Month: October 2014

Too many managed services providers are stuck in the SLA

Good service cannot be reduced to 99.99% availability, says Claranet

Too many managed services providers and end users are stuck in the SLA, where uptime and availability are the core metrics against which their services are evaluated. Service is far more dynamic and can change over the course of a contract meaning it is important to develop new performance objectives that are meaningful to the customer with respect to their changing business needs, says Claranet.

Paul Marland, Director of Account Management at Claranet, said:

What’s clear to us is that the vast majority of SLAs don’t really get to the heart of what’s important to customers – or, at the very least, fall short of guaranteeing what customers really need and expect, beyond uptime and availability. As businesses have come to rely more heavily on third parties to deliver their IT, and as solutions have become more complex, ‘good service’ can’t simply be reduced to the pure metrics of service availability.

“That a provider is meeting the levels of uptime specified by their SLA will be of little solace to the CEO or FD who can’t access their emails fast enough, or the online retailer missing out on sales because of slow page-loads. These performance-based issues have proven to be something of a bugbear for the service provider industry; a grey area that falls beyond the remit of the traditional SLA, but remains key to the overall customer experience,” Marland continued.

Marland went on to say that the service provider industry must look beyond measures of uptime and availability to measures of service that are meaningful to end users and contract against them.

“The industry tends to measure against technical metrics, but it’s important to remember that it’s the end user’s actual experience that counts. End users can have a situation where their SLA is being met and exceeded by their provider but are still not seeing the levels of service that their business now requires. When this happens, it is often a sign that the SLA is too generic and objectives have not been set that reflect the specific performance needs of the end user.

“The problem is that a standard SLA does not reflect the true dynamic nature of the relationship that now prevails between customer and cloud provider. The SLA is a traditional foundation for the contract, but it should not be used as the basis of how we work together.

“The best MSPs understand this and are able to assess what they do in the context of the end user. An SLA is a good baseline contractual agreement but, as the relationship evolves, so too must the level of ‘measurable’ engagement to suit the performance and optimisation criteria of each customer. MSPs need to look at those things that are actually meaningful to businesses– in essence, bringing end user performance objectives into the agreement,” he concluded.

Find out more:

A customer's perspective on our event: Connecting Your Charity to the Future

This blog is used with kind permission from Sift Digital, a digital partner of Claranet’s. The original blog can be found here.

I recently spoke at Claranet’s ‘Connecting your charity to the future’ seminar, hosted on floor 35 of the Shard. Nice views and a great venue for some stimulating debate around the future of digital in the not-for-profit sector.

The context for my talk was all around digital governance, which I find myself speaking about and working on most of the time these days. It’s a fascinating area, agnostic of the sector you work in. All businesses are – to greater or lesser degrees – struggling to adapt to the new digital paradigm.

The audience were an interesting blend of IT, communications and marketing professionals from a wide range of organisations. This seemed like a good starting point as one of the familiar challenges we deal with frequently is the distance and tension that often exists between IT and communications functions. This opening gambit certainly drew a telling response from the crowd, who were keen to all work more closely together but were hindered by legacy systems, processes and lack of cohesive, integrated planning.

read more