Isolationist suppliers limit customer choice

Multi-program, multi-manufacturer connectivity is a reality. It is to application software what plug and play is to hardware, and is one of the most useful computer developments of all time.

But I am concerned that accounting practices may be denied the benefits of this breakthrough by a few of the larger specialist software vendors desperately clinging to outdated isolationist policies.

I doubt that you are concerned whether all the clothes you are wearing, from your suit to your socks and shoes, come from the same manufacturer.

I doubt that you feel less well dressed because they didn’t, probably the reverse is true.

Why then, should you still feel under pressure to have all your computer software from one manufacturer? Why accept a situation in which a software supplier sells you programs that do not ‘best fit’, and do not match with any other packages you use, unless, of course, they come from the same supplier?

Connected solutions

Many programs from many different software companies work together, using technology such as ActiveX (OLE) to create connected solutions. Customers simply pick the different programs (specialist and generalist) which best suit their requirements, and gain an integrated suite of carefully chosen applications. Your off-the-shelf choice of clothes.

But if one of your chosen suppliers decides to have an isolationist policy, all this choice and flexibility is lost to you. Peter Mart (Technology File, 28 October), managing director of market-leading tax software supplier CSM, said: ‘I am often asked why we do not provide links with other practice management software. It’s a competitive issue. We have a rival package so why should I provide links to someone else’s software when users can simply buy my software instead?’

Roughly translated, this means: ‘why should I give you any freedom of choice if we can force you into just buying our stuff?’

To an extent, I can see Mart’s point. We are all running commercial businesses, and his approach is a continuation of the proprietary approach formerly prevalent in the computer industry.

However, his attitude is detrimental to the IT industry, the accounting profession and accountants’ practices. It may even be against the best long-term commercial interests of CSM itself.

Proper connectivity is universal, suppliers cannot restrict which other programs customers connect into, whether rivals or not. Connectivity means that the ‘Customer is King’.

IT suppliers must now realise, if we are talking to our customers, that we also need to talk to each other (or at least have programs that can do so).

Hartley has been talking to other suppliers such as Data Sciences, Digita, Drummohr, Forbes and Taxsoft, to ensure our accounts programs can connect with their tax programs.

This even extends to competing companies such as IBIS, who are also in the accounts production market. Fortunately, connectivity is achieved by use of common protocols, so there is no need to hand over source code and trade secrets to rivals.

Connectivity can take many forms. When we developed our new 32-bit true Windows 95 accounts production program, HartleyAccountant, we made sure that it was fully data compatible with the earlier DOS program, HCA. This meant that clients did not have to throw away most of their computer equipment, and, in fact, could run the two programs together on the same network and on the same clients.

An assumption made by industry loners is that they can provide everything an accountant needs.

However, can you really expect one supplier to meet all your IT needs?

There is no one software house in the world making all the programs that a typical accounting practice uses, let alone the best ones for your practice.

Even Microsoft, with its volte face on Java, has realised they can’t win every race.

Your chances of a best-of-breed solution from one supplier are negligible.

There will always be specialist suppliers producing better products, or better suited products for certain types of firm. The one-stop-shop will give you ease of purchase, but it won’t give you the best software on the market.

Proper connectivity, like good communication, is a dialogue. How will you benefit from using niche suppliers’ software that can talk and listen, if you are also using programs from an isolationist company’s proprietary system that play deaf and dumb? They end up having to work totally separately, so bang goes your integration.

In the single supplier system, some of the modules may be state-of-the-art, but some may be duffers, or just out of date, but you’re still stuck with all of them. Would you wear a paisley pattern shirt and kipper tie just because your single source tailor had not updated his range of shirts and ties?

Integration cannot even take place until the single source supplier provides all the modules. What if they don’t all exist yet? You may have to wait until 1997 or 1998 or whenever before they all do. Until then you will not have an integrated system. Would you feel comfortable going to the office for the next two years in just your underwear because your tailor was still working on your suit?

Myopic vision

The analogy may be silly, but the point is serious. Are we going to see IT development within the profession distorted by the myopic vision of one or two of its larger suppliers?

Let’s get this in perspective. The world players, companies like Microsoft, IBM and Sun Systems, are actively developing the connectivity route. Microsoft is currently unveiling its Office 97 suite. The key message in this product release is connectivity.

Should our profession risk being denied this by one or two companies, each employing less than 100 people?

Connectivity means individual programs can now be bought on their merits, regardless of any tactical manoeuvring or enforced loyalty techniques practised by the vendor. Think how much easier that makes your life. There is no need to replace all programs at the same time, and each department can have what is best for it, not simply the lowest common denominator.

Connectivity gives true freedom of choice allowing accounting practices to put together their own vision of the ideal system, not someone else’s limited view.

By the way, the only person I can recall who ever was persuaded that he must buy all his clothes from one source was a certain emperor, and after the small boy shouted from the crowd, even he changed his mind.

Charles Woodgate FCA is a director of Hartley Computer UK.