BRIDGE CO. SOFTWARE PROCUREMENT Introduction The following is an interview with Mick Kazinski, a senior marketing executive with Bridge co. a Deelandbased construction company. It concerns their purchase of Custcare, a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software package written by the Custcare Corporation, a software company based in Solland, a country some 4000 km away from Deeland. The interview was originally published in the Management Experience magazine. Interviewer: Thank you for talking to us today Mick. Can you tell us how Bridge Co came to choose the Custcare software package? Mick: Well, we didn’t choose it really. Teri Porter has just joined the company as sales and marketing director. She had recently implemented the Custcare package at her previous company and she was very enthusiastic about it. When she found out that we did not have a CRM package at Bridge Co, she suggested that we should also buy the Custcare package as she felt that our requirements were very similar to those of her previous company. We told her that any purchase would have to go through our Capex (capital expenditure) system as the package cost over $20,000. Here at Bridge Co, all CAPEX applications have to be accompanied by a formal business case, and Invitation to Tender (ITT) has to be sent out to at least three potential suppliers. However, Teri is a very clever lady. She managed to do a deal with Custcare and they agreed to supply the package at a cost of $19,500, just under the Capex threshold. Teri has to cut a few things out. For example, we declined the training courses (Teri said the package was an easy one to use and she will show us how to use it), and also we opted for the lowest level of support, something we later came to regret. Overall, we were happy. We knew that Custcare was a popular and successful CRM package. Interviewer: So, did you have a demonstration of the software before you brought it? Mick: Oh yes, and everyone was very impressed. It seemed to do all the things we would ever want it to do and, in fact, it gave us some ideas about possibilities that we would never have thought of. Also, by then, it was clear that our internal IT department could not provide us with a bespoke solution. Teri had spoken to them informally and she was told that they could not look at our requirements for 18 months. In contrast, we could be up and running with the Custcare package for three months. Also, IT quoted an internal transfer cost of $18,000 for just defining our requirements. That was almost as much as we were paying for the whole software solution! Interviewer: When did things begin to go wrong? Mick: Well, the implementation was not straightforward. We needed to migrate some data from our current established system and we had no one who could do it. We tried to recruit some local technical experts, but Custcare pointed out that we had signed their standard contract which only permitted Custcare consultants to work on such tasks. We had not realized this, as nobody had read the contract carefully. 

In the end, we had to give in and it cost us $10,000 in fees to migrate the data from some of our internal systems to the new package. Teri managed to get the money out of the operational budget, but we weren’t happy. We then tried to share data between the Custcare software and our existing order processing system. We thought this would be easy, but apparently, the formats are incompatible. Thus we have to enter customer information into two systems and we are unable to exploit the customer order analysis facility of the Custcare CRM. DC: ACD01-F004 Finally, although we were happy with the functionality and reliability of the Custcare software, it works very slowly. This is really very disappointing. Some reports and queries have been aborted because the software appears to have hung. The software worked very in the demonstration, but it is painfully slow now that it is stalled on our IT platform. Interviewer: What is the current situation? Mick: Well, we are all a bit deflated and disappointed in the package. The software seems reasonable enough, but its poor performance and our inability to interface it to the order processing system have reduced users’ confidence in the system. Because users have not been adequately trained, we have had to phone Custcare’s support desk more than we should. However, as I said before, we took the cheapest option. This is for a helpline to be available from 8.00 hrs to 17.00 hrs Solland time. As you know, Solland is in a completely different time zone and so we have had to stay behind at work and contact them in the late evening. Again, nobody had closely read the terms of the contract. We have taken legal advice, but we have also found that, for dispute resolution, the contract uses the commercial contract laws of Solland. Nobody in Bridge Co knows what these are! Our solicitor said that we should have asked for this specification to be changed when the contract was drawn up. I just wish we had chosen a product produced by a company here in Deeland. It would have made it much easier to resolve issues and disputes. Interviewer: What does Teri think? Mick: Not a lot! She has left us to rejoin her old company in a more senior position. The board did ask her to justify her purchase of the Custcare CRM package, but I don’t think she ever did. I am not sure that she could! 

Required: 

a) Suggest a process for evaluating, selecting, and implementing a software package solution and explain how this process would have prevented the problems experienced at Bridge Co in the Custcare CRM application.

b) The CEO OF Bridge Co now questions whether buying a software package solution was the wrong approach to meeting the CRM requirements at Bridge Co. He wonders whether they should have commissioned a bespoke software system instead. 

Explain, with reference to the CRM project at Bridge Co, the advantages of adopting a software package approach to fulfilling business system requirements compared with a bespoke software solution.