I was chatting with a client recently. We were exploring how much a business invests in ‘this, that or the other’ – and how one then measures return on investment.
Specifically, we were exploring the relationship between investment in UltraMAP’s monitoring services and how this impacted on cable strikes.
To be even more specific, we were trying to measure whether UltraMAP’s services were worth it.
We wanted crystal clear answers. But we had a problem.
There was nothing crystal clear to measure.
This particular client had had no cable strikes at all since UltraMAP had been looking after them.
An Impossible Task
It is not always possible to detect whether flagged threats would have actually resulted in a strike. So it is not possible to say that this 100% clean record was entirely attributable to UltraMAP’s work.
We are really comfortable with that as it goes. We understand this.
Soon after, another cable operator from the same geography joined us and caught up with what we were talking about. He let us know that they had had More than 10 strikes in the same region during the same timeframe.
Smiling inside is a nice feeling. Our new friend had just answered the question.
Our new friend’s business had decided that they’d rather take the risk and wait to repair cables following a strike than invest in the avoidance of strikes in the first instance.
And we understand that, too. Each to their own.
Our new friend now knows we are there for them should they change their thinking.
On this occasion, I didn’t take the time to explore the cost differential between what I’d anticipate that their ‘repair’ approach was versus our ‘avoidance’ approach.
But one of these days, with the right data I just might.