The “M” in MPS – Are all Vendors Alike?

So you are thinking about Managed Print Services for your organization and looking for a vendor? How do you decide who will provide you with the best program?

The Challenge

As you interview vendors you are going to notice that all of them have great sales presentations with lots of promises of cost reductions, fleet optimization and reducing the time you and your staff spend managing your printing environment. The MPS marketing strategy is mature enough today that most everyone knows all of the buzz words and catch phrases, so how do you differentiate one from the other?

There are a number of factors to consider but if you are looking for a comprehensive program that will deliver on all the promises of MPS – and there are many – I suggest you take a good look at the “M” in your potential vendor(s) program.

The Problem (an opinion)

Now let me simply state the problem as I see it today: most vendors are not delivering on the full promise of MPS. As I have stated in previous postings here my experience is that once they take over the service and supply of your network laser printers and begin to collect the resulting income stream there is limited effort to improve your environment beyond selling you additional hardware – which may or may not improve your environment?

A Cause

As someone who interfaces between the client and service providers I have come to some conclusions as to one of the major causative factors and it is the “M”.

To explain this let me use two real world examples:

I have one client I work with who is contracted with a vendor for a comprehensive managed program. This vendor has an entire team of personnel assigned to the task of supporting their MPS clients and dedicated to solving problems, analyzing data, providing recommendations for improvement and implementing strategies and policies.

While not perfect, this vendor is making very good faith efforts to deliver on the MPS promise.

Another client is contracted to a different, still substantial vendor but the contrast is the account management team is the sales representative, service manager and branch manager. While these are all good folks they simply do not have the bandwidth to provide the level of management support required for a comprehensive MPS engagement.

The differentiator between these two vendors is not the promises they made or the benefits they presented but rather the commitment they have made to delivering on them.

This is not a unique case, I see this differentiation among a number of the vendors I have dealt with and client engagements I have been involved with.

How do I Determine Which Vendor has the Best “M”?

The simple answer to the above question is “by asking the right questions and performing the appropriate due diligence” when considering your vendor options.

I can tell you that after assisting a number of clients with this process you can determine who is going to provide the best management in advance. Whether your process is a simple client/sales engagement or a full RFP process similar to those I manage for clients, the right questions will yield responses that provide all the clues you need.

If you are looking for a comprehensive program to yield long-term benefits and if your only contact is the sales professional, sales manager and service manager then beware – demand to find out who will be supporting your program and what their roles will be. Make sure these folks are not merely clerical personnel who they have brought from the office to impress you but support resources you can reach out to and depend on.

For more information please feel free to contact me at (ghawkins@buscomgroup.com ) at your convenience.

“Least Cost Printing” – is it the holy grail of the Managed Print Services effort?

Over the years the convergence of technologies changed not only the way we deliver documents but the cost structure of doing so. As printer technologies evolved workflows shifted from print-once-copy-many to printing to the most convenient device. Commensurate to this was an increase in costs as page volumes moved to relatively expensive toner and ink cartridge-based engines.

So began the idea of least cost printing: as copiers transitioned to digital multifunction devices much of the effort focused on replacing printers and print-once-copy-many workflows with the MFD and concentrating print volumes to a workgroup device.

The Digital Promise

Many organizations invested in new component-based digital MFD technologies on the promise of reduced costs and even improved workflow. More often than not, this digital promise was not realized due to the inability to train their users to adopt these new workflows. The capabilities of the digital MFD remained underutilized in most enterprises as users continued to print to the desktop and workgroup toner and ink cartridge-based printers.

Fleet Management

As the marketplace realized the folly of the idea that the digital MFD would eliminate printers some began to focus on reducing the cost structure of the printer itself. The concept of fleet management began to grow and come to age enabled by improvements in the quality of remanufactured and compatible supplies.

So here we are today with half the marketplace proselytizing the benefits of fleet management while the other half continues to promote digital multifunction devices as the answer to cost containment. Meanwhile, most clients still have one foot in investments in digital MFDs and the other in fleets of printers, both toner and ink cartridge-based. For these, fleet management can without doubt reduce the expenses associated with operating printers but still not to the level of maintaining the multifunction devices.

Least Cost Printing

Simple in concept, least cost printing is one step in the evolution from fleet management to print management. It acknowledges the realities of the marketplace and can deliver dramatic results by shifting pages from higher cost-per-page devices to those with lower operating costs. Organizations can reduce office printing costs by as much as 35% with an effective least cost printing strategy.

A least cost printing strategy takes into account the actual cost-per –page of individual technologies within document output environments combined with the impact on user convenience and efficiency and drives pages to the most cost-efficient device or document delivery method for a particular job. A well designed least cost printing strategy should address issues such as color, duplex printing and electronic document distribution.

Enabling Technologies

While the concept of least cost printing has been promoted by the copier industry for a number of years to cost-justify digital multifunction devices there was not an enabling technology to train and manage users to overcome their resistance to change.

Today, there are low-impact and cost-effective enablers for least cost printing. I have used several and for the most part they are easy to install and maintain and provide an attractive return on investment.

These tools are applicable for small user groups to large enterprises who wish to leverage their technology investments and realize the digital promise. They will receive additional benefits from office printing solutions that include process controls provided by a least cost printing implementation;

• Reduced page output costs
• Improved employee productivity
• Increased utilization of technology investments
• Ability to manage office printing environments

It is my opinion that least cost printing should be part of every well-designed strategy for managing a document output environment.

How Do You Rationalize Your Desktop Printers?

Do you, or does your organization have a strategy for desktop printers? If you are like most of the managers I speak to the answer is no. When they do it is typically that desktop printers are not allowed at all or the exact opposite; anything goes! I am not sure either of these are real strategies.

My experiences have revealed very few fleet management providers address the entire desktop fleet and usually ignore the impact of their expense in assessments. If you notice I specifically said fleet management because I believe a broader managed print services engagement includes all of the devices by default.

I think desktop printers are often ignored for the following reasons:

• Their impact on costs is underestimated
  
• They add to the complexity of the project
  
• No one wants to address the associated political issues
  

Impact on Your Document Output Environment

If you believe your desktop printers will not have a significant impact on your expenses you may want to think again. If I look back over some recent clients' environments it is not at all unusual for the inkjet devices alone to look something like this:

• Inkjet devices ranged from 3 to 33% of the overall device population
  
• Inkjet produced pages ranged from 2 to 11% of the total pages
  
• Inkjet driven expenses ranged from 6 to 43% of the total expense
  
• Savings from an effective inkjet strategy ranged from 8 to 65% of the total savings
  

The actual averages would be in the upper half of these ranges, there were a couple of environments included where a first pass at removing desktop printers had already been completed. The message within the data is that most clients are quite surprised by the actual impact of their desktop, and specifically inkjet devices.

Complexity

Adding locally connected desktop printers to a well designed MPS project does not increase the work and complexity beyond the potential benefits. It is understandable why a fleet management provider who is not likely to increase their revenues as a result of this effort would not want to include them. However, you as the client or end-user should be concerned with a component of your document output environment with as much potential impact as the desktop devices may actually have. The actual savings from a good desktop strategy for some of the clients included in the numbers above ran into thousands of dollars per month.

Political Issues

When you conduct a physical survey inside an enterprise you hear every reason why someone needs (deserves) a personal desktop printer. I have had the pleasure of $450 per hour professionals sit me down and present their 30 minute justification.

Security is an issue that no one believes can, or will be challenged but it can be:

• Network printers and multifunction devices have very good secure print functions
  
• How secure is printing a document on a slow desktop printer to leave it sit in the output tray or on the desktop?
  
• Security is in the workflow and not the device
  

Having a personal printer saves time and therefore expense (soft costs):

• What was the cost difference between printing the job on the desktop versus the workgroup device?
  
• How much time was saved and what was the value of the time?
  
• Was printing the job on the desktop device a good investment?
  
• Are you really that busy 8 hours per day?
  

Printing to a workgroup device disrupts my workflow:

• An interesting statistic inside of my data is that a high percentage of users print less than one job per day to a local device?
  

Printing photographs requires a desktop color printer:

• If the photographic printing is that important you should be using color management and printing on a photo grade paper
  
• The above is rarely evidenced by the pages I see sitting on the printer and desktop
  

Let me make it clear that I am not one who believes that every desktop printer should be "yanked" out of an organization but am convinced that there should be a strategy for their deployment within a well managed document output environment. This discussion can provide an outline for such a strategy but obviously will need greater detail based on your unique environment, cost structure and corporate (institution) philosophy.

Does your RFP Reflect your MPS Objectives?

Are you the person inside your organization who is preparing an RFP or bid for Managed Print Services?

If you are, join me for a few minutes while I share some thoughts and observations based on a sampling of RFPs I have recently reviewed from both private and public enterprises. Typically, these documents did not define a course of action or set of services that would fulfill the stated objective of the RFP and resulting project!

Stated Objectives

Below I have summarized the objectives stated by most of the RFPs:

• Improved user access to resources


• Enhanced support for users


• More productive workflows


• Rationalization (right sizing) of asset base


• Better return on investment in assets


• Lower overall expenses associated with document output


• Enhanced management processes and controls


• Reduced demand on internal resources

In some instances document management, sustainability and compliancy were mentioned or stated as future or secondary goals.

Does this represent what you expect from a re-engineered and better managed document output environment?

Course of Action

Of interest to me was that most of the RFPs stated a fairly robust set of objectives as summarized above but did not lay out a course of action or process that would likely deliver more than half of them.

Typically they requested assessment processes to uncover little more than device locations and meter readings; ostensibly to be used for strategy development. This type of limited data largely represents another replacement strategy and will probably not deliver solutions beyond simple fleet management. To maximize your document output environment a robust and comprehensive assessment is needed to provide the depth of understanding required for development of a strategy.

Most either implied or actually stated their focus was on network printers or copiers (multifunction devices); sometimes stating this was a first step in a larger endeavor. While I completely understand the desire to break a project down into manageable pieces and for immediate realization of savings, these pieces should not be completed without consideration of the document output environment as a whole. After all, this departmentalization and segmentation is what created the problem we are all trying to solve.

I suggest you should consider the document output environment holistically, create an overarching strategy and then break the implementation down into manageable pieces if you feel you cannot manage a broader project at once. If not, you will more than likely be developing strategies, solutions and vendor relationships based on components without the necessary interdependencies to achieve all of your objectives; again, back to the cause of the problem.

An alternative is an all-inclusive analysis of the document output environment, development of a comprehensive strategy and implementation plan for short-, mid- and long-term improvements. There will always be fairly immediate actions which can begin the expense reductions desired without compromising the larger objectives. Similar to software development, vendor contracts should be developed as components with windows that allow them to effectively interact with and support future or expanded strategy components.

Services

As would be expected, the services defined by virtually all of the RFPs were limited along the lines of the course of actions. The assessment and strategy processes were limited to network printers or multifunction devices with other important components of a document output environment as little more than secondary thoughts. Mapping locations of devices usually had greater import than understanding user behaviors and workflow.

Defined services were largely confined to supply replenishment and fix/repair services. There were often requirements for volume tracking and reporting but almost always without a stated purpose for this data and definition of the reporting. Usage statistics other than chargeback situations are very important data but only if used in a manner to and purpose of improving the document output environment. Data limited to page volumes and costs provide limited value for re-engineering and improving the document output environment. These are all remnants of technology refreshment based on replacement versus strategy.

Often device rationalization was mentioned as an organic result of the services outlined above rather than with the appropriate level of definition and focus. Comprehensive technology and device rationalization will deliver the greatest possible expense reductions and workflow improvements and should be defined in much greater detail. A limited amount of in-field observation has led me to conclude that this is one of the promises of management print services that rarely get attention after the supply replenishment and fix/repair service are in place and revenues are being realized by vendors. This is a predictable occurrence since most vendors use MPS as a marketing strategy to capture hardware, supply and service revenues with limited in-place processes for the management component.

My suggestion is that you define the management processes with as much detail and level of interest that you apply to the supply replenishment and fix/repair services. The RFPs I read usually ask an inordinate number of questions about attitudes, processes and capabilities to furnish supplies and fix/repair service and virtually none for the strategy development or management component. You should be asking for rationalization of technology and not simply devices.

Summary

After reviewing RFPs and following up with project managers I realize that this is virgin territory for most of you with few good resources to draw on. It is often obvious these documents have been influenced by vendors' sales and marketing efforts and/or the limited view of MPS within the majority of industry participants.

What does this all mean to you? If you answered yes to the question I asked earlier about your objectives it means the difference between achieving none of them, a few of them, most of them or all of them. I am confident that several of the organizations will miss savings of hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars if they accept proposals that are limited to the course of action and services defined in their RFP.

I advise you to step back and think carefully about your larger goals and objectives and independently research managing your document output environment with less influence by service providers, hardware and supply manufacturers and software developers. There are a number of resources available that bring an independent, end-user view to this market space.

If this post caught your interest and makes some sense to you I would suggest you read several of my earlier postings as well:

Managed Print Services, Blind Men & Elephants
Print Management Versus Device Management
Improving Your Document Output Environment

Are You Sure Those Costs Are Real?

If you are one of the many business managers considering entering into a fleet management agreement today how are you measuring the potential savings to your organization? Are they based on real verifiable expenses or projections provided by a print assessment that you or a vendor has performed?

If you are able to accurately accumulate the expenses you have incurred for hardware, service and supplies you are an exception and have the ability to develop precise cost models for your print output.

However, since most organizations have trouble putting their hands on all of this information they must rely on assumptions and projections; this is where the potential problem may arise.

If this is your case, the question you should ask is "how accurately do these assumptions reflect my unique print output environment?"

Hardware Expense

• Are they based on actual monthly lease payments or amortization?


• Are they based on projected amortization and if so do the assumed life cycles meet your actual experiences?


• Are the projected amortizations based on current asset investments or on today's replacement costs?


• Are the projected amortizations based on retail pricing or current market prices?

My experience has been that often the costs of printer hardware are ignored, usually presented as insignificant but probably driven by not wanting to do the homework to accurately develop these cost components. Depending on your actual page volumes per device these costs can be a fairly significant factor and I would suggest should be based on replacement costs for a like asset.

Supplies (Operating Costs)

• Are the costs per unit based on your actual purchasing history or an assumption?


• Are the assumed costs retail pricing or current market prices?


• Are the assumed costs based on the actual ink or print cartridges that you purchase (standard, high-yield, new OEM, compatibles, return program etc.)?


• Have you included all consumables (toner cartridges, fuser units, transfer kits, drum units, ink heads etc.)?


• Did you factor in supply inventory shrinkage, waste and obsolescence?


• What were the monochrome and color page coverage assumptions (five, nine, twelve, fifteen percent per channel)?

This is the area you should inspect since some sales professionals pad these expenses to make their proposal seem much more attractive. It is not unusual to read a proposal where the highest possible cost per toner cartridge is used (standard cartridge at retail) and unrealistic page coverage models employed. If your projected costs were based on anything higher than eight to ten percent (per color channel) you should ask for a good justification. To understand the impact, a fifteen percent (15%) coverage model used by some sales professionals increases your operating cost three-fold. Just because it is almost impossible to accurately measure your actual coverage you should not accept unreasonably high assumptions.

Service & Support (Operating Costs)

• Are the service costs based on actual in-place contracts, care kits or incurred expenses?
• If assumed costs what is the basis for them and are they realistic (e.g. the cost of care kits)?
• Have you included a cost for your internal IT or Technology support?
• Have you included a cost for infrastructure, network connection, wiring and switches?
  
  

This is another cost factor that gets ignored since it can be difficult to find your actual expenses. Unless you utilize internal support software it may be hard to determine what percentage of your time is spent on printer-related issues. There are published assumptions on these topics within the IT industry itself that you can use to base your assumptions.

I am going to go out on limb here and make the suggestion that the current cost projections contained in most proposals will be overstated as will the potential savings. I am not stating there will not be savings but even if they are small to none a comprehensive fleet management program is worthwhile since it provides so many other benefits for you and your constituent internal clients.

Improving Your Document Output Environment

Are you the one who has been tasked with improving your organizations document output environment – where will you begin?

Taking the common path will mean following the recommendations of most of the vendors you will encounter and focus on reducing the operating costs of your network printer fleet. You may even contract with one of them to "manage" it under an MPS or fleet management umbrella.

Obviously, the network printer fleet is a major component of your document output environment but only that, a component. If you do not consider other elements such as user behaviors and workflow, or try to address the network printer fleet in isolation from the rest of the environment you are missing the greatest opportunity to maximize your environment.

It is my belief that it is just as important to understand how and where the documents originate as it is to know where they are output. Analysis of the data I find in my document environment assessments invariably allows me to identify expense reductions as high as 35% without ever addressing operating costs. Without this knowledge how can one truly maximize both the fleet and user productivity?

Three simple examples to illustrate this point:

In a recent assessment I discovered that the client was printing approximately 36,000 color pages per month from e-mail. At a contracted cost of $0.075 per page they were wasting a minimum of $2,700 per month on this unnecessary activity.

In another project the client's equipment supplier recommended they upgrade a color-enabled MFD due to increased volume. Analysis of the data showed that just over 40% of the volume was coming from another workgroup who had an MFD that did not meet their needs. Replacing the device with too much volume would not have solved the core problem.

It is not unusual to discover that a percentage of users print 100% of their documents in color without any application-based requirements to do so. Additionally they often do this on desktop printers with a cost per page averaging 20 cents.

When performing assessments many vendors map the client's devices, some even map the volumes produced by those devices but mapping the volumes by user really provides a view of how the document output assets should be placed to best meet their needs.

More often than not I encounter prospects and RFPs that are only addressing the network printer fleet without consideration of the desktop printers, facsimile machines and MFDs. It is only with a balanced deployment of all these classes of devices that you can maximize your environment. Detailed data that shows job characteristics such as size by pages allows you to develop an effective least cost printing strategy.

The point of this post is if you are setting out to re-engineer your print output environment do not shortchange yourself by limiting the scope of the project. Assessing and analyzing all components will provide you with the knowledge of their interdependencies and ultimately allow you to maximize each one individually. Stay in touch for more detailed discussions of these topics.

Print Management versus Device Management - One Last Try

My first three posts developed the idea that MPS was more than device or fleet management - discussing the roots of the confusion and the reason(s) it should be important to providers and end-users alike.

It was my intent to move on to more granular discussions of MPS at this point but some of the responses from various sources causes me to make one last attempt to differentiate the parent from the child.

Managed print services (MPS) should do just that; manage print or the print environment. Some of the responses pointed out that MPS is more than CPP programs; it is management of the fleet and fleet strategy. This indicates they missed the point of my postings which leads me to pose the question; "how does device or fleet management fully equate to managing print?” Does it not manage print devices - a subset of managing print? In fact, the term MPS was coined to define a broader set of services than fleet management. I hope the folks who responded by offering various definitions of fleet management as MPS take a moment to read the earlier posting Managed Print Services, Blind Men & Elephants

Since users generate the documents to begin with and their workflow and behaviors determine the methods of output how can we as providers or end-users maximize our print environments without managing user behaviors, workflow and change. How does one maximize the fleet without knowing the sources and characteristics of the documents? Are we trying to just reduce the costs and resources required to print a page or possibly reduce the number of pages, implement a least cost printing strategy or improve productivity?

For those who thought this was all about semantics, it is not! It is important for all parties to realize the full potential of MPS so they do not limit the scope of their strategies to just devices and fleets. End-user clients can maximize their print environments and providers can build a complete set of complementary services. This obviously does not mean every end-user or service provider will implement all possible MPS components but the key idea here is that they should be armed with the awareness that lets them "choose." If MPS is constantly limited to managing the fleet or fleet strategy what choices will be available?

There was at least one suggestion that it did not matter how you defined MPS or what service mark you applied to your offering but rather how you consummate the client engagement. I completely agree with this observation and would suggest that a robust service offering which includes more than just fleet management can significantly increase the ability to meet the client’s needs.

Stay tuned to this blog for expanded discussions of MPS offerings which may shed some light for those with a view limited to device management or management of the fleet and the fleet strategy. I certainly appreciate any and all feedback; the discussion is necessary and excellent. I especially welcome comments from those who are in fact taking MPS beyond the devices and fleet.

MPS – A Contrarian Viewpoint?

First off, let me acknowledge that some of the following assertions and observations are generalizations but that is germane to this posting.

It appears to me that the majority of participants in this industry equate managed print services with cost-per-page or device (fleet) management programs which include supplies, fix/repair services and some degree of usage reporting. If this observation is correct then my view of MPS is contrary to the industry in general.

I have been arguing for some time that MPS is actually a collection of service offerings designed to help clients design, implement and manage a digital document output environment rather than just manage output devices. Further, I would outline the MPS roadmap as follows:

• Assessment services
• RFP & bid management
• Supply sourcing and management
• Fix/Repair services
• Technical support
• Hardware placement
• Workflow design & implementation
• Strategic management services

The question you should be asking is “why is this important to me or my clients.”

While CPP or device management programs may reduce end-user client expenses they do not necessarily solve the underlying problems – a lack of environmental management. A comprehensive MPS engagement on the other hand will address these causative factors and deliver additional benefits such as efficiency, productivity, sustainability and additional savings.

If, as a service provider, you ignore the MPS components other than device management you are not only short-changing your own business but your client(s) as well.

Maybe even more important is the following question:

“As device management services mature, what will be my differentiator other than the cost of my services; will I be able to compete with other service providers who offer more robust managed print services?”

We have seen margins decline in both traditional MFD and printer markets; what makes us think that competition will not bring the same results to device management services?

I realize that every dealer may not have the resources to enter this market with a full set of managed print services but at least you should be aware of the long-term prospects so you can plan accordingly. Enter the market now with what you can do but plan your offerings to fit into a larger professional services practice or develop partnerships to supplement your capabilities.

A case in point is the practice of providing free print assessments to capture the supply and service revenue from network printers. If you are investing the time why not execute them with enough value to charge a reasonable fee? If margins do decline will you be able to continue to bear the costs associated with assessments? The rush to free assessments reminds me of the rush to provide free copier trials as that industry matured or no-charge networking support for MFDs: where did that get us all?

MPS services provide value to the client if executed with their best interest in mind and most reasonable clients expect to pay for services which deliver measureable benefits to their organization.

It seems to me that providing MPS components free of charge indicates you are trying to sell services using a hardware (or supplies) sales model rather than the appropriate model for a professional services offering.

I invite you to view my version of the MPS Roadmap on my LinkedIn profile at http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=3614067&trk=tab_pro

Are You Still Thinking About Managed Print Services?

Managed print services should no longer be ignored or merely contemplated by either the provider community or end-user client. MPS can resolve the issues resulting from the convergence between component-based copiers and cartridge-based printers and continued use of early print workflows by the end-user community.

MPS will deliver expense reductions, improve technology ROI and increase employee productivity for end-user clients who have seen an explosion of cartridge-based assets and associated pages.

MFD dealers who experienced erosion of page volumes can recapture lost revenues or traditional printer dealers can protect or increase their share of the clients document output spend.

Change

In order to cross the chasm most of the interested parties will need to rethink their strategies.

End-user clients can benefit from transitioning to a truly digital document output environment versus simply employing digitally-based technology in a predominantly analog workflow. Virtually all available output technology enables advanced digital production workflows, management and modification of user behaviors, high level proactive support and effective business processes to measure and manage their environments.

Service providers from both sides of the technology spectrum will need to rethink their objectives from simply selling more hardware, supplies and fix/repair services to assisting their clients design, implement and manage a digital document output environment. Most will need to change their approaches from selling hardware, supplies and service to being a services provider much the same way as IT related organizations did a decade ago.

Opportunity

Implementation of managed print services provides the greatest savings for the end-user client; these high value services deliver the highest margin potential for the service provider: both parties win.

All of the managed print services components—assessment services, strategic planning, fleet management, technical support, hardware placement, workflow design and strategic management services provide revenue opportunities for the provider.

The good news is that you probably have many of the resources in place required to enter managed print services and only need to understand it better. If not, you can find partners that will participate with you in building your MPS strategy. Armed with this knowledge and a good assessment of your objectives, expectations and resources you can plan a successful MPS strategy.

Next Step

Ask yourself the following questions:

• What is MPS?
• What are my reasons for getting into it?
• What are my expectations and how will I measure success?
• What commitments am I willing to make to succeed?

Additionally, service providers should consider:

• Are my clients requesting this service?
• Am I meeting competitive pressures?
• Am I looking for new revenue opportunities or am I simply trying to sell more hardware, supplies and fix/repair services.

Once you have answered these questions, you can determine what commitments it will take and what returns they will render.

Managed Print Services, Blind Men & Elephants

After being involved in managed print services for nine years I notice one constant; confusion as to what this opportunity is! Titles such as fleet management, print management and managed print services are used interchangeably and tossed about as synonyms: but should they be?

Much like the story of the blind men and the elephant, MPS is confidently defined by vendors with products that touch a single part of it. Since “managed print services” arose primarily from the printer and compatible cartridge industries, most of its focus is on the service and support of the network print output fleet, or fleet management.

Let me get to the point of this posting: MPS provides revenue opportunities for vendors to help their clients manage document production and printed output, not just the network devices. If you consider that reputable industry analysts project printed output represents only 10 percent of the total cost of document production, it becomes obvious that there is considerable potential outside of simply managing output devices.

MPS is a collection of related service offerings, all of which provide revenue opportunities for the provider. If we continue to let vendors define and promote managed print services offerings based on their individual interests the providers will miss out on significant portions of the revenue opportunity.

With the advent of digital multifunction devices hardware vendors promoted hiring of technology support specialists to promote sales of hardware. In spite of the significant added value provided by their investments, dealers continued to earn their first dollar at the time of the hardware sale and rely on fix/repair services and supply sales for ongoing revenues.

As MPS grows, providers are now encouraged to provide assessment, design and support services free of charge to capture toner cartridge revenues or hardware sales. Software vendors promote sales professionals performing assessment and analysis rather than focusing these practices on specialists; it sells more seat licenses.

Much of the industry simplifies MPS to servicing and supplying fleets of printers and multifunction devices but there is much more to it than that. Fleet management is but one important managed print service.

Implementing MPS carries the highest margin potential for your dealership, and likely the greatest savings for your client.

Your clients realize real value from MPS and you differentiate your dealership when you solve their problems, not just tell them they exist with simplistic print output assessments designed to sell them additional hardware. A well-designed print management strategy will provide a compelling value proposition for your client and deliver multiple benefits to you.

You can positively change the sales dynamics between your sales organization and clients and create greater value. This will increase revenues within your current client base, create a differentiated value proposition in competitive engagements and provide an engagement strategy within your target accounts. You will benefit from net new professional services revenues with potentially higher margins, increased hardware placements and greater aftermarket revenues.