Codified DAM Consultant

DAM Rant 1: TecnoPolitical Vendor Selection and how to mitigate it with facts.

DAM Rant 1: TecnoPolitical Vendor Selection and how to mitigate it with facts.

You know the story, Bob from business development at Humongous Company PLC  had a round of Golf with Bill VP of something or another who had a word with Mary in HR, who had coffee with Jane heading up the DAM stakeholders group and all of a sudden Humongous is the front-runner for the new DAM initiative. Yeah WTF!! it happens more than you may think.

Why asks everyone?

It's all about leverage dear DAM stakeholder team. Humongous has a huge contract with X, Y, Z department and as a company, we are looking at their new whatyathingymajig and its all going to be fabulous, even if 10X the price of your other vendors ... and usually the train wreck follows and three to five years later with most of the stakeholders team gone having been driven mad or left after being blamed for the failure the whole process starts again.

Hard to believe in this day and age of SOX compliance, but the narrative above happens far too often and usually edges the DAM failure rate in the wrong direction, good people leave and Bob buys a new car and Bill gets VIP treatment at all subsequent summits and never has the finger pointed at him. Grrrr!

So what can you do about it?

Firstly, we recommend a stakeholder group of individuals from all the departments that content touches. We also recommend a metric based approach where data shows the disparity between the short list of vendors and Humongous who just happens to have DAM as part of their monolithic technology offerings and plays golf as a strategy.

Here is how not to get squeezed, go mad or have to look for another job.

Jane, Thanks for the heads-up Mary, but here are the details of Humongous that Bill may need to hear. 

General Analysis of 36 Vendors

  1. This vendor came 12th across 22 strategic variables
  2. They were five times the price, although if Bill wants to add to the budget we will reevaluate, although the following circumstances still apply
  3.  Customer Service 13th
  4. Value for money 28th out of 36 vendors
  5. Cloud Proclivity 9th
  6. Rights Management they scored very low and you know Zeus our CEO is BIG on that!
  7. On Content Analysis they were middle of the road, and I thought it was Bill who wanted complete oversight of all content?

Specific differentials with our requirements gathering

  1. They scored 65% overall, our stakeholder benchmark was minimum of 75%
  2. Our four vendors for demo all scored above 80% fit for purpose
  3. On metadata they score a measly 42% our benchmark was 100%

Technical specifications, Workflow Management and tools ... do you want me to go on Mary?

Happy to send Bill our full analysis against Humongous, we love their whatyathingymajig but they do not cut the DAM mustard for this procurement, no matter how much they want to spread the costs of licences, or indeed help improve Bills handicap.

The above is based on actual facts for a made up narrative. If you want a happy ending, please contact the Codified DAM Consultant, we kill the horrible situations stated above with deep domain expertise, metrics based on facts within a best practice methodology, oh and with funky graphics and detailed reporting even Bill will understand!

Leave a comment:

New Vendors, New Content New Strategies