RE: Vendor conflict of interest - Consultants, etc.

Notwithstanding the Excellent points already made, Leif's can be implemented
by what Andy (iirc) said about vetting the Source(s) for the
recommendation(s).  Iow, IF you actually DO want a semi-objective
recommendation on one or more possible solutions, then how much do you wanna
invest in looking at more than one:

And a Manager can look towards how the recommender weighs the pros and cons
of at least two or three possible solutions.  Plus, this can be done
regardless of whether the recommender can provide one-a the possiblities or
not.  "Due diligence" costs money, so is a matter of "taste".

A shortcut I've used (learned from Boss's) is to ask a provider (vendor) for
who their primary competition is, and then see what they say about them..
Some vendors will be more honest than others, and some saleman will be more
honest than others within a company, in answering that kind of question.
And then do a quick-look at alternative sourcea, just to make relatively
sure the vendor you're leaning towards (if any) is at least within reason on
both projected value and costs.

And I still hold to the theory that if you have a good idea of, and monitor,
the TCO vs. "value proposition" then the ROI tends to take care of itself.
I think that's a long way of saying what Leif said, and adding that removing
ALL conflicts-of-interest is not possible, and eliminating most through "due
diligence" is both exceedingly difficult and resource instensive...  (Still
recommend it, obviously (to the extent it's "feasible"...;-).)

| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-nontech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| [mailto:midrange-nontech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Leif
| Svalgaard
| Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 10:04 AM
| To: Non-Technical Discussion about the AS400 / iSeries
| Subject: Re: Vendor conflict of interest - Consultants, etc.
|
|
| From: <Mike.Crump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
| > Am I the only one that thinks this is wrong and fraught with potential
| > issues?  All conflicts of interest discussions lately don't
| seem to look at
| > this side of the issue but I have large concerns
|
| I would look at the question a bit more pragmatically: if the proposed
| solution solves the business problem at a reasonably cost, why then
| worry? What does it matter that there is a conflict if the customer is
| happy?