The Agile Micro ISV Blog

Image by jgrantmac via Flickr

Just been catching up on my Business Of Software reading. It seems that Yahoo
has spat the dummy, thrown its toys out of the pram
and flicked the self destruct switch. Now that’s a lot of metaphors!
Their domain customers are receiving emails with the following text:

Important note: Beginning on July 1, 2008, Yahoo!’s annual domain renewal price increases to $34.95 per year.

Now, as if the price wasn’t ridiculous enough, they’ve put this into the public domain by emailing their customers, but their website
makes no mention of the increase. That means someone buying a domain
today is told a renewal will cost $9.95, when in reality, Yahoo has no
intention of offering such a price.

A little dishonest? I think so.

Image via Wikipedia

I have to relay this story. It’s a good illustration of just how poor customer service can get.

I love my car. It’s like a comfy pair of slippers, it’s just so
familiar to me. I’ve done 90000 miles in it, and it still feels good.
It’s nothing too flash. A Volvo S60 T5, an executive sports saloon, leather interior, and all the candy you’d expect from an exec model.

Imagine my dismay when  a lane weaving eejit in a UPS
van smashed into the side of me, seriously damaging the drivers side
body work, and damaging the wheels and suspension when he pushed me
into the curb.

Now leaving aside the other stuff, my insurers, Direct Line, sent
the car into the Pentagon Vauxhall garage in Burton on Trent. Now, the
repairs took them about 8 weeks. Seem excessive? Yea I thought so too.
A complaint to Direct Line resulted in an apology and a cheque through
the post. No big deal.

The car was delivered back to me by truck. I had a good look at the
wheels and bodywork, all looked fine. When I got in the car, it was a
different story. A cup holder had been snapped. No big deal I thought,
accidents happen, I’ll call the garage. The nice lady at the garage
said she was very sorry, and they’d have it fixed.

Then came the second problem. When I turned on the car and pulled
off the drive, the dashboard lit up like a Christmas tree, saying 
that there was a fault on the traction control systems (ABS and DSTC).
OK, I was a little more concerned now. I called the garage up again and
relayed the issue, they requested that I bring the car straight back,
which I duly did.

After looking at it for a day, they (head eejit, Ken) contacted me
and told me that the damage wasn’t accident related and they wouldn’t
fix it. I pointed out that I knew the damage wasn’t accident related,
as it was fine when it went in the garage. I was told that they
couldn’t possibly have caused any damage, so weren’t going to fix it.

I spoke to Direct Line again, who advised me that I’d have to send
it to be assessed at a Volvo specialist, at my own cost. AT MY OWN
COST! Well, I did. They did a little investigative work, and told me it
would cost towards £1000 to find the problem. I told them to stop work,
and called Direct Line again.

I am still without a car, 10 weeks later. Direct Line’s engineers are looking into it. I’ll keep you posted.

Over the weekend, I’ve been thinking about the accepted wisdom
regarding micro ISV website design. A lot of the websites I’ve looked
at are well made, clean, easy to navigate and so on. In other words,
they tick all the boxes. And I think that’s the thing that’s bothering
me.

Software houses that use Agile Software Development techniques have
to negotiate contracts like all other companies. Wherever possible,
agile teams will try to steer clear of fixed cost, fixed scope, fixed
time contracts, preferring instead to opt for an optional scope, or
time and materials contract. There are a number of reasons for this,
but the one that sticks out in my mind is this: Fixed scope/cost/time
contracts are gladiatorial. They pit the interests of the customer
against the interests of the vendor. Optional scope contracts, on the
other hand, align the interests of the two, specifically because
optional scope contracts are typically short, 90 days or something, so
it is in the interests of the vendor to continually impress, rather
than to take the quickest dirtiest route to satisfy the contract.

When I think about issues of trust, specifically investing in trust,
I wonder whether traditional micro ISV website designs are the right
idea. After all, by their nature, they exist to sell ‘the product’. I
wonder if this too might be gladiatorial. I wonder if potential buyers
browse sales oriented sites with their guard up, as if they’re wary,
looking to see if they can trust you.

If I ask the question “what might a non-gladiatorial micro ISV web
site look like?” I find that the answer is “a blog”; a blog that sells
stuff, but a blog nonetheless.

So say if you write task management software, what would happen if
your site was a GTD blog, a GTD blog that sold task management
software. If you write <cough> some document management software
for home users, your site is a blog about decluttering and organising
your home documents. If you’re passionate about your domain, and write
passionately about it, I wonder what effect it would have on your
customer’s perception of your trustworthiness. Your interests are now
aligned with your customer’s interests, so would this breed trust? I’m
not sure. But it has to be worth a shot. I’m prepared to be wrong.

It opens up other interesting possibilities: Guest bloggers. If
you’re lucky enough to get prominent voices in your field, having them
guest blog on your site will further increase your credibility, and
make you even more aligned with your customer’s interests. I’ve seen an
increasing number of sites use a ‘magazine’ layout for their blogs, and
it’s one I think would be particularly suited to the task. It is
content rich, and it helps foster the notion that you sell a product
because you are passionate about solving a particular problem, not
because you think you can make a quick buck out of it.

I might be way off base. But like I said, I’m prepared to be wrong.

—–
EXTENDED