AccMan Pro (now moved to www.accmanpro.com)

Why can't we share information?

I was thinking wouldn't it be fantastic if there was a way we could cull the collective thoughts of people like John Newth, Nichola Ross Martin and Francesca Lagerberg and then freely add comments or share experience to both support and reject arguments so that over time, their expertise not only gets distilled, but is also refined. This would not diminish their stature in the eyes of professionals that rely on their expertise. If anything, I'd wager it would enhance their individual reputations. But then I became depsondent.

Stick with me, it gets crystal clear at the end.

The Royal Society has put forward a convoluted argument against the idea of open access (OA) and in doing so, set off a firestorm. The Indian RS fires back:

"I read Barbara Kirsop's letter (see Royal Society must embrace open archiving) on the appalling stand taken by the UK Royal Society on open access. Thankfully, the science academies in India are supporting open access. In fact, all the journals published by the Indian National Science Academy, currently presided over by a fellow of the UK Royal Society, are open access journals and one can search and download articles from volume 1, number 1."

Wow. Then comes this from Peter Suber:

"As with the earlier statement, most of the RS doubts focus on the viability of OA journals even though the RCUK proposal mandates deposit in OA archives, not submission to OA journals. I can't count the number of times this misunderstanding has been corrected, not only when the RS makes it but also when made by Lord Sainsbury and the UK government."

But then 61 of its own members, including FIVE Nobel Laureates weighed in against the RS stated position. Now it's all over the BBC. So here's the crunch:

I wonder the extent to which the profession is so used to paying for everything that carries the tag: "expert" whether it's lost sight of the fact that collectively, there's a huge amount to be gained from sharing and refining information. The innovation comes from doing it.

Some authors are claiming that by giving away some of their copyright, they actually increase print sales. So being open and sharing is a win-win-win. The proof already exists.

If you're out there seeing this John/Nichola/Francesca and you've not given all your copyright away to the various places where you are published, now might be a good time to be thinking about this. I'd be happy to get the ball rolling. And it's a win-win-win.

Technorati Tags : OA, open+access, Peter+Suber, Google, uk+taxation, tax+marketing

Access Accounting - call for customer group

Earlier today, I spoke with Owen Bishop, FD at Geotechnical Instruments, a £5 million specialist instrumentation manufacturer operating in gas detection, water qualityand geotechnical equipment.  The company is coming to the end of its first full year using Access Accounts.

The implementation had its share of hiccups, as all implementations do, but certain key issues remain:

• Expectations about automated BACS payment and reporting were set at unrealistic levels, or worse, misleading
• Reporting has been a major issue (in fairness, most vendors fall short in the reporting department)
• The user experience for mid-range products is not as good as it is for entry level offerings
• It takes an unacceptable amount of time to get approporate answers
• There is no direct means of influencing development because there is no recognisable user group.
• Neither is there an easy way to share tips and tricks because there is no user group with which to share that information

Interestingly, Owen made direct comparisons in service between Access Accounting and Sage. Many readers will be surprised to learn that Owen's past experience with Sage Line 50 support has been excellent.

This is not the first time that users have expressed dis-satisfaction at Access Accounting service. Earlier, I pointed up issues faced by others. Owen is very clear that as a robust transaction process engine, he is more than happy. That's not the point. He, along with others is concerned about service. He also said he'd willingly pay £750-1,000 to get a decent report template pack.

His call to Access Accounting is clear and simple: Work with users. Don't ignore. But are they listening?

Technorati Tags : Access Accounting, customer_service

Sage's banana skin

John Stokdyk - tech editor at AccountingWEB must have had a whale of a time at Sage's Edinburgh reseller knees up. I wish I had been the proverbial fly on the wall. Among the classic quotes from CEO Paul Stobart were:

"The data tells us that channel capacity and its effect on service is the main constraint on our growth."

In other words, they haven't got enough of you lot acting as kick-ass sales people and when (or could it be because?) you don't deliver, it's your fault. Solution? Train more salespeople to punt directly into the reseller channel. Cost to Sage £2 million.

Money really well spent. Most of these guys will be off to the best jobs they can get as soon as possible. Why? Good salespeople can only hold a limited number of thoughts in their head. One of them is the size of their pay packet. So where's your £2 mill now then Paul?

"After all the investment and effort Sage and partners have been investing in new opportunities, we're still showing single digit growth...It's not good enough."

So let me get this straight. Either the resellers are crap or your products are because everyone's investing and it ain't working. Which is it? Oh - and we're in a tough market but that doesn't count. And to the finale:

"Fixing customer service is easy. All it requires is a shift of attitude to put the customer first, and a shift of resources."

A maestros' performance. Edinburgh may be a great city but if this is Stobarts' message, I don't know which I'd want to dodge first. The pidgeon crap or the ton of crap coming out of Sage Towers?

Does he really think resellers are going to put up with this? Is that his idea of customer service. Doesn't he realise the reseller is his first line customer?  John nevertheless came up with this beauty:

'In one of my lighter moments, I asked a business partner whether the Sage "charm offensive" had made an impact on him.

"From what Paul Stobart said this morning, where he appeared to blame business partners for Sage's lack of growth, I'd hardly call it a charm offensive!" he replied.'

I can guarantee that quote was 'massaged' to put into a business context. Ahem...

Access Accounting comes up smelling of roses

It's been a frantic 24 hours on the Access Accounting story so here goes. Access sent an email which took a bit of fathoming but I managed to get to the bottom of it. This is the outcome:

• Ian Clark has withdrawn his original post from the Any Questions forum. He doesn't wish to see this debate taken further in the public domain. That's his right and I respect his decision.
• Access asked If I would consider doing the same. I cannot accommodate that request for reasons set out later.
• Most respondents and others I've spoken with generally praise Access Accounts for their attention to service.
• Access plans to meet Ian next week with a view to discussing the issues raised. This is the earliest date when the parties can come together. That's excellent news.

To put some colour on this. Access initially wanted the whole thing kept under wraps. But that doesn't help anyone and doesn't help decision makers understand the company's approach to service. Nevertheless, their customer service people said to me:

"Thank you for bringing this to our attention.  Please accept our apologies for not replying to you earlier, but we felt it important to firstly ascertain who this customer was and then to work towards resolving any problems he is facing before responding."

I followed this up with John Beech, Access' service director. He said the company prefers to resolve these issues privately. While I don't fully agree, it's understandable. But...when something 'negative' comes into the public domain, it has a habit of taking on a life of its own. This medium encourages debate and I see no way of preventing similar occurrences in the future.

The customer's ability to have an unfettered voice will create a genuine challenge for the vendor community. Where it is a one-off problem, there is a case for keeping it private. There will always be the pissed off person who got out of bed the wrong side and decides to vent because the opportunity exists. That's not the same thing as the generalised issue that needs public airing.

John agrees with me that swift resolution for a dissatisfied customer is one of the best forms of marketing you can get. This is because the ability to resolve problems is more important than the service itself. Let's face it, you get more kudos for reducing a tax bill then you will ever do for filing the tax return. In much the same way, a vendor that delivers great functionality is not much good if that same vendor pretends that the service component is the prime responsibility of the reseller and refuses to assist.

Chartered Accountant Adrian Melrose and his appalling Landrover Discovery experience is a good example of mismanaged customer service. Of particular interest are the comments which can be found by clicking <here> (Note: a big thank you to Adrian for providing counsel on the best way to pursue this.)

I don't believe the Access vignette has fundemanentally changed the service game. But it has opened a dialogue that might otherwise never have happened. And for that, Access Accounts should be praised. They've stepped up to the plate, they're dealing with it. That's what anyone with a problem wants. Isn't it?

Access Accounting - a raspberry for service?

I stumbled across a post where the question posed was: Access v Sage. What piqued my interest were comments by Ian Clark:

"Access is sold by dealers only, and they make their money by writing reports, charging extortionate fees for support, and writing add ons for you, and making sure that users are NEVER allowed to speak to one another (which is also Access's main aim). Don't ring Access themselves they won't even speak to you, let alone offer support, they refer you to the dealer. Make sure that you get ALL the answers from the dealer up front and that you find out how much they charge for support and writing reports and add ons, make sure you get a service level agreement as well. I'd talk to a few of their customers to get their feedback also." (my emphasis)

The community spends a lot of time sticking it to Sage but this is awful. I know Access-Accounting but I have come at them from a different angle. In the past, I've reviewed company products and provided a degree of guidance on product direction.

Having said that, an email I sent to Lorraine Kirby (PR wonk at Access) on 23rd September introducing the site, reminding the CEO of a past relationship and offering its CEO an opportunity to create a podcast on compliance went unanswered. Which would support Ian's otherwise potentially libelous statement about his 'knowledge' of Access service. This is a pity because the company had just sent out a press release on the topic. And it was coming off record results.

If you're in the business of providing consulting services then the views of existing customers are absolutely vital. I've always said that even if the client disregards every word you offer in 'good faith' advice, they will always listen to the voice of customer references. When a professional turns round and savages a supplier's customer service, the vendor can say: "He's had a bad experience, let's deal with it." Research shows that customers with the most vehement complaints often become the most loyal if you attend to their problems and fix them quickly, fairly and openly. Most people don't know that. I'm wondering how smart Access-Accounting really is.

It can choose to ignore in the belief Ian is only a single case. A very bad idea. Ian represents a potential income stream. As does the original questioner. That's two revenue streams gone. How many more might be out there? That's the power of the conversation.

In the interests of transparency, I've emailed Access marketing and PR with this post location. I wonder if they'll respond?