[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ngw
Subject:    [ngw] Re: Exchange.......No.........!
From:       "David Gerisch" <DEGerisch () co ! tulare ! ca ! us>
Date:       2008-08-27 23:59:37
Message-ID: 48B587F8.55DB.0059.3 () co ! tulare ! ca ! us
[Download RAW message or body]

I've looked for the survey document the project manager worked up, but I'm not \
finding it.  I see that we delayed the roll-out of Outlook until after the users got \
formal training at a local training center.  We really didn't want there to be any \
technical reason or perceived bias from IT in poisoning the project.  It was given \
the best shot it could at success, and failed because our long time users just love \
GroupWise.

That I recall, the survey asked users to rate on a scale of 1 - 10 how easy it was to \
{insert operation here} - for twenty to thirty things you normally do in GroupWise \
(send an email, check the status of that email, send an appointment, reschedule the \
appointment, etc.)  After the users had been running Outlook + Exchange for a month \
and a half, they filled out the same survey.  Of course, at the end of the survey was \
a section for narrative - which was where we REALLY got the comments on how much they \
wanted GroupWise back.  :-)

The Statement Of Work said we would provide the results of the surveys, and projected \
costs to move the entire organization.  We did, and powers-that-be made the right \
choice.  Well, they were the ones going through the pain (Ouchlook, as it were), so \
they wanted back on GroupWise too.  ;-)

David Gerisch

> > > "Brett McKeachnie" <MCKEACBR@uvu.edu> 08-26-2008 15:25 >>>
Wow!  Excellent idea!  I'm sure this satisfaction survey would be just the solution \
for organizations like mine.  Would you mind sharing more details about what you did \
and how?

Thanks,

Brett

> > > On 8/26/2008 at 4:11 PM, "David Gerisch" <DEGerisch@co.tulare.ca.us> wrote:
> We fended off a migration to Exchange a long time ago.  What worked for us, 
> was that only two people in the organization really wanted Exchange.  They 
> were VIP's though... so we did a pilot project with a formal satisfaction 
> survey before and after.
> 
> The score was 38 to 2 in favor of "WE WANT OUR GROUPWISE BACK!"
> 
> So we did.  ;-)
> 
> In your case, it's probably going to boil down to a matter of cost.  Today, 
> you have an email system.  Next year, you will either have spent a little 
> money and still have an email system -or- you will have spent a LOT OF money 
> and ... still have an email system (with a different name).
> 
> Don't forget to budget for the Quest tool (per seat) to migrate the user's 
> mailboxes into Exchange.  You won't be able to run the Microsoft software on 
> the existing hardware, so the migration plan needs to include all new 
> hardware, and licenses for the additional backup/restore services and 
> anti-virus services.  You probably do not want to run the Outlook Web Access 
> on the primary Exchange server, so that's another cost.
> 
> David Gerisch, Systems and Procedures Analyst II
> Tulare County Information Technology
> degerisch@co.tulare.ca.us or 559-636-4886
> 
> 
> > > > "Renee Hunter" <Renee@wfse.org> 08-26-2008 12:45 >>>
> ** High Priority **
> 
> Well, a move from GroupWise to Exchange reared its ugly head in a
> meeting today.  We are still at 6.5 and I was planning this month to
> start the process to move to GroupWise 7 and other 3rd party products. 
> I've been asked to provide reasons by this Friday of why moving to
> Exchange is not the way to go.  I reread the emails I saved from this
> list, include going to the link for Greg's article in 2007 on Novell's
> site.  100 users, one Post Office, rare downtime or issues.  Am looking
> for current information.
> 
> Thanks for anyone who can assist with this.  I'm also checking other
> avenues, but this list seems to be the best.
> 
> 
> --
> Visit http://www.ngwlist.com for help unsubscribing



--
Visit http://www.ngwlist.com for help unsubscribing


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]