‘Paineless’ Common SENSE

WHEN PROPOSING something as volatile as the right of first refusal, it makes sense to benchmark one of the forefathers of insubordinate enlightenment.

In 1776, Thomas Paine published an essay called “Common Sense.” It clearly delineated the reasons why 13 overtaxed colonies should work together to succeed without bowing to the self-interest of outside concerns. It was a logical call for interdependent independence.

It took courage to point out the obvious. In-plant managers will require a measure of that valor.

Knowing Why

Doesn’t it make sense for an organization to invest in its own services? It’s like taking money out of the left pocket and putting it in the right pocket. It’s simple, it’s logical and it doesn’t happen all the time.

Winning the right of first refusal for an in-plant should be easy. It isn’t.

Even pressing it to debate can be dangerous. Boundaries are crossed. Control is threatened. Many in-plant managers are advised to win business from the trenches and not risk exposure. Brandishing a treasonously regarded proposal for the right of first refusal can land a publishing professional within firing range.

Why bother to fight for the right of first refusal? In my opinion, it is the only way an in-plant printing facility can maximize its efficiencies and benefits to its parent organization.

Being an entrepreneur with a great track record isn’t enough any more to fulfill the in-plant’s mission to make its parent organization more successful. The way today’s businesses simultaneously expand, divest and diversify, even the best in-plant without this right can go unnoticed. After a management shift, the clients that raved about your services move on. Recognition fades. An in-plant manager becomes graded on the last request delivered.

Without the right of first refusal, it becomes a constant battle to make internal print consumers aware of the in-plant’s service. Marketing internal services becomes time consuming and often brings the in-plant manager under fire for the expense. One marketing campaign a year isn’t enough. A barrage of promotions is needed to reach print buyers who are already being bombarded with an arsenal of sales pitches from outside print providers.

New management has a way of bringing solutions that have historically worked for them. If there is little or no knowledge of the in-plant and no mandate to use internal services, new executives probably will resort to old ways of meeting print needs. These solutions might be outsourcing firms.

With the freedom to get anything from the outside without controls or recommendations to lower the cost, printing expenses tend to grow.

With no right of first refusal, leverage is wasted. No competition is offered to outside providers. How much sharper would commercial printers’ quotes be if they had to compete with an “at cost” competitor on the inside?

‘The Copiers are Coming!’

With no direction to use internal services, production model copiers will start to proliferate within a company or organization. Time and money will be wasted as their users become slaves to these machines. Costly leases, unnecessary copying and additional invoice tracking prevail.

With production technology at everyone’s fingertips, creativity blossoms and branding suffers for the art. Taking artistic license with branding puts an organization at risk.

Shared Benefits

The benefits of having the right of first refusal are qualitative and quantitative. The comfort of confidentiality, priority and accountability are guaranteed. The savings in production cost and elimination of sales taxes are reported.

Measurable Control and Leverage

This procedure also gives measurable control and leverage to a company or organization. Tracking and processing invoices can be reduced. Copier leases and the associated supply cost will dwindle. Outside print providers will have to compete with this cost-cutting in-house service. A business can easily wrap its arms around the cost of printing and make it more manageable.

This mandate would streamline decision-making. Management could quickly determine the in-plant’s strengths and weaknesses. Knowing what to keep in and what to outsource could be proven, rather than assumed. New opportunities to save would come to light. Technology selection and justification would be immediately identified and tailored to the high return needs of the company.

Full utilization of the in-plant will guarantee lower cost to users. On-demand services can help zero inventory become a reality. The savings in storage and waste reduction can be giddily high.

With the right of first refusal, the in-plant can focus its marketing on bringing in outside customers that help zero out the facility budget and further drop the bottom out of cost to internal clients.

Disarming the Critics

Would being forced to use the in-plant cause animosity among customers?

Tyranny won’t be tolerated and neither will poor service. An in-plant with first refusal is under constant scrutiny. Internal services must perform and perform exceptionally. Without the luxury of long-term contracts that outsourcing providers secure, poor performance can reduce an in-plant to cannon-fodder.

An in-plant having a monopoly on printing isn’t a bad thing as long as checks and balances are common policy. In-plants were created to economically and effectively meet the needs of the organization, not to constantly vie for business. If customer service, cost savings and recovery are the goals of the in-plant, rather than strictly production, upper management will reap the benefits. Internal customers will discover strength comes from within.

The smoke has yet to clear on the battle here, but I remain firm in my resolve. Granting the right of first refusal to an in-plant is merely Paineless Common Sense. IPG

Mike Renn is the assistant vice president of corporate services for Mellon Financial Corp., in Philadelphia. He has also served as president of the Philadelphia chapter of the In-plant Printing and Mailing Association. You can contact him at:

renn.m@mellon.com

Requesting ‘The Right’

Back in Thomas Paine’s time, talking points had more impact when real bullets were used. When you request the right of first refusal, though, no one has to take cover. In fact, there is no risk at all.

Clearly state your objective:

“All moderate to large printing and copying projects should be offered to in-house printing services before contacting outside providers in order to fully utilize capabilities of corporate services to reduce, measure and control expenses. An exemption can be obtained by executive sign-off only for valid and justifiable reasons.”

Outline your argument with simple indisputable facts that can easily fend off a volley of criticism, and start stumping for approval. Emphasize the benefits and neutralize fears. Remind your audience, that unlike Paine’s publication, Common Sense, the right of first refusal isn’t revolutionary. There is plenty of benchmarked evidence proving its success. Include several successful case studies of companies, universities and government agencies that have adopted the policy.

PowerPoint is a good tool to create this proposal. Stick to bulleted points. Polish it and then submit it to your manager. Be prepared to fight and defend it.