Simplifying the
Hardware Support
Model

OEM support vs. TPM

In a support model, where does it make the most sense to use OEM support vs. third-party maintenance (TPM)?

This segment is taken from a recent podcast that delves into the benefits of third-party maintenance (TPM) and how it fits into the concept of a hybrid support solution. View the full podcast here.

Podcast

Watch other segments from our informative podcast, Third-Party Maintenance and the Value of a Hybrid Support Solution, at the links below:


White Paper

Interested in delving further into the concepts of hybrid support and TPM? Download your free guide, The Value of a Hybrid Support Strategy, here.


Learn More

Learn more about how CXtec can help you build a hybrid support solution here.

Find out about CXtec's third-party maintenance offering here.


Resources

Transcription

This is really just a graphical representation of what I was just talking about. Things that we would recommend on OEM maintenance. If there's a lot of integration, like in a collaboration suite or your security appliances. If these applications are foundation to your business or data and analytics that you want to protect or anything mission-critical, you might want to lean towards putting that on the OEM support.

To the right is the third-party. If you have reliable hardware, stable software, it's not critical gear. You got a high-density or if it's end-of-sale/end-of-support support, those should be automatically third-party maintenance.

Now, in the middle you've got to do some compromising and now based on the five considerations I just talked about, because you could put some mission-critical gear that you have high density on and save yourself a lot of money with very limited risk.

Now this is a support model, simplified. To the left are a couple of cartoon chaps. They look like my uncles, neither one of those guys I really like that much, but it's very complicated when you talk about going through Cisco TAC or HP's Foundation Care or Juniper's J-Care.

The first thing they do is they kind of put you through a whole entitlement. Is this asset covered? Now, you could have a major outage and you need some support right away, they're going to take you through this painstaking thing to say that it's covered. Then they're going to put you through, you know, is it a horizontal or a technical team? Is it going to be a network problem or is it an application problem?

Then it's going to get to the point: Are you on the current version of the software? And if not, then they're going to push you to upgrade that and call them back. And the thing that annoys me the most is if you have to get off the phone ... Now, if you have unlimited staff, right? And your guy's got to get off the phone for whatever reason (get lunch, go home, take a break), Cisco takes a break right along with you. They don't continue to work the problem unless you're on the phone with them and then you call back and you may or may not get that exact same engineer you were working with.

Third-party maintenance, their technology-centric model really works as simple as this: You call up, you tell them what your issue is, the best of them do not force you on entitlement. They're going to definitely come back to you if it's not an entitled product but they're there to fix your problem first. They know they'll get paid. They're in it for the long haul. They want to make sure you are up and running and taken care of and they push you to their most technical resources as quickly as possible because they want the case resolved so they can move on to doing something else and they want it resolved permanently.