Agreement Criteria

[ORV]

I have found at least 2 important issues with the new MA engine. 

1. I feel the actual process of pricing the agreement leaves it subjective and pricing will be inconsistent. The person calculating the agreement still has to try and calculate the number of hours in the agreement. We need preset criteria for different types of equipment. Also, maybe a spot for mobilization fees, out of town per diem, and scissor lift usage if required. I already have a way of doing this that I would be more than happy to share. (I can create a maintenance agreement proposal in less than 5 Minutes. 

2. We need a way to propose the agreement to the customer, and let them CHOOSE which type of maintenance agreement they go with. Quarterly, Biannual, Monthly, Annual service, and their preferred billing cycle. After talking with other users in this group, we all pretty much agree we still have to calculate the agreement outside of ST. 

It would be helpful to walk you through our process as someone estimating these maintenance agreements. I think the engine you built for monitoring and auditing current maintenance agreements is outstanding. It is very close to being what most of us would need. Please feel free to reach out if you would like to take a look at my system again. I really want to help. 

[afranza1]

The current method of pricing makes it difficult to create and price a service agreement. on the pricing page, I'd like to see the ability to add a tasks and/or material items to the agreement to create the price.

[dhelms]

To expand on #2 above, what if we also thought about options beyond just the duration? We have some "add-ons" we offer commercial customers, and our SAs look like a simple menu. The first section is the basic inspection, maybe with one or two duration options, then we also offer other services like remote monitoring (we are also an HVAC Building Automation Contractor) or an annual software upgrade. I feel like if we are already defining them as "visits", maybe there could be an option that customers choose to accept. If not chosen, we simply deactivate the visit(s), for example.

Another thought I had that's related to #1 and #2, is that we have costs that don't necessarily relate to a "visit" that I would like to include, and would even like to base it on what options the customer chooses. For example, if we offer the customer the remote monitoring service, that entitles them to get better insight into their building, but it does not necessarily come with a "visit" from us. I realize this is beyond the scope of most users, but I think many of us would appreciate a simple way to add costs that don't necessarily correlate to a specific visit.

[jbushong]

These are both two things I would like to see as well. Right now we operate our Seasonal Maintenance Agreements under the Memberships module which is very limiting in a lot of ways. We have flat rate pricing for our Agreements depending on the quantity and types of equipment they have.

It's funny because this is the only area in which we use flat rate pricing and are a T&M business otherwise. Service Titan is always telling us how the system works so much better with flat rate pricing but this new module seems kind of T&M focused.

[esmith]

Thanks @ORV and@sjaeger

RE: #1 - I will follow up with you via email; we are actively working on an enhancement that would allow you to set defaults based on equipment type. These defaults can be used to calculate the overall hours for the agreement.

We can also discuss #2 during that time.

If any others want to be directly involved in providing feedback on our next enhancement, please 'like' this comment and I'll reach out directly!

[sjaeger]

I agree with #1 

Never thought about #2 and I like it as well.