How much of the business case for SaaS is predicated on the false assumption that companies will save on hardware and technical support? As much as 75% if you still cling to the idea that new wireless communication platforms haven’t shifted the costs of hosting and support to all alternatives including customized solutions.
It wasn’t too long ago that WebEx Communications estimated that personnel and internal hardware costs for acquired software “can add 250% to 700%” to the actual expenditure over a three year period.” No wonder some CFOs still mandate that organizations use SaaS whenever possible. It would appear that there is a significant financial premium for doing otherwise.
But when it comes to recognition systems there are two mistaken assumptions made by most. The first is that only SaaS can be delivered remotely. Madison does both SaaS and customized applications and makes them available to clients via secured internet connections. Both options eliminate client hosting costs.
The second is that “operational” costs vs. “opportunity” costs should play the biggest role in the evaluation. Odd when you consider that the real goal of any recognition program is to spike and sustain employee engagement.
In reevaluating the business case companies would be smart to examine how either system supports the projected economic gains promised via increased employee motivation. Does it give you the latitude you need to manage program rules and exceptions across your enterprise? Does it allow managers to freely set goals and objectives that are relevant to their individual employees? And does it allow the HR team to do more than simply monitor activity? By that I mean does it help them become more diagnostic and thus proactive in determining how recognition can be utilized as a business improvement lever within the company?
It’s time to reevaluate some of the current paradigms surrounding SaaS and recognition. While it works fine for some it may very well cause others to miss out on the real return on recognition.