3 Strategies to Elevate Your Software Supplier Relationship

Over the years, our TNG client family has requested more and more guidance related to managing and elevating their commercial supplier relationships. Within this article, you’ll find our top 3 proven strategies to transform IT supplier relationships from tactical to strategic.

Strategy #1 – Control the Flow

When we say “control the flow”, we’re referring to conversation, meeting, and engagement flow.

When prospective clients reach out to TNG, they almost always have the complaint that the supplier knows more about the “needs” of their organization than they do. This most typically is due to the internal lack of time and/or resources to focus on a specific supplier or digital capability. On the other hand, the supplier’s sales team is laser focused on opportunities to grow their business inside of your organization. Immediately, this creates an unfair environment for all parties involved.

You may be thinking that this only creates an unfair advantage for you, the customer. Well, in most situations that’s true. However, it should also be noted that in some circumstances, the supplier’s sales team may be operating with good intentions and simply answering your internal stakeholder’s demand for attention. In short, when one side knows more than the other, it creates an uncomfortable situation for at least one party.

As our team brings 100+ years of collective experience, we have seen just about everything. Most of TNG’s clients are very well-established companies that have $5 billion+ in annual revenue. These companies typically have a “center of excellence (COE)” and/or a “software asset management (SAM)” team. While the overall intent is good, we typically see only about 10% of our clients leveraging these teams of resources correctly.

What happens to the other 90%? Well, one of the most classic inside sales techniques is for a supplier’s sales team member to establish, chair, and/or participate in a COE with a specific focus on their software and its many digital capabilities. This type of group typically meets either monthly or quarterly and is sold as a way in which the sales team member can “inform” the COE/SAM team members of the “demand” coming from inside of the organization. The reality is that the “demand” is often created by the sales team member who has been pushing a land-and-expand strategy inside of the organization.

The easiest way to not only level the playing field with your software suppliers, but also elevate the relationship from tactical to strategic, is to set up strict governance around the overall engagement. Every supplier engagement is slightly unique, but we recommend focusing on the following core tenants:

Focus your efforts on your Top 10 software suppliers.
Develop a steering team of executive IT leaders that are in control of the Digital Capability strategy for your company.
Develop an internal COE for each of your Top 10 suppliers. The size and scope of them should proportionally match the importance of the supplier’s impact on your business.
Identify and assign clear roles & responsibilities for each employee team member that is part of their performance objectives.
Do not allow supplier sales team members to be a member of the core team but rather serve as an invited guest on a routine cadence.

This is about the time where traditional sales team members will indicate that this approach will slow down process, innovation, growth, etc. The reality is quite the opposite when properly set up and managed. The primary outcomes you want to achieve are the following:

Shift the communication paradigm from outside-in to inside-out. This allows the company to ideate, contemplate, and organically socialize a software roadmap (vs. constantly asking the supplier for a list of their asset inventory).
Share information with suppliers only when it has been fully vetted and approved as a sanctioned project or approved proof of concept. If done properly, this drastically decreases the chance of duplicate purchasing, split requirements, and/or random unwarranted proof of concepts (that usually turn into shelfware) around the enterprise.
Allow everyone to be more efficient and structured with their time by eliminating the need for follow-up meetings, etc. In other words, engaging suppliers only after decisions have been made internally by the COE will enable the COE to be treated as a true authoritative entity vs a “check the box” exercise.
Provide opportunities for suppliers to suggest innovative solutions in a fully committed environment.

We find that our TNG clients save an average of 26% annually by deploying this strategy alone (with our help, of course).

Strategy #2 – Manage Upwards

Anyone who knows the basics of selling understands that the easiest way to make a sale is to identify and influence the decision-maker directly. For large enterprise sales teams who are managing multi-million-dollar contracts, that decision-maker is very often an executive leader within the company. Far too often, we find that organizations provide unfettered access to executives without reason. This, in short, usually enables a very unhealthy and complacent comfort for the supplier sales team that (if not properly managed) rarely produces intrinsic value for the company.

By far one of the most effective ways to elevate your supplier relationship is to set up strategic business discussions between company and supplier executives. The key here is to establish equal representation on both sides and ensure there is proper attention and respect established between both companies. Access to your company’s executives should largely be restricted to these meetings which, where possible, should be set up by the COE/SAM teams mentioned in Strategy #1.

Subsequently, it’s important to know that you can leverage access to your executives to exemplify to a new supplier that any new proof of concept, tool, etc. will be given the highest level of attention and visibility. This means a lot for any supplier (new or existing) as it ensures the right eyes are engaged.

Strategy #3 – Set Realistic Milestones that are Mutually Achievable

Just as employees like to understand their performance objectives for each year, it has been proven by TNG that suppliers who understand what “great looks like” outperform those that are not given clear business objectives. Nearly everyone in the business world understands the concept of milestones; however, the implementation of the methodology is highly inconsistent.

One of the many mistakes companies make when establishing a milestone-based contract is they make the actual milestones either ambiguous or unrealistic. Both are equally as dangerous. Ambiguity allows everyone to be right and wrong at the same time. Unrealistic milestones, if accepted by the supplier, often induce unhealthy behaviors by those chartered with meeting or exceeding the same. It doesn’t take much to set a once “strategic” relationship on a path to implosion with either of these scenarios.

Establishing realistic milestones is important for your suppliers. Everyone, at every age, enjoys accomplishing a goal. It’s important to recognize this fact since at the end of the day, as this is a human reaction, and well, we’re all human.

To learn how to properly set up a milestone plan and/or implement any other strategies mentioned above that drive performance for both the company and the supplier, here’s a hint: It’s not just the supplier that has performance milestones!

More resources

From Fortune 500 giants to fast-growing innovators, TNG has helped clients save 20% – 40%+ on enterprise software contracts — even when they thought it was impossible

The Difference Between Gartner & The Negotiator Guru

Gartner, at its core, is a market intelligence firm. It uses a wide-angle lens to give you a big-picture view of market and industry trends. You can use their data as general negotiation guidance and add their toolkits to your own.There is absolutely value in this broad-stroke model but it can be limiting when it comes to looking for data and resources that more specifically mirror the size and needs of your organization.

In this article, I want to outline the similarities and differences between a simple market intelligence firm approach and a niche service provider approach. There are many reasons you might want to research best practices from a 30,000-foot view as well as dive deeper at a 5,000-foot view. Many of my clients will use both Gartner’s and The Negotiator Guru’s (TNG) services to achieve the best results for their companies. The graphic below gives a basic overview of the similarities and differences between our companies and we’ll break each one down in this article.

There Are Some Similarities Between Gartner & The Negotiator Guru

Both Gartner and TNG provide information on market and industry trends as well as general guidance on IT Cost Optimization. We have each developed our own toolkits to strategically approach each client’s needs. We overlap when it comes to providing general guidance to CIO’s. Our companies also both provide rate benchmark data although, as you’ll read below, we go about this in different ways. Gartner has quite a bit of data they provide in aggregated terms which is useful but, without isolating the information by industry or annual spend or similar categories, it can be difficult for CIOs and their supporting functions to narrow down actionable intelligence that is defensible and realistic.

There Are Many Differences Between Gartner & The Negotiator Guru

The keyword I would use to describe the services Gartner and TNG have in common is ‘general.’ Gartner is a great resource for general information across a wide array of topics but rarely provides niche depth that our customers are longing to consume. In contrast, TNG has a deep and disciplined focus within the IT Software vertical which enables our team to share actionable insights that are localized, specific, and highly relevant to our clients. In fact, it was our early clients that helped shaped this disciplined focus as they made their niche needs clearly known to our team. Due to our outstanding client family, TNG has been on a journey to fill our clients’ market intelligence needs for specific supplier relationships. This has organically driven our firm to be the worldwide leader in Salesforce Contract Negotiation Advisory Services which typically is 80% of our work portfolio at any given time. With the average cost of a Gartner subscription being $30,000 per seat, plus additional consulting costs in order to receive personalized advisory services, it’s worth your while to be informed on what they can and cannot help you achieve. Because we provide specialized data and consulting services, we’re able to dig deeper into our clients’ businesses and tailor our process to better achieve the results they’re looking for. The following are a few of the specific areas The Negotiator Guru differs from Gartner in terms of what services and results we can offer our clients.

Right Size

While Gartner has a wealth of industry data and information, it can be nearly impossible for a client to look at the data and isolate a specific instance to best compare themselves to their peers. This leaves clients feeling informed but uncomfortable about how this information is applicable, and more importantly defensible, within their environment. In certain circumstances, Gartner will provide “best in class” rates for a specific digital capability or service portfolio. One would argue that this provides directionally correct price targets to use as a market intelligence within their supplier negotiation. We generally agree, however, it’s important to note that your software sales executive (or worse yet your internal colleagues) will very quickly share with you that you don’t fit the profile of those rates for XYZ reason. We know this because we’ve been in these conversations on countless occasions. In the rare case that you obtain “best in class” rate information for your specific topic of interest, you are still missing a critical piece of knowledge which we call our “Right Size” guidance. Using conservative figures, there is a 15-20% value-capture opportunity just by applying Right Size practices to your research and internal analysis before entering into any IT contract negotiation Our supplier-specific expertise is one of the biggest contributors to this Right Sizing approach. Within our Discovery Phase, we take an inventory of your current products and licenses and match them against your actual business needs. Almost always, we find that our clients are over licensed and have shelfware within their environment. This is an example of Right Sizing. From a Right Pricing standpoint, not only do we understand “best in class” rates, we localize price targets based on industry, client size, and contract value. This enables our clients to feel 100% confident about the market intelligence as we’re benchmarking their rates against that of their like size industry peers. To expand upon this difference, we’ll use our expertise in Salesforce as an example. As raised and validated by leading consulting and intelligence firms, TNG has the most comprehensive database of Salesforce rates in the world. This capability allows our team to quickly and easily perform a price benchmarking exercise for our clients. In many instances, we’ll inform prospective clients that their rates are within an acceptable margin of their “Right Price” benchmark and that the only real opportunity (if any) is to pursue “Right Sizing” inside of their environment. At TNG, our culture and client centric values direct our work and guide us to only accept prospective clients where we know with certainty there is a strong potential to drive huge impact.

Being able to combine Right Price and Right Size analysis will have a significant impact on the effectiveness of your supplier negotiation strategies.

Contract Language Risks

As a result of our deep supplier-specific expertise, our team on average analyzes 5 - 15 software contracts per day. As a result, we know what’s “normal” with all of the large enterprise software platforms and any common risks that are inserted unbeknownst to our clients. By doing this every single day, our team is easily able to identify commonly-used, ambiguous language that always favors the supplier. Large software companies know their customers rarely spend time analyzing terms and conditions within their contracts. Furthermore, the widely accepted principle of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) leads clients to believe the terms are standard and unchangeable. Unfortunately, this simply isn’t true. As part of our Contract Execution Phase, we conduct a deep dive assessment of our client’s supplier contract as part of our standard service (another major difference from Gartner). To put the impact of this added service into context, our team identifies a unique contractual risk within SaaS contracts alone 33% of the time. If the contract we are analyzing is not a SaaS contract, contractual risks are identified, on average, 85% of the time. Knowing what to look for in each supplier’s contract language helps our clients avoid common pitfalls and supplier-centric renegotiation strategies.

Sales Playbook Coaching

Another key difference between taking a general approach on market intelligence (Gartner) vs. a software specific deep niche (TNG) is the ability to learn and leverage the sales playbook(s) for these large enterprise suppliers. It may not surprise you that within the most successful software sales organizations are repeatable and prescriptive sales playbooks that guide the near robotic actions of their sales representatives. As a result of learning these sales playbooks we are literally able to tell our clients the moves their suppliers are going to take next. This intelligence allows us to be one step ahead within the negotiation process while leveraging the interests of both parties. While the art of negotiation is an art and not a science, arming yourself with this intelligence allows you to deploy counterintelligence strategies inside of your organization (to counteract common supplier tactics such as divide and conquer) while also proactively preparing counterpoints to their foreseeable arguments. As a result, our clients commonly tell us that they were the most prepared they have ever been before, during, and after a negotiation.

Advisory and Execution Services

We don’t just tell you what is possible. We help you achieve it. The biggest criticism most companies have of typical market intelligence and/or management consulting firms is that they’ll tell you what “best in class” looks like but will leave you to figure out how to achieve it within your organization. If they do offer advisory services that help you implement their “best in class” then it will be for additional fees that eat away at the cost savings potential, etc. We’re a full, beginning-to-end provider who will help you all the way through to the execution of the contract.. At TNG, we not only share a “best in class” picture but also create a realistic future state localized for your business. We help you implement that future state while also limiting risks to your organization long after our engagement ends. This is all part of our standard duty of care for our clients.

4-Step Negotiation Process

Our proprietary 4-step negotiation process allows us to deliver a clear and consistent service to our clients. In the interest of brevity we won’t go into detail of what each step entails, however, please know that within the Discovery and Strategy steps you will walk away with a forward looking roadmap as part of the overall engagement. If even offered, this would be an extra advisory fee from Gartner and/or any other market intelligence and/or management consulting firm. The graphic below quickly outlines our negotiation process:

Compensation & Fees

Our compensation for these services is also entirely different from Gartner’s method. As mentioned above, Gartner’s average subscription rate is $30,000 per person plus any additional consulting fees. With this package, you have access to their standard publications, toolkits, and potentially a limited number of “analyst calls” which are quick conversations with the author of the publications. Any additional advisory assistance, if even possible, comes as an upcharge. Even with this additional cost, you will be on your own from an execution standpoint.

We charge either an Advisory Fee based on annual contract value or we offer a Pay Per Performance option with a simple baseline calculation. We don’t charge based on a subscription service to our articles, we provide all this information for free. Our rates contain no hidden charges or surprise upsells. On top of that, we’ll help you execute the strategies we develop with you. We’re incredibly transparent with how we price our services and our clients never question the value they achieved from engaging with TNG.

Combining a Broad Overview Approach with a Specialized, Niche Consulting Firm is a Winning Equation

One of the questions we hear frequently is whether someone can/should work with both Gartner AND The Negotiator Guru. The answer is yes! Gartner provides a lot of good, general information. TNG helps you zoom in on the information that is most relevant to your organization so you can determine which key findings are critical for driving cost savings/avoidance while lowering your contractual risk. Gartner is a market intelligence research firm that has a very limited advisory component separate from their articles. They do not generally provide execution services. TNG provides information without a subscription fee and our advisory and execution services are provided in the same package. Bringing in TNG to help you pinpoint your specific needs, value capture opportunities, and execution strategies will provide immediate and long-term intrinsic value for your organization. Remember, TNG will only accept you as a client if there is clear and distinct net positive impact potential… well, we can’t speak for the other guys.

Quid Pro Quo: Salesforce & Salesforce Consulting Partners

We commonly get asked the following questions in varying forms:

Is The Negotiator Guru (TNG) a Salesforce Partner? Are you on the AppExchange?
What are the differences between TNG and a Salesforce Partner?
Why can’t my Salesforce Partner advise me on the best possible rates/products for my Salesforce environment?

Before we get into the specific answers to the above questions, let us share a brilliant unsolicited quote from one of our recent multinational clients regarding the motivational differences between TNG and a Salesforce Partner:

Expecting a registered Salesforce Partner listed on the AppExchange to give you completely impartial advice on Salesforce pricing is like expecting a court room prosecutor to share their notes with the defense before every trial.

Why, you might ask? The answer is simple: All Salesforce Consulting Partners have an unavoidable conflict of interest with their clients. Why? Because of the inherent need for these “Partners” to make both their client and Salesforce happy. In this article we’re going to cover this conflict of interest and why TNG is different. Salesforce Partners Always Have

Two Clients (and one isn’t you) Salesforce Partners have two customers:

You the client; and,
Your Salesforce account management team (hereby collectively referred to as “Salesforce”)

The fact of the matter is that your Salesforce Partner is, by design, incentivized to keep both its client and Salesforce happy. The difficult truth is that you, the customer, are the least important of the two clients. Yes indeed, more often than not, your Salesforce Partner has a greater long-term interest in keeping Salesforce happy. Yes, we know this sounds horrible, but we hope you appreciate our directness here. Let’s dig into two key, but interrelated, reasons:

‍1. Business Relationships

Your Salesforce Partner focuses heavily on keeping a strong business relationship with Salesforce. Why? Because Salesforce is their single most effective sales channel to acquire new business. When Salesforce identifies a new or existing client that needs custom development work, they have the entire Salesforce Partner community to consider when providing a recommendation to their customer. Naturally, those Salesforce Partners that are “supportive” to their sales process will be referred more and more business.

‍2. Money

‍More referrals = more business = more money. Back in the 18th century Edmund Burke once said “…never bite the hands that feed you.” Presenting this differently, if you were a Salesforce Account Executive and you had a Salesforce Partner repeatedly suggest changes to an account that materially decreased your sales compensation revenue, would you continue using that Partner when you have others options available? To be clear; we are not saying that all Salesforce Account Executives are unethical in how they conduct business. However, we are stating that there is an inherent fundamental conflict of interest for the Salesforce Partner who commercially needs to appease both parties. The unfortunate situation is that while a Salesforce Partner may know a customer is being sold more products and/or services than they actually need, they rarely speak up for the reasons above. We’ve even been told there is an informal blacklist inside of Salesforce that keeps track of these Partners that raise cost avoidance opportunities during the sales process. We don’t like writing about this topic but we know every customer wants the truth.

‍Why TNG is different

Quite simply we are only focused on keeping you, the client, happy. When the firm was founded we only included a “pay for performance” compensation option to ensure our incentives were aligned with the client. Over the years, we added an “advisory fixed fee” option purely based on repeated client requests.

‍TNG’s Right Size & Right Price Process

Part of our secret sauce is a deep focus and understanding on 1) how Salesforce works, 2) you as a customer, and 3) best practices on how to quickly drive savings in your environment. While strategic negotiation is an art, our Right Size & Right Price process is more of a science based on its repeatability across all industries.

The Right Size process

‍ focuses on identifying consumption based savings opportunities within your organization.

Our three most commonly identified opportunities within this process are:

“shelfware” elimination
license optimization
governance enhancement. On average, we identify 24% savings opportunity within this process alone.

‍The Right Price process purely focuses on your product and service price points within your specific Salesforce contract. The vast majority of our clients reach out to us for this service alone. Specifically, they want to know how their prices compare to their peers and if they’re getting a “good deal.” We have the largest database of Salesforce rates in the world and can quite easily identify if there is a price optimization opportunity within your various SKUs. Unlike other large market intelligence firms, we are able to isolate your realistic “should cost” price points based on your industry, annual revenue, and annual contract value. The others simply will share a “best in class” rate which is ambiguous and often self-serving. On average, we identify a 22% savings opportunity here but your specific opportunity could be as high as 305% (yes, this was a real client). Fit-for-Purpose Engagement Style The Founder of TNG, Dan Kelly, feels strongly about providing our clients options on how they engage our firm depending on each individual client’s needs. Some clients want a “negotiation-as-a-service” approach while others simply want the output of our Right Price process to identify target price benchmarks to use within their own negotiations. We welcome you to start a conversation with our firm to determine how we can most effectively and efficiently support you.

‍Summary

To recap, here are the basic points of what we’ve covered in this article:

Your Salesforce Partner has motivation to keep both you and Salesforce happy;
They aren’t able to easily share cost savings opportunities with you in fear of losing future opportunities with other Salesforce customers;

The Negotiator Guru is only focused on driving cost savings for you by negotiating with Salesforce, the client;
We have a proprietary negotiation process that includes both the art of negotiation and the science of opportunity creation inside of your Salesforce organization,
On average, we save clients 20-50% on their Salesforce annual expenses through our Right Size and Right Price process; and,
On SELA Agreements (Salesforce Enterprise License Agreement), we typically generate a 41.3% savings for our clients.
We only accept clients within our full negotiation service where we know we can make a huge impact.

What to Look Out for When Negotiating with ERP Providers like Oracle & SAP

Do you know how to protect yourself and stay in the driver’s seat during contract negotiations so that you won’t be held ransom by your ERP provider? In this article, we’re going to outline the top things you need to take into consideration when negotiating contracts with Oracle, SAP, and any other ERP system.

We’re going to share with you the key terms to clarify in your contracts to avoid extra costs and substantial frustrations down the road.

What to Look for in an ERP

While no company has a crystal ball to know exactly what the future will look like, you do need to identify how you’d like your business to function over the next 10 years.

Why 10 years? Typical business roadmaps project as far as 3-5 years in the future. Most ERP systems relationships last a minimum of 10 years. You need to know how your business will function in order to know what you’d even need an ERP for and what it would need to do. You need to be risk-averse in your contract negotiation in order to cover your bases for what could happen.

Once you have your future vision in place, you’ll look at the supplier landscape. Compare what each of the top ERP systems providers offers and how it’ll meet your needs outlined above. Create a Supplier Decision Matrix and stack each contender against it to determine which is the best for your corporation.

Once you know which ERP software is right for your corporation, you’ll need to dig deep to really figure out the total ownership cost. This is the tricky part and is best handled through careful contract negotiation, financial analysis, and service management.

Key Things to Consider When Negotiating an ERP Software Contract

The contract is the most important factor when determining the total cost of ownership of the ERP and there are generally only two triggers for renegotiation once a contract is in place: mergers & acquisition activity and contract renewals.

Providers know that you don’t read ERP contracts every day. They design contracts in complex and ambiguous ways, which leads to more revenue for them—and more fees for you. Each of the following points needs to be specifically addressed and outlined in your contract to prevent your ERP from holding you ransom at various times over the course of your relationship.

Pay Attention to Intellectual Property Ownership

Many ERP contracts will state that any systems or processes developed while using the ERP are now Intellectual Property (IP) owned by the ERP provider.

We worked with a customer recently in the manufacturing industry. They had developed a process for creating their materials more efficiently going through the production line. According to their contract with their ERP provider, any process developed using the ERP software can be considered ERP owned IP. As such, we needed to carefully negotiate the situation with the ERP provider so as to not cannibalize the newly found process improvement which led to millions in positive P&L impact.

In a contract, you need to be very clear who owns the rights of process improvements as far as when it may directly or indirectly utilize an ERP system. Your ERP is the backbone of your business, and if properly set up, it touches most aspects of your business. Naturally, this complicates any opportunity to disentangle from that ERP. If Oracle, SAP or any other provider wanted to play hardball, they could say any process improvement that utilizes an ERP system could be co-owned or sole-owned by that ERP, and then they could take that process and sell it.

Make it very clear who owns what when negotiating your own contract. It needs to be clear that the client owns all IP that are developed for the benefit of their company.

Be Smart About Your License Cost Model

Everyone knows ERPs cost a lot. New contracts with smaller providers will often undercut themselves for the first year or two but will see a massive uptick in years 3-8 because the ERP knows it’s incredibly difficult to leave an ERP once you’re integrated into it.

The cost models of ERPs vary depending on the makeup of the customer’s business and what will be the most profitable for the provider. Some of the pricing models include:

Seat-based: Typically the number of humans who log in to the system. These licenses can be either Perpetual or SaaS based.
Site-based: Number of physical locations, etc.
Consumption Based: Number of processes, inputs, etc., into the tool.
Value Based: The newest model within the marketplace and yet the scariest of all. A cost associated with the perceived value of using the platform within your business.

Generally speaking, seat-based pricing is the most cost-effective for companies looking at ERPs, but this depends greatly on what your 5-10 year plan looks like to know which would be the most beneficial to you.

In addition to your unit cost, there could also be annual maintenance expenses. This acts like an annual expense and is generally a percentage of your perpetual license fee/net spend with the ERP. There are 2 ways to host an ERP system:

On-premise: Software that is loaded on the servers you’re in control of.
Software as a Service (SaaS): Software is hosted in the cloud by the provider.

Either way, you need to be careful how you license a product because if you don’t have control of consumption and volume-based metrics, it can skyrocket your costs.

Know Your Audit Rights

This is one that gets people in trouble a lot. Generally speaking, Oracle and SAP will not proactively limit access or connectivity to your ERP. This almost always is the responsibility of their customer, based on their unique needs. As such, these providers will contractually allow themselves unfettered access to your ERP environment with the intent of auditing the usage of their software.

The most common areas of audit risk are:

License compliance (Using more seats/volume/etc than you are paying for)
Architecture compliance (Too many API connections, etc.)
M&A compliance (Acquisitions, divestiture, subsidiary utilization)

It’s important to know there is intentional ambiguity by the software providers in how one could interpret contract language related to permissible use. Furthermore, we find that clients have no intention of noncompliance within any area but find it most difficult to monitor and govern the area of architecture compliance.

A common example of noncompliance is when a client links their ERP system to both development and production environments. Similarly, if an ERP is connected (in any way) to a client’s CRM system, it may also trigger a non-compliance event.

Providers are inserting audit right language within clients’ contracts (both new and old) providing the legal authority to conduct random audits of a client’s environment. They deploy both human and technical tools. The technical tools include running scripts that “listen” to your environment and create a report identifying potential non-compliance, which automatically places the client in a defensive position. Architecture-based non-compliance is most often the most profitable audit for a provider.

Another risk area is when your ERP is connected to other systems outside of your current infrastructure. Every time you make a connection between your ERP and another outside platform (often through APIs), the ERP provider may identify this as a missed charge and will charge you retroactively since the connection was initiated. This can easily develop into millions of dollars of new revenue.

The provider may also push value-based pricing by arguing that the API connections help you go to market faster, justifying an increase in your fee based on the perceived increase in value. Value-based pricing is risky because these providers can charge for new API connections, new acquisitions, product launches, and/or the output of the tool.

Don’t let a provider run a script inside your environment. If they don’t have access to your information, you’re in control of it and you remain in the driver’s seat.

Have Clear Merger & Acquisition Language

Put specific clauses in the contract that make it very clear what happens if you are acquired or if you acquire someone else. More often, it is the provider who offers this language, using very loose terms to say ‘if this happens, we will talk about it’ which leaves a lot of area for ambiguity.

To best prepare yourself for any situation, we recommend you place specific and measurable language in your contract that outlines the cause and effect for the most common situations. From a commercial perspective, this means having specific pricing thresholds.

If you are acquired, you take the better of two prices. You take the best price of both until you, as the newly combined customer, want to renegotiate.
If you are acquiring a company, insert legal language allowing you to renegotiate the contract immediately or simply adding the newly acquired entity into your existing contract with only a reasonable increase in fees.

You want to eliminate ambiguity. From a pricing standpoint, you want to make this as clear as possible.

Set Expectations About Subsidiaries

You also want to know the specific parties of the agreement. A common hiccup for companies is that they don’t have subsidiary language in their ERP contracts. A company like Coca-Cola, where each product line acts as its own subsidiary, could be in default of the contract by letting that subsidiary use your system without proper language.

This is something people don’t think about until your provider comes to you and says, ‘Hey, by the way, your other subsidiaries are using this ERP software. Happy you are doing it, but that is not part of your contract so here is a bill for another million dollars.’

Third parties—suppliers, vendors, non-employees—need to be defined in the contract as well. If third parties are allowed to act on your behalf, there shouldn’t be any additional fees for them to use your system.

Be Sure to Outline Price Protection

Another thing you need to consider when negotiating your contract is price protection. Generally speaking, companies don’t write in any sort of price protection year-over-year. What that means is that over the contract term, your ERP provider could change the price points of your unit costs at any given time.

It is not just about being clear about locking in your price at contract term, it is also putting a cap on the amount of increase that can happen at the next contract renewal, which needs to be aligned to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). A general rule of thumb is that the increase shouldn't exceed 3-5% at renewal.

Include Clear Terms Around Your Service Level Agreement (SLA)

An ERP is a critical piece of software for any corporation and yet we often don’t negotiate Service Level Agreements (SLAs). If ERP systems go down, it can shut down governments and grids.

Make sure that you have the best service level agreements and governance agreements by specifically outlining them in your contract.
There needs to be penalties for an ERP provider not meeting or exceeding the Service Levels you agreed upon. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are left out there because companies don't track failure.
You should put the onus on the ERP provider to send you reports of the performance versus making your employees have to monitor if it was working correctly. Make it the obligation of the ERP provider to know that there has been a breach in the SLA.

Don’t Forget Cybersecurity and Intrusion Detection

You need to be careful that if you get hacked, you don’t owe your ERP provider or are legally obligated in any other way to pay a hacking fee. This is called indemnification.

In matters of cybersecurity and hacking, your contract should stipulate that the ERP provider should be accountable, if possible. There should be financial and legal obligations, and your ERP software provider should be responsible for any sort of intrusion into the system—especially if it’s located in the cloud.

The concept being that if someone hacks your environment, the source code from the ERP could be opened to the black market for rip off and resell. People don’t look out for this enough and hackers are getting more sophisticated every day.

Know the Rules About Implementation Partners

Implementation partners are third parties that will help develop custom code on top of the ERP system for your business.

Most of the time, your contract states that any implementation partners have to be registered as “Preferred Providers” for your specific ERP software. It is a contractual risk to your company if your contractors are not certified by your ERP provider.

Your E-Commerce System Needs to Play Nice

If your company is in e-commerce, you need to make sure that there is an active and working connection between your ERP provider and your e-commerce provider.

Many ERPs will tell you “Don’t worry, we will make a connection.” What they won’t tell you is that the connection they make will cost YOU more money. Your contract needs to dictate who is accountable for paying for any connections that are required for your e-commerce platform and your ERP system to play nicely together.

We always make the new piece of software that is connected to the ERP system pay for the API. It is the third party’s cost. That basic API connection should not be your cost to maintain and pay for—stipulate in the contract who is responsible (ideally the third party) ahead of time so you aren’t stuck with a huge bill.

Make Sure You Have Coterminous Contracts

Another big thing to look out for is coterminous contracts. In most large companies, each department will have separate contracts with an ERP provider and these contracts won’t align on the same termination date.

This is the biggest trick in the book. It creates massive chaos because you can’t get everyone on the same page and forces the client to align internally at multiple times throughout the year. Clients typically lose 10 - 20% when they are in a non-coterminous environment.

If you are subject to a non-coterminous environment, the ERP provider is in the driver’s seat. They will divide and conquer you, negotiating at a business unit level versus an enterprise level. At the enterprise level, you have the volume and leverage to get better terms which typically drives an additional 10-20% in value.

In Conclusion

Whether you’re negotiating an initial contract or a renewal, make sure you develop and maintain a total cost of ownership view. First, make sure you understand how your business will be growing over the next 10 years. Then, dissect the contract so that you better understand the unit cost and connection fees.

In the contract, lay out all potential possibilities early as opposed to being forced to react to them as they come along. The more prepared you are, the better you’ll be able to handle surprises, pivots, and conflicts. Make sure that in the contract, each of the specific points outlined above are detailed with zero ambiguity. Hit all these points as a minimum.

The truth of the situation is that the sales representatives at these ERP providers know you aren’t negotiating an ERP contract everyday. It’s important to understand how to protect your company. Keeping these points in mind will help you to protect yourself and your company.