Is buying a formula car really the right choice for a rally driver?

Question: is it sensible to buy a prestigious car brand that does not offer support or spare parts in Slovenia? I understand. People who love prestigious brands might have different reasons guiding their decision.

But what about buying a software tool where the buyer uses only certain functionalities and doesn’t need the rest at all? For an easier comparison - would you buy a supercar for driving in everyday traffic? And only use it on Sundays? Driving it to lunch, never shifting past third gear, and keeping the rev counter below 1,500 RPM?

“Regardless of everything, you will never be able to buy an airplane for the price of a pair of hiking boots, to put it quite vividly.

We all know that every vehicle needs support and regular service. The same goes for our smartphones or internet browsers, which often update automatically. All this seems completely normal and familiar to us. But we perceive other software tools differently. We often forget that these also need maintenance and to keep up with development trends. Too often, due to a lack of time (as I wrote in the previous issue), we don’t think carefully enough about the desired functionalities of each software tool.

Then comes the frustration when it doesn’t behave as one imagined. Often, only through use, one realizes that a change or additional functionality would be useful. This reminds me of the classic millennia-old “dispute” between genders in a domestic setting, which can be best described with the dialogue: “I didn’t mean that,” “But you know what I meant,” “How can you not know what I meant”... Sound familiar?

If the software tool does not meet expectations or match the envisioned use, the reason is likely that we didn’t take enough time to think about our actual needs before purchase. Furthermore, we didn’t accurately list our requirements and expectations. Consequently, questions or requests follow: “You know, we would just like to add a small detail.”

Unfortunately, it often turns out that it’s not a small detail but a somewhat larger, maybe even crucial, change. Using an analogy from the automotive world again, it’s like a buyer who bought a formula car and suddenly wants to compete in the Dakar Rally with it.

When they communicate their desires to the seller, the seller, surprised by the customer’s new wishes, presents an extensive list of changes needed for such a feat. The response: “What? You need that much time for one minor change!?”

At this point, the “fun” often begins. Big players in the field of digital solutions have, of course, thoroughly studied sales methods. They use full “omnichannel” marketing and can easily catch “inexperienced fish” in the sea of numerous providers. As a result, these often decide against their real needs.

Especially when the provider waves a long list of references in front of the client. Unfortunately, it too often gets stuck on the fine print that most of us, unfortunately, do not read.

Then there’s often unresponsive support, and possible additional development can cost a fortune. In such cases, I recall a comedy where a customer, despite all efforts, the superiors’ “expert” cannot draw a red line with a blue pencil.

In sales departments, they often promise more than is possible. On the other hand, the expectations of potential buyers/clients are much higher than what they are willing to invest. Regardless of everything, you will never be able to buy an airplane for the price of a pair of hiking boots, to put it quite vividly.

I advocate for transparency and self-criticism. This is too often a problem - not just with “big” providers. I firmly believe that a company gains trust in the long run only in this way. With complete transparency, where there are no hidden clauses or fine print. The customer must be warned in advance about all possible critical points. The seller must follow the true needs of the customer and not just maximize their own profit.

Especially today, when we live in the digital age, information circulates very quickly and is easy to verify. Here, I would return to a thought from the previous issue: “For planning digitization and improving business processes, it’s important to take the time, as only such an approach brings long-term savings.”

As mentioned, it is crucial that the buyer first carefully considers what they really need. Only then can they make the right decision. It often turns out that this is not as it seemed at first glance.

In our case, we can return to the question of whether buying a super sports car for which we cannot get neither service nor suitable spare parts in Slovenia is the right choice? Maybe. If you have unlimited time and money. However, if you prioritize rationality in your purchase, your decision will be significantly different.

Jurij Triller