Revealed: Why Telstra sold Kaz

  • Email a Friend
  • Print Page
Revealed: Why Telstra sold Kaz
"It's interesting to read these comments. When Mike Foster gave his spiel at the Fujitsu lunch, he seemed to be wanting to make a very clear distinction between Kaz's future and past owners. He ..."
 
By Sholto Macpherson
Nov 5, 2009 4:31 PM
Tags: telstra | kaz | integration | cloud | enterprise | david | thodey | sol | trujillo | mike | foster

Telcos have no place in enterprise cloud services, says former Kaz MD.

Telcos wanting to deliver cloud services to enterprises are barking up the wrong tree.

At least, that was the message from Mike Foster, former Kaz managing director, speaking at a function for Fujitsu Australia, which acquired Kaz in March.

Foster said that his experience at Telstra, which acquired Kaz in 2004 and then spent five years unsuccessfully trying to develop the business, showed that telcos and enterprise system integrators had fundamentally different business models that were incompatible in practice.

When former Telstra CEO, Sol Trujillo, joined Telstra, the chief executive was intent on cutting costs by reducing the telco's staff numbers and on squeezing more revenue from its networks, said Foster.

However, Kaz, which was kept as a separate unit within the telco, needed to keep hiring in pace with its growing number of customers.

Foster found he had to fight to grow the business.

"Telstra was always saying you've got too many people. Sol wanted to reduce my workforce," said Foster, now group executive sales at Fujitsu Australia.

"Sol could build another network but for me to grow I had to add more people."

While Kaz had higher staffing costs and lower margins than Telstra's network business, the system integrator required less capital outlay.

"It was basically a commercial decision. I could make less margin but had lower costs. In the end Sol decided to stick with being a core telco," said Foster, who described the former CEO as a "switched-on guy" who "got it".

Current CEO David Thodey would tell you the same thing, he added.

Foster alluded to other problems in running Kaz as a separate business unit within Telstra.

Kaz was frustrated by having to work with multiple systems of holiday entitlements for staff and by a requirement to assign income to different profit and loss balance sheets.

And Alphawest?

Foster was equally as sceptical of the rival alliance of enterprise integrator Alphawest and Optus to provide enterprise cloud services.

Large organisations need a level of customisation at the desktop that telcos were not able or willing to supply, he said.

"Telcos don't care if you're talking about national security or your girlfriend. They take a voice-like mentality into a completely different environment," said Foster.

Foster said one cloud service developed by Telstra, a desktop messaging widget which integrates with Outlook and Lotus Notes, was a good example of how telcos were unsuited to servicing the enterprise.

"It still needs integration at the desktop - so who does it?"

Telcos "don't understand the application. [A cloud service] has to integrate to SAP or core systems - they don't do that.

"Everyone just talks about cloud as something you could turn on like a mobile phone. It's just not like that," said Foster.

The Kaz brand is 'gracefully retired'

Foster said Kaz had found its "rightful home" at Fujitsu Australia, which had formed a board to handle the integration of Kaz and another recent acquisition, Supply Chain.

Foster said Fujitsu was "gracefully retiring the Kaz and Supply Chain brands" under the Fujitsu banner and that the integration of staff and systems was progressing smoothly.

Foster couldn't resist a dig at Kaz's former owner's failure to capitalise on its prize acquisition.

"When you buy a business you need to have the money to do what you wanted to do with it," said Foster.

Rod Vawdrey, managing director of Fujitsu Australia, said that Kaz's government customers were a key factor in the acquisition, especially its relationship with Defence.

 
 


Comments: 5
Thoughts on this article? Add a comment below.
em3
Nov 5, 2009 6:51 PM
I am probably going to be unpopular for posting this comment, however so many people suffered during the Kaz / Telstra integration and the whole affair was a pipe dream at best.

Both Telstra and Kaz technical teams knew this BEFORE the integration commenced.

The fundamental issue with Telstra buying Kaz is that Telstra always struggled with Managed Services at the server and desktop level (key areas for Kaz clients).

This is not through the fault of Telstra's technical people, who are some of the best people I have personally met and worked with.

Kaz had a great team and were very quick to make change in customer environments - hence their former slogan "flexibility with strength", however adapting this method for operation with Telstra was never going to work.

I met some of the people at Kaz, who were individually brilliant, however they were soon let down by excessive process, red tape and delays which were unfortunately part of Telstra's way of doing business.

These are generally contractual issues and not a reflection of capability.

Kaz people had a close relationship with their clients, which then turned cold as Telstra's process prevented staff from really helping their clients when they needed it most.

Sometimes when client systems are broken, they just need to be fixed, regardless of who's fault it is. Plans need to be quickly made and the service provider sometimes needs to make an "investment" in their client.

Instead of leading the way for Managed Services technologies, Telstra ended up (in my opnion) making every decision a commercial one - which is fine, except very little was achieved and a lot of money was lost.

Clients also lost a great deal of revenue as their systems were not up to scratch, failing and sometimes beyond repair.

Whilst people sit in rooms arguing about who pays for what, the client's business and staff are being let down, and in the end are forced to re-insource or go somewhere else in the hope for better service.

Then, to add injury, the technical staff have their hands tied and can't effect the change they've architected, designed, planned and prepared for implementation.

Proper due diligence goes a long way, but flexibility in an offering also helps. Big deal - if you need to spend $200K for new servers, you will make all that and more back over the term of any client contract.

It's great to say all the right words and create transition programs, but at the end of the day it's all about the client first and foremost, then the capability (technical and delivery teams).

When you look after the relationship, everything else falls into place.

A happy customer is a good customer, who is willing to overlook errors and issues.

Most importantly, for a Managed Services organisation, happy staff are the world's best asset - they will stay past 5pm to fix broken infrastructure and they'll answer the phone at 2am when the client's systems are down.

DJ1966
Nov 5, 2009 7:24 PM
you might be unpopular but you are spot on

I was at kaz when all this happened and we were forced to take telstra pay and conditions


what a debacle
no wonder so many left
Marcus
Nov 5, 2009 7:39 PM
Well said em3. You are spot on. We used to work with Kaz as a subcontractor doing a lot of their integration work. After the Telstra acquisition they became much harder to deal with - often completely inflexible.

I don't know when people will wake up to this (we've worked with almost all the telcos over the years and none of them get it). Telco's want to sell large volumes of a commodity product (and sometimes even do it well!). They simply don't/won't take the time to develop the customer intimacy and flexibility that Systems Integration needs
WhatThe?
Nov 6, 2009 9:10 AM
Most of what you say is spot on em3, the slogan was "strength in flexibity".

I was part of the IT services arm before KAZ was bought and survived until the Telstra mass sacking started. Then the re-hiring of all the staff that were required to avoid the legal suits that were getting filed against KAZ/Telstra for breach of contract due to lack of resources.
Telstra removed entire departments based on cost per head without any knowledge of what the departments did. I was handed my redundancy pay and asked "So what was your rols in KAZ?" by the Telstra toe-cutters. Great Management there.

Before then the KAZ IT business staff were cut by 40%, anything that was larger volume or profit was simply sold for quick bucks. These sub businesses that grew from customer requirement were an easy way to increase Telstra share price for a while.
The largest problem that Telstra Management were not aware of was the in-roads that these other businesses created. Customer leads, trust and complete service offerings. All of these things were given away and then the questions started about why Kaz had not gotten a new customer in over 12 months. The sales were geared to work with the existing customer base and improve on the relationships we already had.

Marcus, you are so right when you say Telcos dont get it. This is not a walk in - walk out business. The fast sell does not work and if one of the telcos realise this and back a good IT Service provider, they will be hard to beat.

Just as a side note, I know that everyone I dealt with in KAZ now avoid Telstra wherever possible and will suggest to their customers to avoid them too. I dont know whether Companies like Telstra realise how much bad publicity is generated from a screw up of this size...

sholtomacpherson
Nov 6, 2009 2:06 PM
It's interesting to read these comments. When Mike Foster gave his spiel at the Fujitsu lunch, he seemed to be wanting to make a very clear distinction between Kaz's future and past owners. He seemed to be reliving the frustration when he spoke about having to check which holiday schedule staff were on and to which P&L he needed to assign revenue. At the time the little outburst seemed a bit random given we were there to talk about Fujitsu.
Foster told me afterwards that even though Kaz was nominally independent within Telstra, "we still had the one shareholder and if Telstra said 'jump', you jumped". Listening to him talk reminded me of Skase's comment about swapping his Autralian citizenship for Spanish; I think the phrase was "removing dirty socks"...
bit harsh maybe, as he talked positively of Sol, but maybe that was because I was writing everything down in front of him.
Comment:
Want to participate in the discussion?
Or log in now to comment


Top Stories
S Central to finally enter liquidation
Mavridis looks to Government to pay staff entitlements.
 
Microsoft announces Azure launch date
Australia in second wave of country releases.
 
Opinion: Avaya tries to out-Cisco Cisco
Ex-Cisco execs head up Avaya.
 

Shortcutsall you need to know on...

  • NBN 
  • Windows 7 
  • Unified Communications 
  • Smart Power 
  • Virtualisation 

Latest Comments

"Though wireless broadband is quite expensive but I like mobility so I can always prefer wireless ..."
by katiegardner Feb 9, 2010 5:51 PM
 
"I must say Telstra customers can also have confidence in the fact that their wireless broadband ..."
by katiegardner Feb 9, 2010 5:50 PM
 
"Hang on a minute! Why is Australia any different from anywhere else. I know that this type of ..."
by webxopt Feb 9, 2010 2:31 PM
 
"Avatar..did not do to bad at the box office!! 3D has given the industry the boot it needed. What ..."
by jimmydee4 Feb 5, 2010 5:04 AM
 
"I totally agree. As has been said before the copyright holder would be better off to engage an ..."
by fagtatts Feb 4, 2010 8:25 PM

Polls

What is the sweet spot for Apple's entry 16GB Wi-Fi iPad?




   |   View results
$549
  69%
 
$579
  17%
 
$619
  2%
 
$649
  6%
 
$699
  5%
TOTAL VOTES: 121

Vote now

CRN Magazine

Issue: 275 | January, 2010

CRN Magazine looks in-depth at the emerging issues and developments for the Channel, and provides insight, analysis and strategic information to help resellers better run their businesses.