Common Response #1:
No vendor can possibly service all
our o ces.
Answer: false.
While this may have
been true 10 years ago, it is not true
today and most certainly will not be
true in the future. Any legitimate
national vendor will be able to service
all of a firm's offices either through
direct channels or through some type
of network of regional dealers or
a liations. Ricoh/IKON, Staples or
Iron Mountain, for example, have
direct, national reach to service all
domestic regions; or, on the other
hand, consider vendors such as
Canon and Xerox for copiers, or
NRC—National Records Center—for
o site records storage all of whom
have full stables of local and regional
providers and a liates. ere are pros
and cons for both situations, but it is
su ciently clear that there are
national providers for every area of
operation. Servicing your o ces is
not the problem.
Common Response #2:
All of our o ces are so di erent.
Answer: true.
However, that is true
with every
rm nationally and
internationally. at being the case, it
is also true that if the scope of
services, performance standards,
service levels requirements, and
request for proposals are dra ed
correctly and the subsequent contract
incorporates
these
di erences,
individual anomalies can easily be
addressed.
Common Response #3:
We like to give our local o ces the
decision making authority in this
area or we don't like to dictate
decisions from the home o ce.
Dictate
-
to prescribe or lay down
authoritatively or peremptorily;
command unconditionally; to dictate
peace terms to a conquered enemy.
Answer: not applicable.
Autonomy is important as well as
respecting the valuable input of the
attorneys and sta in your o ces. But,
consistency is king. You don't let your
satellite o ces determine what word
processing so ware to use, though
you may listen to the input of your
professionals when making a choice
between two platforms.
I argue this principle ought to be
extended to the selection of your
services vendors, whether that is for
o site records, duplication equip-
ment, o ce supplies or outsourcing.
If the service is superior, the rm is
able to reduce costs by, say, 30%,
improve contract terms or, say, reduce
permanent withdrawal fees all the
while gaining exibility and better
pricing, the term ‘dictate’ simply does
not apply.
Common Response #4:
National contracts don't save you
money.
Answer: false.
e only people saying
this are the local vendors your rm is
currently using or the people who
don't want to do the work.
In the last twelve months,
Mattern & Associates has negotiated
national contracts for outsourcing,
o site records, o ce supplies and
multi-functional equipment.
e
average 1st year savings that our
clients have enjoyed has been 23%,
and there is not one national contract
that did not result in savings and
improved contract terms. Not one.
Common Response #5:
We have long-term local vendors
and we don't want to disrupt the
relationship.
Answer: not applicable.
Loyalty is
important. Many of our clients are
extremely loyal to their vendors, and
I truly appreciate that. But don’t
con ate productive loyalty with
blind loyalty.
In some situations, your local
vendor may be able to service you at a
national level through their regional
a liations or vendor network.
Depending upon the type of situation,
your rm’s initiative may be the
opportunity that this particular
vendor is looking for to expand
nationally or into some other
geographic region. Alternatively, if
the vendor isn't able to service you,
then they may be able to recommend
vendors
who
can.
Ultimately,
however, if the vendor is also recipro-
cally loyal and has your firm's best
interests at heart, the dialogue will be
constructive to all parties.
ere’s just no question that
consistency is king when it comes to
rm wide contracts. National
contracts
do
work and will bring
savings to the table at a time when
rms are still focusing on expenses
reduction. Not to look at this area
based upon the reasons outlined
above is leaving signi cant savings on
the table.
7
|
Mattern & Associates
