I don't often join in the conversations.  I don't jump on newbies and don't get 
into non-edi discussions like immigration. I do agree that this is not the 
forum to bare ones political leanings.
But this is my hot button. I detest paying good money (not my own) to get 
jerked around by testing services that test nothing.  I hate assigning one of 
my resources to fake EDI testing to pass invalid EDI test criteria. 
We had one "customer" require that we pay a testing service to test our ability 
to receive an 860. And the testing service didn't advise this hapless idiot 
that the ability of the vendors to return a 997 proved nothing. What service 
did they provide? We put the request on our backlog until the requester went 
bankrupt.
If there were actual value provided by these "services" then it would be worth 
the cost, but the fact of the matter is that many of these "services" are only 
servicing themselves. And when a trading partner requires you to use and pay 
for them, they are only signaling that they don't get it and aren't really a 
partner. 

Tim




--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Retail Edi <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Retail Edi <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [EDI-L] Re: Question on Testing & Economics
To: [email protected], "Craig Dunham" <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, July 19, 2010, 7:16 PM















 
 



  


    
      
      
      Cool, Craig.  I'm fine with everything you said.

 

I'm really looking for feedback on dropped connection opportunities due 
to testing fees rather than arguing whether or not it should be done or by 
whom.  I want to know how often you fine consultants see it happen e.g. a 
dropped EDI connection with a retailer because there is a testing fee required.

 

Thanks,

Jim



--- On Mon, 7/19/10, Craig Dunham <[email protected]> wrote:



From: Craig Dunham <[email protected]>

Subject: [EDI-L] Re: Question on Testing & Economics

To: [email protected]

Date: Monday, July 19, 2010, 9:28 PM



  



It always strikes Me as being . well, I can't quite put a finger on it . but

there are so many questions and issues around testing and the associated

costs of testing. And so many (often) seem to be extremely opposed to the

concepts - almost to the point of throwing a (virtual) punch.! It's almost

as volatile a discussion as the discussions revolving around politics,

religion or that certain state's upcoming law..



First, I'm pretty sure that we all agree that TESTING is a necessary part of

enabling EDI. Or, really, enabling any new or different process, program or

procedure, in the workplace. It's a given. Even if you eschew testing and

start sending/receiving data, you will find errors, correct them and have

the data resent - which, by the way, IS a form of testing. No matter what

you do, however, there IS some kind of testing done.



Now, since I'm again sure we all agree that testing is needed, the big

discussion and sticking point often comes down to cost. So many on this

list bemoan the costs associated with "3rd party testing" services - no

matter how valid or valuable such testing may be to a trading partner. Of

course, there is also the dilemma of working with somebody OTHER than your

trading partner when testing is done this way. But still, testing needs to

be done. And somebody has to pay for it - even if it's all done "in-house".



We all know that Mr. Mattias is a paid EDI consultant (and obviously a

pretty good one or he'd not still be in business). So are quite a few other

members of this list (Art, Emmanuel, and many others!). The reason I bring

these fine people up is because there is a cost associated with their work.

I'm pretty sure that none of the people that consult do it for free,

strictly from the bottom of their heart for the betterment and benefit of

humanity. Some companies will contract Michael, Art, Emmanuel or ________

to create and enable (or just change, manage or _____) their EDI

program/process. Other companies hire somebody to work for them to do the

same thing.



Guess what, folks. There is a COST involved in these options. These people

don't work for free.



Then, there is the "other side" of the EDI coin - what your trading partner

is doing. Maybe they've contracted with their OWN consultant or hired their

own staff to do EDI for them. And they have a cost involved, too. 



As some of you may remember, I worked for a fairly large retailer, as the

COMPLETE EDI DEPARTMENT. Just one person with a TP list of about 700 active

TPs and a handful of documents being used. That company went through a huge

expansion of their EDI program and we did it using a 3rd party testing site

& company. And our TPs had to pay the fee and complete the testing. Sure,

the company could have hired more people for the EDI department to handle

the testing. Or they could have contracted with somebody to do that, too.

But somehow, that EDI testing had to be paid for. If they had done

something like hiring another person (or people), then it could have

affected the profit picture or the cost of the items sold in the stores or

_____... In other words, SOMEBODY was paying for that testing.



As some of you also may remember, I've resorted to the "other" career

experience I have since I was laid off from the company I was working for.

That other experience is RETAIL. At the STORE level. I started a retail

store where I live. Most of it is because there is not a lot of need right

now where I live for experienced EDI folks. And there is little contract

work out here, as well. So, I started a retail store. The reason I mention

this is to kind of drive home the point about the costs of testing - by

using another cost of business - shipping. It's like EDI testing - it's a

cost and SOMEBODY has to pay for it. Usually, the receiving party (that's

the store in this case) pays for the items being shipped. Sometimes the

shipper will pay for it. And if they do pay for it, usually it's figured

into the cost of the items I'm buying from them. Instead of charging us a

freight charge of 50 bucks for a shipment, maybe they add 2 cents to the

cost of each item they sell. Then they can look like the "good guy" and say

"Hey, we pay for freight!" and I'm a happy camper with them. I can tell you

that there are some companies that we will not buy from in the future

because of the way that they ship things. I ordered some shopping bags and

gift boxes from one source and paid nearly HALF of the cost of good ordered

in SHIPPING.! Another supplier of products also had rather high shipping

charges - so I probably won't be buying from them again, either.



Another aspect of the "new gig" is the costs of displays. Think about every

store you've been in and you see those nifty spinners and racks and holders

of the products you may be buying. Well, like EDI testing - somebody has to

pay for those display racks & spinners. Most times, it's the buyer - the

retailer - that pays for these racks & displays. And they're not cheap,

either. I was at the California Gift Show in LA this past week and bought

some new products and paid for a few displays. And then I've got some other

vendors that GIVE AWAY the displays. But of the vendors that charge for the

displays, there's one thing I've noticed. Some seem to use it as a profit

center - by charging an exorbitant amount for the item - 150 bucks for a

wire rack - and others view it as a cost of doing business and only charge

the actual cost of the tem - maybe $25 instead. Again, though, somebody is

paying for these displays and racks. When I'm charged an outrageous cost

for the displays, it makes us think twice about the value of the items being

purchased.



When it comes to EDI testing - we all agree that there is a cost involved.

But maybe companies need to think of the bigger picture and take the wider

view in before they say "NO" to testing and enablement, all because it's

going to cost them a few extra dollars up front for a truly 



Craig Dunham



Bear Necessities Computing



EDI Sherpa



Author/blogger



<http://www.retailedi.com/> RetailEDI.com



<http://editalk.com/> EDITalk.com



<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/message/28626;_ylc=X3oDMTJybjlidDN2BF9T

Azk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzIxMDc2NzYEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDA1NTgyBG1zZ0lkAzI4NjI2BHNl

YwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzEyNzk1Mjk1MDI-> Re: Question on Testing &

Economics 



Posted by: "Michael Mattias/LS" 



Sun Jul 18, 2010 8:17 am (PDT) 



>Michael, you are one of these people who has been around the block.

> How many clients have you had *roughly* that decided to 'pass' on a 

> relationship because of testing?



I's not always the "testing" specifically.. it's the "total cost" to 

"EDI-enable" a particular customer or vendor.



That said....I only know of two of my clients who have actually used the 

"n-word" ("no") but...



A) One has said no to about half a dozen such requests.

B) I quote my clients a lot more enablements than ever happen.



Unfortunately - for purposes of addressing your particular question - my 

phone does not ring when there is nothing to be done.



Michael C. Mattias

Tal Systems Inc.

Racine WI



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





    
     

    
    


 



  











      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

...
Please use the following Message Identifiers as your subject prefix: <SALES>, 
<JOBS>, <LIST>, <TECH>, <MISC>, <EVENT>, <OFF-TOPIC>

Job postings are welcome, but for job postings or requests for work: <JOBS> IS 
REQUIRED in the subject line as a prefix.Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EDI-L/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to