Dr Shaun West of Luzern University offers us some insight into the barriers to digital transformation - one of the biggest areas of focus within the field service sector globally...

 

I believe digital transformation is difficult for manufacturers to design and develop, before considering its execution or delivery. I will draw from published materials, an unpublished survey and study, and personal experience to help understand the challenges we face, and suggest realistic actions firms can use to help them overcome the barriers and develop new value positions and solutions.

The motivation for our research came from a Swiss study that identified the drivers, barriers and risks for digital transformation (Figure 1 below).

 

 

The Need for Digital Transformation:

Why do we need to make this transition? Within a Swiss context, a recent survey by Swissmem confirmed the importance of the development of new digital solutions. The Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation report “Research and Innovation in Switzerland 2020” expanded further: they anticipate “that future revenue models for these new digitally enabled solutions will be mainly driven by data and platform exchanges and will become output focused (e.g., pay-per use)”. It is clear that even in an economy focused on manufacturing there is an ongoing shift from a goods-dominated world to a services-dominated world.

Reading the newspapers, it would appear that digital transformation is all about technology and within ten years we will all be out of jobs as robots and AI will have taken over. Read beyond the hype, and it becomes clear that the development of new digital solutions within a product service system environment is as much about organization change as technology.

"Digital transformation has a wider impact than most companies see, and this creates barriers within firms..."

Much of the new technology will allow us to redesign our current work and the way in which we deliver it. Netflix evolved from a DVD subscription model based on postal services to an internet-based model. As Netflix evolved, they removed the physical material from their system, improved the efficiency of the service delivered, and increased the value in their offer (anyone who watched UK television in the 1970s would be amazed by Netflix today).

Digital transformation has a wider impact than most companies see, and this creates barriers within firms. Digital has a clear impact on production (e.g., MES, ERP), IT (e.g., cloud services) and marketing (e.g., big data behaviour insights), but it has a hidden impact on other parts of the business, often in unexpected ways (e.g., your customers have more information on status than your service personnel). Perhaps a better way to view digital’s potential impact is to consider the technology, people and processes involved. Think how we moved to faxes, then email, then to WhatsApp, now to Zoom and workflows; we have absorbed each new technology and changed processes and our behaviours, as Table 1 shows.

 

 

Examples of the digital transition:

Before examining our survey in detail, it is useful to consider some cases. Table 2 gives insights into a range of firms and the barriers they encountered: Piaggio is undergoing a servitization journey with a product-centric mindset; Kone have wide range of technologies within their installed base; FAVI’s workforce resisted empowerment; Unilever built their own data-lake with a massive amount of data; Mass Mutual moved to real-time fraud detection; Domino’s integrated production technologies into a manual process; Cannon faced challenges connecting machines; Allianz moved from operational silos to a process driven business. No firm is alone in the digital transition, many face similar challenges, and all firms should look to others for lessons.

 

 

Survey and interview insights

We conducted a survey with 124 respondents from different-sized firms, the majority (+90%) of which were industrial. Most information was provided by middle management, with over 2/3 of the respondents being from the firms’ headquarters.

When we asked what was driving digitization in each company, we discovered firms wanted to improve internal process efficiency, develop new customer value propositions and use both to deliver new business models. Some companies expressed concerns with hiring Gen-Y or millennial staff, as they felt they were “somewhat old-fashioned and not an attractive employer” but they confirmed they needed Millennials. We were concerned that many firms were only interested in internal efficiency improvements, rather than wishing to build new digitally-enabled value propositions.

The barriers firms were facing were based around weak/no vision from the leadership, existing/legacy IT, the lack of skilled talent, and general resistance to change. Lack of vision from leadership was considered a major barrier, the interviews showed flip/flopping with direction and application of digital was an issue.

"The lack of skilled talent matches with the lack of leadership vision: how can you hire the right people when you have no clear vision?"

I have some sympathy for this as it’s hard for a second-tier manufacturer to be able to create a clear and viable strategy and vision when it comes to digital – just look at the challenge VW Group are facing today with this. Existing IT systems were considered next most important, as in the new world IT skills become core to value creation and capture, rather than just being a business cost. The lack of skilled talent matches with the lack of leadership vision: how can you hire the right people when you have no clear vision? Resistance to change and an organization’s silo mentality cannot be broken without clear leadership.

Respondents strongly agreed that business development should lead the digital transformation, as it’s not a technology development program but rather a business and cultural change program that has impacts across the business. Treating it as an IT project means it will fail; treating it as a technology play means it will fail. Treating digital transformation as a change management program (that is even more transformational internally and externally than Lean) means it may well succeed.

The respondents confirmed that digital will impact on all areas of the business, however service was considered to be the area most affected. Most thought the firm’s internal infrastructure would be impacted, and this is one of the most visible aspects of the transformation– in effect the whole business will change.

Over 330 individual comments were left by the respondents, demonstrating how important this topic is to the community. Analysis showed that ‘people aspects’ were more commonly mentioned (80%) as barriers to a successful digital transformation:

• Strategy: lack of vision & mission from the leadership, transformation roadmap.
• Leadership: resources, sponsorship and management conception, and fear of losing power
• Culture: customer centricity, openness and willingness to change, silo management, hierarchy vs network.
• People: capabilities, expertise, roles, adaptability.
• Governance: communication and collaboration, KPIs, alignment.
• Middle management: as a key role between leadership and workforce.
• The workforce: knows that they need to update, but Leadership does not understand where to start.
• Education: is key for long-term sustainable implementation.
• Digital transformation never starts at C-Level: provide evidence that it can be profitable
• Build teams – members must have digital skills, flexibility (intellectual) and the capability to do abstract work.

Technology must always be applied in tandem with effective, well-designed processes. These converge into a “single system” where data is shared, processed, and integrated across the organization. Technology and process barriers (20%) were based around:

• Automation and connectivity (ICT infrastructure, cyber-physical products).
• Intelligence (processing and analyzing data).
• Operations, supply chain, product lifecycle (channel and business practices/processes, agility, Integration and data exchange).
• Select a technology that fits with your value chain.
• No technologies are perfect.
• Missing customer voice: Involvement of customers in product development.

When it comes to implantation in the business, we found that:

• Legacy systems are a barrier: How to digitalize all company levels? Not only buy technology but adapt products and processes accordingly.
• DT costs money and time.
• New jobs/ functions as a DT consequence.
• Start small, and if it works, go ahead; if not, change strategy.

Companies must adapt their organizational structures and processes to allow their workforce to drive and deliver Industry 4.0 initiatives. This must be done within a clear vision set out by the leadership. Some new ways of working will fail, and some will be successful. The lessons learned need to be openly shared within the firm. Companies should encourage cross functional and cross business collaborations on smaller projects rather than large formal “IT” projects which generally lack long-term business impact. The overview of the transformation should be led by business development and be close to, but separate from, the operational business.

Teams need to try out new technologies, such as cloud computing and machine learning. Assets and equipment need to be integrated with the enterprise system, to monitor and analyze the performance on both a technical and an operational base. As processes within production, services, sales, supply chain and the product lifecycle become integrated, they will converge allowing data to be shared, processed, and integrated across the business. Figure 2 (below) provides graphically the complex environment in which we live and the considerations we have to take when designing Smart digitally-enabled services.

 

 

How can you help your firm overcome barriers preventing digitalization?

Knowing where to start isn’t easy, however the survey sheds some light on the barriers preventing or slowing digitization. Our view of the future is shown in figure 3 (below)and knowing where you and your firm sits within this ecosystem is the key. Three ways you could help your firm, based on our insights from the study:

1. Develop a digital strategy, vision and road map for your team or business and communicate it clearly inside and outside the team. Ask at every team meeting how digital will impact and change the business and discuss opportunities and risks.
2. Use small mixed teams to develop digital solutions with impact within the firm. Learn from these teams what works and what doesn’t in your business environment.
3. Share your digital lessons learnt from the projects within the firm, with your customers and your suppliers. Work with suppliers to improve operational efficiency: work with customers to develop, prototype and test new digitally-enabled solutions and value propositions.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts for providing the funding for the study as well as my colleagues (Günter Zepf, Ute Klotz, Barbara Kummler, Pilar Gil Fombella and Paolo Gaiardelli).

---

 

Further Reading:

• Read more about digital transformation @ www.fieldservicenews.com/digital_transformation
• Read more articles from Dr West @ https://www.fieldservicenews.com/blog/author/shaun-west
• Read more articles from academia @ https://www.fieldservicenews.com/blog/tag/academic
• Connect With Dr West on LinkedIn @ https://www.linkedin.com/in/shaunwest

 

Dr. Shaun West, of Lucerne University, explains why increasingly it seems that we have made the mistake of designing services with the machine in mind and us mere humans are developing a habit of just getting in the way...

I don’t like to be treated as a cog in a larger wheel and so why do we often design systems that treat us as if we were a cog in a complex system? This has been to me often a contradiction we see in the modern world where services are more and more standardized so that we feel we are there to service the machine.

The Importance of Service Design

My recent trip through Heathrow was very much in that vain – services (often hidden services) have been dehumanized that the experience for all actors involved is very poor.

Agency within the system at Heathrow has been lost for all actors leading you to consider that sheep might have a better experience, but at least the system is cost-effective and compliant. But service science and through service design, we don’t have to design the future world like this - we can and must do better. 

We are trying to look at things in a more human-centric approach with our Smart Twin’s project where, with ten partners, we are building digital twins for different use cases. Within a number of the cases, the interactions with the digital assistant are really important as they are supporting decision-making processes.

In other cases, we’re considering how to delegate important tasks to the digital assistant and expecting them to return for new instructions when problems start to build. This is a very different position from asking Siri to find the music I’ve been listening too (Nylon Strung by Underworld if you were interested) or to tell my heating system at home to change the set-point to 19°C from 14°C.

This returns us to the thought that “we need to remember that the human is part of the system rather than subservient to the system”. Given that many of us are in the more technical environment, it is worth looking at how we used to treat machines – we gave them care and attention, we looked after them and we listened to them.

In effect, we treated them as if they were human in many aspects. This was part of the logic that we initially used with the development of the Avatar model. (See figure 1 below). To keep the truck working for me I have to look after it and treat it with respect, if I don’t it will stop doing what I expect of it.

 

 

The model shows graphically what you need to do for it and what it will do for you – over the life-cycle you can see the whole range of services that it needs to consume to deliver for you. My coffee machine behaves just like this – if I don’t fulfil my side of the bargain it delivers me poor coffee.

When digitalization takes place we automate jobs so, therefore, people just resist the change. How true is this really? It depends… robotic or digital service assistants can be deployed.

The ‘self-service kiosk’ service assistants can, in product dominate logic, appear to be a major step forward on the service. It becomes possible to have one “service operative” whose real job appears to tell me how I should be interacting with their new solution rather than allow redeployment of staff to improve the overall customer journey and experience.

In a case I know well, the digital assistant does this by taking away tasks that the current service desk operators are poor at performing and allowing them to focus on supporting the customer with real issues – the objective of the service desk.

Here the service desk didn’t want to go back to the old way of working. Interestingly, they are now happier in their work and doing a better job.

The common theme here is to focus on all people and machines with respect and understand their basic needs and requirements, as well as what you're expecting from them when building digital solutions.

Agency is important for people; this places us in ‘control’ and allows us to have some control and understanding of what is happening. It stops us from feeling like being a small cog in a large complex wheel. Agency also brings co-creation of value, again important as the literature confirms that lasting relationships are built on co-creation of value and joint decision making between many actors.

Such relationships also create social and emotional value during service engagements and somehow we need to learn to do this effectively with digital helpers, assistants, and advisors. 

 

Data2Action is a program devised in partnership between academia and industry with Luzerne University, University of Firenze and Ricoh collaborating on developing a framework for how companies should move towards data driven services. Here Dr. Shawn West and Oliver Stoll outline that framework...


How To Develop Databased Solutions 
Today any machine can be digitized and connected; collecting the data is not an issue; what is becoming more important is how the field data can be exploited to identify the right action to be taken.

This creates a very complex problem, as the right data must be transformed so that only the right information, at the right time, in the right form can be delivered to the right decision-maker, independently of the problem domain - e.g. route cause analysis, demand forecasting, productivity optimisation, spare parts delivery. Helping people taking decisions can be seen as a smart service, that is designed on the base of a thoroughly understanding of the business complexity.

Ecosystems made of people and equipment, business objectives and strategies, as well as personal needs, attitudes and preferences (must-have’s, nice-to-have’s) of each operators. Once these needs are fully understood, information can be elaborated from data to create the right insights. The Data2Action framework provides guidance towards the development of data-driven services. The understanding of why and how customers interact with assets is achieved using Design Thinking approach.

Principles Of Service Design Thinking Underpin the Data2action Framework
A good design is not only a matter of aesthetics. When designing a product, many factors have to be considered. For example, how the product is going to be used, and by who. This determines the product functions, form, materials, colors, etc. This requires the ability to understand what the product user is trying to achieve (an outcome, an experience).

The same applies to service design, in which the object to be designed is a process which aims to reach a goal, through the use of products, software applications, information, etc. The challenge is that there are many more people involved in the consumption and delivery of the service, the service relies on collaboration, the service is mostly intangible. The Service Design approach is based on a hands-on, user-centric approach to problem definition and idea/solution generation can lead to innovation.

This is of utmost importance, as the application of these principles can lead to competitive advantages. Remember you only do things that are of value to you in one form or other. Service Design Thinking (SDT) is an approach that aims at designing services by applying different tools based on five principles.

Service design thinking should be:
• User centred;
• Co-creative;
• Sequencing; 
• Evidencing;
• Holistic.

Understanding The Problem: Why Understand First?
How can a problem or challenge be successfully solved without understanding it properly? Well, it can not. Without a deep understanding, disruptive solutions will not work, or you will be applying sticky plasters. The challenge lying ahead of you is to understand, describe and visualize the situation. The understanding of a complex problem requires to know who the involved people and equipment are, and how the processes in which they are operating runs. The understanding phase of the Data-2-Action framework consists of mapping the (OVERALL) job-to-be-done of the customer, mapping the actors and using avatars to build the ecosystem to discover and appraise who and what is involved.

Principles for Digital Service Development: How To Generate The Best Ideas
The problem statements and the ecosystem visualization developed provides a solid foundation for the development of new ideas and solutions for services. Some new ideas may have already appeared and can be improved in this phase.

These cases, also called scenarios or user stories, can be visualized using the customer journey blueprint. In the customer journey blueprint, the processes, actions, and involved personas/avatars are visualized to display the desired situation, in which the problems are solved.

Outcomes for each actor here should be clearly defined along with any payoffs. Working in pen and paper works really well. For Smart Services with many actors and many machines expect there to be many scenarios to focus on and even more ideas to provide improvements. In the ideation stage, many ideas will be generated.

The ideas need to be rated in order to evaluate which are worth to be prototyped. For selecting the best ideas, an idea scoring system is best.


Building Valuable Solutions: Creating Information From The Raw Data
With the overview of the ecosystem of people, processes, and machines it becomes clear from the scenarios and user stories of where the data is produced and who needs to consume information derived from it. Prototyping it is a way to validate our ideas and possible solutions and it should be fast and keep concepts as simple as possible. This avoids spending too many resources on building solutions only to then finding out that it does not work.

The best way is to create hand-drawn dashboards or widgets which represent the solution and test them as quickly as possible before starting with the actual implementation (often coding!). The process of drawing dashboards may also reveal new ideas which can be useful or new insights into whether the solution is technically visible or not. Many dashboards should be created, to keep it organized we use the Case Actor Matrix (CAM).

This tool allows matching Actors with a Cases (we use a scenario before) and the dashboard enabling the understanding of their purposes - how would you use it to help make a decision. A logical cascade should be build and dashboard widgets should be reused as much as makes sense. These conceptual solutions need to be challenged from a technical perspective.

We use a Source Target Link Matrix (STL Matrix) to show the information needed from the conceptual point of view. We define the requirements and quality of the data needed to develop the dashboards. The matrix distinguishes between existing data and data that needs to be collected, as well as adjustments and improvements that have to be made to the databases

Test Ideas And Improve
The testing is essential within the data2action frameworks and Service Design. It should happen as quickly to avoid the development of solutions, which do not fulfill the identified case and or are not technical visible. The best method for testing the usability is to hand over the dashboard to the target actor and ask them to try to use it and listen to their feedback based on the feedback the usefulness can be improved. New ideas also come from the feedback discussions. The technical aspect needs to be evaluated as well. Meaning, that the information derived from the data is actually significant. This is determined by the data experts and the user.

Increasing competition and complexity of product selling put firms under pressure to add value, so many firms are moving towards delivering service solutions and outcomes. Traditional manufacturing companies are often strong with risk-management process on the product side, however they fail to grasp the complexity associated with managing risk on the service side, here Dr. Shaun West and Victoria Paytova of Lucerne University offer their insight into these challenges. 

 When a supplier decides to provide more than just product-related services it has to consider risk over the whole product life-cycle because the risk is no longer just a “warranty”.

Traditional manufacturing companies are often strong with risk-management process on the product side, however they fail to grasp the complexity associated with managing risk on the service side. Based on the interviews with fourteen companies operating globally and domestically in different fields: from power generation to food industry, this paper introduces their insights on risk awareness and evaluation in services.

Some companies produce high capital goods and services constitute the part of the product-service portfolio; others offer purely services; their annual revenues vary from millions to billions. Another aspect is that some of those are pioneers in service provision rather than others already have long experience in the service business. So, we can classify them by the percentage of service sales: three companies with service sales up to 25%, five companies indicate service sales between 25 and 40%, and four firms provide purely services (100%); also, two respondents present opinion on risk from the customer perspective.

Industrial feedback on risk in services revealed that service providers neither recognise risk as a competitive advantage nor actively implement risk management practices into service offer creation. This white paper provides guidance on how to understand and manage risk to create competitive advantage in a product service system environment.

Risks From An Asset Life-Cycle Perspective
Risk should be initially considered on an asset life-cycle perspective. (See Figure 1.)



Today a well-documented example is the Rolls-Royce Trent engine, the turbines of which fail to meet the operational performance due to poor design. The deterioration of turbine blades inside Rolls-Royce jet engines has required constant monitoring of the engines, urgent maintenance and repairs through 2022.

The problems have caused serious disruption to airlines — and they are proving costly to the engine-maker. Rolls-Royce reported an accounting charge of $315 million to cover ongoing repairs to two models of its jet engines it has supplied for more than 200 aircraft as well as compensation to airlines for planes taken out of service for the engine retrofits.

Which confirms the fact that issues at early stages cause significant risks and endanger not only product performance but also the reputation and financial stability of the service provider.

Service offering and embedded risks
In order to see what particular services industrial companies offer we analysed 14 firms. The analysis confirmed that in general there was risk transfer from the basic services to the more advanced services. A variety of services can be built-up in product-service portfolios depending on company’s ability and readiness to deliver good service, risk acceptance, as well as the type of relationships service provider wants to establish with a customer.

The analysis also showed that they provided three different levels of service: product services, operations support services, life cycle and asset support services. The typical services in each level are shown in Table 1 (below) and have been categories based on the service level.



I. Product services – represent services which are closely associated with a product or to help the customer to gain access to it, often mostly associated with the maintenance of the equipment.

II. Operations support services – represent services that support the operation of the equipment provided.

III. Life-cycle/asset support services – support the product over its life; they are designed to ensure good asset performance and to help to improve performance based on new technologies and market requirements. When building a portfolio of products and services, companies should consider risks over the product life no matter whether it is basic or advanced service
agreement.

The execution risks will continue to repeat unless effective control and improvement measures are put in place. The statistical information on the failure rates will support the understanding of the commercial risks ensuring that they reduce the negative impact.

Finally, if it is not tracked, how do you know where the problem is, the root cause and how to best solve it in future products?

Execution and Commercial risks
This white paper breaks risks into two closely related categories, the first is execution risk and the second is a commercial risk. Execution risk is the additional cost that the firm has due to execution failures and closely associated with service delivery, includes internal and external quality problems, late completion, or post service failures due.

For example, the late delivery of a small consumable item can mean that inspection work on the machine cannot be completed on time. This can then trigger commercial risk to come to play which could be many times larger than the cost of the consumable item.
The commercial risk can be made by the supplier at the contracting stage, such as unsuitable contract decisions, typically firms overpromise performance (delivery, availability etc.), or have unsuitable agreements for services. These are often related to the execution risk (e.g., late delivery) and can be significantly higher in value (e.g., liquidated damages resulting from the late delivery).

This is shown graphically in Figure 2 (below) where the supplier’s liquidated damages never cover the customer’s risk fully, this is because the customer’s business risk is typically orders of magnitude greater than those of the supplier.


Therefore, the customer needs to either self-insure and to buy insurance to cover their full consequential and business interruption costs. The supplier should always consider the full impact it can have on customer’s business because the liquidated damages will likely only cover a part of the customer’s losses.

The use of risk/reward-type performance commitments should incentivise the supplier to achieve the right outcome for their customer, it is not a replacement for insurance.

Understanding Risks
At each stage from the beginning, different risks may unstable internal processes, increase the time to the market and affect future performance of the product. For example, poor reliability of a part decreases the overall reliability of the product, consequently, the supplier under a basic after-market service holds minimum risk and only responsible for the replacement of the first failing part under warranty.

Under an advanced service agreement (performance/output-base) the supplier is responsible for removing and replacing the part as well as paying the liquidated damages for poor performance due to machine downtime because its customer has a revenue loss.
So, the supplier is not only exposed to execution risk but also to significant commercial risk: it has to pay the liquidated damages meaning customer is partly compensated for the loss of performance. Interviews confirmed that risks rise both at the service contracting stage and at the delivery stage, so they refer to commercial risk and operational (execution) risk.

It is common for manufacturing firms to have well defined contracts for new equipment sales whereas service contracts may be less appropriate for the service environment, being more applicable to the sale of basic rather than advanced services.
It is very challenging for contract or project managers identify and measure potential risks and create sort of standardised approach for risk assessment.

Their role is to determine the risks that customers expect them to take with service contracts as well as evaluate the critical risks that they finally accept. The deep understanding of the customer, awareness of your capabilities can decrease the lack of information and associated counterparty risks.

The supplier can actually create competitive advantage by building an active model for risk management. Understanding the risk implies that service provider can identify and measure the risk it transfers from the customer.

Calculating the Value at Risk
Only knowing the possibility of risk appearance does not solve the problem, more important is to know the frequency of events, its execution and commercial impact. Digitalization can help here in the form of data analysis of performance (e.g., lead times, number of failed starts, output), so the firm should create a database that allows the supplier to model and predict risks. By collecting and analysing data on product design or manufacturing issues, failure rates and time (logistics or maintenance completion), the supplier also knows what must be changed or improved as well as understanding the cost of mitigation. Statistical analysis helps service providers to understand better their capabilities and to control risks.


The Value at Risk (VaR) concept is defined as an expected maximum loss of the risk position and it is widely applied in the finance industry. For example, we take the planned maintenance and the issue would be late delivery of parts which was promised at 26 days.

From the past (data analysis), we have to find out what is our actual lead time and deviation from the ‘expected’ lead time. Form this we can calculate the expected execution cost and predict the commercial impact based on the lead time.

The total risk is the position valued at current prices, in our case is the total execution and commercial, from which we can define the expected maximum loss.

The higher the chosen confidence level is, the higher the potential maximum loss. From these principles and calculations results drawn from the concept, the VaR of individual risk position can be derived.

This analysis will help the supplier to decide on what delivery terms, performance commitments or other KPIs they can provide as well as calculate the commercial value of the contract with particular services.

Answers to these questions also will tell what liquidated damages to expect for availability, reliability, efficiency and late delivery if supplier choses terms that do not correspond to statistical analysis.

Pricing the risk
Now that we understand the value at risk, it is important to price the risk. This is because you are taking risk from the customer and you are therefore providing a valuable service for them. How can this additional service be priced? First, the price should be above the cost otherwise you are not getting a reward for taking the risk! Questions to ask yourself when estimating the ‘fairprice’ to charge:

• What are the customers critical performance measures or outcomes?
• How much would it cost the customer to take the risk themselves?
• How much pain are you really taking from the customer?
• Is the gain/pain sharing balanced?
• What do you think is their ‘willingness-to-pay’?

Do not accept to hold a risk where they cannot control or mitigate the risk, taking market risks is not a sure-fire way to go out of business. Finding a balance with the risks so that you are incentivised to improve performance and outcome for the customer is nevertheless difficult but something worth doing.

Learn from past experiences, the RR example with the Trent engine was predictable as were the costs. Recommendations Firms should consider how they assess risk for product service systems, this is practically important for advanced services. It is recommended to measure execution and commercial risks for every project.

Learning to track the events that cause both execution and commercial risks will help you to better understand the risks and the costs associated with them.

By being more proactive in risk management, industrial firms can turn the risk into commercial advantage.

Value based pricing is a hot topic in industry today, but what exactly is it and why is everyone talking about it?

Is value based pricing simply about getting as much price from your customers as possible? Or is it about valuing your longer-term relationship with your customers, or perhaps improving your service? In fact it is each of these and potentially more. What is clear however, is that cost-plus pricing for services does not always offer the customer or the supplier the best value - yet there may now be options to combat this with value based pricing.

The following report co-authored by Dr Shaun West, Lucerne University and Dominik Kujawski, Arvik Bolting Solutions brings together good industry practices in a solid academic framework. The report provides business leaders with a guide on how to create a value based strategy to price B2B services - as such it is essential reading for all business leaders...

Why value based pricing?

During a conference we recently attended, a phrase that kept coming up in conversation was “We should all switch to value based pricing”. An increasingly topical statement in industry today, however, the approach of value based pricing is also one which is not being discussed any further. No one seems to be speaking about HOW to actually achieve this goal.

Pricing is not new- even Oscar Wilde said: “Nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing”

Companies need to focus on customer value in developing pricing strategies as pricing pressure in the industrial B2B market has been increasing as a result of changing customer buying behaviors. In this article we’ll delve deeper into why value based pricing can be challenging and why it has a huge impact on companies’ business.

Is pricing really a strategic capability?

Pricing is an important management tool to help achieve the firm’s objectives and has a huge impact on the financial results. It is a multi-departmental activity influenced by several functions within the firm that may attach different importance to pricing and the value drivers of the business.

Every business manager needs to be aware that pricing has an impact on customer satisfaction and that pricing is not only dependent on price itself.

Pricing of services is dependent on situations in which a customer finds themselves in and the jobs in which they need to do at that time.

This relation of pricing to customer engagement in this process includes three strategies:

• Cost plus strategy;
• Competition/market base strategy;
• Value based strategy.

Cost plus pricing

The process of cost plus pricing starts with the firm determining the scope of their service. Here, a unit cost is simply calculated and a pre-determined margin is applied to set the price. This margin reflects the desired profitability of the firm. The customers are then told what will be ultimately delivered in exchange for the set price

Competition/market based pricing

This process begins with pricing based both on the scope and the costs, then additionally on what the competition charges for a similar service. Setting the price here has an influence on the market situation. Large competitors tend to have a scale advantage over the smaller ones since their fixed costs are mostly lower due to a larger customer base. The last step of this process is presenting the customer with the value that is being offered through the service.

Remember that data is in your CRM system and in the market – keep track of it.

Value based pricing

The value based pricing approach is based on analyzing each customer’s needs, pains and gains, and their willingness to pay. It depends on the customer interest and acceptance of price for a provided value. Here, the price is set for the offered value, and later the scope of the service itself is determined.

Calculating the costs in this strategy is also necessary as they used to make a reality check and afterwards calculate the margin achieved.

Listen to your customers

The process of pricing in cost and competition based strategies suggests to ask the question “why is the customer situated at the end of the process if all of the companies always state that customers are the most important?”. A juxtaposition to the truth, you will always hear stated that companies involve their customers in the co-creation of service value from the very beginning, but how can this be actually possible with a cost plus and competition based pricing strategy?

Now, how do we turn this approach around and place focus back on the customer? Straight away, let’s forget about pure cost plus strategy.

This ‘simpler’ pricing strategy shows that the supplier can have a lack of understanding of the customer value and as a result the customer offering can be weak.

In addition to this, the competition/market base strategy, which is endorsed by many companies, indicates that pricing is controlled by the market. As such, this removes focus from the customer and indicates that the supplier does not entirely understand customer value, showing that the resultant value outlined by the firms offering can also be low.

So, how should service companies price in order to bring the customer into the focal point? The answer is quite straightforward; by aligning pricing objectives, strategies and tools according to the holistic strategy of the company.

Note: pricing needs to be strategic… it must not be left solely to Sales,

Production or Marketing departments. It needs to be driven by management and agreed by all the departments influenced by pricing Companies should create more customer focused objectives to choose pricing strategies that consider customer value.

This means that when pricing services, you as a firm need to firstly understand how your customer creates value and secondly, where you and your equipment fit into this process. You need to know that pricing tools used also need to support the objectives of pricing and the pricing strategies. For example, a pricing tool supporting customer oriented objectives can be bundling as it is a way for firms to present the scope/price negations, thereby providing a different approach to customer value discovery and leading to improved customer experiences.

Source of pricing power

Here, a B2B example is given, showing that the source or pricing power comes from customer need states. Let me take you through the example of a simple bolt used in industrial equipment. Bolts are widely present in everyday life and more specifically, they are present in almost every technologically advanced machine or construction, from compressor valves and turbines, to the foundations of wind mills.

So, what is the price of tightening a single bolt? The price of a single bolt varies from market-to-market, from machine-to-machine and from company to company.

The most significant result of bolting, however, is the residual load that a customer requires from the bolting supplier. Now, to show where the pricing power of services come from, let’s imagine a situation where you exchange a single bolt worth a couple of dollars, in a compressor valve which is worth hundreds of thousands or install one in an offshore wind turbine, worth even

more. How much should the tightening of one bolt be worth to keep the compressor running or the turbine safe on its foundation?

In this case, bolting provides safety and savings on a huge scale however, the value of the service to each customer varies depending on the scope of the project. Here, not all customers are the same, so they should also not be treated with the same approach.

Customer value connection based on colors

Customer value connection shows that companies need to do what their particular customer values. If the value proposition you offer creates no customer value, it is then only a purely basic cost to your customer.

It is time to use the “knowledge” about your customers to move to customer value propositions and find ways to deliver what is really valued. Hence, what they are really ready to pay for?

Firms need to consider what is core and what is standardized.

It is important to be aware that pricing can be different for different modules. This means that the customer can pay a different price based on the “menu” or “á la carte”, and shows that there are multiple pricing points for services but what is really interesting, is that its components don’t change. So what is changing?

It is the location and more importantly the type of service provision together with the customer need state. In the first mentioned case, the compressor valve is available in a workshop where the bolt can be tightened with use of onshore equipment, in a quite friendly environment.

However, the tightening of wind turbine requires going offshore to harsh conditions with special trainings and guaranteeing the customer that a bolt tightened worth a percentile of the whole wind mill will provide safety from failing the whole project.

This clearly shows that the customer gets usage, location and utility from the supplier. And if a firm is able to segment customer needs states and purposes for buying. It is also able to find the right pricing points for it.

This helps to identify margin and revenue opportunities available to a company.

This shows that that customer value identification process work for product based firms too.

Pricing waterfall for value based pricing

A prototype of pricing waterfall diagram provides guidance towards value based service pricing. It considers the most important aspects of pricing, starting from benchmarking competitors to considering the customers’ willingness to pay. As such, it helps you to triangulate on the value based price that your customer is willing to pay.

The pricing waterfall presents that single, inflexible offerings can limit companies to sharing limited value. Whereas, flexible offerings respond to customers’ changing needs.

Also, flexible pricing based on all important factors helps to increase customer value. Offering flexible service dimensions that support customer choices, together with flexible pricing strategies can provide the supplier with additional pricing dimensions that can have a positive margin increase impact. The pricing waterfall also highlights the importance of triangulation of pricing based on market analysis, internal value creation and customer value.

Final comments

This article presents that pricing is a strategic capability and needs to be kept in line with the company’s overall strategy. There is a great need to focus on customer value creation during service pricing, and aligning strategies and tools to support the objectives set by the company. Understanding customer value rather than simply relying on cost-plus or market-based approach, is a key to pricing industrial services. Another very important step in the process of pricing, is margin calculation based on the identified costs and value price offered. It is essential to calculate the margins in order to assess the correctness and validity of the price.

To summarise, consistency in pricing is of great importance and needs to be maintained across all pricing objectives, strategies and tools used to determine the final price of a service offering. So after reading this article, ask yourself again, “Should I switch to value based pricing?”. The answer is not always, but one can learn to determine situations, locations, needs and pains to price according to value.

 

---

 

Be social and share this feature