Support with an SLA for your clients

A tender arrives from a retail chain: installation across 60 stores and, after that, three years of maintenance with committed response times across the whole mainland. The integrator could do the installation with its eyes closed. What it does not have is people available in Lugo and in Almería on the same Tuesday, nor an on call structure to respond when a screen goes down in August. So two things happen, and both of them are bad: either it does not bid, or it bids and signs a commitment it does not know whether it can meet.

Maintenance is where the recurring revenue of this sector sits, and it is also where it gets decided who keeps the big accounts. A client with sites spread out is no longer buying just an installation: they are buying the guarantee that somebody answers when something fails. And that requirement leaves very good integrators out for a reason that has nothing to do with their craft, and everything to do with their geographic coverage and the size of their payroll.

Our idea is that this capacity could be bought in. The integrator would buy a support service with an agreed service level from Level AV, and offer it to its end client as part of its own proposal, with its name and its commercial relationship intact. Behind the scenes, the platform's technician network would be the one delivering it. The integrator stays the face and the owner of the account; what it buys is the ability to be in many places without having anyone in many places.

It fits with other ideas we are already exploring here, and that is why it feels coherent to us rather than a loose invention. Reports would come in with the installation context already attached, which is the post installation support idea. They would be resolved by making use of whoever is already nearby, which is the same day incidents idea. And if the client opens sites abroad, the same standard of verified technicians should travel with them, which is the Level AV without borders idea. Seen together, they draw the same thing from different angles: letting a small company deliver a large company's service.

What each side gains. The integrator could compete for contracts it does not even look at today and add recurring revenue on top of the installation project, which is what makes a year stable. The technician would gain predictable, repeat work in their own area, not just rollout peaks: maintenance is the boring, steady part that makes it possible to plan a month. The end client would gain the only thing that really matters to them when something breaks, which is knowing that somebody is obliged to turn up.

And now the uncomfortable part, because a service level is not marketing: it is a promise with consequences. We are not going to put a number in a contract before we can back it up. What can be committed to will depend on how much network there is in each area, and that is not solved with a nice screen. If we build this, it would go area by area and level by level, starting where the network runs deep enough to actually deliver, and preferring to say “not here yet” over signing something that gets broken on the second call. It is a direction we believe in, not a contract we are offering today.

If you sell maintenance, or you would like to be able to sell it, this is the poll where your vote interests us most.