mike.nevin@alliancebestpractice.com*Mike Nevin*Alliance Best Practice Ltd*Alliance Best Practice Ltd*Alliance Best Practice Ltd*Alliance Best Practice Ltd*2

Our partners work with us and other partners to enhance ecosystem value.| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*We have a clear exit strategy for non-performing partners.| Opinion: .Disagree.*The vision for the ecosystem is regularly reviewed.| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*All employees have clarity in our own organisation's SWOT analysis.| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*Our Executive Leadership Team (ELT) has a clear understanding of the Partner Ecosystem Model and they actively support it.| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*We conduct simple SWOT analysis of partners so that field sales forces know which combination of partners to recommend in which situation.| Opinion: .Agree.*We have a Taxonomy of terms so that everyone in the Ecosystem understands the implications of key terms| Opinion: .Disagree.*We have made suitable human resources investment in our Ecosystem| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*We have made suitable IP investment in our Ecosystem| Opinion: .Disagree.*We run regular partner ecosystem roadshows at which we explain to prospective partners how our ecosystem operates| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*There is a high level of trust in our partner ecosystem| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*We create 'Use Cases' with our ecosystem partners which can then be reshared in the ecosystem..| Opinion: .Disagree.*We manage a system of multiple Partner MDF Funds that fund whole solutions jointly to market?| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*We have made suitable financial investment in our Ecosystem| Opinion: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*What process for negotiation was employed in developing this relationship?

Score 0 if - None
Score 25 if - Confrontational commercial bargaining
Score 50 if - Confrontational commercial bargaining but conceding on vital issues
Score 75 if - Well intentioned ad hoc collaborative negotiating trying to see it from the other parties point of view
Score 100 if - Formal co-Collaborative negotiations| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*Co8 What is the commercial benefit of this relationship?

Score 0 if - Unknown
Score 25 if - Some benefits known
Score 50 if - Direct benefits known
Score 75 if - Direct and indirect benefits known
Score 100 if - Direct, indirect and other benefits known| Benchmark: .Disagree.*Co7 What is the commercial cost of this relationship?

Score 0 if - Unknown
Score 25 if - Some costs known
Score 50 if - Direct costs known
Score 75 if - Direct and indirect costs known
Score 100 if - Direct, indirect and other costs known| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*Co6 Do you have a relationship reward system linked to key metrics?

Score 0 if - None
Score 25 if - Ad hoc to one side
Score 50 if - Formal to one or either side but not shared
Score 75 if - Ad Hoc shared
Score 100 if - Fully costed in all alliance and partnership relationships. Rules are clear and applied consistently. Money is paid into pot available to BOTH sides equally.| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*Co5 Do you have an alliance balanced scorecard?

Score 0 if - None
Score 25 if - Commercial
Score 50 if - Commercial and some others
Score 75 if - Cause and effect metrics
Score 100 if - Fully balanced best practice scorecard| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*Do you regularly perform a relationship audit with this partner?

Score 0 if - Never
Score 25 if - Rarely
Score 50 if - Semi regularly
Score 75 if - Regularly
Score 100 if - Regularly at a predetermined time.| Benchmark: .Agree.*How did you arrive at the optimum legal / business structure?

0 - Haven't got one
25 - We used our lawyers
50 - We used both lawyers in series
75 - We used both lawyers in tandem
100  - We used a Memorandum of Understanding and Principles (MOUP) then lawyers| Benchmark: .Disagree.*Have you conducted due diligence to identify suitable candidate partners? If so can you identify in the Comments box the criteria that were used?

Score 0 if - None conducted
Score 25 if - We assessed Financial aspects only
Score 50 if - We assessed both financial and strategic aspects
Score 75 if - We assessed a range of dimensions consistent with our risk mitigation and control strategies.
Score 100 if - We conducted a full and complete due diligence with the full support of the partner concerned.| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*Co10 What is the expected cost / value ratio of this relationship?

Score 0 if - Unknown
Score 25 if - We have a general idea of the payback we are looking for
Score 50 if - We have a detailed view of the payback we are looking for
Score 75 if - Both partners have an agreed general view of the payback they are looking for
Score 100 if - Both partners have a detailed and accurate cost / value payback ratio that they are both expecting from the relationship.| Benchmark: .Disagree.*Co1 Do you have one or more identified business value propositions for the relationship? If so can you describe them in the comments box?

Score 0 if - Haven't got one
Score 25 if - Got one on one side only
Score 50 if - Got one on both sides
Score 75 if - Jointly agreed by alliance teams on both sides
Score 100 if - Jointly agreed by key stakeholders on both sides| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*T19 What is the degree of partner accountability and how is this expressed? Please place your score in the Score box and your comments in the Comments box.

Score 0 if - None
Score 25 if - General statements of accountability in the contract - non specific.
Score 50 if - Detailed statements of accountability in the contract - very specific and focusing on technical / commercial issues.
Score 75 if - Both alliance teams have sat down and discussed partner accountability in detail. There is a clear documentation of the accountability on both sides in the charter. This is reflected in the contract.
Score 100 if - Both alliance teams have briefed all the key stakeholders from each side and there is genuine and tangible buyin at multiple levels in both organisations. There is a clear documentation of the accountability on both sides in the charter. This is reflected in the contract.
| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*T17 Is there a process for joint problem solving? If so can you describe it briefly in the comments box?

Score 0 if - Unknown
Score 25 if - Ad hoc process identified and executed in a patchy manner
Score 50 if - Problems are passed from one partner to the other
Score 75 if - There is an informal joint problem solving process which seems to work well
Score 100 if - There is a formal and documented joint problem solving process which works excellently
| Benchmark: .Disagree.*T16 – Are there clearly identified mutual needs which are satisfied in the proposed relationship? If so can you briefly describe them in the comments box?

Score 0 if - We have needs which are satisfied but we have not shared them with our partner
Score 25 if - We have shared with each other our different needs
Score 50 if - We have worked together as two aliance teams and agreed some joint needs
Score 75 if - We have worked together as two integrated companies including both alliance teams but also executive teams to agree a set of mutually agreed needs which will result in commercial value.
Score 100 if - We have worked together as two companies and identified a set of needs which are integral to our business strtegies.
| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*T15 To what extent does your product or service fit with your partner’s product / service offerings?

Score 0 if - Unknown
Score 25 if - Many duplications
Score 50 if - Some duplications
Score 75 if - Few duplications
Score 100 if - Completely complementary
| Benchmark: .Neither Agree or Disagree.*

PHP Code Snippets Powered By : XYZScripts.com