Networks·41,424 discussions

Who pays?

Locked

I certainly would appreciate some sage advice on a burning issue currently affecting my company.

I am a partner in a small IT firm that offers maintenance services to small- & mid-sized companies. In essence, if they don’t have an internal IT dept, they can outsource to us and we take care of their needs in terms of hardware and software maintenance and supply.

In the case of one particular company with which we have a contractual arrangement, we had – at the initial interview – been asked if we could support hardware, and basic sofware, in addition to a specialised accounting package they utilise. Eventually, they decided that they would retain the services of a previous company for that specialised software and only have us support hardware and regular software packages (office, anti-virus installations et al).

Upon audit assessment of their systems and infrastrucure, we made recommendations for changes and upgrades, to, of course, improve efficiency and performance.

In the case of the server in particular, we recommended an upgrade from NT4 server to 2k3server. As many of you will know, this would not only require hardware changes, but upgrades (or reconfiguration) also in software titles currently run on NT which may not work with the new generation OS. The database for the Accounting pkg previously mentioned is run on the server.

We, therefore, made it abundantly clear that if we upgraded the OS, the accounting pkg could/would be affected and at best would require reconfig. at worst – a totally new installation. We consulted with the support individual for the Accounting pkg and asked if the current version would work on win2k3 server, he said “yes” (maybe in hindsight we should have asked if it would work if we did an upgrade in place, as was the case)

I must note that in consideration of the client’s position, and in an effort to be helpful, we assured them that we would make every effort to have the accounting pkg working properly after we carried out the upgrade. We did the upgrade, and the software did not work (since we had been informed that it does work on 2k3 server, we opined that it would only need a reinstallation and reconfig.) Alas! we couldn’t get it to work, after about 12 hours of attempting to do so.

The company then called in a support person for the accounting package, he rectified the situation, and sent them a bill. A bill which they expect us to pay!!!

Their case: the software changes (and thus the bill) was as a result of the changes we had made (which is true) so we should pay for the support services.

Our case: We made recommendations with a caveat that there may be problems with a particular s/ware, s/ware we were told (in writing) that we would not have to support. You accepted these recommendations, and by doing so accept the fact that you may have to pay extra to have sofware support for your specialised accounting pkg.

Who should pay?

Topic

PAY THE BILL – keep the customer – Face it your outfit failed!

In reply to Who pays?

To keep the customer happy and future customers – Eat the Bill – it can’t be that much.

First: Your recommendation stated that accounting package would have to be A or B, and your company would do that! – Well after 12 hours your company failed to perform within the contract. So they went and got someone that could do it..

PAY THE BILL – Your company didn’t asked the correct questions – fail to perform to expected levels – you will lose big time in court – you will lose this customer at renewal time – you will lose future companies from word of mouth about this problem.. Cut your lose and PAY THE BILL…

You’re right, but…

In reply to PAY THE BILL – keep the customer – Face it your outfit failed!

You are right skip! We failed – it’s a bitter pill to swallow but we did. Tanks for your words.

I have long concluded, however, that online forums are the last (or only) bastion of power and authoritative voice for some, and you strike me as exactly one of those. I’m a big boy – I can admit when I’m wrong and it doesn’t need to be sugar coated, but get off your ego trip!!!!

We are here to help each other, and it doesn’t have to be presented in an “I am right, you’re wrong manner” Just present the facts and keep the attitude to yourself! You might learn a thing or two from Stress Junkie…

But at the end of the day you were right, and I intend on doing as you advised.

Thanks for the time you took to share your views

Can’t say I agree …..

In reply to You’re right, but…

First, recognize that this is a two part issue.
1. Customer retention
2. Who’s right

Part 1 … if the amount from the other guy is small and you’ll save a client from it … okay, make a marketing decision and eat it. BUT, be aware that that may colour your future dealings with that client … and the 200 people he knows.

Part 2 … and this is the part that I disagree with …. you told the client that the accounting software was out of scope, but that you would try to get it working. Now personally, that was a mistake. If it’s out of scope, it’s out of scope. You did not make a mistake by turning it over to the other guy … you had said that that would happen. 12 hours qualifies as a more than acceptable attempt on your part. The mistake you made was in not just cutting it out. Out of scope is out of scope. That way the client has no question that they are going to pay extra.

Glen Ford, PMP
Can Da Software
IS Project Management
Business Process Improvement

Why small companies are small …….

In reply to PAY THE BILL – keep the customer – Face it your outfit failed!

I agree, pay the bill! This small business is already paying the bill in lost customer confidence. The work thye provided failed. They had apparently no back up plan, and have caused the client loss. Now they are whining over being responsible. That is sad…..and the reason they can anticipate less business as time goes on.

BE:)

You Made a Bad Call

In reply to Why small companies are small …….

Your company made a bad call when choosing to upgrade the operating system on a server running an application you knew very little about. At the very least you should have checked with the application vendor to ensure Win2K3 compatibility. You let your client down by just focusing on one component of a business critical application. Your company is responsible and should pay the bill.

Ditto

In reply to You Made a Bad Call

As a systems/network consultant we MUST act as the coordinator to ensure the applications side is covered (at least pre-notification). It’s the essence of what we do. Pay the bill, learn a lesson, and keep the client.

Two issues: legal and customer relations

In reply to Who pays?

It seems to me that your situation has two sides: legal and CRM. On the legal side CONSULT AN ATTORNEY. Initial consultation is ( usually ) free.

The customer relations side is tied to the legal but, in order to have any room for discussion, let’s say that the attorney says that you may not be legally liable for the accounting package fix. In this case the post from SkipperUSN is correct. You messed up. You created expectations of service performance that you couldn’t produce. Also, even if the attorney says that you may not be liable for the accounting package bill your customer may still sue you. That will cost you money and your customer. Even if you prevail in court you will have out of pocket legal expenses, time spent in court, the case could drag out over years. Do you want the trouble that resisting payment could cost you?

This is one of the reasons that, when I’m working as a temp, I always use contract employment agencies. I don’t want to be faced with contractual problems because I didn’t think of this or that. Nor do I want to face dealing with a customer that doesn’t pay his bills. True self employment or running a service business has its pitfalls. You are responsible for everything, even if you misspoke or just didn’t think of some given issue.

In the end my advice is the same as provided by SkipperUSN. Pay the bill and try to recover your customer’s good will. And learn a lesson.

I think if I were in the same starting situation that you describe, before any work had been done I would have done this.

I would note that performance increases may be achieved by doing some work. I would mention that to the customer, and then drop it. If the customer is satisfied with their current systems then, as they say, if it works don’t fix it.

If the customer showed any interest I would put together a formal proposal. This would include the fact that the people supporting the accounting system may be required to perform some work and that I could not make that determination. This would be listed as a project ‘issue’.

If the customer wanted to proceed I would ask the customer to set up some sort of communication between myself and the accounting application support people. Their involvement would be required and they would assume responsibility for making the accounting package work.

A backout plan would be formalised so that if the accounting package, or any other software, did not work in the new environment, then the entire project would be rolled back to establish the original system environment. The customer would still have to pay for any purchases and for time spent my me on the project.

The customer would have to agree to take final responsibility for whatever happened during the course of this project. An attorney would say that your customer would indemnify you of liability.

As I mentioned before, when I’m working as a temp then all of this stuff can be done verbally because my employer, the contract agency, assumes liability for my work. This is in my contracts. But since you are working for a service business that actually does the work then this business is liable.

Thank you

In reply to Two issues: legal and customer relations

You’re time and effort were much appreciated (as was that of SkipperUSN).

We live, we learn and we cut our losses.

I truly also appreciate your thoughts on what may have been a more correct procedure.

Keep on helping…

Contract Terms – Relationship ?

In reply to Two issues: legal and customer relations

My first reaction was : “Pay it and raise your rates to cover this BS and anything like it in the future.”, or just state that you can’t be liable for ‘unsupported (by you) Third Party Software’, perhaps paying that bill (once) while making it clear that this is outside of the scope of your services.

If this is a key customer, you are going to need to be a lot more formal in terms of specifying service provided and associated liability (going forward).

What my gut says (and I trust my gut more than I trust Lawyers anyway, although it might initially seem more expensive to do so, in a longer analysis it might be cheapest) is to eat the bill and either carefully, explicitly define your responsibilities and liabilities (disclaim liability for anything that you are not explicitly stating that you support – to make it very, very clear that future issues are not going to be billed to you – and that if your work has some demonstrated defect, that YOU would be given the opportunity to either fix it yourself – or engage any needed other services yourself) or raise support charges to cover this kind of ‘Third Party Billing’ even if it means that you service becomes substantially more expensive for this client. Anyone else they expect to be able to deal with as they are treating you will also need to cover those liabilities – the non-confrontational way to deal with it is to raise rates accordingly (so as to make the client pay the bill ‘less directly’, avoiding confrontation about the specific bill, but escalating the issue of liability (I assume that what you did was done properly, sounds like Microsoft may have caused the problem with the Third Party Software – perhaps the client should have billed them [but wouldn’t even try it because Microsoft does have a substantial legal department, and also would consider this client to be a lot less significant than you might].

Longer term, it appears that this client is being unfair and somewhat nasty. I personally would look to whatever the end to your contract is currently, and be ‘unable to support that specific client’ in the future (stated clearly: “Dump them, they don’t seem worth it.”). Naturally, a lot depends on how significant this client is to your businesss – if they are a major client, a great deal of added formality may be needed to include having Lawyers prepare appropiate disclaimers to assure that you will not assume such liability in the future.

The client seems to be somewhat abusive and heavy-handed… the kind of client I’d love to refer to my competition (to let them deal with the BS). Any client with an attitude like that is unlikely to be treating THEIR customers well enough to prosper – in any case I’d seriously consider pursuing other, more reasonable, clients rather than invest a lot of energy in an adversarial client.

due diligence

In reply to Two issues: legal and customer relations

I agree with most of hstress junkie’s position. Where I differ the project plan should have included a “dependence” calling for the installation of an eval platform running a copy of the clients accounting package.

In any case, all third party software must be validated as compatible by the vendor or by lab testing prior to proceeding with an upgrade.

The concept that IT Service providers should keep in mind is “Due Diligence. Simply relying upon a contractual “disclaimer” fails to meet the reasonable expectation of due diligence.

In business, the unexpected disappointments are less important than how they are responded to. Here, your company has an opportunity to take leadership and proactive resolve this situation on your client’s behalf.

Yes, test systems are best

In reply to due diligence

I gave exactly that advice on another post; use a test system. I didn’t think of everything while I was writing my post for this subject. Also I’m used to working on computer systems that are too expensive to have a spare available. Projects on mission critical systems absolutely should be done on a test environment somehow. The next best thing is to be able to roll back to the original environment by means of full backups.

I also realized that I may have given the impression that I don’t make formal written project plans when I said that I often handle details verbally. Actually I always write everything down as far as risks, other issues, roll back plan, testing the new system, … etc.

Test systems are a Requirement.

In reply to Yes, test systems are best

The only time a Test system is not a deal breaker is when the cost of performing the work on a test system is more than the cost of loosing(completly) the production environment.

This is also where having a relationship with the hardware vendor comes into play. Very often you can negotiate a short term “at cost” lease to use their hardware for the upgrade.

Similar problem

In reply to Who pays?

I had a very similar situation. Customer needed new computers. I consulted with software vendors to verify applications would work. After deploying new computers, we found out that Windows XP continually corrupted a database that 10 users used. The software vendor for this product had told me “it should work with XP” but I did not ask the manufacturer of software.

I worked with the software vendor and we split the costs of purchasing Windows 98 for the new computers and I ate the time to install it.

All in all, it cost me dearly but I kept the customer.

Cut the cost in half

In reply to Who pays?

We all have had a problem similar before. I would cut the 12 hours I worked on the software issue in half or pay half of the software support bill. Why assume responsiblity for the entire bill when the software support company claimed it would work on 2003. Sharing the cost shows the client you are trying to compensate a bad situation with them.

Your not in business to pay everyone’s bill, and if you do you will not be in business long!

The other gender’s perspective

In reply to Cut the cost in half

CMR functions are key to your Business success.
Are you trying to secure the client (long term)? or
Are you just delivering “the service”?

Yes, call a lawyer

In reply to Who pays?

I’ll never understand why people with problems like this come to US for help! None of us (as far as I know) is qualified to give legal advice.

If you are really desperate to hang onto this customer (I can’t imagine why, they sound like knuckleheads who will continue to pull any stunt they can get away with and cause you nothing but grief), then be sure and tell the lawyer that. They charge by the hour whether you take their advice or not, and a good one will be happy to tell you all of your options, including the problems inherent in setting a bad precedent.

It sounds like where you really needed a lawyer was when you were drafting the contract in the first place. Remember that next time.

Anyone who is self employed MUST have an attorney on retainer, and should never sign ANYTHING without the attorney’s review.

The customer is ALWAYS right, . . . BUT …

In reply to Yes, call a lawyer

. . . the customer does NOT run or manage your business.

Add to that, lawyers do NOT manage anyone’s business. They are in business to move money from your pocket to theirs.

Review the central core of the problem: LACK OF COMMUNICATION. Stated another way, set expectations EARLY and be as clear and precise as possible.

Up front, preferrably in writing, formal or otherwise, state the boundaries of your responsibility and service.

For example …”I’ll install the OS and hardware. I am told the XYZ app will work by the app people, but I have concerns. If any application requires more than a simple reinstall, then you (the customer) will need to have your app software people make it work.”

Ok – so you didn’t do that. Now what??

Always good advice: Give the customer a choice.

Confess the communication oversight. Explain your position WITHOUT angst, confrontation, or ulterior intent. Let THEM choose what is fair. You are willing to pay anywhere from zero to 100% of the bill.

They will have a hard time refusing to take the offer of letting them choose. Their decision and how they respond to your offer of that choice will tell you if that customer is one that you really want to keep.

Either way, everyone wins.

So, this costs you a few $$$. Big deal. Consider it a cheap lesson – just don’t let it get you sidetracked and do NOT do it again. Main point: take a line of action that let’s everyone keep their head on straight.

Contacting a lawyer, being confrontational, NOT dealing with yourself, … all those will get you the booby prize.

Reread line one.

The customer is NOT always right ….

In reply to The customer is ALWAYS right, . . . BUT …

But they are the customer.

Actually you need to read again… the client was told that the third party software was out of scope. The problem comes in when the company turned around and tried to soften the blow by offering to try to get it running.

So it wasn’t a communications problem at all.

You are right, however, in that the company needs to decide if they want to retain the client. And your method gives them the best chance to make sure the client is aware of the reason they are getting the discount.

Glen Ford, PMP
Can Da Software
IS Project Management

Who Pays?

In reply to Who pays?

It is crystal clear. You made the changes to the server and even though the package firm informed you that it should not be a problem, it is (and was) YOUR responsibility to make everything work when you make a change. Your ‘not my problem’ attitude is part of what gives the industry you are in a bad name. It is ALWAYS your problem. You made the recommendation – you cannot walk away from it without making certain that everything that was working still works even if you have to contract with the other vendor (and pay for it) yourself.

questions… questions

In reply to Who Pays?

lot’s of interesting perspectives… but an important question was not asked: did you offer a flat rate for the project?

Reply To: Who pays?

In reply to Who pays?

You want to keep the client, pay the support bill and give them something for their down time. If it’s not a big deal “financially” if they leave you, don’t pay and highlight the items mentioned in your post.

I don’t think you should have touched the server that is running software you don’t support with out first discussing it with the software vendor. This is where consultants go wrong. DO YOUR HOMEWORK before suggesting upgrades. If you were an employee of the company, you would not have made that mistake. Something to remember for the future.

Get it in writing

In reply to Reply To: Who pays?

Just thought of something else. If the software company told you it would work on the OS in writing, then they would be responsible for the bill. This is not a excuse. You still should have tested the software on a pre-production server to protect your client.

Systems should pay

In reply to Who pays?

Just because a contract was signed basically stating that someone is going to “upgrade the system, but we can’t guarantee the software will work afterwards, and if it doesn’t, you’ll have to pay more money to fix it”, doesn’t get you out of the mess. You have some responsibility towards this damage, and the client CAN take you to court for damages, and possibly win. Regardless of what was signed, you caused the problem, so you need to pay to fix it. You incur some responsibility when you tamper with someone else’s system – it’s called “inherited risk”. Just from a client’s standpoint, if you pay this bill, you’ll be redeemed…if you don’t, you can kiss that client goodbye. Hmmm. I’m not casting stones, just offering my professional opinion. I’ve been there before.

Thanks

You Pay!

In reply to Who pays?

I have a situation where I support small networks with a variety of specialized software. It is not in my or my clients best interest to have multiple support people poking around and making god no’s what changes, so I field all support calls and either deal with them myself or redirect to the appropriate support group all billing is done through me this way I know what is happening at all times and the clients aren’t trying to decide if what the support group is recommending is correct for the situation

What do you expect to get from this question?

In reply to Who pays?

I am unsure in this situation that any one except yourself and your customer determine the cause and effect of the situation. I think if I was to give a positive point to this I would say that you need to brush up on your communication and negoation skills. “Who pays?” is a question that should never be asked it should be determined up front before any work/service is performed. If this situation does occur then you should have built it into the basic contract, you smile and tell the customer that the issue is resolved.

If this has occurred more than once then you need to get under the umbrella of another company that makes sure these things do not happen, as mentioned in another reply.

I tend to agree with Skipper on this, if this question ever gets asked it indicates more problems below the surface that is talked about in your message.

Kevin

The oldest problem in the world

In reply to Who pays?

“So tell me, Eve, just why did you eat the apple?”
“The snake said it would be okay.”

Much as I sympathise, this is a failure in the initial negotiation. I
can tell you that in 25 years I have never carried out or received
an upgrade of anything from mainframes to hand-helds that
didn’t have some knock-on effect on current applications. Even
“second decimal” upgrades (from 1.0.3 to 1.0.4 as example) will
screw up something. My personal view is that you should never
recommend an upgrade. By this I mean that you put the pros
and cons neutrally in front of the client and get them to make
the decision.
Your pros are:1. You are going to have to do it eventually. 2. The
longer you leave it the more disruption and cost it will cause
The cons is: 1. It will cost you to get all other applications back
on line
The client therefore has a simple choice between the opportunity
cost of foregone functionality by staying where they are versus
the cost of getting everything (not just the upgrade) back and
stable.
But this way it is the client’s decision and responsibility – which
is quite different from them “acting on your recommendation”.

What is the job of the consultant

In reply to The oldest problem in the world

What is a consultant’s job?

Their job is to analyse business situations, research solutions and recommend actions, and perhaps implement them – is it not?

Clients don’t have the skills to make these ‘technical’ decisions – that’s why consultants are hired!

Nothing would ever get done if everyone said here are the pros and cons of this decision, now you, as the client, make a decision – the consultant is off the hook.

Certainly, no medical operations would be done ( that’s why there is medical insurance – to protect individuals from human errors or ommisions).

Sometimes lessons may cost money.

Regards

I love a fight!

In reply to What is the job of the consultant

Fairly clear battlelines these!

A business must take its own decisions. If a consultant cannot
describe the pros and cons to the client then the consultant
does not understand the problem.

“Why did you drive at 80 mph across this busy intersection
against the red lights causing the death of 15 children?”
“Because the consultant recommended it.”

Bill the Accounting Firm!

In reply to The oldest problem in the world

I would pay the bill to the accounting firm. And then turn around and send a bill to the accounting firm for your time and services.

Simply put, according to your description you consulted with the accounting firm as to the platforms supported by their package. Their recommendation was given that it would work on the platform suggested without their involvement.

As a consultant I work with industry specific 3rd party applications and I always get them involved during the upgrade at zero cost to the client because I can usually work with their techs over the phone.

I’ve actually had to kick a couple of accounting firms out of my accounts because they were typically clueless.

good luck on that one…

In reply to Bill the Accounting Firm!

Bill the accounting firm? It may work, but I can tell you from experience, that bill will sit on someone’s desk for months until legal action is taken…then, and only then will you get a response, but I doubt you’ll get reimbursed financially…this is a finger-pointing problem, and if there are legal fees involved, I’m sure it will outweigh the cost of this job…It’s a no-win situation…pay the bill, lose the client, and move onto bigger and better things, learning from this experience.

Due dilligence seems complete!

In reply to Who pays?

In your explaination, you did your due dilligence and stated that you explained to the client the potential for problems due to their proprietary software and the OS upgrade. The client cannot be ignorant of this situation, and calling in an expert for the client’s proprietary app should not have been a surprise.

The information missing in your letter is have you spoken with the client about the bill, and what was their response? You seem to have good ground if you informed them about the possibility of needing outside assistance for their app. You promise to do everything you can is what you are supposed to do, and the only problem with calling in the app specialist is that you spent 12 hours trying to resolve the problem on your own.
In any event, the bill should go to the client. If the client has an issue, offer to split and learn from the mistake.

Re; Who pays?

In reply to Who pays?

I am a software consultant for the last 20 years.
In my opinion, the customer has to pay this bill, atleast partially, because, among other things, I notice that it was the customer who initiated the call to call a third party to fix the problem. So you never got a chance to shop or even negotiate the price of the service. Basically that was outside your control.

Of course, when customer satisfaction is in line, you may want to consider this as a bad experience and pay the bill, atleast if the amount is not too much, and there was some learning you got to do.

You are correct, but in a tough spot…

In reply to Who pays?

As the owner of a small consulting company that handles ERP software it is my opinion that your “business partner” has failed you. Any time that there is a server upgrade (especially one of this magnitude), the ERP software vendor/provider should be intimately involved in testing the effects of the upgrade before allowing you to put anything into production.

I would also suggest that the customer is ultimately responsible for the bill to correct the software issue as it is part of the upgrade process.

Unfortunately, you are past the point of this as a viable scenario. My suggestion to you at this point is if the bill is small, pay it and find yourself a new software provider with whom to work. It doesn’t sound like they have a firm grasp on their business or that you can trust them.

MICROSOFT SHOULD PAY

In reply to Who pays?

An organization that is so big putting out an OS that fails to recognize legecy apps.

Sounds like Microsoft. Perhaps now if you had MICROSOFT accounting software this would not have happened, eh?

Pay the Bill and move on….. Learn something too!

In reply to Who pays?

This is exactly why Network Consultants can sometimes get a bad ‘stereo type’ name in the industry, customers are skeptical, suspicious and afraid of being taken advantage of! They count on & pay you (the professional) to advise them in these matters. It is your responsibility to do the ‘do diligence’ and determine what impact your recommendations will have …. no matter what! If you do screw up (and we all do from time to time) be honest enough with your customer to admit you screwed up, and take full responsibility. Don’t blame your customer for your oversight, or at best lack of communication.

If you do the right thing, be honest & admit when your wrong, you will be respected, have a good reputation and will not be confused about what to do. If you are confused, it’s probably something you have done (or haven’t done)!

Who Pays? The question really is: who is responsible?

In reply to Who pays?

I just read the responses from everyone else, and while I find them all contributing valuable recommendations and suggestions, I find that, bar one, no one has mentioned the most important aspect: What was your upgrade plan?

I consult for mega-corporations: IBM, Merrill Lynch, Citibank, MCI, Goldman Sachs, to name a few. I was taught early on in my career (1978) by the firm I was working for then:

1) Draw up a plan for the whole thing that includes:
a) testing the entire installation (i) on a mirror-image duplicate system, or (ii) over the weekend on the live system; anything else will not be guaranteed, and repaired at customer expense;
b) contingencies for everything (i) how to backout upgrade; (ii) how to restore original system; (iii) availability of ALL installation materials for ALL software and hardware devices.
c) parallel testing to assure upgrade consistency
d) who is responsible for supporting what software – support is defined as assuring application continues to work under any condition
e) hardware upgrades to support new software; specify complete costs
f) milestones and signoff requirements; customer must sign off and approve everything major step before you can proceed to the next one, and there is no pointing fingers after the signoff.
g) upgrades are not guaranteed under any circumstances, because you, as the upgrader, do not own the OS, the utilities, the apps, etc. You are merely following vendor rules/training, and using your experience to guide you through the process. (This is a complex legal area that WILL REQUIRE your attorney’s input).

2) Invoice customer for the plan; let the customer approve the plan, in whatever form they want, modified or intact. No further work until pad in full; they can take this plan to anyone else they want, and not use you, so you must be paid for doing the planning.

3) At the same time as #2, Invoice customer for the upgrade; require deposit (I always ask for 50%).

4) Schedule the test and the actual upgrades. Schedule everyone who is needed to be available either onsite or callable/pageable for BOTH events. Make sure everyone agrees (one of those signoffs) that the test will require much more time than the actual upgrade, and may need to be repeated.

5) Perform the test upgrade, following the plan. Record EVERYTHING you do that was not in the plan, so that you can repeat it during real upgrade. If the test gets hairy, diverts significantly from plan, goes off the deep end, or requires significant assist from other supporters/vendors, perform test again. This may cost you lots of money, which is why you asked to be paid for the highly detailed plan that includes contingencies.

6) Perform the upgrade.

7) Monitor upgrade for proper performance (included in cost of upgrade)

I am sure many of you will be able to add more items to this little check list, but I hope everyone sees my points:
1) You must document it
2) the customer must approve it
3) you must be responsible to keep the customer running
4) the customer can not blame you for something you do not own.
5) you can not blame the customer when an existing working item fails to work after you’ve had your fingers in the system. You must plan for coverage for every item, and not start the work until the responsibility for every item is set and agreed upon.

Good luck, please let us all know how it turns out.

Dave A.

Not bad but…

In reply to Who Pays? The question really is: who is responsible?

The recommendations are good, but for small and medium-sized companies, this is more work than the actual job. Very few of the small/medium-sized businesses I have worked with were willing to entertain the complexity of the proposal – let alone pay for it.

re: Not bad but…

In reply to Not bad but…

To the contrary, with only a few exceptions, I have found that my small and mid-size customers appreciate the level of professionalism displayed by my willingness to provide part of the service for them, and allowing them topick the best-of-breed for each major work item.

The exceptions almost all turned out to be tyrannical owners who expected 3 months worth of work to be completed by the end of the month, that I would start immediately and shove off all my other clients, and I would answer ALL his questions about anything, anytime, and include all sorts of unrelated work items for free. In otherwords, they were unreasonable.

Dave A

Any Computer Owner Knows!

In reply to Who pays?

It is the owners responsibility to pay for additional hardware/software upgrades that are required to make them compatible with the new OS.

Anyone who has ever owned a computer and upgraded the OS (even back in DOS days) knows that all of the hardware/software installed may not be compatible with the new OS. Especially in the case of custom or proprietary software that is not written to Microsoft standards.

However, as a service provider, you should have initially tested the upgrade in an evaluation environment so that it would not impact actual business operations.

I would agree with you if they didn’t

In reply to Any Computer Owner Knows!

I would agree with you if his company wouldn’t of stated the following to the customers…

“We, therefore, made it abundantly clear that if we upgraded the OS, the accounting pkg could/would be affected and at best would require reconfig. at worst – a totally new installation.”

Now to the customer new installation – is the reinstallation of the package – not the purchase and upgrade of it. His company also stated they would handle it. They had contacted the vendor – and asked questions – I would say asked the wrong questions… They quoted the price – they quoted the work to be accomplished..

They failed to develop a backout plan if their plan failed, they failed to reinstall/reconfigure the accounting package correctly, they failed to fulfill the contracted services. In short his company learned a valuable lesson in upgrading a Microsoft product – they learned a valuable lesson in writing contracts – they learned a valuable lesson in asking questions of other vendors – In short its going to cost them Big Dollars not to pay – Loss of this customer – this customer taking them to court – lawyers – time – (cheaper to pay).. Not to say that many companies will hear of the way this company conducted business –

So Cheaper to Suck Up – Admit they Failed at ever turn – Learn the Valuable lessons – Pay the Bills – Ask for forgiveness from the client – and hope you can rebuild trust in the relationship for renewal…

They Failed! 🙁 😀 – Pay the bill

This argument does not work

In reply to Any Computer Owner Knows!

I send my child in for an operation that the surgeon tells me
without any reservation will cure his minor ailment. My child
dies, and in his defence the surgeon tells me that “everyone
knows” that there was only a 5% chance of survival. If he hadn’t
previously told me, and satisfied himself that I understood what
he had said, and the implications of what he had said, and is
unable to prove both assertions, then he is culpable for what has
happened. He is the professional, and this is what I pay him for.

Size of bill?

In reply to Who pays?

You really have a couple of options, but they all depend on the monetary figures involved. You can:
1) refuse to pay the the bill,
2) refuse to pay the bill, and offer them a discount on your invoice,
3) offer to pay a portion of the bill, or
4) offer to pay the entire bill

Whatever you choose, I would reinforce to them that they are a valued customer, and that this was an unfortunate and unforseeable (but possible) outcome. You may express to them that, while you understand that they were inconvenienced, that the cost of the bill is not something which you are legally liable to pay for.

The ultimate decision depends on the amount of revenue that this client generates for you in business every year. If the bill is more than the yearly revenue from their support contract, I don’t think you can afford to pay it, and I would point this out. If the bill is a mere fraction of the yearly service contract, I would work with the company towards a solution acceptable to both parties.

What is the REAL problem here????

In reply to Who pays?

The Problem is already present, by the way, now it does not matter who will pay. I’m worried about this types of problems, because the cause of this problem is not sw, but is the way we do business, in this case a Technology Implementation; where is the contract signed with the statements of both companies (customer and solution or services provider) and the actions to take in case of these kind of issues?, it?s just as if you would did a real plan for this or any implementation, probably you would consider these and other possible problems in order to provide possible solutions or workarounds. What about testing the sw on labs before going to the production enviroment? Please take care!!! It?s just part of the now days IT Management, if the provider doesn’t have the resources to do this, and you analize all the risks taken and the possible consequences and present to the customer, i?m sure the customer would like to pay every cent of that, because it?s a case of not incurring in possible expenses and reducing any possible problems about doing their business. have you heard about ITIL, MOF, MSF?? is not only for bigger IT services providers, it?s about the best way of planning, implementing, and supporting any IT environment.

Who pays…

In reply to Who pays?

During your due diligence when you found that certain software would not operate – you should have called off the upgrade and found out what requirements hsould have done to bring the s/ware nto the new operating system. therefore – sorry but the bill should be on you.

IT Management, Quality and Risks

In reply to Who pays?

Based on past internal IT management experiences, I offer the following for your consideration.

When multiple vendors are involved in one project effort, I would get them on the same page. Face to face meetings, phone conferences, or as simple as circulating a descriptive document between the participants. I would make sure that the support resources were available on the date and time of implementation up to and including on site if that were necessary. In reality, always went with on sight support from all vendors just in case, except once. It is an old story, save a dime to end up spending a dollar. If I could attribute any of the cost of preparedness to anything it was quality or decreasing the impact of unlikely problems. When things went smoothly, everyone enjoyed it. In your case I suspect even Accounting would agree to the small increased cost as insurance.

Found out early that when a problem occurs, those outside of IT see only one team on the court. Internal IT, and as many of the vendors that are involved are one unit. So why not include that responsibility as part of the cost when formulating the proposal. It will cost you less, as you have discovered.

So, feeling like the question should be asked. Does the client company have capable internal IT Management? I have no way to know here if they do or do not. If they do not then what happened to the most basic business-operating rule that vendors require management?

Suggest that you pay the bill in person filling out the check after a short discussion with the Accounting System vendor decision-maker; if you are inclined and you see it as productive in future efforts

Always cover the cost of reducing those risks in the estimate, and allow the client to accept those risks along with the associated costs if they wave your quality-based requirements. Besides, in every business discussion you need to ask yourself “who holds the risk of failure.”

On client relationship mending: I admit saying one time that I have learned not assume cost cutting decisions on quality preparedness and in the future they will be involved making those decisions up front.

Hope I have conveyed something that helps.

Best Regards

Reasonable Expectations

In reply to Who pays?

You should not have touched the Acct Pkg if they had
support on it. That said, The recommendation to move
to 2003 Server was well founded. The client is allowed
to have the expectation that after the work is done they
will be functioning as they were. However , It is not a
reasonable expectation to think you should be
responsible for the Acct pkg failure. Any reconfig should
have been expected and handled through their normal
support plan on that software. The problem is that you
did touch it. That brings in doubt as to the amount of
work needed. The Acct Pkg support person may have
been able to solve it in 15 min. You however sound like
you re-installed it. That may have caused an amount of
work that was not expected and therefore…your fault.

Who Pays? Three Options:

Option 1: Insist they pay and, win or loose, an account
worth maybe thousands over time.

Option 2: Offer to split the cost 50/50 based on the fact
that software not working was expected but to eat any
costs you created.

Option 3: (CHOOSE THIS ONE) Eat the cost. Mistakes
happen and it is the cost of doing business. Make it
right and make sure they know you are eating crow.
They will tell other business about how their IT
company is the most fair company they know. Then
next time make it clear that the recommended changes
are for (READ BENIFITS HERE) and that while the long
term advantages are worth it their may be some short
term issue that are unavoidable and out of your control.
Those unseen issues are to be dealt with through
seperate support channels/contracts, or on an hourly
rate.

It sounds like you did in my opinion give the right talk.
Your mistake was touching the software without the
proper knowledge. I think you could have even gotten
away with that if you had qualified what their
reasonable expectation should be.

razz

I would agree to an extent….

In reply to Reasonable Expectations

You will probably still lose the client, as they will now view you as a risk, and an elevated expense. Even if you make good on the damage, psychologically they will be associating you will the damaged goods for all-time. They expect you to pay, but I’m sure after this is all said and done, they’ll show you the door…sorry…reality check…it’s better than getting sued!

Client should recognice responsability on their decission

In reply to Who pays?

As long as “customer satisfaction” concerns, staff team could reassonable be leaded to think they must pay the bill. However, 2 things the client needs to have in mind: 1sr. The client contracted a staff company for conducing performance analisys and present recommendations based on results, and so recommendations were done (including responsible observations about software compatibility as far as was visible), but it’d concern to client to decide if the upgrade propossed will suit enterely to his enviroment (assisted by staff reports). That’s the reason for informing about compatibility issues that could arise, or isn’t it? 2nd. The client authorized the staff team to rollout the changes propossed, so this point and forward, as long as staff company made the changes under lining of the proposal, arising incompatibility issues, if any, fall inside client’s responsability.

3 Parts to the Problem…

In reply to Who pays?

What you should have done?
Everyone here has rightly explained some of the many things you should have done. Due diligence, pre-production system, formal agreements, etc. Pick and choose which ones work best for you.

In my mind, the one thing you should have done was get a written procedure from the software vendor on what you wanted to do with their software. You should have followed it. And if it didn’t work, you should have gotten on the phone immediately to find out why and how to fix it.

What happened?
You screwed up, you spent a lot of time, and someone sent someone a bill.

You also found out that you did not know how to reinstall a piece of software critical to your client. If this was a disaster recovery scenario and the software vendor and/or support was not available, you would have a bigger problem on your hands than just a bill to pay.

How to get that piece of software up and running should be part of your Disaster Recovery Plan – and you should test it.

Who’s responsible?
In the end, we are all responsible for the things we do and don’t do. If it falls under your domain, learn everything you can about it. Especially getting it up and running on your clients IT infrastructure.

However, remember that our clients are companies and they have made decisions no one forced them to make. They do not have to be in business. No one made them buy computers, or servers, or have an IT infrastructure, or an accounting application. They can try to compete in today?s business world without all these tools, or they can close their doors.

But with all these choices there are costs. Don’t let this situation be an opportunity for them to deflect their responsibility for their choices.

-Alex

Take responsibility and protect your reputation

In reply to Who pays?

Yes, it sounds like this problem may have been avoided with better planning and communication.

At least you warned them ahead of time that there may be problems with their existing accounting software and that they weren’t blindsided. The only mistake you made was not consulting with their other support team for the accounting software, and not communicating fully with the client up front about the possible consequences and who would be responsible for in the event that the system were rendered incapable.

About your reputation, even if you keep them “happy,” I wouldn’t necessarily count on them for a reference unless you know for a fact they’re truly happy with your performance overall.

We all make mistakes while building our businesses; it happens, and now you know better for next time.

From a S/w Specialist’s View

In reply to Who pays?

From the position of being a consultant to another program (CRM), that was affected by a Win2003 upgrade, I can understand the position that your client was put in.

The IT person that upgraded my client to Win2003 was very selective as to the options of Win2003 that were installed. Yes – I could confirm that the program I supported worked on Win2003, but I also had them upgrade their version of the program first because I could advise them that their current version was not supported on Win2003 (being written in 2001).

But little did I suspect at the time that only part of Win2003 had been installed, and it needed to have this-that and other bits installed as well, and turned on, which had been turned off on purpose!! (A fairly std custom install should have done all this by default, I’m told). For some reason or other, the IT person was very reluctant to install it in full, even under these circumstances. I believe that this also could have been his first 2003 upgrade project, so a huge learning curve for him also.

The IT person did the upgrade at a time when they didn’t advise me, and within 24hrs I was drawn into the situation. I worked with the IT person to identify the issues, and get parts of it working – in fact got it working 3 times, and after leaving site, it would fall over again with 48 hrs due to these 2003 install problems. I also consulted with other IT firms to get other opinions etc on what was happening (or not – PS, some of them did note that they had encountered some accounting/database programs had difficulties with 2003).

In the end, the system was rolled back to Win2000 which worked as expected.

The client was only charged half of my hours as I had advised that Win2003 was suitable, but I did this to maintain good client relations. The client also paid me, understanding that it was not my fault (and I could prove it). I don’t know what happened to the bill for the IT person, but he still works for the client.

I don’t say that these exactly match your circumstances.

In my circumstances, there were 4 things which made a difference:

1. The client was willing to take some responsibility for their own equipment. They are also willing to be TAUGHT more about the issues of IT, from a novice perspective.

(Don’t knock this idea – radical as it is, every company that invests in a major piece of complex equipment (ie computers and IT) should be aware of at least the basics of how it operates and the consequences.

It is our responsibility as IT people to teach them this. Don’t complain they don’t understand, or are poor darlings that can’t possibly understand technical things, if we don’t teach them these concepts. It’s just another part of business management. The good lord knows they don’t learn it at uni or other business schools.)

2. I, as the software specialist, was able to work with the IT person, and I softened my bill to do so.

3. The IT person, finally paid attention to his options, and rolled back the whole system, when he couldn’t get it working, on how much of the install he was prepared to do.

4. The recognition that Microsoft is only in the game for itself, and bugger the users, while they can sucker poor fools into keep on buying and having their products supported, they are the only winners.

In your case, I’d recommend you to consider paying the bill, and deciding whether you want to keep this client or not in future. But certainly, if you do, sit down with them and TRAIN them in their internal IT responsibilities. If they pay no attention, recommend them to your competitor, as heads-in-sand attitudes are not what you want in business.

They certainly need a lesson anyway in how to meet their notified obligations, in that original wording you gave them on possible options, you did do right by them.

Hope this helps,

Have been where your are.

In reply to Who pays?

Updgraded a Novell 4.11 to Novell 6 to correct SCSI and Veritas software issues. A ‘consultant’ programmed the ‘unique database software’ for Regional and City records. The Software went ‘Tango Uniform’ and we were charged for the service. I proved that the data base was not using industry standard drivers and engignes plus the software was never updated to meet current standards. The consultant apologized for their work and recoded the software using the proper updates. After doing so the software now works with the updated OS.

If that doesn’t work ask business to remove their software and the problem will go away.

hmmmmmmmm

Have been where your are.

In reply to Who pays?

Updgraded a Novell 4.11 to Novell 6 to correct SCSI and Veritas software issues. A ‘consultant’ programmed the ‘unique database software’ for Regional and City records. The Software went ‘Tango Uniform’ and we were charged for the service. I proved that the data base was not using industry standard drivers and engignes plus the software was never updated to meet current standards. The consultant apologized for their work and recoded the software using the proper updates. After doing so the software now works with the updated OS.

If that doesn’t work ask business to remove their software and the problem will go away.

hmmmmmmmm

Have been where your are.

In reply to Who pays?

Updgraded a Novell 4.11 to Novell 6 to correct SCSI and Veritas software issues. A ‘consultant’ programmed the ‘unique database software’ for Regional and City records. The Software went ‘Tango Uniform’ and we were charged for the service. I proved that the data base was not using industry standard drivers and engignes plus the software was never updated to meet current standards. The consultant apologized for their work and recoded the software using the proper updates. After doing so the software now works with the updated OS.

If that doesn’t work ask business to remove their software and the problem will go away.

hmmmmmmmm

Project Management

In reply to Who pays?

I have been doing contracted project management and implementations for about 10 years, and this is the type of issue that I have found needs to be addressed properly up front in your proposal.

Part of the issue may have been a “Sales Issue” instead of a service issue. You may have had a salesperson talk them into an upgrade, and then you were scrambling to put a proposal together that could live up to the salesman’s claims. It is always important to keep a client’s expectations reasonable from the outset. If you have set their expectations high, then you are the one that is going to have to meet these expectations within your project plan. You cannot set expectations high and then simply place disclaimers for change ordering them to death if anything goes sideways on you during the implementation.

It is important to develop the following specific and defined pieces of your proposal:

1) Business/Client Goals (What have they asked you for?)

2) Business/Client Expectations (What is expected upon completion?)

3) Your Recommendations (Always give them a choice of options. Customer Choice = limited liability)

4) Scope of Work (Exactly what work will be done)

5) Assumptions (Cover constraints, etc.)

6) Terms and Conditions (Legal junk)

I always make sure that numbers 1 & 2 are completely written in business language. If you write everything in these sections from the “Business Systems” perspective instead of the “Information Systems” perspective, you will have defined the expectations of your client more effectively.

In your posting, you mentioned:

“We, therefore, made it abundantly clear that if we upgraded the OS, the accounting pkg could/would be affected and at best would require reconfig. at worst – a totally new installation.”

This says to me that you set their expectations to be “We will make it work, and at worst case, we will have to reinstall the accounting software.” Personally, I wouldn’t have ever begun this project with that much of a constraint and liability exposure.

You stated further that:

“We consulted with the support individual for the Accounting pkg and asked if the current version would work on win2k3 server, he said ‘yes’ (maybe in hindsight we should have asked if it would work if we did an upgrade in place, as was the case)”

This points out to me only that you made an effort to call the vendor, and that you didn’t even ask the right questions. Deep down inside, you should know at this point that you screwed up.

Finally, you stated:

“I must note that in consideration of the client’s position, and in an effort to be helpful, we assured them that we would make every effort to have the accounting pkg working properly after we carried out the upgrade. We did the upgrade, and the software did not work (since we had been informed that it does work on 2k3 server, we opined that it would only need a reinstallation and reconfig.) Alas! we couldn’t get it to work, after about 12 hours of attempting to do so.”

To me, this is where you made your final mistake in managing the project that could have possibly saved you a little bit of face. If you had at this point handled this issue as a change order with the client (prior to spending 12 hours of attempts to resolve the issue), the issue would have been addressed as to whether or not this was an expectation within the scope of the project or not. Since you apparently took it upon yourself to work 12 hours towards an attempt to resolve the issue, you have essentially admitted your own guilt. You worked 12 hours towards resolving the issue (presumably without billing the client), so I would assume that at that time, you were assuming responsibility. Once you could not resolve the issue and someone else had to be brought in to resolve the issue, you cannot simply give up that responsibility because the resolution came at a cost.

Business is about Realationships

In reply to Who pays?

apsis_2000, I think anyone who has been in the IT consulting/services business long enough has faced this situation. The bottom line is that it is hard enough to attract and retain good customers in today?s environment, so it is better to eat the cost, keep the customer happy and learn a valuable lesson. Although you stated that you have in writing that the accounting app is not your responsibility, we all know the realities of working on customer systems. When we do one thing and something else breaks the perception of responsibility is usually the reality. One thing I can suggest to you for the future is that you go the extra mile and check on every software package and or system that interfaces with what ever changes you are making. In this case a direct call to the company supporting the accounting software may have yielded information about updates or patches that would be needed to have it run on win2k3 server. I think good consultants should always add value.

Regards,
Patrick

Client should pay

In reply to Who pays?

I think the client should pay. They hired you to make their system more efficient, so you made the changes you knew that would increase the efficiency. You did what they asked, you’re saving them time and money because they will now run more efficiently. It probably wasn’t the software’s fault that the system ran slow, it was probably many factors combined. The software company had to bill for their time also. Both your company and the software company were doing your parts to get the system running in it’s most efficient way possible and the company you did this for will benefit from it, so why shouldn’t they pay? They could have said no to the changes. With this said, there has to be a simplified explanation for your client because they may not understand the different pieces and parts of the system. Once they understand that it was a group effort, and that both companies had to make changes to succeed, they shouldn’t hesitate paying. Otherwise, they’re taking advantage of the situation.

A Different Way of Looking At It…

In reply to Who pays?

More than anything, this strikes me as a failure to plan. Anyone can run setup.exe. The value you should be bringing to your client is the ability to see the big picture and help them identify all the implications of performing this upgrade.

Before running the upgrade, you should have identified the accounting system as potentially being affected by the upgrade. You should have then contacted the accounting software vendor or consultant to understand how your upgrade would impact their application.

Rather than just throwing a blanket disclaimer at your client and burying your head, you would have raised your value to them by giving them the whole picture ahead of time. The client (or you!) could have then scheduled the accounting software consultant to come in and make the necessary adjustments to their package. They clearly don’t expect you to be an expert on the accounting package, but they do expect you to understand that it could be affected by an operating system upgrade.

This wouldn’t have cost the customer any more than it ultimately has, but it would have saved everyone a lot of pain because they would have understood all of the dependencies and costs (software, you, the accounting software consultant) ahead of time. Because you would have identified an issue wouldn’t have seen on their own, you’d come out looking like the expert and be indispensible to them whenever they need true IT advice.

My recommendation: If you want to keep the customer, pay the bill and apologize for not identifying the dependency ahead of time. Drop the legal talk and have an honest one-on-one with them. Let them know you’ll spend more time planning with them next time, trying to identify these types of problems before they happen.

Another Comment

In reply to A Different Way of Looking At It…

I just re-read your post, and want to modify my comments a bit:

It sounds to me like you’re in over your head trying to support this accounting package. This clearly isn’t your area of expertise. Why not let them retain the specialized consultant for this package? You’re overcommitting yourself with regards to this application, and I sense that’s what frustrating the customer. Next time, offer to do the infrastructure upgrades, but plan to have the accounting software consultant on-call–and have his/her time budgeted into your plan. We can’t all be experts on everything 🙂

[Author]

Replies