This is more work to sell with C2E as there is so much more internal meetings prior to customer meeting then there is always cleanup after a C2E engagement. Is anyone measuring the amount of effort it takes to use C2E and the effort it take to save a deal or do damage control after engaging C2E. Rarely had these issues prior to C2E.
9 replies (most recent on top)
@1ybx+1eR6yXFU - Well said.
@1ybx+1eR6yXFU wrong. For all industries since the dawn of time specialization pays more.
From a career perspective, C2E limits your career, not just within Cisco but more importantly outside of Cisco. The industry wants true architects, not just someone that can do one thing well. When you are one dimensional, Cisco can pay you less and they intend to pay everyone in C2E less. It will take time, but they have to start a new paradigm in paying engineering at a lower cost as the current cost of engineering resources is not sustainable. Enter C2E.
Unfortunately C2E is great for EK and the SEDs as they continue to get pay raises and nice bonuses but C2E is the worse thing to happen to the Cisco Engineer / Architect as it means lower pay and fewer opportunities.
Trying to implement C2E is an acknowledgement that architectural selling does not work and we need to get in the kn--e fights on every opportunity. Our team does not use C2E as it is a complete debacle and loses more deals than it wins.
C2E works well, I’ve had all positive experiences with my engagements
C2E is not a success let alone huge success it s a train wreck. The only one coming out ahead is Eric Knipp. TSA's and Account teams get screwed with it and all HATE it.
Agree with OP. Every time our team tries to use it, it is a complete mess. Customers want easy to do business with and C2E is far from that.
C2E is actually a huge success. You are just complaining because now you have to actually work instead of hide out.
C2E is a solution looking for a problem.