More transparency from an AMS vendor

I’ve written in the past about the need for more AMS vendors to be transparent about how things are going with their company and product. Here’s another nice example of that from Dmitriy Buterin at Wild Apricot.  (I interviewed Dmitriy a couple years back. You can hear that here.)

In this blog post Dmitriy highlights both the good and the bad from 2014. I especially liked his honesty when talking about their launch of their largest release, version 5:

“However, there were challenges for both Wild Apricot and our customers. We had underestimated the volume of support tickets from the upgrade. This combined with some staffing challenges, meant that our response time for customer requests suffered for a number of weeks.”

That’s the kind of transparency more vendors should practice. My experience with my clients is that they get angriest not when the software doesn’t work, but when the vendor goes “silent” on big issues. It’s what I call the “black hole” of IT support. The client reports the problem, the vendor acknowledges the problem (maybe), and then the client never hears back from the vendor again, often even when the problem is fixed!

More transparency, please!

About Wes Trochlil

For over 30 years, Wes has worked in and with dozens of associations and membership organizations throughout the US, ranging in size from zero staff (all-volunteer) to over 700. In that time Wes has provided a range of consulting services, from general consulting on data management issues to full-scale, association-wide selection and implementation of association management systems.

Scroll to Top