Considering Immediate Cost And Long Term Productivity

Through most of my career I have used one type of software package and I was very proficient in its use.  I knew I should have tried other packages but I didn’t get around to doing that.  I was, however, rather interested in one particular suite that was gaining significant market share.  I asked some of my colleagues why was it so popular.  All they said was that it costs much less than the competition. That was completely understandable.  It is always preferable to get any product or service at the lowest price.  Or is it?

I finally got the chance to use this software and I was surprised with its functionality. Some of the basic functions were quicker to use than the software I was used to but I found it to be frustrating when I performed more advanced tasks.  I told one of my colleagues about my findings.  He had used this package before learning the suite that I’m used to. He mentioned it’s shortcomings and said he preferred the other software, despite it being more expensive.

Before I continue I would like to state that I’m not endorsing any product or service over another.  The purpose of this post is to demonstrate considerations that may not be present in the selection process of products and services.

When ever I performed an advanced function the programme would execute differently to what I wanted.  Eventually I discovered a technique to work around this shortcoming but it would take at least three times longer, depending on the complexity, than on the other programme.  This definitely had an impact on productivity.  The company saved money up front with the purchase price of this software but a portion of it’s operational costs had increased in comparison.  I would wonder if the equivalent cost of extra time to market was less than the price difference of the other software suites.  I was certain it was not considered.

I’ve witnessed the same thing with other products with differences in maintainability, reliability, security as well as other factors.  For example, if the selected equipment requires a more frequent maintenance interval, longer maintenance period, or breaks down more often then the initial purchase savings would be erased by the maintenance costs and the costs associated with downtime.  If the security capabilities of the selected system is not a robust as the higher costing competitors then the resulting costs due to breaches will be significantly higher than the initial purchase savings.  The downtime needed to mitigate damages, fix the vulnerability, or replace the system could be very long, therefore, adding considerable cost and adversely impacting productivity.

A somewhat similar situation could also arise when companies move their operations to low cost centers to take advantage of lower labour costs.  If the lower cost labour’s skill set is not near the level of your domestic labourers then quality and training costs will be much higher.  If the lower cost labour does not possess the same level of diligence as your domestic employees then problem identification would be greatly reduced.  Problem resolutions would only be accomplished by a select few rather than it being a combined employee effort.

Over the long term (or even the short term) these extra costs could easily exceed the initial savings thus eliminating it’s cost advantage. With that in mind, it is extremely important to consider the long term impact of any performance differences between competing products, services, or regions before deciding.  Also, if it is decided to change a product, service, or region after discovering the extra costs associated with a performance difference then there will be the addition costs of switching, in terms of set up, training, logistics, et cetera.

Until the next time!

Understanding Expanded

In my previous post I wrote about seven common points for effective listening.  I would like to expand on the point ‘understanding’.  I felt it warranted further explanation.  For example, a person could be listening well to what is said but they may not completely understand the intent of the message.  What I’m saying is that understanding goes beyond just spoken or written words.  It involves already having a background knowledge on the subject matter and using that knowledge to develop an idea of the goals; or the desire to gain further knowledge.

To be more specific, if someone was to tell you or ask you something and they didn’t provide all of the information, with your background knowledge you would be able to determine what the missing information is yourself.  If you didn’t have enough background knowledge then you would ask pertinent questions in order to obtain the missing information.  This is one facet of understanding.

I have been in situations where someone was expressing a need for something by listing the requirements.  They didn’t know what it was specifically but with the criteria they presented and my background knowledge I was able to tell them precisely what they were seeking.

Of course I have been in the situation of seeking something specific but not knowing enough to identify it.  An example was when I needed a certain electrical connector. I could have spent a considerable amount of time navigating several connector companies’ websites.  I felt it would be more time effective if I presented the criteria to the individual sales reps.  Since they have in-depth knowledge of their entire product line, they would be able to identify a suitable connector much quicker.

I provided the criteria and a 3D sketch of the required configuration.  My 3D sketch showed a generalisation of a 16 pin connector with mounting points on the left and right sides. None of the companies I contacted did not have any connectors in that configuration. The sales reps could have said, “sorry, we don’t have any connectors that match that configuration and ended the inquiry.  Instead one of the reps recommended a connector that looked nothing like the sketch but had two mounting points at the rear of the connector.  Without me telling him he understood the location of the mounting points was not critical, just that they were necessary . He also understood that the connector body didn’t need to look like the sketch.  Functionality rather than the looks was paramount.

Another sale rep recommended a connector that looked very similar to the sketch but it didn’t have any mounting points.  There was no way to secure it to the other component without the need to specifically design a bracket for that purpose.  That would have added time to the design cycle and other costs.  Overall, it was not a preferred option.

As I stated before, communications is all about getting what one needs, therefore, it is essential that you understand what those needs are.  Understanding them results in less time to realise the deliverables, greater satisfaction, appreciation, and higher confidence from the requester.  To aid in gaining an understanding of what is required the first thing you have to do is list the presented requirements along with the expectation.  You will also have to determine which information is pertinent and which is superfluous.  Referring to my example, the connector having 16 pins was pertinent.  It looking like the sketch was superfluous.

Once all of the requirements have been given you would then use your knowledge to derive a preliminary plan that would realise the desired outcome.  If you determine that you don’t posse the necessary skill set to achieve the required outcome then you would use your knowledge of your colleagues skill sets to determine which one would be capable.

It is very important that if don’t have the required skill set that you pass the task to someone else whom does.  At the very least, inform the requester that you don’t have the necessary skill sets.  Both actions will save time, prevent frustration, and a loss of confidence from the requester.

When it comes to expectations, the act of understanding something could be very involved or it could simply.  It all depends on what is required.  Essentially it is a combination of knowing the requirements and yourself.

Until the next time!