Hmmm - Please re-read my posts as I think you and I agree at the very heart of this matter and that is it is a decision that must be made individually and as it relates to the needs, goals and character of each business. I simply objected to the immediate castigation of "Managed EDI Services" as a viable choice, that you will get inferior service and to the perpetuation of lies. The fact is, trust me when I say this, I am not trying to sell you, but I do manage over 80 customers who today have better service, more reliability and a higher degree of technical capability than they had previous to us providing Managed EDI Services and it might be surprising to note that the vast majority of them were not struggling with EDI.
But lets move on shall we. Thanks, Steve _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Craig Dunham Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 6:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [EDI-L] Re: [OFF TOPIC] - the "In-house vs Hosted" debate - was software install Hmmm... "Hmmm" indeed, Art. First off - I'm the EDI Coordinator for a fairly large (over 400 locations) retailer with sales in excess of $900-million per year. And I'm more than just the EDI Coordinator - I'm the "EDI Department" - I do it all - mapping, creating specs, managing data flow, managing trading partners, doing some 'in-house' testing, working with our testing program to get new vendors tested and so on and so forth. I also manage, support and administer other programs and applications and data on top of the EDI gig... This includes a sales reporting system (internal), a POS reporting system (external) and fixing SKU and UPC errors and working with the Store Support group and the AS400 support group on pricing and SKU and UPC errors and issues. Hmmm.... a lot, I know. Sure, we could outsource our EDI... but why? Would it save us money on a monthly basis? Probably. But then what happens when there IS a problem...? And how would we get the data from our system into the EDI program for sending POs...? Oh, through some kind of interface... that somebody has to program, pay for, monitor, adminster and keep up... Hmmm.... So many people - and I'm surely not pointing fingers - focus SOLELY on the concept of PRICE. I get calls and e-mails and other solicitations from ths network, that network and this other provider over there, telling Me that they can save Me "50% on your VAN costs!"... Frankly, it's a bunch of BS and sales hype. I already get a pretty damn good rate on My VAN bill - well under a dime per KC. And the overage is even less... Could you beat My VAN costs...? Sure, but at what cost...? What about My concerns about "downtime"...? What about support issues? What about... Well, there are a ton of questions.... And, I get to have it work seemlessly with My EDI software - which come from the same VAN... And when I have a problem, I don't call software support and get told it's a network issue and don't call network support and get told it's a software issue. It's all ONE company, and they can figure it out on their side. And trust Me, I'm that squeeky wheel getting greased... I've got no problems going up the food-chain if I don't get a satisfactory reply from support... And yes, I use one one of the "big 3" providers.... Does "managed EDI" have a place...? Sure..! Is it valuable to more than just small scale companies? Sure! But is it a fit-all and be- all and end-all solution for EVERYBODY..?? No freakin' way, Jose! There are far too many complexities to be considered.... NOTHING about EDI is a perfect solution for ANYBODY... There are always going to be issues and complexities and nuances and variations that can and WILL occur between customer A and customer B and the next. I deal with a lot of small mom-n-pop vendors/suppliers and work with a lot of the big boys (not just 800lb gorillas, but 1800lb gorillas and bigger!) and work with My VAN/network and talk to other networks and VANS and service providers and 3rd party hosters and all the rest.... So Steve (at ECEDILTD) and Allen (at wherever) and Art (at Blackwater) and Earl (at wherever) and all the rest - relax...! It's a big pond out there and lots of fishes to feed upon... Steve - your solution may not and probably will not work for everybody... Allen - Steve's solution may just work for you - who knows...? Finally, Steve, I must call into question your statement "However, like any other aspect of a company a decision must be made at some point when it makes sense to discontinue doing things that are unrelated to what the organization is in business for." So does this mean because I work for a retailer, they should "discontinue doing things unrelated to" retail? So we should outsource our EDI - hell, our entire MIS department - including the network guys that support the users - we should get rid of our Store Support group because they're "unrelated" to our business.... our accounting departments should be outsourced because, well, they just pay bills - they don't sell anything... our advertising department - well, no, it can be argued that by creating ads, they sell things - oh, but wait, advertising is unrelated to our core business... That's why so many people took offense to your query that started the whole thing - about "The real question is WHY is anyone still installing EDI software?"... Simple answer? Because it fills a need they have.... Oh, and to all? Go back and look at a comment Laurie made - it's not an EDI application she's installing but a REPORTING APPLICATION for her EDI system - "Software was their 852 Reporting Tool" Craig Dunham EDI Coordinator PS - Steve - one other thing - just because your product is being used by "several fortune 500 companies" doesn't mean it will benefit all of those Fortune 500 companies... --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:EDI-L%40yahoogroups.com> com, "Art Douglas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Let me throw my hat into the ring on this discussion. > > I also have seen both sides of this coin. Some of you remember that I was > the EDI Guy at a company formerly known as PaperPak. They restructured, > outsourced IT and EDI. Now their EDI is being run by an excellent managed > services organization. Some comments I have heard from my former colleagues > who still work for the remnant of that company include observations that > everything costs extra. If they want to add a trading partner, there is a > charge. If they need a new report, there is a charge. What they don't > understand is that I wasn't free working there - the company was shelling > out a bundle, and the nickels and dimes they find themselves paying don't > add up to what my salary and benefits cost the corporation. So, there is > big savings. > > On the other hand, the outsourcing company isn't sitting in on the user > meetings. They don't hear the day-to-day problems that every business has, > and cannot interject ideas for using EDI or other IT capabilities for > solving these problems. When you cut your IT staff, you lose much more than > technical expertise. You lose a huge investment in business understanding. > I think that is the biggest loss when IT or EDI is outsourced. A good EDI > person has dealt with multiple facets of their employer's business: AP, AR, > supply, shipping, receiving, sales, marketing, planning and IT, to mention a > few. The managed services guys deal with AP, when they need a check. It > means that IT is no longer a strategic advantage, because the brain trust > that comes along with an in-house IT staff is gone. You get what is in the > box, nothing more. And if you don't really understand how to use what is in > the box, you don't even get that. > > I'm guessing that, when all those guys Steve mentioned decided to go to > managed services, they retained key staff assets who knew EDI and the > business. But the average Fortune 50,000 company doesn't have six guys > doing mapping, another doing translating, and a cadre of business analysts, > systems analysts and IT staff. It's all one or two people, and if you think > that coding or mapping or setups is what they do, and you can get that done > outside, you may be missing the boat. > > Now I am back to being a consultant. I clean up the mess others leave > behind. I find I am most effective when I am on-site regularly, and begin > to learn the nuances of how the firm does business. Kind of like an > employee - but more expensive. > > Hmmm. > > Art Douglas > Lead Consultant > Blackwater Network > (877) 464-8915 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ ... Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, <JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC> Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
