Each year FileHold undergoes several tests in order to retain our “Microsoft Gold” certification. For this certification, FileHold provides Microsoft with a minimum of 10 customers who respond to a short survey that asks questions about our software and then compares the results to benchmarks from the industry (other software products developed by Microsoft “Gold” partners). My assumption is that if we did not compare well, Microsoft would ask us to take some remedial action. This year we had 11 respondents to the survey and our Gold recertification was successful. Microsoft says “Microsoft Partners are certified for their deep knowledge of our products and services. They are businesses and people you can trust. Gold competencies demonstrate best-in-class capability within a specific Microsoft solution area.”
How FileHold does compared to benchmarks
What I am always encouraged by in these surveys is the positive way in which FileHold is seen relative to the Microsoft benchmarks. In this graph you see how FileHold compares to the survey benchmarks – in all cases we do better. In the graph below, FileHold is represented in blue, benchmarks are represented in gold. Of course our results may be a bit skewed, as I am sure the benchmarks are, because I only invite customers who have a full implementation.
Respondents rate “value of software” low
What I found interesting in this round is that the lowest grade given to the benchmarks is relative to value received by customers. Value received on the benchmarks is about 65 points out of a possible 120 points or a bit over 50%. FileHold was ranked a bit better around 100 points out of the possible 120.
In this next graph, the results show the benchmarks in each category and compares to all partners as well as just those in Canada. Again the perceived value received from the benchmarks is the lowest of any category – just 66% for all parties and 68% for Canadian customers.
The second lowest area of satisfaction is “Ability to meet your needs”. This is also the category that FileHold performed the lowest on in the first graph. It is probably fair to connect the two if the software is not meeting customer needs then the value received is going to be low.
So the question is why are software users perceiving that value received in their software is low? Is it because the cost of the software is high relative to value received? Is it that the functionality of the software does not produce value? Or could it be related to the difficulty of fully using and deploying the software?
Our goal as a software provider is to give value for payment received and we are always looking for ways to enhance, deploy, and support our software to ensure highest value. I am very interested in any comments people have on why software in general (or specifically FileHold) is not perceived as delivering value. If you have a comment or would like to discuss perceived value of our software, please email email@example.com.
|Larry Oliver is the President of FileHold Systems Inc. FileHold is the industry leading document management software that advocates "Go Paperless".|