A Customer Perspective Presentation title goes here, using
A Customer Perspective Presentation title goes here, using Growth through satisfaction Happy Customers Buy Segoe Regular, inMore sentence case. More Phil Carrier Licensing Sales Director Agenda Purpose & Intent Role of The Licensing Group Building on a firm foundation Key focus areas for FY06 and beyond What customers have to say! Q&A Microsoft Australia Sales Group (US$641m) (General Mgr. - Gary Cox) Public Sector Sales (US$213m) (Director - Kevin Ackhurst) Commercial & FSI Sales (US$133m) (Director - Colin Timm) Media & Telco Sales (US$27m) (Director - John Hennessey) Small & Med Business Sales (US$268m) (Director - Pip Marlow) Specialist Sales Group (Director - Rob Vogler)
Partner Sales Group (Director - Kerstin Baxter) (US$641m) = A$915m Licensing (US$641m) (Director - Phil Carrier) Purpose & Intent 2 big Bets for MS in FY06 = Make Licensing a positive experience Make Security a positive experience Grow the Licensing Business. Annuity is Key for all segments & verticals Not move business from partner to partner Be a Licensing Channel advocate inside & out MS. Understand the Customer & Partner pain & address. Focus on all customers (by segment & vertical). Ensure a competitive focus is front and centre. Less Process & More Selling! Licensing Brains Trust. Ensure positive market perceptions. Building on a firm foundation 1. 2.
3. 4. 5. 6. Channel Strategy Closer Business Relationships with Customers and Partners Build the channel for growth Communications Internal and External: To increase satisfaction within Customer and Partners Integration with the Corporation & Regional Teams Skills Training Internal within MS External with Partners Sales Process Forums to allow deal discussions Effective escalation processes & quick decisions Customer Strategy
By Segment/vertical Customer information forums with Partners Compliance New Product Licensing Strategy Work with Corporation, Partners & Customers to address areas of concern Customer Study Feedback A Customer Perspective Growth through satisfaction Happy Customers Buy More Study Background Global customer satisfaction survey Conducted 2004/5 Account View Community View Global scorecards/country reports Process built to optimise insight and action locally 2005 Australian Sample Profile ACCOUNT VIEW RAW WEIGHTED Strategic Major Corporate 164
2005 Australian Sample Profile COMMUNITY VIEW RAW IT Professional - Total WEIGHTED Core Dual Extra Industry 774 91 229 454 300 Developer Affiliates Small Business Medium Business Information Worker Consumer 236 594 99 68 101 105 78
406 118 120 87 60 66 104 130 2005 Australian Sample Profile ACT NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA Strategic 6 49 0
- Small Business Medium Business Information Worker 0 - 23 - 0 - 9 - 3 - 1 - 25 - 7 - Consumer - -
- - - - - - COMMUNITY VIEW Understanding the Issues To gain greater clarity and understanding of the key issues driving satisfaction we looked at two open-ended response questions: 1. What one specific improvement could Microsoft make that would have the greatest impact on your satisfaction with them? 2. For each low rating factor: Specifically, what kind of experiences have you had with Microsoft that made you rate them as you did? Results have been split these into 4 groups: 1. 2. 3. 4. Hierarchy of Pain Common Pain Customer Verbatim Positive Comments Areas for Improvements Licensing Customer Hierarchy of Pain
Common to All LORG Specific MORG Specific SORG Specific Universal Pain (Overall Value, SA, Financial Terms, Comparing Licensing Options, Receiving Assistance from MS ) Complex Pain The type of pain organizations experience around licensing becomes more complex with the size of the company (Flexibility of Licensing Program, Level of Trust in Vendor, Fairness of Contract Terms, Keeping up with Changes ) Advanced Pain (Integrating Systems with Vendor ) Basic Pain (Microsofts Knowledge of End-Customer Environment, Integrating Systems with Microsoft)
Small and mid-size companies are concerned with fundamental issues of integration, while larger organizations are concerned with more complex issues such as licensing flexibility and contract terms Companies of all sizes are concerned with larger issues around value, financial terms, comparing licensing programs and receiving assistance from Microsoft Security Microsoft is renowned for poor security however, I believe that this is a consequence of being one of the worlds largest software providers and security breaches are specifically targeted at Microsoft products. My experience is that whilst Microsoft react quickly to new vulnerabilities, they are not always able to provide complete solutions. Strategic I guess because of their popularity they seem to be targeted more and therefore we seem to have to do more patch updates etc. Strategic Known holes/bugs take time to get fixes rolled out across our network. Strategic Numerous incompatible patch methodologies within product sets cause maximum confusion. Corporate
Patching is one reason. Their philosophy of having things open until you shut them, rather than competitors who have things closed until you open them. Strategic Trick question right? How about having to continually patch the OS and Office products. Trying to keep on top of this in a 2700 seat organisation is 'fun'. Corporate In general, third-party products are required to try to prevent infestations from viruses, worms, trojans, keyloggers, browser hijackers, and other malware. Strategic Licensing Still too complex. The seemingly constant change to the Usage Rights and the effect this has on licensing. The requirement to re-purchase technology (search facility in Site Server reappears in SPPS at additional cost). Major Totally inflexible if you only want to use a small part of a large product bundle eg. SQL Report Services would still cost us $35k per processor. Strategic Too expensive, unattractive terms, too frequent product upgrades with little value to the customer, no license upgrade as per old scheme just means that we are less likely to move to a newer product. Corporate
The flexibility of options are pretty good. Also, the way it's presented is reasonably clear with what you're provided. Corporate The licensing programs seems to change every three or so years; and the options available are not easily understood. Strategic Price aside, Willingness to work through issues, adapt to needs, flexible and product managers advice on how to purchase & upgrade products. Minimal fuss where we have had difficultly tracking PCs and software. Corporate It is over-priced. It costs a lot of money and is hard to understand licensing and obligations of licenses. Get flexibility in licensing models. Mostly it is about the cost and complexity of licensing. It is too hard to understand and is too extensive. Corporate Pricing Issues 'when you compare product pricing with other products on the market, they are very competitive 'Inflexible licensing programs. Licensing is built to suit MS and not the customer
'Microsoft is generally cheaper than most of the competition but we have to do a lot of work to stabilise some of the products 'Why would I pay ~$1000 for Office XP when I can get 70-80% of the same features for free in OpenOffice? Most people don't use anywhere near the full feature set of Office, and so are paying a lot for features they never use Power to the Licensing Partner A recurring theme is that the licensing partner relationship is a significant driver of overall Customer Satisfaction. What can we do in our business relationship together to maximise these thoughts? The Positives from Customers: Customers are over licensing 6 changes. They like the SA Benefits (if they are made aware of them!).
Customers with EAs are usually happier than transactional customers. Those customers who have bought into the MS Stack get the most value and can do things quickly. Customers like our position on hyper threading and Multi-core CPUs. Customers like the MVLS website. Microsoft is becoming more flexible and is willing to listen and respond. Customers with Support agreements are happier than non-Supported customers. MM customers like having the ability to spread the payments under OLV Customers in general feel we are cost effective. Areas for improvement are: Large agreements with lots of pages = lots of signatures. Few Competitive Upgrades. Transparency around international agreements. We need to show flexibility without it appearing complex. Software licensing is still too confusing to some. Terminating Pools under a Select Agreement is hard/complex. Still question the need for a Channel Partner. Feel few people can articulate the holistic licensing picture. Pricing an issue sometimes (But we are more flexible now). More regular informed contact needed from MS/Partners. Little joint engagement from MS & partner once agreement is signed.
Call to Action: If you want a session to discuss: Your customers Licensing Satisfaction How we can work together to improve it Please email me: [email protected] (copy your Acc. Mgr.) Please remember.. Building on a firm foundation 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Channel Strategy Closer Business Relationships with Customers and Partners Build the channel for growth Communications Internal and External: To increase satisfaction within Customer and Partners Integration with the Corporation & Regional Teams
Skills Training Internal within MS External with Partners Sales Process Forums to allow deal discussions Effective escalation processes & quick decisions Customer Strategy By Segment/vertical Customer information forums with Partners Compliance New Product Licensing Strategy Work with Corporation, Partners & Customers to address areas of concern Thank You Q&A
ConclusionIndicator 6 Terminology: Early Childhood Special Education Settings. This concludes the second webinar in the series. The terminology for Indicator 6 is important to understand so data can be reported accurately. For more information on Indicator 6, please view the...
There is multiple-sponsor co-branding, such as Taligent, a one-time technological alliance of Apple, IBM, and Motorola. Finally, there is retail co-branding in which two retail establishments use the same location to optimize space and profits, such as jointly owned Pizza...
Andrew Heywood has identified four main theories of voting. These are. The Party Identification Model. Sociological Model. Rational Choice Model. Dominant Ideology Model. Party Identification Model. Dr. R.E.V. GYAMPO Dept of Political Science, UG. Slide .
Trade chgd to palm oil, feathers, ivory, rubber, etc. Tried to push their way inland to gain more control—met w/ resistance. SamoryToure led fight vs Fr. in Senegal—failed. GB gained control of Gold Coast (Ghana), kingdom of Ashanti.
CHG: Preventing Intraluminal Entry of Microorganisms: Scrub the Hub. Prospective, randomized, blinded crossover clinical trial in a 24-bed MICU. Findings: 113/509 (22%) hubs contaminated. Use of a 3.15% CHG/70% IPA prep pad was associated with less CVC hub contamination compared...
Ready to download the document? Go ahead and hit continue!