General Consultant Discussion

I have been assisting another reseller with an implementation going from Quickbooks. The client is a wee bit difficult, if not irrational at times. The staff is really resistant to the change, and we consistently hear ""......we did it this way n Quickbooks..."". These users are all young, not what I would expect to be so resistant to change. We have seen refusal to follow instructions (new procedure docs), when questions are asked of consultants the answers are RARELY shared with other users, and the kicker was this......during training class I received ""big sighs"" throughout the class each time someone disapproved. No one from management (in attendance) said a word, so I did. One day everything is fine, the next day they report ""nothing is working""......they do not read messages on the screen either. For example, we received a scathing Email stating the software was garbage due to error messages, when the message only stated ""the Invoice exists in Batch xxxx). Argh!!! I have had difficult clients over the years, and I know the QB conversions are historically the most difficult, but this one..........actually hurts!!

A thankless job :(

My favorite is when they ask ""Did you know in QB you can just go change the number, amount, date?

Reminds me of the client that migrated from an AS400 after 25 years of customized programming. BITCH and MOAN!!!!! I told the owner that if it was so great, than why was he switching? The transition was difficult (though it was made much easier with a great trainer). They are actually now saying great things about the product. So my response is ""this too shall pass"" They have a great trainer, one day they will appreciate you too! Though it boggles the mind that management is being a spineless amoeba! BTW, there is still room at this weekend's MOTF symposium in DC. Get a last minute deal to DC, hang with the buds for a couple days and be back in CA on Tuesday!!!

We should put together a collection a articles where the company was a victim of an embezzlement crime because you CAN change the number, amount, date, etc............

Stay the course Kathleen but have a talk with the project owner. One of the responsibilities of the project owners is to address (and re-address multiple times if necessary) why the change is occurring, where the ROI is in the change, and affirm that management is fully committed to the project as so should everyone else. If the staff is not following documented procedures, this should be reported to the project lead. If they staff don't follow the procedures and additional work is required on your part, this will result in a change order, pushing up the cost of the project. If the client needs another method of communication, they need to share that with the team. We had a project where we did weekly lunch and learns (for an additional fee as this was not included in the original project plan.) It became apparent to us that the staff wasn't reading documentation we spent hours writing so we went over the documents at lunch once a week and discussed how to resolve issues everyone was having so everyone heard it at the same time. Then the project lead asked that all questions be routed through her so she could deal with those who chose not to listen. It took care of the problem quickly. The really hard part in all of this is that in the end, if the project goes well, they will have done it on their own. If it fails, it's all your fault. Then again, that's why you get paid the big bucks!

@ShawnSlavin GREAT ideas. Thanks for posting.

How many times have we all talked to a prospect and within the first five minutes they volunteer ""we were never properly trained"" .... in most cases I figure the majority of the blame rests with the company.

Thanks Shawn for some REALLY great advice, however in this case one of the problems is the Project Lead. She (to my face) says how wonderful the training is and how thankful she is. But, the minute I am gone she starts in with ""The system is slow, we can't find xxx (never mind the reason they can't find xxx) and it's ALWAYS via Email copying everyone but Obama!!! Then the threats start and we are off to the races again......And yes, I can't even count how many times I have heard.....What do you mean we can't just go back and change the Invoice?"" Just shoot me now.......It's almost like I don't want to work with QB converts.

@WayneSchulz I honestly believe that some of the fault lies with the way we have trained in the past. (Maybe the ""we"" I'm talking about are just the many voices in my head). The old method of walking in and conducting training sessions over 2 to 3 days, with or without relevant test data, really doesn't work. It doesn't stick. Let's face it, we have a hard time staying focused at session at Summit and we are paying money out of our own pockets to be there. Training in long sessions doesn't work for most. Kahn Academy does their sessions in 10 minutes or less. That started out to be because of limitations in delivery technology. Today, they stick with it because studies have found that is about the limit of most of our attention spans. Give 10 minutes of instruction and then give the student something to do to reinforce it. Then give another 10 minutes then another reinforcement session. I've even heard that this may work even better if you will record your training session and let the client gain access to the session afterwards. We don't do the recording thing today but recently I used Camtasia to record a few of my support session and cut out the important pieces the sent them to the client for follow up. The client appreciated the extra effort and he didn't call about what we covered. Anyway, how we train is changing these days and I think it is getting better. If you (generic you here, not Wayne in particular) aren't changing how you deliver knowledge, you probably aren't as effective as you would like to be.

@KathleenMatthews, I agree with you completely regarding QB and converting people who are used to changing things after posting. Continuous resistance indicates folks who don't have the discipline (they blame it on time but we know better) to get it right the first time and won't make the changes needed to do so. Another common reason is that they are not able to cover their tracks better and the number of mistakes they make really start to show. I would suggest going to your project Owner and making sure they help communicate to the project lead the value they are trying to get and the reason for the change. If the Project Owner isn't on board, then you have a real challenge on your hands. Come see me at Summit and we can commiserate. We've all gone through these and sometimes, it's just a painful process. Good luck. I wish you the best.

I agree 100%. In fact I have completely changed my methodology of training. Some due to exactly what you described above and some just due to the age (I know, politically incorrect) of the students now, BUT mostly due to the downturn of the economy. Companies do not have enough staff to allow a person (or persons) to be away from their workload for 2-3 days; nor will companies pay for 2-3 days of training. I've found doing mini sessions - by task seems to work the best. I will still be on site for 2-3 days. It takes a bit longer to put together my curriculum, but it's worth it. If this engagement was just training, I might have been OK....but this was a Controller-Trainer thing. Why is it we see more QB users with no accounting background or understanding? These engagements are very difficult.....at best! Jeff - I wish I could get back there, but between the $$$$ and family obligations that week, I can't. Maybe next year - God willing :) I would love to go.....

There are 2 famous Harvard case studies pertaining to failed ERP implementations..... Nestle and Nike. Both were attempts at implementing SAP, but it could have been any software as the reasons for the failure weren't the fault of the software manufacturer. The common thread of both failures was a deficiency in the needs analysis. In both cases the department heads, controllers, IT people et al had many meetings and planning sessions to hash out the details of the new system. Processes were documented, features were designed, and programmers and consultants implemented the code changes. The go live was a disaster. Users couldn't or wouldn't use the software. Incorrect SKUs were sent to customers. Millions of dollars were lost in costs of software, consulting, inventory, and customer goodwill. Both Nestle and Nike started from scratch. What did they do wrong the first time? They didn't involve the employees actually using the system. Most end users weren't involved in the ""high-level"" meetings. management decided that ""this is what we need"" and tried to shove it down the throat of the order takers, AP and AR clerks, and shipping and receiving personnel. The lessons learned were: You need to involve the users of the software in a new implementation. Every keystroke, menu, job function, and feature needs to be examined. If a process needs to change, the person doing the work needs to be involved. Make the user feel they are a part of the implementation team so they have some ""buy in"" on the project.. When a user feels they were part of the team helping to improve the company they are far less likely to reject the software and the ""the old system used to do this"" is minimized.

Wonder if Harvard would do a case study on Sage?

@JohnBroadfoot - Harvard considered Sage for a case study and determined the subject matter was too voluminous to cover in a 2-year MBA program.

@DougHiggs - That's interesting. I'm disappointed as I think it would have been interesting reading. Sage was in the back of my mind as I read your comment and I managed to keep it there until I saw the phrase ""shove it down the throat"" in the 4th paragraph.

@JohnBroadfoot - I don't know for certain, but @DougHiggs comments seems a bit ""tongue in cheek"".............. Or as Sheldon would say ""Bazinga, that was sarcasm""!!!!

@JeffSchwenk - You are catching on! ..... and Sheldon Cooper is my hero.

@kathleenmatthews I think you are living my life! We've had two implementations in the last year that went exactly like this. During the sales process they couldn't wait to get off QB but once they went live, you would have thought QB cured cancer! The resistance to new processes and to just give Sage a try is incredible. Like others are saying, I've moved away from ""official"" lenghty training and focus on just getting them the knowledge to do their daily jobs. We then come back after they are live for a few months and then try to go over some of the new functionality they might be missing. I feel your pain!!

Sad to think it takes a 2 year Harvard study for management to get buy-in from the very people using the process and software daily. Sheesh, the narcissistic tendencies of management never ceases to amaze.......After 20+ years of doing implementations, this is the one constant!