The importance of the client/supplier relationship

 

This is a slightly corny sounding subject at first sight, but it really is true and it really is important! The following are some of the things I have learned over the years which you might like to consider when buying and then implementing a fundraising, membership or CRM database (or anything else come to that!):

• The first thing which helps in this area is that hopefully you will consider supplier empathy and approach even during procurement. Especially the lead/key staff you will be working with. If you select a company where their staff do appear awkward/unhelpful/blunt or just don't care about what you are doing, then that isn't going to help... You might do this if everything else about the company and software was so fantastic that you had to do so, but personally I wouldn't advise it. (This may be an obvious thing for me to say but in the NFP sector this can truly make a difference, compared to a hard-nosed commercial organisation)
• The supplier should be on your project board/steering committee during implementation. This will really help the relationship and project. And if you also need to hold private board meetings without the supplier then that's fine, just make sure they are part of the key meetings.
• Set ground rules for both parties in your kick-off meeting: start as you mean to go on. It's the best time to do this when you are both happy and enthusiastic!
• Invite your supplier's key staff to one of your organisation's away-days, SMT meeting, fundraising planning workshop etc at the start of your implementation. It will give them a far better insight into what your charity does, what is important to you, what your staff are like and so on. (NB For suppliers who work with commercial clients too, you might well find their staff find it a refreshing thing to be working for a good cause - and the more engaged they are, the more likely they will pull out the stops to help you when push comes to shove).
• Don't squeeze suppliers on costs til they bleed - it will backfire. They almost certainly will be a for-profit company so understand you do need to treat them as such.
• Your contract should include a SLA (Service Level Agreement).
• Ensure you have an Escalation Policy which covers what you will do and who will do it - for both parties - if anything does need escalating.
• Build a more personal relationship with the supplier's key staff so that if you do have a problem or an awkward thing to discuss then it should be easier. Ditto if they need to come to you about such issues. Visit their office, meet their other staff, meet their CEO (or as high as you can go - you may not meet Marc Benioff or Satya Nadelle themselves!)
• And when things go wrong, discuss them as openly and as honestly as possible. Don't shout! (I know this is basic advice but I have seen situations when it has not been followed...)

Why Not Outsource All Your Database Management?

The role of Database Manager can be a tough role to fill, especially for organisations who use the more sophisticated fundraising and membership database packages such as Raiser's Edge, IRIS, ThankQ, Progress and many more. You need someone who is not only technically adept but, ideally, someone who also understands your charity's business requirements, who can ask questions and who is able to work pro-actively to help support your database and associated systems.

So I'm wondering if there is an argument as to whether this role could be completely outsourced? Why should you as a charity have to recruit and manage a database manager when there might be a company or individual who could do the job as well or better and potentially at the same or lower cost? After all, many other activities both in and outside technology are outsourced, from IT support and hosting databases to marketing and even HR.

Indeed, outsourced database management has been something which data bureaus have already provided for some years, sometimes admittadly because the databases they have created have been so complex or inflexible that only they could understand them, but sometimes because it made complete sense to the charity to let them do this.

The key would be to find someone who could really understand your fundraising or business requirements but still be able to provide excellent database management. But with specialist companies, database suppliers themselves and some individuals, this would be exactly what they could offer. You would need to determine exactly what you wanted them to do: is their role simply to maintain the structure and data integrity, security and finance codes, or would they actually run queries and write reports, do segmentations and help with mailings, run Gift Aid claims, do data loading, review and write processes and so on. Is it really possible that your fundraisers could simply use the database to just look-up records, run the actual reports, do some basic analysis on donors and prospects?

Some charities clearly think so. Médecins Sans Frontières are renound for their outsourcing, and consultancy, Purple Vision have introduced their 'database management on demand' service for this precise service; and a number of fundraising and membership database suppliers now offer such a service on their own propietary databases too. In fact, on the Database Outsourcing page of my web site, I list another 10 organisations who offer at least some elements of this approach.

But you do need to consider everything very carefully: you would absolutely need a tight SLA (Service Level Agreement), tight data protection contracts, a well-defined scope for the work they are and are not doing, and full clarity on costs. Depending on your needs, it might make sense to have a fixed price contract for specific services or to charge by the hour/day.

But the benefits can be great. A knowledgeable and instantly available person to support you who is (should be) a specialist, (potentially) contractable accountability, potentially lower costs - although I realise that is very much debatable and dependent on the specific contract (e.g. especially with economies of scale for the outsourcer, if their specialist skills mean less time is needed per task, no NI/employee costs etc) - and, as harsh as this sounds, if it doesn't work out, then providing you have considered your contract up-front, then you could still get rid of them for an alternative (as much as this would be a bad thing to have to do).

Let me know if you have succeeded or failed in any such venture.