A Rose by Any Other Name….
Over the past several days the UCStrategies team has been involved in an interesting, sometimes heated, and sometimes funny discussion on a name for UC “resellers”. As we prepare our marketing material for the UC Summit 2010, we’ve been trying to figure out the best/proper term for the data VARs, systems integrators, and telecom dealers/interconnects who offer VoIP and UC solutions to their customers. Certainly “VARs/systems integrators/telecom dealers/interconnects” is much too long. We could lump them together as “resellers” – but that term doesn’t even begin to describe what they do or the level of expertise that they bring to the table.
If a rose by any other name is still a rose – what the heck is a VAR or telecom dealer who has progressed beyond selling “features and benefits” to identifying and solving customer business problems by integrating various technology elements into a “solution” (whew! that was a mouthful!)? And while each UCS team member had their own thoughts and suggestions (some not repeatable), it seems to me that the naming issue comes down to this:
· The name/term needs to properly position the “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” as a problem solver (or that over-used term “trusted advisor”) for their customer. In other words, I think the term needs to focus on what the “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” does rather than where they come from or what they sell.
· The name/term needs to be flexible and broad so that it survives the changes in the industries and changes in the “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect’s” product or solution direction.
· “UC” should NOT be a part of the name/term because a “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” may be focusing on only one area of UC or UC may be only one silo in their overall business direction.
OK – are you tired yet of reading “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect” to describe those who are integrating products to provide voice/data/mobility/video solutions to their customers?
So here’s what the team came up with – and I like it a lot…… “SOLUTIONS INTEGRATORS”! If I were a “VAR/systems integrator/telecom dealer/interconnect”, I’d like it because it says to a customer that I deal in solutions for their needs/problems and it says that I have the expertise to integrate elements/technologies to create those solutions. It doesn’t reflect whether I come from a traditional voice or data environment….. it doesn’t reflect that I sell something…. it does reflect my focus on solving problems and providing solutions. Yea! Higher margins!
What do you think? Does “solutions integrator” work? And if you’re thinking about the acronym “SI” and its current meaning for “systems integrator” – DON’T GO THERE!
Pam,
I’m glad that you documented our conference call discussion on what to label technology providers who sell and support UC solutions. However, although I liked the new name suggested to replace the legacy “VAR” and “Reseller” labels tied to premise-based, hardware-oriented telephone systems, I think the qualifications for being such a “solutions integrator” for UC will require more skills than connecting software applications together.
UC applications will not only require an understanding of the communication functions involved, including infrastructure needs (wires/wireless networking, storage, business process applications, endpoint software clients, etc., but also identifying and prioritizing operational problems that need to be selectively fixed to meet specific business objectives. It’s not just technology procurement and installation anymore!
The challenge, therefore, is for the sales “channels” to be more than traditional telephony resellers, installers, or even “integrators.” They have to be knowledgeable about different user contact needs, mobile and multi-modal devices, all forms of “UC” activity, and operational analytics.
There is also the question of premise vs. hosted solutions that traditional VARs will now need to deal with. But now they will be facing up to wireless carriers for FMC solutions. So, which channel will really be is in charge of enterprise UC implementation?