Skip to main content

Much more then sensors


Everyone knows that the wise man starts any innovative designs with the business objective(s) in mind. Tremendous clarity occurs when we can identify with the business requirements and then work backwards to translate these needs into toolsets. It gets a bit tricky when the change seems so logical, like connected systems, yet the business model is screaming for a new paradigm. 



Think about the paradox, as a service industry we bring in lots of sensors and indicators to help us formulate our decisions to send a person to a site based off of field / asset conditions . That seems all well enough for those businesses which aren't making money from a truck roll.  Even if the type of dispatch is related to maintenance in many cases this maintenance is simply negotiated labor and materials markup, we are still making money when we roll a truck. Service organizations which have embraced the "full responsibility" type of contracts are in a much better position to leverage emerging tools and their direct impact on the bottom line.



So it's settled then, if you are going to deploy IOT and/or connected systems, convert your business to full risk contracts. Sound okay to you? While this approach is certainly logical I'm not sure that it is the best way to approach this because it leaves quite a bit of opportunity on the table. If you believe for a moment that the customers interests are to preserve the life of their assets, by the way individual and holistically, then possibly this narrow approach on just mechanical equipment may not be the right way to move forward. Take for instance an unsophisticated building, for conversation let's say under 50,000 ft.², properly deployed innovation stands to help that client reduce their utility and operating costs. If that is the case, then wouldn't a plausible solution be some mixture of the components of full responsibility, those elements of shared utility savings, and even elements from performance contracting (too far?). When all these are mixed up in the same stew could that provide a new business model?



Simple fact is if you are thinking about connected systems and innovation within your business I strongly encourage you to consider first what your ultimate objective is, second how your business will make money, and third how you will differentiate yourself in the market.



Comments encouraged



-----

Next post:  in the "people" business can you really measure performance?

Questions?  feel free to leave replies or direct message me

See all of the "last mile worker" posts here:  http://lastmileworker.com

-----
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

suggesting is NOT selling

People and companies want to buy from people that they trust.   The individual which possesses the broadest set of knowledge will gain the most credibility and as a result yield high levels of trust.   When I was in the field I definitely had the ear of the customer and for the most part discussed areas that needed improvement or replacement. At no moment was I ever, at least in my mind, selling. Instead, as I think back on those days, I believe I was simply "suggesting". Take an immediate need, add in a trusted advisor and a credible suggestion, you will most likely get a sale. However, this is not selling. From my non-salesman perspective I would sum up the following related to the sales process; sales is not a single event but instead a sequence of connection points which create a positive experience that leads to a purchase . Over the years I've been fortunate to have known many different types of salespeople in different industries and I believe that they a...
Post a Comment
Read more

In$pired

As the steam from Avid Andy's coffee fogged his glasses on this crisp January morning, he reflected on last year and thought enthusiastically about the year ahead.   Sometimes the noise of business is deafening, we rarely take the time to contemplate our moves, instead are often thrown one direction or another.   Hey, face it, if you are reading posts to gain perspective you fall in the group of folks who pride themselves as obsequious hoop-jumpers.   We live to help others and expect that all of those around us feel the same way.   I just love Influential Irene.   Okay, it is out in the open, she is an inspiration for me and so many others.   Irene reminds folks every year, without fail, these three statements which she fondly refers to as "the punchline" (although this is no joke).   Businesses, of any size, will be successful if they remember that it is people that make a company.   Put this advice into practice, today: Sincerity |...
Post a Comment
Read more

focus on your annuity base, come on man..

Stick with what you know and repeat often. When I think about maintenance, regardless of type of contract, I think about consistency, consistency, consistency. The motivation behind writing this post is to encourage you to either build or bolster your existing maintenance base, here are some things to consider: most maintenance contracts should yield between 5% and 7% additional revenue above and beyond the contract value.   Building trust between you and your clients organization will result in additional service activity. Full risk contracts, or those where you were charging one flat amount and taking all of the financial risk, can be profitable.   Watch out for the age of the equipment, service call track record, and customer disposition pull-through opportunities can be constrained with full risk contracts unless the scope of work is very specific. This can be a bit of a slippery slope. The perception of a...
Post a Comment
Read more