"Channel leak" may refer to margins But the true leak is the loss of Relationship Selling and Direct Partnership. When a deal is non strategic and strictly cost effect, clients will buy from the BPs and in best case from Marketplace. This is called a vendor sale. So why pay a levy attached to the luxury of a Channels team on such a massive scale. Isn't that why PPA levels exist? Put all that resource back closer to the Client via Tech Reps and grow real Pipeline through true collaboration. Getting back to the Client...how un-IBM...just might be a step in the right direction
4 replies (most recent on top)
The post clearly states LESS channels and MORE tech ya Igit
over the last few years - IBM has consistently changed "tech reps" every 6 to 12 months. They have caused issues of these reps having minimal to no relationship with the buyers. how is cutting this off even more going to help improve this??? Every other successful company is getting closer to the customer - IBM is going the opposite direction
The obvious problem that AK & Co missed with pushing more channel/BP engagements is that the channel doesn't like to sell IBM. Why even bother selling a convoluted IBM solution that isn't even competitive when they can make huge margins selling literally anything else?
What do you mean no channel reps? You mean digital Sales?