Toward a More Perfect Union of Software Vendors and Customers

Earlier this week analyst firm Gartner announced formation of what it called a Global IT Council for IT Maintenance and released a proposed Code of Conduct that, it suggested, should define and govern the rights and responsibilities of enterprise applications vendors and their customers when it comes to maintenance contracts.

This is a great idea. Many manufacturers I talk to are frustrated by the rigid and costly maintenance contracts that are forced on them when they buy ERP and other enterprise applications. Vendors are constantly attempting to increase what they charge for maintenance — already the biggest long-term expense faced by manufacturers who enter into traditional enterprise software license deals.

But it’s not just the cost of software maintenance that bothers manufacturers. They also complain that maintenance contracts are often vague when it comes to defining exactly what benefits vendors will deliver and on what schedule. And, at the same time, maintenance contracts make it difficult for manufacturers to manage their costs by, for example, allowing customers to quickly and easily discontinue maintenance charges on unused software seats or modules.

The Gartner Code of Conduct directly addresses some of the important software maintenance pain points facing manufacturers. Unfortunately it also ignores some important issues, and the document lacks a strong call-to-action for vendors.

Gartner’s code defines seven “rights of IT maintenance customers.” Some are rather obvious. The Gartner Council, for example, says enterprise software customers on maintenance deserve an update/patch process “with clearly defined frequency and duration times.” The code also calls for vendors to deliver comparable levels of support in all geographic regions where they do business.

Other rights defined by the Gartner Council, however, go further and would require significant changes on the part of vendors. Rather than providing one-size-fits-all maintenance programs, for example, the council says vendors should “offer varying levels of maintenance support based on specific enterprise criteria, including the degree of criticality of the application being supported…”

The Gartner Council also calls for greater flexibility in maintenance contracts, enabling customers to adjust support levels as product usage levels change.

If enterprise applications vendors and customers could explicitly agree on such common-sense principals, it would make life easier for all.

But Gartner’s proposed Code of Conduct fails to touch on some important points of friction between enterprise software vendors and customers. An obvious one is vendor support for third-party maintenance. Customers that choose to obtain maintenance from third-party providers rather vendors should be able to easily get software bug fixes and othere support to which they’re entitled through their third-party vendors.  And they should be able to buy new seats and licenses when needed. Unfortunately, some vendors prefer to pretend that third-party maintenance doesn’t exist. Or worse: Some are actively trying to drive third party maintenance providers out of business.

The Gartner Council would do well to study a similar proposed code of behavior developed back in 2006 by former Forrester analyst Ray Wang. Wang’s Enterprise Software Licensee’s Bill of Rights goes a lot further, including a recommendation that vendors explicitly support third-party maintenance. Wang, now at Altimeter Group, also proposes vendor-customer rules of engagement for other phases of the enterprise software lifecycle, including software selection, implementation, utilization, and retirement phases.

What would be most helpful would be for groups like Wang’s and Gartner to team up, create a comprehensive code of conduct for enterprise software vendors and their customers, and offer vendors a chance to publicly endorse it, promising to conform their contracts, policies, and behavior to its principles.