We have been experiencing a flurry of RFPs regarding out outsourcing product and from this we are learning a lot about the current environment. Speaking frankly we have been challenged on price consistently. Not surprising in this economy, however, on a post mortem I don't think we are ensuring that our services are being compared on an apples to apples basis.
Componentization of services versus an End to End process are very different and need to be compared appropriately. For the prices we are seeing people must be getting components, but think they are getting end to end.
Visit our website for more on our outsourcing services.
http://www.mdsolutionsllc.net/content/services/
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Professional Services
Most people dread using professional services of a vendor to implement software and I can understand. If the professional services estimate is driven by the sales process it can be exaggerated either up or down. And in today's cost conscience environment it is most likely down. In my opinion this situation jeopardize the success of an implementation! Sales folks will cut the estimate to hopefully find the price point that will entice the prospect to buy the software, regardless of the ultimate outcome of the project.
There is not getting around the fact that you will need professional services to implement complex, mission critical software, however, you needn't overpay for those services. I would say that with a little due diligence there are plenty of competent firms (read non-vendor) that can guide you through the sales (most critical!) and then implement and train with great success.
For example, our firm is a Certified Service Provider for a vendor
we were former employees. We can guide people through the sales
process and and implement easily.
While the vendor generally views prospects as a "transaction", we view the prospect as a relationship that needs to be cultivated for the long-term. We know that if we do a good job we can have this firm as a client for as long as they use the software. Most vendors will talk the "relationship" talk, but walk the "transaction" walk.
Visit our website to see how we can help you with your RFP or upgrade. We work specifically with Advent platform of products, Axys, Moxy, APX, Qube, DTCC, REX, ACD, DataExchange, you name it.
www.mdsolutionsllc.net
Most people dread using professional services of a vendor to implement software and I can understand. If the professional services estimate is driven by the sales process it can be exaggerated either up or down. And in today's cost conscience environment it is most likely down. In my opinion this situation jeopardize the success of an implementation! Sales folks will cut the estimate to hopefully find the price point that will entice the prospect to buy the software, regardless of the ultimate outcome of the project.
There is not getting around the fact that you will need professional services to implement complex, mission critical software, however, you needn't overpay for those services. I would say that with a little due diligence there are plenty of competent firms (read non-vendor) that can guide you through the sales (most critical!) and then implement and train with great success.
For example, our firm is a Certified Service Provider for a vendor
we were former employees. We can guide people through the sales
process and and implement easily.
While the vendor generally views prospects as a "transaction", we view the prospect as a relationship that needs to be cultivated for the long-term. We know that if we do a good job we can have this firm as a client for as long as they use the software. Most vendors will talk the "relationship" talk, but walk the "transaction" walk.
Visit our website to see how we can help you with your RFP or upgrade. We work specifically with Advent platform of products, Axys, Moxy, APX, Qube, DTCC, REX, ACD, DataExchange, you name it.
www.mdsolutionsllc.net
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Custodial Data Quality
One of the biggest challenges to an efficient back office operation is custodial data quality. Obviously, every time one has to intercede or touch custodial data it slows the entire work flow and potential consternation downstream as your Moxy import, therefore trading is delayed. Reporting can be effected, whether daily, monthly or quarterly.
Most people don't understand that every custodial accounting system is different and so when writing these interfaces you have to "normalize" the data the best you can to incorporate it into the portfolio accounting system, in our case Advent. Even within large institutions, like Merrill Lynch, you can have multiple accounting systems, so depending on where your assets are custodied you may or may not even has access to your data.
So what can an operations manager do about it?
1) First, understand the data thoroughly. Sounds obvious, but no matter what the online documentation says, it may be wrong. For example, it may say all data is "trade date", hooey! I have seen the transaction data be trade date, but the positions settle date. Even within the position files I have seen positions trade and the cash settle. (Frankly, this is the hardest to deal with!) So knowing exactly what the data is saying is a large part of the data, because at a basic level you can create workflows to accomodate.
- In my example above I would have the client run the position report trade for positions and settle for cash recon. Clumsy, but it works.
2) Another answer could be to explore ByAllAccounts. www.byallaccounts.com
We have several clients that have used them successfully.
3) The last option is building a software solutions. It could be a report that can handle your issue or building an application that can "normalize" the data based on rules you identify. This is the most expensive solution, but depending on the time savings can easily be justified.
4) Automation can sometimes be a solution, but frankly it breaks periodically, so this isn't always the cleanest solution.
Please visit us at for more information on how we can help you.
Most people don't understand that every custodial accounting system is different and so when writing these interfaces you have to "normalize" the data the best you can to incorporate it into the portfolio accounting system, in our case Advent. Even within large institutions, like Merrill Lynch, you can have multiple accounting systems, so depending on where your assets are custodied you may or may not even has access to your data.
So what can an operations manager do about it?
1) First, understand the data thoroughly. Sounds obvious, but no matter what the online documentation says, it may be wrong. For example, it may say all data is "trade date", hooey! I have seen the transaction data be trade date, but the positions settle date. Even within the position files I have seen positions trade and the cash settle. (Frankly, this is the hardest to deal with!) So knowing exactly what the data is saying is a large part of the data, because at a basic level you can create workflows to accomodate.
- In my example above I would have the client run the position report trade for positions and settle for cash recon. Clumsy, but it works.
2) Another answer could be to explore ByAllAccounts. www.byallaccounts.com
We have several clients that have used them successfully.
3) The last option is building a software solutions. It could be a report that can handle your issue or building an application that can "normalize" the data based on rules you identify. This is the most expensive solution, but depending on the time savings can easily be justified.
4) Automation can sometimes be a solution, but frankly it breaks periodically, so this isn't always the cleanest solution.
Please visit us at for more information on how we can help you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
