Reputation suicide

SAP SA is trying to commit image suicide. And the City of Johannesburg (COJ) is lending a hand.

An assisted, reputation suicide is the only logical explanation I can come up with. But that's still one excuse more than SAP has to offer.

What brings on this amateur, yet somewhat accurate corporate psychology on my part? The SAP Quality Award that the COJ should have had to use blackmail to get.

The award was granted to the COJ for its “successful” implementation of the SAP-based billing system, the Phakama Programme.

The system has been plagued by several problems since its installation. Over the last December-January festive season, about 800 000 citizens received their bills late due to technical glitches.

The Hello Peter Web site displayed numerous complaints of varied nature by residents about the COJ and its billing system. Some were billed more than double their usual amount for water and electricity. Others received bills for properties that weren't theirs or that weren't in use.

A backlog of rates clearance certificates means that some citizens cannot get new homes transferred into their names.

The cherry? Frustrated people can't get through to the COJ call centre either. Assistance is just another flaw in the whole operation.

Now I'm not sure if I'm missing some critical (perhaps political) point here, but I have to ask: How? How did the Phakama Programme manage to get such an award?

If I told this story to a five-year-old, I would say: Johnny had many toys. His Phakama doll, which was supposed to dance gracefully, did not. In fact, when he first got it, it had trouble simply walking. But the Phakama doll is Johnny's favourite.

This isn't pre-school where you get a gold star just for trying.

Farzana Rasool, journalist, ITWeb

Using the simple logic of things as children do, they would likely ask one question first, and rightfully so: “Why?”

Why SAP chose this flawed programme above all others is the key question.

If you don't win, you don't win. This isn't pre-school where you get a gold star just for trying.

If I was really dramatic, I would say the award is a slap in the face of all those citizens who have struggled and are still struggling with billing faults on the part of the system. But I'm not, so I won't.

If you had to ask SAP the key question, this is likely what you'd hear:

“We had judges; there were criteria; the COJ put through the submission; something political; the pilot system worked; it's not our fault if staff training was hindered by absenteeism; there were criteria.”

So they're asking that the inquirer take whichever excuse suits them best. Because there isn't just one good reason.

An additional excuse by SAP for giving the Phakama Programme the award is that it's essentially not as bad as it could have been. There was mention that, compared to where it started off, the system is doing well. Last time I checked, an achievement like that merits a “most improved” award, and not a “top of the class” one.

Here's another bit of logic:

The COJ implements a new billing system. The new billing system has a problem sending out accurate bills and sometimes just sending out bills in general. SAP gives a quality award to the system that doesn't work. SAP doesn't really know why. The public now doesn't trust SAP's idea of quality.

This is where the reputation suicide comes in. With a stunt like this, the company loses integrity in the eyes of the public. People won't trust its standards anymore.

Also, other deserving systems that have been granted SAP Quality Awards may not be able to get full acknowledgement of their worth. The meaning of being granted a SAP Quality Award will be lost. “Oh, a SAP award? Pssht, anyone can get one of those.”

One has to wonder if the public will come to doubt the quality of the company's products, because the thought process may lead to questions like: if this system is what SAP thinks top quality is, then what exactly is it offering?

Never before has the meaning of the phrase “digging your own grave” been clearer to me. Thank you SAP for that insight. You have just successfully shot yourself in the foot with this award. I'm sure there are several other clich'es that could be awarded to the situation, but let's just leave it there.