“Déjà Vu All Over Again”

To quote Yogi Berra, this was my reaction when I recently attended a session on Managed Print Services at the CompTIA conference.

“One Day we Will”

To set the stage, the speaker was a nationally recognized leader in the world of Managed Print Services. Shortly after the presentation began, I heard the statement “one day we will” followed by a number of action statements laying out advantages of, and benefits resulting from, a managed print services program. These were client focused – musing, or maybe wishing, that one day the industry would provide these to their clients. I was taken aback by this setup phrase and the list that followed.

The Surprise

This presentation took me back to a decade ago when the industry was spending a great deal of time and energy defining, and re-defining what managed print services was, or should be. Bloggers and chat site participants offered, and often argued over these definitions. Back then it caused me to post the “Blind Men and the Elephant” tale on this blog. So here I am, ten years later and listening to an industry expert surmising that one day, managed print services vendors would provide these advantages and benefits for their clients. I could not help but wonder what has been going on for the past decade, I thought these things defined managed print services, are they not what service providers do for their clients?

The Next Three Days

This session really set my agenda for the rest of the conference as I set out to understand what other folks, closely tied to managed print services, were experiencing. I had lengthy conversations with software vendors, analysts, industry journalists and service providers. I began each of these conversations describing my reaction to what I had heard and solicited their opinions on both the content and my reaction. I was trying to determine whether I was totally out of touch with the state of the industry today.

My Findings

Without exception, each of the individuals, or groups I talked to, confirmed what the speaker had inferred; that the vast majority of service providers used managed print services as a marketing strategy but rarely delivered on their pre-sale promises.

The software vendors explained how dealers would leverage their products to entice a prospect, but only occasionally implement it in the final solution. The general consensus was that they liked to talk about reducing pages and expense during the sales process but were loath to do so once they captured the revenue stream. This seems to be especially true when it comes to implementing rules-based-printing to reduce the number of those highly profitable color pages.

The industry analysts I talked to were unanimous in their observations that few service providers ever delivered on most of the promises of their print management program. The most generous opinion was that twenty percent of the providers delivered on their commitments while the most cynical put that number at ten percent.

Back to the Beginning

It has been quite some time since I published here, or attended an industry event. My last posting was titled “The “M” in MPS – Are all Vendors Alike”; I decided to attend the CompTIA event to see what was happening in managed print services beyond my view. I was interested in knowing what had changed since this last posting.

I need to clarify what I said at the beginning about being surprised. What actually surprised me was that I was not surprised. I went to this event to explore whether what I see in my world is representative of the whole – it appears it may be!

My personal findings are that there are only a handful of managed print services vendors who provide any significant level of management. This includes nationally recognized vendors who have put millions into some very convincing marketing efforts.

To quote a client who I recently took over from one of these vendors, “you have done more in three months than they did in the past three years.”

Maybe the difference is that I do not sell hardware or supplies, which means I do not have the conflicting motives that continue to dominate managed print services.

I think there may be a lesson in that!

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

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.

Managing your Document Output Environment – Where do you Begin?

I suppose that I should disclose from the beginning that this posting was born largely from frustration. After studying a couple of dozen more RFPs and RFIs from both private and public organizations I hope I may be able to influence some of you!

What are your Influences?

While I have read a number of well thought out documents it seems to me that the majority have two primary influences:

• copier and multifunction device leases up for renewal
• vendor presentations on their versions of managed print services

My impression is that most of these RFPs are seeking a strategy rather than being based on a thoroughly developed one. My concern is that many well-intentioned project managers are rushing into commitments and contracts that will tie their hands from real environment improvements and expense reductions for the period of the resulting contract.

What is the Rush?

I am surprised by how many of these RFPs have been published with a combination of short time frames for implementation and lack of strategic direction. Most of these appear to be copier bids modified in some way to explore managed print services. My conclusion is that their genesis is a copier contract expiring in sixty or ninety days and were rushed to meet that restrictive timeline.

Since my professional life is based on helping you implement efficient document output environments, maximizing your effort and realizing your objectives are important to me. My advice therefore is take your time, do it right and follow a strategic plan!

Two of my more recent clients brought me in to make recommendations for upcoming technology replacement: lease ends. In both cases I was able to show them that it was in their best interest to take the time to approach their document output environments holistically and strategically.

Where did we Begin?

After these clients saw the long-term potential of changing their approach from rushing to replace their leased hardware to implementing a managed document output environment we explored the short-, mid- and long-term actions for implementation.

The first step was to consider the current fleet. In the cases of both clients and most of the RFPs I have read, the fleet had useful life remaining – there was no immediate need to replace it. So rather than rush into an agreement looking for a strategy we extended the current contract; in one case by negotiating a much reduced monthly lease payment and the other by exercising a very low cost purchase option. These actions provided time to develop a comprehensive document output strategy and resulted in significant monthly expense reductions while we did. Interesting note is that I helped the client who exercised their buyout sell the fleet for $35,000 more than their purchase option a year later.

During the same time we implemented other cost-saving actions as well as putting a freeze on new printer purchases resulting in even more savings.

Preparing for MPS

By taking a step back we were able to accomplish a number of things:

• create immediate significant expense reductions
• rationalize the entire fleet of document output devices
• prepare the employees for change and future workflows
• implement new workflows to leverage new hardware
• create a plan for the contract term and beyond
• develop a comprehensive document output strategy

Taking the time to create a thorough document output strategy enabled:

• identification of additional savings and improvements
• full leveraging of current investments in technology
• issuance of highly defined RFPs that supported the clients’ strategies
• implementation of world class managed document output environments

The Take-Away

What I hope you take away from this posting is that implementation of a managed document output environment is an important undertaking in today’s business and technology climate and deserves the time and attention to do it right.

I encourage you to begin your planning today if you are under a current copier/multifunction device contract or explore ways to avoid rushing into an incomplete agreement.

Additionally, develop your RFP and resulting contract based on your individual needs and strategy and do not limit them to what service providers tell you they can do. Managed print services should not come from a can!

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

Where Have All The Phases Gone?

After viewing vendor MPS programs and talking to you, the end-user clients I am beginning to wonder where have all the phases gone? The more I explore the more it seems that these theoretical phases are just that – theory. My real question is what long-term plan they belong to; providing you with the “managed” component of MPS or waiting for you to forget about the promises made to phase in your expected benefits.

Phase One And Then?

How many of you have contracted with a vendor for managed print services to find that after offering up your fleet and paying a few months worth of invoices the program results in nothing more than a cost per page service and supply contract – fleet management.

What reports are you receiving to help improve your document output environment? Are they limited to how much your fleet is producing and how well your new vendor is servicing them?

Have you found that most of the management recommendations you receive are for additional or new technology investments you need to make?

If so, how does this help you to create a world-class document output environment: how does it reduce expenses, improve productivity or make for greater user satisfaction?

How Do You Get What You Expected?

As you consider entering into a managed print services relationship you need to do a better job of determining which vendor can simply talk the talk and which can illustrate their ability to deliver the results you are looking for. Just like interviewing a new employee, past performance is a good predictor of future success; do not accept vendor sales presentations that tell you what they did for other clients but demand they clearly explain in detail how they are going to meet your objectives. Require and read a business proposal that addresses your environment, organizational politics and goals.

Is your current vendor agreement based on a contract presented by that vendor? If so, how does this boilerplate document meet your specific needs any better than the last lease or service agreement you had in place. It is my suggestion that these contracts represent a program-in-a- box and can provide little more than the previously mentioned fleet management.

A managed print services engagement, like any other professional services contract, should be customized to your project, contain a detailed scope of work and clearly outline how services will be delivered and the responsibilities of both parties. In addition, I would suggest it defines success and failure and contains remedies for lack of performance.

This discussion reminds me a bit of the current political discourse in America, Many, including me believe that we deserve the government we currently have. Until we demand better and pay attention to the result we will not get better.

The same goes for the state of MPS; if you, the client demand more the service providers will be forced to improve their capabilities and resulting performance. If you never call in your provider and question what happened to the other phases I am confident many will conveniently forget about them.

Part of the problem is MPS is relatively new in the industry and even though many copier and printer dealers realize they need to participate they are struggling with the how. This goes back to my earlier point; you need to separate those who can talk from those who know how to do.

Summary

For those of you, who are truly looking to realize the benefits of a world-class managed document output environment you have to take some responsibility, just like any other business venture you undertake:

• Educate yourself on what MPS can and should be
• Understand the differences between managing your document output environment and fleet management
• Define your own objectives, do not let a vendor determine them for you since this is a basic conflict of interest
• Create a statement of work based on your own goals and expectations, do not enter into a boilerplate MPS agreement
• Inspect what your vendor is doing and provide them with proper reinforcement

Like anything else, as an educated and motivated client you will realize the benefits you are looking for and may locate where the mysterious phases have been hiding.

If these opinions and discussion caught your attention and you would like to pursue it further please contact me (ghawkins@buscomgroup.com ) at your convenience.

What Have I Missed?

It has been quite some time since I last posted to this blog or contributed to any of the interest groups on the web. I thought it would be interesting to catch up a little bit and see what I have missed.

Where Have I Been?

Just so folks realize that I still have a grass-roots perspective on the state of the industry I thought I would let you know that I have been extremely busy with a number of large projects assisting organizations to assess their document output environments and create and implement comprehensive document output strategies.

In addition, I have been reading quite a few bids, RFPs and proposals for managed print services from around the country as I help independent dealers write their proposals and create their reports.

My Personal Assessment

My absence was not only a result of being extremely busy but also influenced by what I saw happening within the industry and in the multitude of web conversations. It became very frustrating to read the same rehashed information and what I believe to be limited views of the managed print services as a whole.

It is my opinion that other than more people talking about the topic, the state of managed print services has not progressed too much in the past number of years. While some of the software tools have developed and hardware has become more compliant the actual services being offered fail to deliver on the promise.

There are a number of analysts and organizations promoting multiple definitions of MPS while others chatter about hybrid dealers and phases of engagement but I queston what clients are actually realizing.

My Experiences

A while back there was an ongoing conversation about MPS being little more than a marketing strategy. My experience with actual clients who have engaged with MPS providers largely confirms that observation. Once the contracts were signed and the first of the proverbial phases captured the income stream the other phases seem to be forgotten. The resulting engagement quickly reverted to a cost-per-page fleet management program.

As I read through end-user client generated bids and RFPs I understand how this can happen – they rarely address anything beyond a fleet management engagement. It is very easy to see the influences of the various vendors and dealers they talked to prior to building their requirements document.

My Conclusion

Maybe I am just too impatient and expect the industry to develop at a pace faster than it is capable of. I suppose if I wait long enough MPS engagements will deliver on their potential and promise. Given enough time will end-user clients demand more from their vendors?

But wait a minute, what will be the drivers that cause this to happen:

• Clients’ realizing they are spending more than they did before?
• Competition driving pricing down and creating need for greater differentiation?
• New players jumping in and forcing the industry to change?

On the other hand this is still a manufacturer-driven industry and as long as they are accomplishing their objectives (software, supply and hardware sales) who will be leading the charge for change?

What’s Next?

This is a at least in part a hypothetical question but I there are some things each of us can do to chart our own course and enact positive changes:

• MPS providers can begin to look beyond the simple supply provisioning, fix/repair services and simple reporting they are offering to develop value-laden and highly differentiated MPS service offerings
• Clients can do a little more homework and invest in greater knowledge which will yield handsome returns in the form of greater savings, better workflow and return on their technology investments.

Personally I am going back to work helping end-user clients realize the benefits of a world-class document output environment for their enterprise.

If these opinions and discussion caught your attention and you would like to pursue it further please contact me (ghawkins@buscomgroup.com ) at your convenience.

Least Cost Printing – Why Users Don’t Print to the MFD

Many of you have attempted to reduce your document output expenses by investing in multifunction devices and connecting them to your network. The question is how many of you have realized the results you hoped for?

Success Stories

As I talk to organizations across the country and spectrum of purpose I have found a relatively small percentage that has succeeded. Almost without exception, those that met their objectives did it by removing their cartridge-based printer fleet; thereby forcing users to use the component-based multifunction devices. It is rare to find a success story within the population that left the printer fleet intact.

Where Do the Pages Go?

The observation stated above comes from the data within the detailed assessments I perform as part of my client engagement. Even today, in mixed environments the number of pages produced on printers typically exceeds those produced on MFDs in a truly mixed environment. My experience shows the hoped-for shift in user behaviors and pages did not occur on a large scale, if at all.

Why User Behaviors Did Not Change

Let me share with you a few high-level findings that are common upon an assessment of document output environments similar to yours:

• Most users are totally unaware of the page cost differential
• Many users do not have MFD print drivers loaded on their workstation
• A large number of users are unaware of workflows that would be of benefit
• Inadequate training led to fear of change

While these seem like very simple “duh” statements they are significant to the failure of most attempts to print to lower cost per page MFDs.

Awareness

When performing a detailed environmental assessment I spend a great deal of time within the user community. Invariable during the device discovery process or user interviews I am questioned as to the cause and purpose of the project.

When I explain the high-level expenses associated with document output (possibly millions of dollars) users are quite surprised. When the discussion becomes more granular it often becomes disbelief; they simply had no clue that their desktop inkjet may be generating expenses as high as $0.25 per page or that the cost per page of the MFD (copier) is half that of their laser printer. Once that discussion is complete (proven) and expense reduction tied into something important to them (maintaining their benefits for example) their attitude typically changes to one of support.

Access to Devices

Very often during one of my user discussions they relate that they do not use the MFD because they do not have access to it. Further discovery usually uncovers that they have access to it but do not have a print driver, or the correct print driver loaded on their workstation.

There are actually two somewhat separate issues here, ability to print to the MFD at all and ability to access the features and functions offered by the MFD.

During a typical on-site discovery I load quite a few print drivers for the MFD that should be used. When shown the correct print driver and the functions they can access I usually encounter a little bit of excitement exhibited by the fact they print a document before I can leave.

Workflow

Another one of the significant influencers I find is that users typically do not understand the workflows associated with the MFD and how it can benefit them:

• Access to finishing options from the print driver
• Ability to identify and print to special media such as letterhead
• Secure printing workflows
• Print and hold workflows

These discussions often result in a “ah ha” moment when they realize they can actually take advantage of the speed and functions of the MFD from the print driver and maintain control of their jobs.

Training

This last issue, lack of training is the single most significant contributor to resistance to change behaviors and obviously influences the three other issues discussed above. It is interesting that in a group interview the issue rarely presents itself; few of us want to admit we do not understand something. However, if you listen and observe carefully, and ask the question in the correct manner someone will usually identify lack of training in a second or third party inference.

When approached individually and confidentially you will have the opportunity to walk the resistant user through the process and again experience the “ah ha” moment as they discover how it actually benefits them.

Now it is quite obvious that none of this is rocket science but these issues commonly derail attempts to redefine your document output strategy. Addressing them should be part of your implementation strategy and performed by your internal resources or contracted vendor.

Admittedly, fixing these issues may not still give you all the results you were hoping for, but will contribute. For those of you thinking, "some users just do not want to change," further modification of user behaviors can be accomplished with one of the software packages designed for that purpose. An additional benefit of these tools is they also provide you the measurements from which you can manage individual users and your entire document output environment.

Are You Getting the Color You Expected?

Have you invested in new digital color technology? Are you getting the color quality you were hoping for – the expectation that drove your investment? If you would like to see improvements read on!

Unattended Consequences

Typically change brings both positive and negative consequences. As color-enabled printers and multifunction devices have become commonplace we have enjoyed dramatic decreases in the associated costs. Color has become increasingly affordable and therefore more accessible to your organizations and user communities. Commensurate with this popularity has been the declining levels of color knowledge among the vendor and end-users which often results in your organization not realizing the quality of color you hoped to or should get.

Does it Really Matter Anyway?

This is an excellent question; does the color quality really matter? If green is green and red is red what is the difference? In many applications it does not really matter but there are plenty where it does or it should. If color is being used to highlight text or titles, or to separate segments of a pie chart then as long as red is red maybe that is good enough.

On the other hand many organizations have made significant investments in brand development so they should be concerned about the accuracy of color that represents corporate logos and color schemes. Is it important that embedded images of products, buildings and people be accurately represented?

Color Influencers

This topic has occupied complete books so I will keep it really simple here. There are many influences on color quality ranging from user tastes to changes in climate. Some of these we cannot change or control, but we can manage with some simple processes:

• Standardized desktop applications


• Workflow design to maximize the technology being utilized


• Workflow designed to compensate for user skills or lack thereof


• Document standards to maximize the technology being utilized


• Processes to maintain consistency on the output devices

Design and implementation of some basic processes and controls can maximize the quality from your particular technology, brand or model of device while taking into account the knowledge level of your users.

What Changed

It was not long ago that good to excellent quality color devices were very slow, costly to acquire and expensive to operate. The marketplace was limited to several significant manufacturers and often a subset of their distribution. The successful vendors utilized color specialists who helped the client justify these investments by implementing some of the processes mentioned above. This support structure and marketing strategy is now limited to high-end graphic arts devices if it exists at all. Today, virtually every sales person sells color enabled devices but very few of them have any substantial knowledge of color production issues.

As I work with clients who are seeking better color output I am quite amused by the sales strategies and product positioning they relay to me. What frustrates me is that often the sales person could have made a more expensive sale if they had listened to and understood their client’s needs better.

Doe's This Matter to You?

If maximizing color quality from your color output devices does matter to you then there are several things you can do today, or in the future when considering technology refreshment.

• You can inquire of your current vendor if they provide, or can direct you to someone who does provide this type of support and workflow design


• Next time you consider investing in color technology, ask these same questions of your potential vendors and demand proof that they really can provide the support you will require if they claim they do


• When purchasing color enabled output devices make sure you clearly define your expectations and purchase the correct technology to fulfill them. This may not mean the cheapest solution presented to you.

There are services providers out here who can help you build the processes and controls to maximize your color output or can assist you to determine whether the technologies, brands, devices or vendors you are considering can meet your needs.

In closing I would like to make it very clear that given today’s pricing for color enabled output devices it is not reasonable to expect a current or potential vendor to do this for no additional charge. There simply is not enough profit left to carry the cost of that type of support. It is not something that everyone needs, but it is something that a lot of organizations should be concerned about. If you are one of those I hope these thoughts help you to formulate a plan of action.

MPS – Are You Thinking Laterally or Vertically?

After reading a number of postings in several Linkedin user groups I recognize similarities to our national political discussion. So, I have decided to borrow an idea from Mike Huckabee and apply it to the ongoing MPS discussion; lateral and vertical thinking.

The Similarities

If you are a cable news junkie like me, you must be amused by the non-stop chatter of political talking heads who constantly position every issue as either left or right. This filters down to our elected officials who argue every point strictly within their Democratic or Republican party position. Have you noticed no one seems to care about what is good for We the People, the taxpayers. This is lateral thinking, right or left versus vertical thinking, positive results for the people or negative impact on them– get the idea?

What I see happening in the MPS discussion are different folks taking positions to the left (MPS) or the right (hardware focused sales). MPS advocates definitely consider themselves as the progressives so they earn the left position on my lateral scale.

Lateral Thinking

In many of these discussions the participants like to talk about the positioning of their offerings and usually describe them in terms of how solution oriented (leftist) they are. They talk about what title to apply to their sales professionals and programs. Much attention is paid to the CPP approach and electronic monitoring of devices. There are lots of challenges issued to the dinosaurs of the copier world (my words) and a significant number of negative references to their business practices. Has anyone but me noticed that each side considers the other’s sales professionals and dealers as pencil whipping scammers and brokers of dishonesty?

Bottom line is most of the discussion is on positioning according to the marketing strategy and processes employed: this is how we do it!

Vertical Thinking

In contrast vertical thinking is about positive or negative results for the client.

Outside of a few individuals there does not seem to be much discussion about this. I read about and see in the field many programs that employ MPS processes but do little to nothing to improve the client’s environment. Some of the ones I have seen actually increase the clients cost structure without adding very much convenience to justify it (must have been some great pencil whipping done).

I think a recent posting by Jim Fitzpatrick summed it up quite well. To paraphrase; “if the client has not seen an account manager or been presented with suggestions for improvement based on reports since the implementation this is not MPS!”

Where is Your Thinking

So the question I ask is where is your thinking and MPS program? Is it simply a sales strategy as discussed by Tom Callinan a while back, or is it an actual program that manages the client’s environment beyond delivery of fix/repair services, supplies and usage reporting?

I would suggest if it is the former you are going to see some pretty strong competitive challenges as other vendors and industry participants educate your clients about what MPS could be. If this is the case, there are a number of resources for you to use to create greater value in your programs and service offerings. Start with taking a quick look at the Managed Print Services Roadmap contained in my Linkedin profile.

My Linkedin Profile

If your thinking is truly vertical, congratulations and good luck with your business; you should be able to realize some nice growth over the next few years!

“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.

MPSA – Constructive or Divisive?

As I follow the numerous discussions and postings on various blogs and Linkedin groups I cannot help but wonder if this new organization will promote the MPS market space, or divide the participants.

It is a fact that any organization of two or more human beings is subject to politics; the challenge is to rise above them to serve a useful and maybe even noble purpose to its constituents.

• Provide a forum for sharing of ideas
  
• Facilitate learning for the improvement of the industry
  
• Recognize and promote best practices
  
• Create standards for the protection of end-user clients
  
• Promote fair business practices between manufacturers, vendors and end-user clients
  
• Combine resources to promote growth of the entire marketplace
  

There are many personal and corporate agendas being interjected into these communications. Not only should this be expected but the competition benefits all of us in the end. However, with that said there are several underlying themes which I personally find disturbing and disruptive to the value and growth of this association and the market space in general.

Throughout is an arrogance that there is a higher calling to service-centric sales strategy than a hardware- or supplies-centric one. Many of the folks who appear to be central to this new association are setting themselves on a pedestal above "lesser" industry participants. While I personally believe in the service-centric approach and do not wish to go back in time to selling hardware, I recognize there are a lot of value-laden dealers who do business with great integrity, provide their clients with excellent service and create a large number of very good-paying jobs.

Related though somewhat separate is the theme that the traditional copier dealer and their sales professionals are intrinsically dishonest and stupid! Copier dealers have been providing a high-level of managed print services through facilities management programs for many years. In addition, most offer page acquisition models equal to the print management programs I experience in the field. They provide supplies, fix/repair services, technology refreshment and usage reporting for a fixed cost per page. Let me ask how that is significantly different than the vast majority of so-called print management programs? I must also ask the question "if copier dealers should get into MPS for higher margins then how are they currently gouging their clients?"

Both themes were epitomized by the recent discussion about a relationship between the new MPSA and the BTA. The BTA has transformed over the years to accommodate changes in the market it serves; like Tom Callinan I remember when it was NOMDA and largely populated by calculator and typewriter dealers. Over the years it evolved to play a significant role in building the copier industry and continued to change to adopt the transition to digital technologies and yes, even managed print services. I remember discussions with them to develop managed print services training in 2005 and they have actually been sponsoring training events for the past couple of years. The real point I want to make is not about the value of a relationship or association, but the underlying arrogance and divisiveness that arose in these discussions.

It is my honest opinion (IMHO) that if the MPSA is going to promote the MPS market space then it should embrace all industry participants as potential "converts" rather than the continual piling of some less than civil discourse upon them. I certainly hope this type of posting and discussion is no longer commended and recommended by the association leadership! These individuals and companies can be represented as the iceberg below the water line while the "San Antonio" gathering is that small and visible portion.

Rather than forming an inward-facing print-centric circle holding hands and singing Kum Bah Ya I hope the MPSA turns around and puts their collective hands outward to welcome all of the participants in this industry. This is what will enable this association to reach a "noble" purpose.

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.

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.