Falling Short: Welcome to The 2004 ARC Hall of Shame

In keeping with my annual tradition of inducting new members into VARBusiness' Annual Report Card Hall of Shame, let's take a look at the vendors that delivered less than satisfactory ARC scores. But, before we dive into the scores, which can make a grown channel executive cry, let me note that overall scores VARs gave to their vendor partners declined for the third straight year. There is no easy way to explain this trend. Perhaps VARs are a bit jaded by vendor promises, burned out by all the recent channel-program changes or are just rating their vendors more harshly. Either way, the trend of lower satisfaction scores is something vendors should be as worried about as making their numbers for the quarter. In a strange way, the VARs who scored their vendors lower than my senior year calculus final are doing these companies a great service. These VARs spent a great deal of time grading their satisfaction with those companies' products, support programs and partnering efforts. The information is worth its weight in a platinum-dipped McKinsey consultant for the losers because it provides invaluable insight into what is inhibiting their channel sales efforts. The VARs we surveyed are part of a vendor's official channel program and have been engaged with its product for at least a year.

Now, let's take a look at some of the shameful performances. Oracle has a new channel chief in veteran Rauline Ochs, so she can't be blamed for the company's dismal performance in the database category. (That's akin to losing a World Series played entirely on your home field.) On a scale of 1 to 100, Oracle scored a 50, one of the lowest scores we've seen in a long time. It was trounced by IBM, Microsoft and Sybase. Oracle's presales support efforts earned it a score of 39, its sales partnering was awarded a 34 and its efforts to manage conflict earned it a 39. Partners obviously feel they are getting no marketing support from Larry Ellison's outfit because they graded that effort a 36. And when it comes to how easy Oracle is to do business with--well, to put it mildly, it is not. The good news for Oracle and Ochs is the company has no place to go but up.

Next, AT&T has so many problems that it almost pains me to inform you that it scored even lower than Oracle in managing channel conflict, with a score of 38--the worst score in that criteria. AT&T also has the distinction of tying Oracle for single worst score in the entire survey, a 34 in ease of doing business for AT&T and sales partnering for Oracle. Maybe AT&T execs should phone a few partners and find out what is going on here because Ma Bell is turning over in her monopolistic grave.

Meanwhile, SCO should spend more time working on its Unix products and less time in litigation. It received the survey's lowest score for product innovation, some 30 points lower than Samsung, which had the highest. Oh, I almost forgot--SCO was slapped with a sad 60 for the product innovation subcategory. Across the board, SCO is doing little to impress partners. It should be ashamed it received the lowest score in the survey for richness of features and innovation. (If Darl McBride's lawyer calls, tell him I'm not in.)

Now, get ready for a shocker: Dell might be the standard bearer for efficiency and customer relationships in IT, but it has struggled with how to leverage solution providers. This year, it finished last in desktops and servers, and shared last place in notebooks with Toshiba. You'd expect partners to be hard on Dell, but how could Toshiba lose to Dell in VAR loyalty? VARs also rated Dell higher than Toshiba for marketing support, joint sales efforts, the ability to generate profit and sales, along with ease of doing business. I could spend days dissecting the Dell vs. Toshiba results, but the big Japanese tech company has no business letting Dell turn its hard work into spoiled sushi.

Let's turn our attention to Dell's relationship with Lexmark. As many know, Lexmark supplies printers to Dell, and that has caused some angst in the channel. What we didn't know until the ARC survey results came in is how Dell is contributing to Lexmark's poor satisfaction scores. Lexmark finished last in the network color printer competition, walking away with the second lowest loyalty score in the entire survey. The exact number was 52, the same score VARs gave Dell in entry-level servers and Sony in displays. Wonder if there is any connection between Lexmark's loyalty score and the Dell partnership?

In your estimation, tell me which vendors you think are doing poorly. I will protect your identity, and the first 10 to reach me will receive a gift. E-mail me at [email protected].