marije_Brummel

Like fixing diner; washing the dishes; vacuum cleaning; gardening ???

Guys please; :!:
I meant this serous!

kine

"We want it exactly like in our Excel file, to be able to change the functions expressions etc."

"We want it to do it "on push"" - it means, we press this button and it will do it all (posting consumption, output, etc, without entering real quantities etc.)

"Why the system is not able to enter the scrap quantity automatically?" (customer has no counters or readers to automatically collect the data)

"We need to know all that but we do not want to enter the data into the system..." (of course, some automation is not possible...:-))

ara3n

Here is one. Landsteiner has dynamic buttons that are displayed based on menu you setup.

The client wated to dynamically create the Menues based on what was selected.

For example, if a POS user selected an item, the subsequent Menue would show related Items for that Item.

As you might know. Dynamically creating anything visual is a challenge in navision.

kine

(but is not impossible... ;-) only nobody will pay for it...

Shenpen

My favourite one:

"We have a Delphi operations and accounting software. We customized the operations part so much that it is now no more integrated. Therefore we need to switch to an integrated software. Can you rebuild the operations part in Navision so that it looks and works exactly as the old software so we don't need to relearn anything, but keeping it integrated?"

radianis

Hi Mark,

It is common when customer ask you about anything they would like to have. Sometimes it is imposible and going to far with Navision. I myself also a marketing, project manager, functional consultant and a bit of technical consultant.

I really understand what you are saying and again it is normal. Please remind them Navision is only one tool to help them achieve their objective, not 'all you can do' application.

If you are talking to marketing or project manager tell them the truth, You can do someting like this but it will take this, this and this.. Tell them the consequences. Better to emphasize the consequenses than the can do..

There is some trick for you, if you want your client to see you as a good consultant, tell them you can do this but the consequences will be not good for them, like it will cost you this, it will risk your data, it will risk your user, I can not guarantee if shit happens and so on. If they still insist it is your bad day.. O:)

By telling this to your client, you stop your client to have a big expectation or even a imposible expectation to Navision. You make your client to stay on the ground... \:D/

And reduce your headache so you can enjoy your life being "a good consultant" =D> not "all you can do consultant" :twisted: and "all headache is on you"

Cheers,


Radianis

Shenpen

There is some trick for you, if you want your client to see you as a good consultant, tell them you can do this but the consequences will be not good for them, like it will cost you this, it will risk your data, it will risk your user, I can not guarantee if shit happens and so on.

This not gonna work as the customer will simply ask "So you mean you guys cannot do it right? Why shoud I be interested? Just do it right or you will be sued." In that case, of course, "you guys" means everybody from you to MS, as they don't make a difference.

So I'd rather suggest a tactics of tiring out.

1. They demand something you don't want to do.
2. You say no, try to explain, try a new suggestion, to no avail.
3. Customer threatens to pay nothing, keep back the whole project price.
4. Stop support completely.
5. After a few weeks negotiate about the issue again.

After a few cycles, you should win such arm-wrestling if you don't give up, because for you only a $100 000 - $200 000 total project price is at risk while a customer, after going live, has it's complete business at risk.

Actually I am sad that this happens so often, but it seems if people exchange a $5000 accounting/operations software for a $100 000 one then they expect it to do wonders, which is OK, but they also demand and threaten wonders, which is definitely not OK. I think every company in this history must go through one ERP disappointment phase in the process of growing up.

Alex_Chow

Shenpen wrote:

There is some trick for you, if you want your client to see you as a good consultant, tell them you can do this but the consequences will be not good for them, like it will cost you this, it will risk your data, it will risk your user, I can not guarantee if shit happens and so on.

This not gonna work as the customer will simply ask "So you mean you guys cannot do it right? Why shoud I be interested? Just do it right or you will be sued." In that case, of course, "you guys" means everybody from you to MS, as they don't make a difference.
quote]

I find that these type of demands from the customer usually arise from irresponsible salespeople pitching the software to the client. Basically, these salespeople cover up their lack of sales skills by promising the world.

You'd be surprised that these kind of problems is significantly reduced by having salespeople that care about the customer, the programmers, and the company they work for.

Indeed, these salespeople are hard to find.

Shenpen

Yes, I also like to blame the sales, it feels good However, in a country with about 30 partners selling a total of 60 projects each year, so 2/company as the average, they don't have much choice, do they?

Alex_Chow

Shenpen wrote:

Yes, I also like to blame the sales, it feels good However, in a country with about 30 partners selling a total of 60 projects each year, so 2/company as the average, they don't have much choice, do they?

Word my friend... Word.

themave

Shenpen wrote:

Yes, I also like to blame the sales, it feels good However, in a country with about 30 partners selling a total of 60 projects each year, so 2/company as the average, they don't have much choice, do they?

I would think this would be their opportunity to be honest and deliver what is promised, it will create better results which will result in happier customers, which will result in better references, then you will get a higher percentage of the 60 installs a year, because your new customer will know you will do what you say.

As it stands now, it sounds like most new prospects call references and hear, they are all bad, our install was terrible. they said they could do this but couldn't, bla, bla bla. It probably is part of the reason there are only 60 installs a year, because many potential customer never install because of all the bad references there must be.

Shenpen

In that case we would have to work 400 days and get paid 40. Not gonna work.

Today I got an e-mail: a customer is saying they must present a report to tax inspectors whenever they visit them showing the current Inventory tracked back to Purchase Invoice Lines by FIFO method showing original unit costs in original currency (for import goods) so tax inspectors can check whether the current inventory value is calculated correctly from purchases or not, one by one, in a list. It means Navision's "cost forwarding" FIFO-calculation will not be usable for this task, instead I'll need to implement a "backward FIFO calculation" from current Inventory, meanwhile modifing posting logic to store the Line No. of Purch. Inv. -s in Value Entries and figuring out what the hell will I do if an Item Ledger Entry has multiple Value Entries - perhaps calculate average unit costs or hell knows. This is kind of development is about as pleasant as cleaning toilets, meanwhile knowing that it's a complete unnecessary, irrational foolishness. All this thing for free of course, as the customer thinks it's a localization deficiency and in their eyes it's our product, not Microsofts, so it's a "warranty repair". Meanwhile, their auditor jovially warning me that "a sytem should be designed so that it handles all possible requests that might arise", as if it was me who designed the system and not MSFT and as if it would not have been totally bloody impossible, because it would theoretically mean an infinite number of features... Luckily we have "we will repair bugs in the standard system for half the usual rates" in the contract and of course I can always overestimate days So this time I'm dedicated I will not let myself be buggered with a chainsaw and let the message "I am not the damned vendor of this product, I just provide service so if it's deficient then BUY a service from me to repair it!" go REALLY deep but actually... the sad truth is that we still not got a cent paid from this project half year after going live so if they keep on insisting and threatening then we will have to yield again, again, and again... (The only solace being that these things will eventually turn me into a first-class developer.)

So, no, I think it's not solely a sales issue.