I appreciate that small and medium businesses now get more attention from vendors and other media outlets. I don’t even mind that other media outlets mislead their readers: if readers go to the wrong place, instead of coming here, they take their chances (that’s only about half way a joke). But I feel the need to correct really bad advice, or at least add a “real life” disclaimer. Another magazine Web site offered a white paper called something like “Tips for managing IT costs” aimed directly at small businesses. I downloaded it because I’m always look for good information to reference. But I strongly disagree with two of their tips and think four others don’t apply to real small businesses. This is why I won’t tell you where to get the white paper, because 40 percent good advice can’t overcome the 60 percent mistakes.
Perhaps the service company that issued this white paper with a failing grade only services companies with plenty of money. Unfortunately, small businesses I know always have budget problems. Am I just picking the wrong companies? If money is a problem in the real world, how can someone advise you that the way to “manage IT costs” is to buy all your hardware at the same time, new, from the same vendor? Oh, but save money by putting the equipment on a three year lease. After all, this is how the big companies do it (that’s exactly what they said: “larger companies do this technical refresh every few years”). If you can’t buy all your computers at once, at least buy the same brand of business computer every time. Tricky to complain about advice when some good points lurk among the bad. If you have all the same computers, you save time troubleshooting and stock fewer replacement parts. Yet I believe a better piece of advice: “Buy the right tool for the job,” yields a much better result. That’s just messier and more chaotic, much like daily life in a small company. Does every user in your company need the latest business class, ahead of the hardware curve computer? (yes, the paper said always buy ahead of the hardware curve). No. Doing so will put an expensive computer on a casual user’s desk, and a general purpose computer on the desk of a power user with advanced requirements. If you have a graphics designer, for example, that person will need a much better monitor and graphics card than normal. In fact, that person may not need a PC at all, but a Macintosh instead. Ooh, is “buy the same for everyone” really a slap at Macintosh? Maybe so. Apply this “same for everyone” advice to vehicles. If one person needs a dualie diesel pickup, does everyone need one? If one person needs a 15 passenger van, does everyone? No, you buy the right vehicle for the job. Really aggravating: “use industry leading products.” Yeah, those pesky smaller innovative companies with new products just disturb the status quo. So buy the full suite of Microsoft Office products for every user (that’s their advice) so you’ll have consistency. Linux for some users? “Sure, we all wish we could save a buck or two by dumping Microsoft for the latest version of free Linux software, but it just isn’t wise to do so.” That’s the actual quote, friends. The next sentence is worse: “By saving a few hundred dollars on a Microsoft Office license, you will spend countless dollars struggling to find appropriate support and compatible products.” Perhaps the fact this advice first came out over a year ago excuses this statement. Wait, no it doesn’t. It was wrong and stupid then, and it’s even wronger and stupider now. Pick the software for the job. If a user needs a full Microsoft Office suite, get it. If a user needs casual memo writing software, e-mail, and a browser, get the appropriate software and save those hundreds of dollars. If you’re one of these magical small businesses overflowing with cash, donate your savings to a favorite charity. I suggest a rehab program for stupid writers of misleading white papers.
