Software vendors tend to emphasise the "user-friendliness" of applications, but often new technologies fail before they can be used because the implementation is unsuccessful.
This week I acquired a state-of-the-art graphics card for my home PC, bowing to pressure from my eight-year-old son dying to fire up a new multimedia game. Great technology, but after several hours of trying to install the all-empowering device, I had to concede defeat.
It was tempting to blame the technology for my loss of face, but reason prevailed and I deferred the problem to someone far more skilled in the finer workings of PC hardware and operating systems. The problem was easily resolved and my son was soon happily waging battle in defence of Middle Earth in a perfectly rendered 3D animated environment.
There was nothing wrong with the graphics card, but I was unable to get it to perform. Had it been supplied with a guide to installing the software drivers and eliminating hardware conflicts, it would have been a different story.
Later in the week, the same scenario was highlighted by an integration consultant at a briefing on the BrightStor r11.1 storage management solution from Computer Associates.
Eirin Lankwarden, Integr8 IT network engineer, cited an example of a blue-chip company that had criticised the ARCserve backup facility within BrightStor for failing to deliver the required service. Further investigation found that the blue-chip`s implementation was at fault.
Lankwarden said the company had installed the software without the necessary customisation, resulting in a faulty implementation and its ultimate failure.
I suspect it would be a frightening statistic, were it available, to know how many companies write off technology as bad technology when all that prevented service delivery was a faulty implementation.
Warwick Ashford, technology editor, ITWeb
Fortunately for the blue-chip, the problem was referred to a vendor partner who was able to prove the value of the application once the implementation problems had been ironed out, but what about the companies that do not refer such problems?
I suspect it would be a frightening statistic, were it available, to know how many companies write off technology as bad technology when all that prevented service delivery was a faulty implementation.
Once the blue-chip`s installation had been customised appropriately and the IT system configured correctly, the ARCserve backup facility, like my graphics card, delivered the expected service. The blue‑chip`s position echoes mine exactly. In both cases, getting real about the situation meant acknowledging that the fault lay in the implementation; now where does one place the blame?
In the business scenario, Lankwarden says companies need to ensure they have the necessary knowledge and experience before taking on complex implementations themselves and should either improve their skills or use the services of a recognised vendor partner.
Fair enough, but in the retail market scenario, not every consumer has access to obliging tech-savvy colleagues, so shouldn`t the onus be on manufacturers to provide an installation guide or on the retailers to ensure consumers have the necessary knowledge to use the product?
I think that`s the position I am going to adopt while I try to figure out a way to repair my ego and restore my image as a fearless and powerful technology warrior in my son`s eyes...
Share