Evan Schuman's StorefrontBacktalk

Franchisee Columnist Todd Michaud has spent the last 16 years trying to fight IT issues, with the last six years focused on franchisee IT issues. He is currently responsible for IT at Focus Brands (Cinnabon, Carvel, Schlotzsky’s and Moe’s Southwestern Grill).

It amazes me how many business leaders treat their IT business partners poorly. Delivering IT services is hard, no matter which company you work for. IT is complex, and it breaks (at the worst times). IT people are not perfect. Does anyone really think that all of the yelling and screaming is going to help? The same people who wouldn’t think about giving anything but an “Exceeds” on a performance review have no problem screaming at a service provider over and over again.

Then there are negotiations. “You need to sharpen your pencil, I’m not paying this much.” Good IT leaders will work hard to deliver services at the lowest possible cost. But they need to be careful not to negotiate such a low price that the vendor will never be able to meet their expectations for service. Believe it or not, getting the lowest price is not always the right goal. By the way, if anyone is looking for someone to help negotiate a cheap, crappy IT service I know plenty of people who would rock your world.

I have somewhat of a unique perspective on this situation, because I have only been on the customer side of the table for the last 7 years. Prior to that, I was on the provider side. Believe me when I say that I have been part of more than one customer smack-down. Sometimes it is absolutely deserved (a recent incident with a service provider prompted me to write this article); sometimes, however, it is just standard operating procedure. I am talking about those people who have unrealistic expectations and go off the deep end whenever the smallest thing happens. There is a time and place to express frustration or even anger. But done in perpetuity it not only loses its impact, it works against you. (I don’t know about you, but the last person who I want to talk to is the one who always yells at me.)

I think that one of the biggest problems is having unrealistic expectations of a service provider. The three biggest expectation barriers are the “Expert Driver Syndrome,” the “I Don’t Get It Syndrome” and the “Everything Costs $1 Syndrome.”

Let’s start with the “Expert Driver Syndrome. ”Something like 90 percent of all drivers believe that they are much better than the average driver (the same holds true for poker players). This is, of course, not possible. When it comes to IT services, I smile when I hear IT leaders say “If I had this in-house, we wouldn’t have these problems” or “If it were my team, it would absolutely be better/faster/cheaper than these knuckleheads.”

I hate to break it to these folks, but that is probably not the case. Let’s go back to my opening about IT being hard. The fact is that at some point, somebody (maybe even the same person making the comments) chose this particular service provider because that person believed the provider could supply a high level of service at a reasonable cost. Typically, this vendor was chosen after closely considering all of the competitors in the same space. So what makes some IT leaders feel that internal resources could do a better job?

I am realistic about my ability to attract and retain top IT talent when IT is not something that is core to a company (we sell food). I believe a service provider that is good enough to win my business will have attracted some of the top talent in that particular technical arena. Technical people tend to migrate to where their talents can be best utilized. My goal is to find the provider that best meets my price/value needs and to support that provider with a staff who is good at extracting as much value from that provider as possible. There are things that it makes sense to keep in-house. But IT is not a core competency of my organization, so my goal is to keep that in-house list pretty small.

I absolutely don’t buy the “If it were internal resources they would care more” rebuttal. Unless you really purchased the bottom-of-the-barrel service, your provider cares as much–if not more–about supplying the highest level of service. Losing a client may have a dramatic impact on the company’s future, and that is motivating to the team. I know. I’ve been there.

Let’s say that the “Expert Driver Syndrome” prevails, and the IT services are brought in-house. Of course, part of the justification for this change will be that “It will be better if we do it ourselves.” What happens if it isn’t any better? If the people providing the service worked for the IT leader instead of the service provider, would they still be treated the same way? Would the IT leader take that tone of voice or send those e-mails? I believe that most would not. So why is it any different? In both situations you are paying people to provide a service, so why in some situations are people treated differently? Is a purchase really that different from a hire?