{"id":5280,"date":"2015-05-24T09:51:41","date_gmt":"2015-05-24T07:51:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/staging.alainveuve.ch\/internet-agencies-product-change-what-to-do\/"},"modified":"2015-05-24T09:51:41","modified_gmt":"2015-05-24T07:51:41","slug":"internet-agencies-product-change-what-to-do","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.alainveuve.ch\/en\/internet-agencies-product-change-what-to-do\/","title":{"rendered":"Internet agencies: Product change, what to do?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The design of an agency’s product portfolio is rarely a deliberate process. Many agencies have built up their expertise for a product more by chance. The drivers of such a selection were and are usually the preferences of the agency’s developers, but the foundation of the selection is always the market demand for a product. So let’s not kid ourselves. In the long or short term, agencies deliver solutions in the system in which they receive the most inquiries. So what do you do when these systems change? <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

(Reading time 4 minutes)<\/p>\n

Product change, just like that?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Such changes are always emotionally difficult for agencies. Most agency entrepreneurs are well aware of the importance of the frameworks they use. If demand collapses due to a change in the product, for example, they feel it directly. What’s more, if there’s one thing I’ve learned in 10 years of agency management, it’s quite a difficult undertaking to convert an agency from one key product to another. It always costs time and money. As you know, you don’t have a lot of either in the project business. <\/p>\n

The announcement of Neos and TYPO3 splitting into two different projects is just 1 week old. Over the past 5 days, I have been able to speak to various TYPO3\/Neos agency owners and managers and have heard from many more. Of course, this is an issue for everyone and many are wondering what to do next. Fortunately, I have seen very little actionism. On the contrary. Most agencies are reaffirming their commitment to both products because they see that this split will make both products stronger. <\/p>\n

OpenSource as an advantage – once again<\/strong><\/p>\n

Once again, agencies and clients have an advantage by using open source software. Because no matter what is announced, agencies and clients can continue to use the software for the time being. In the proprietary sector, however, we have seen numerous consolidations in the last 10 years and these have not necessarily been to the advantage of the customer. This is one of the reasons why small CMS consultancies such as Digital Clarity Group<\/a> or J.Boye<\/a> have been talking about this topic like a mantra (you can earn money with it in consulting). <\/p>\n

Opportunists<\/strong><\/p>\n

The agency numero2 didn’t do itself and Contao that many favors with its blog post<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\"2015-05-24<\/p>\n

I can only see this as a kind of well-intentioned opportunism to seize the moment and create uncertainty among TYPO3 and Neos customers. But precisely this question does not arise at all, because there is zero need for action: both systems are stronger than ever. <\/p>\n

In the case of TYPO3, and the agency numero2 has probably missed this just as much as I have missed the fact that Contao has developed really cool, it is more the case that we are currently experiencing something like a second spring and we can expect a lot in the future. And by no means just in the enterprise segment. Version 2.0 of Neos is in the starting blocks and we have already seen this week that there is a new spirit of optimism. There is magic in every beginning. And that releases unimagined energy. <\/p>\n

So the answer to the question posed by agency numero2 can only be: TYPO3 AND Neos, now more than ever. This is also the tenor that I hear from the agency base. <\/p>\n

When should I change my product portfolio?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I believe that an agency’s product portfolio needs to be reviewed on an ongoing basis. If you wanted to do it strategically correctly, you would have to observe the needs of customers over a longer time axis and, based on this, evaluate systems that best cover these needs. Would, would, have… <\/p>\n

The reality in most agencies is different: If three requests for system XY, which you don’t offer, come in in quick succession or, even worse, are communicated as the system of choice when a project is canceled, panic usually sets in.<\/p>\n

The most unfortunate agency owners or managers then get carried away and simply offer system XY for their next project. In the worst case, they even win the project and then make a loss. Which is hardly surprising. After all, who can carry out commercial projects with a new system without preparation? Nobody. <\/p>\n

However, a large proportion of agencies adopt a “medium-term strategic approach”. By this I mean that they are guided by the following criteria: <\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Market demand<\/em>
    \nMarket demand is observed and used as an important indicator. Market demand is not a statistical variable, but a subjective experience. <\/li>\n
  2. Technological preferences<\/em>
    \nIt is very difficult to switch from PHP to Java, for example. Not necessarily as a developer perhaps, but as a company. It’s a multi-layered, complex process that very often also involves cultural changes. Many employees are subliminally aware of this. That’s why most companies that make product changes remain in a similar technological environment (this applies to all IT companies, by the way). <\/li>\n
  3. Employee mindset<\/em>
    \nProduct portfolio changes mean retraining and, more importantly, settling into new communities. In most cases, developers simply don’t want to use any other technology. As an agency manager, you don’t want to counteract this unless there really is no other way. <\/li>\n
  4. Positioning of the agency<\/em>
    \nMany agencies have benefited enormously from the success of products. For example, there is company XY, which is considered a Drupal agency or company XX, which is considered a Magnolia agency. Changing this in terms of marketing and communication is a lot of work. In addition, existing customers (who bought the “old” product), who usually provide the basis for a basic workload, are unsettled. <\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Change only if absolutely<\/em> necessary<\/strong><\/p>\n

    For the reasons mentioned above, an abrupt change is only advisable if there are also abrupt changes in the product. For example, the announced discontinuation of a (proprietary) product or massive security flaws in the product. Whenever possible, product portfolio changes should be made slowly. The best way to do this is to add a new product, set up a dedicated team for it and carry out simpler projects with it. In this way, know-how and skills can be built up in the team for the new product and the necessary marketing and community\/manufacturer measures can be taken. <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Artikel auf Social Media teilen:<\/p>\n<\/div>

    <\/div>