Provider Scan helps you understand how you stand out

Advisor Relations - July 2022

I hope you’re all enjoying your summer! This note focuses on the Provider Scan, the first phase of the ISG FutureSource™ methodology. In summary, this note addresses the following points:

• Average performance is not good enough during your first meeting with the client – you need to stand out or you’re more likely to be eliminated after this first meeting (Provider Scan)
• Our research shows that providers that advance beyond the Provider Scan tend to do better on these three things than those that get eliminated at this phase:
  • Connecting with the client personally
  • Persuading the client you will achieve results
  • Showing the overall value from your solution
• Many of the ‘mistakes’ providers make during the Provider Scan appear to solvable through more diligent preparation
  

Many of you have heard me say, “ISG advisors have a front row seat to more of the largest provider pursuits than any other firm.” From this vantage point, ISG advisors record their experiences with each pursuit, rating each provider on a number of attributes, including what each provider did well and reasons why they were eliminated or selected.

Over the last month or so I have been working with an aggregated dataset of more than 1,000 provider pursuits and it reveals some exciting details about what it takes to be successful during the pursuit process.

Before I share my findings, let me talk a bit about the data. Our findings come from more than 1,000 provider pursuits between 2018-2021 on ISG-advised deals that went to award. In total, the TCV of these pursuits exceed $67B of awarded TCV. About 60 percent are from the Americas, 30 percent from Europe, and 10 percent from Asia Pacific. (Note: to protect client and provider confidentiality, this data only addresses broad market themes and learnings.)

In the ISG Pursuit Optimization and Differentiation (POD) workshop, we highlight there are 10 things that winning providers do better than second place finishers. ISG advisors rate each provider pursuit on these 10 attributes. Here is a list of the top ten factors, ranked by average rating on a scale between 1-3, where 1 is below average and 3 is above average:

Factor Studied	Average Rating
Collaborated with client	2.20
Followed purchasing process	2.15
Understood client needs	2.14
Educated client with new ideas or perspectives	2.11
Connected with client personally	2.10
Listened to client	2.08
Crafted a compelling solution	2.08
Overall value from solution	2.05
Persuaded client they would achieve results	2.05
Helped client avoid potential pitfalls	1.97

 

Without getting too deep into the algorithm, I used these ratings to evaluate provider pursuits into one of three categories: Strong, Average, and Poor. Then I looked at only those pursuits where the provider was eliminated after the first meeting (the Provider Scan). Here are the pursuit quality ratings for those pursuits that were eliminated after the Provider Scan:

Pursuit Quality	Eliminated After First Meeting
Poor	40%
Average	52%
Strong	8%

 

The key take-away for me is this—since your first meeting with the client (the Provider Scan) is critical to moving deeper into the pursuit process, being average isn’t good enough! To put an exclamation point on this, 46% of providers invited to the next round of the process are classified as having a Strong pursuit (compared with only 8% of those eliminated after the first meeting). You need to stand out from your competitors.

So how do you stand out? To help understand this a bit better, I identified what those advancing to the next round did better than those that got eliminated. Let’s focus on the top three most influential things you can focus on, according to our top ten list from earlier:

1. Connecting with the client personally
2. Persuading the client you will achieve results
3. Showing the overall value from your solution

Let’s consider the first attribute. I’ve selected some comments from advisors on three ways they have seen providers fail to connect with clients:

Bringing the wrong team to the provider scan	“[The provider] did not understand client’s requirements and the right team was not bought to the table.” “Their solution was not as expected and the team they brought to the table did not excite the client.” “They came close but the team they fielded for CAS-PS did not impress the client. Client did not connect well with them.” “Cultural fit did not align as well other competitors. [The provider] was very laid back and the Pursuit Lead did not have the right supporting team members during the CAS session to address [the client’s] questions.”
Failed to create alignment with the client	“[The provider] didn't convey their capabilities very well and really mismanaged their time during the Provider Scan session. “ “Cultural mismatch. The senior person from [the provider] did not make his presence felt nor did he have any good connection with the client.” “[The provider] account executive overstepped his bounds and enraged the Vice President of Infrastructure and Applications.”
Failed to relate to the client’s situation	“At the Provider Scan, the team did not coordinate well.  The presentation was very generic and did not relate specifically to client's needs.” “Client was looking for additional vertical expertise in the veterinary healthcare arena.”

 

The comments above are all on the ‘negative’ side, so for the second and third attributes, I’ll showcase how advisors saw providers stand out from their competition:

Persuading clients they would achieve results

“The Account Executive leadership was excellent, they offered a compelling solution, and showcased the confidence to the client that they can deliver with the A-team.” “[The provider] built a relationship and showed the client they could get [the provider’s] CEO attention if necessary. [The provider] built the relationship with the client’s CIO who felt that he could reach to the top of [the provider organization] and get results if there were ever a problem.” “The quality of the delivery team was the differentiator. They convinced the client they could take on the customer’s requirements/needs, act down-to-earth/hands on, and offer qualified personnel.”

Showing the overall value from their solution

“[The provider] was selected by the client because their solution represented the best total value and best fit among the providers involved in the competitive procurement.   [The provider’s] solution met [the client’s] requirements to transform the current “build” and “run” environments; accelerate the enhancement development and fielding process; substantially reduce the current backlog of open AD projects; and, drive significant efficiencies and price performance for services over the life of the agreement.” “[The provider] had a very compelling proposition. They presented good pricing and their leadership team interacted at various levels throughout the transaction cycle. They were very collaborative and cooperative throughout the process with ISG and client.” “They were pretty good across the range of expectations. They were very flexible and showcased a lot of motivation. They offered the transition cost for free, and that was really worth several million dollars. This showcased a significant commitment from the provider to win the client relationship.”

 

In reading through a lot of the research, I find that in many cases providers appear to not have prepared as well as they could have for the Provider Scan, and being average is not good enough at this phase. My recommendation is to have a solid operational process and one person who is responsible for readying the pursuit team for the Provider Scan. Their role is not only to organize the team but challenge them on their time management, ensuring all aspects of the expected outcomes are addressed, the right case studies are chosen, their storytelling will resonate, etc.

These numbers are just one part of ISG’s continuing focus to bring new insights to pursuit effectiveness through studies, workshops, and other means. I like to think our research gives us differentiated insights into the pursuit process and, therefore, the best vantage point to help providers run their pursuits better. If you have any ideas or feedback on how ISG’s research and deal experience can be leveraged to help your organization develop a solid plan of execution for your first meeting with a client, I would love to hear about it.

Catch up on past newsletters

Thanks,

Paul

Advisor Relations Newsletter Archive