01. Copperberg Podcast
The Next Service Equation: Talent, Technology, and Value with Aly Pinder Jr.
This episode of Copperberg Conversations on Manufacturing Matters explores how aftermarket and field service are evolving as manufacturers move from reactive service models toward more predictive, connected, and value-focused strategies.
02. CONTENT
As aftermarket and field service become more connected, intelligent, and commercially visible, the challenge is no longer simply adopting new technologies.
Our guest, Aly Pinder Jr., Research Vice President, Aftermarket and Service Strategies at IDC, joins Lisa Hellqvist to reflect on the key conversations coming out of Copperberg’s Birmingham events and what they reveal about the future of service. Drawing on his research and work with manufacturers, service organizations, and technology providers, Aly shares his perspective on the shifts reshaping service today; from connected assets and AI to workforce development, service monetization, and the changing relationship between manufacturers and solution partners.
Key Topics Covered in This Episode:
- From Reactive to Predictive Service: Why service organizations are moving beyond break-fix models and using connected assets, data, and intelligence to better plan capacity, reduce downtime, and trigger service more proactively.
- The Workforce as the North Star: Why attracting, retaining, upskilling, and valuing service talent remains one of the most critical challenges for the industry.
- Making Service Value Commercially Visible: How manufacturers can move beyond parts, labor, and consumables by selling tangible service knowledge, training, remote monitoring, and customer care.
- AI Beyond the Hype: Where AI can create practical value today by giving technicians contextual knowledge at the point of need, and how agentic AI could eventually orchestrate workflows across the enterprise.
- Bridging the Gap Between Manufacturers and Solution Providers: Why successful technology deployment depends on practical tools, fast adoption, vendor accountability, and a deeper understanding of real service environments.
As aftermarket and field service become more connected, intelligent, and commercially visible, the challenge is no longer simply adopting new technologies. It is aligning people, data, processes, and partnerships around the value that service can create for customers, technicians, and the business.
03. Speakers
Copperberg Conversations on Manufacturing Matters is your go-to podcast for candid discussions with the industry’s top thinkers and innovators.
04. Listen now
The Next Service Equation: Talent, Technology, and Value with Aly Pinder Jr.
05. Transcript
Nina Roper Yearwood:
Hello and welcome to a new episode of Copperberg Conversations on Manufacturing Matters. In this episode, Copperberg’s managing director, Lisa Hellqvist sits down with Aly Pinder Jr., Research Vice President Aftermarket Services Strategies at IDC, the International Data Corporation, premier global market intelligence data and events provider for the information technology, telecommunications, and consumer technology markets.
This comes out after the conversations that they’ve had in the UK during our back to back events for the field service and aftermarket leaders. Aly and Lisa will look at the shift from reactive service to more predictive data driven models, but also the parts of the transformation that still need more work. From connected assets and AI to service monetization, workforce development, and the relationship between manufacturers and solution providers. This is a sharp look at where the industry is gaining momentum and where the real value still needs to be unlocked. Let’s take a listen.
Lisa Hellqvist:
Well, hi everyone and welcome! And today I’m sitting down with Aly Pinder Jr., who’s Research Vice President Aftermarket and Service Strategies at IDC. Hi, Aly, and good morning! Welcome to our little chat, as I’ve chosen to call it.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Hello, hi Lisa! Good morning!
Lisa Hellqvist:
We’ve known each other for many years actually, and we’ve been in the same orbit for over a decade, I would say. I can’t even remember. Let’s not dive into that, I always say, because then I have to reveal how old I am, which is a horrible, horrible thing to do.
But you are actually spending most of your time working with manufacturers and service organizations around the world, and you’re really looking at how service and aftermarket are evolving from reactive models, I would dare to say, to something much more data driven, predictive, and ultimately, I guess, value focused is a lot where you spend your time in your research. But for the ones who potentially have missed your name in the context of service, what do you do? What does IDC do?
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Great! Yeah, we do a lot. And to that point, I have a long-standing history in this aspect of conversations, I like to say. So I lead IDC’s research with regard to aftermarket service strategies, long title to encompass things like field service aspects like service parts planning and management, the warranties entitlements that are associated with how a manufacturer engages with their customers.
I’ve been covering this market for going on… Yeah, we’re not supposed to talk about age. But for about 18 years now. And I know I look young, but I’m graying and balding. So I look at how manufacturers, OEMs, service businesses think about how they can shift their organizations and operations to really deliver a new set of outcomes to customers. So when I think about the research that I do, I want to enable both buyers of technology, companies that look at investing in tools to improve their businesses. And I like to support them on what best practices and trends I see.
I also, and IDC also works with technology vendors to help them as they think about their go-to-market strategy. So a lot of what I am passionate about is that interplay between service leaders, people that are looking at improving their business, and the technology providers that can support them through automation, you know, new sets of tools to help make that next transformation. IDC as a market research firm is known for digital transformation. We talk really at a high level when we think about how we can help companies on either end of that buying journey make the right decisions to truly transform a business, not make incremental changes, but really think about how they can shift the way in which they deliver a new set of outcomes to customers.
We also at IDC do what’s called a competitive assessment. So there are a number of those out there, but we do help executives like many of your audience make the right decisions based off of what tools are out there. So we identify, you know, what are the capabilities that are forward looking that can help companies future proof their businesses as they move forward.
Lisa Hellqvist:
Yeah, and I must say it’s, you know, probably in this area or domain is one of the, if not the leading sort of analyst results we get out of you. I read the reports thoroughly when they come out, and I know a lot of people in the service industry do as well. And I think it’s this great balance and the intersection between the actual manufacturers and the users and service organizations and the technology vendors and landscape, which is often something we always try to bridge, you know, trying to make the ecosystem come together. So it’s really nice having you here with me.
And I started off saying we’ve known each other for quite some time. But I had the honor of welcoming you in person to our Birmingham events earlier this year. And it’s been a while since you were there, or not that long actually, but a few weeks, if not a month or so. It feels like a very long time ago.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
A lot’s happened.
Lisa Hellqvist:
A lot of a lot of things are happening in the meantime, you know, life goes on.
But I actually find it quite interesting to reflect when quite some time has passed, you know, to what actually stayed with you afterwards. Because when you strayed out of the event, you have so many, you know, kind of one-liners and buzzwords that stick with you. But then as time goes by, it tends to be a few ideas that are sort of captured in your head more than others. So what are the things you’re actually taking away from those days? Because you joined the, let’s clarify that, you joined the parts and after sales event and the field service forum event in Birmingham.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Yes, I had the opportunity to join both, and thank you again for the invitation to be in the room and help, you know, talk through a lot of the trends.
And as I reflect back on a few weeks back, the biggest things that still stand out to me would probably be threefold. One, the passion in the room. Like everyone was so excited to be a part of this conversation. I mean, you know, it’s a room of the right leaders who in their own businesses and their four walls and what they do. They know what they do matter and they are passionate about it. But when you get everyone together, we’re all really trying to move service, field service, or parts forward as a differentiating opportunity within our businesses.
And you can get in the weeds when I write reports for a living, I look at data, which you know, Excel spreadsheets still. And often I forget that these are people that are doing really, really interesting things in mission critical environments. And the passion they have for delivering value to their customers, value to their users, value to their teams was really impactful. And I think that was the overarching thing. The passion in the room was really exciting.
Two other things that were interesting were technology was more than a buzzword or part of a hype cycle in the room. I do think executives that are looking at both field service and aftersales and and parts management are understanding that there’s an opportunity to leverage technology tools to automate route processes that can help us focus on the things that are valuable, right? You know, a lot of the challenge or friction is do we have the right tools to make sure we can make the right decisions at the point of service? And that was something that continued to come up in conversations where, you know, there was an expectation that we should have the right tools that are service-specific to help solve a problem.
And then the third thing that popped out and I still reflect on is how much on both ends, I know we’ve been talking about being in the space for a long period of time. So much was talked about the workforce and what are we going to do as the next wave of workers come into the business? How do we attract retain, incentivize, and value the next set of workers so they can hit the ground running and ensure that there’s no drop-off in knowledge, there’s no drop-off in experiences being delivered. And I really think the workforce aspect of most of the organizations that were on site talking about what they were dealing with from challenges and best practices was also something that resonated well.
Lisa Hellqvist:
I couldn’t agree more. And especially the workforce thing. I mean it’s almost like the holy grail. It’s whoever cracks the code on this one. I hope they monetize it because it’s going to be revolutionary, right?
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Talent is important. I mean, talent is how we, you know, how we all engage. I think too much of the conversation is removing the human from aspects of the day-to-day work. But within field service, within parts, like the human interaction between an organization and a customer is really still important and impactful.
Lisa Hellqvist:
Yeah. And I mean, I think what occurred to me in the discussions was that what has happened though is that it seems to have been a slight transition on the pragmatic approach. Because back in the days it was more of this overarching system failure, almost like, you know, it’s like we don’t know what to do. And, you know, it was almost like a blank sheet, and we started crafting ideas and trying to figure out what to do.
But within the room, as you said, the fantastic part of having, you know, so many voices sharing expertise in one room is that you got like golden nuggets and like bits and pieces that actually together probably form a pretty solid strategy. No one has it all, but you know, I noticed a few things that I haven’t heard before, everything from like mentorship programs to sort of different kinds of certifications that could be carried over to other career paths. Changing the role of the engineer to different aspects depending on what attracts different generations and et cetera. It’s like there’s some really nice ideas coming out of these forum but as again as you’re saying no one seemed to really have a clear strategy and idea on how to solve it.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Because things are changing so quickly, and I do think the landscape is evolving, and one of the nuggets that I really like — all three of those nuggets that you laid out — but yeah, one thing that I pushed or tried to advocate for was assessing your talent and understanding what is the risk of them leaving. And I don’t think a number of organizations really had a tenor around are we just assuming that we have an aging workforce that’s going to retire, or do we know that for a fact? Like, how are we managing this risk level? Like, some employees may want to work until the very, you know, until the last day of their whether government mandated retirement is or not. And some want to retire at 50 and, you know, live on a beach and have a margarita, right?
And so I do think having an understanding of your risk assessment around your talent mix, I think is something that I advocate for because you don’t really know unless you ask the team and you log that information, you figure out what their motivation is. And maybe you can extend someone with your organization if you tap into the fact that they’re frustrated or they want to shift roles to your point around career development and upskilling. Like maybe a technician will work another 10 years with your company if you ask them a question, you find out their challenges and you infuse the right next steps for them to extend their life with you.
So I do think that understanding of maybe linking HR, building a profile of your team, and really identifying what is the actual risk of attrition, if you know if people are really leaving or graying out and having that, you know, silver tsunami that we hear about from a marketing term perspective.
Lisa Hellqvist:
A hundred percent! And I mean, you’re touching so many points there, and also the conversation around okay, but can we make, now we have this assumption that if we take on new talent, they will leave after two years and you know, jump ship to something else. And I think someone in the audience brought up, but what if we just embrace that fact then? Because every other industry is, you know. So maybe that’s also a way forward of actually attracting younger talent is that, you know, whatever you know capabilities and competence you actually get within these corporate walls and in this job you can actually bring with you to another job and it will be to your to your benefit then you might have a larger pool of applicants because that’s one of the shortcomings as well is that we don’t even have enough people applying.
So there’s really many areas, first of all the aging and then the fact that we don’t have enough applicants wanting to work for the organizations that we met on site, for example.
Lisa Hellqvist:
But if we zoom out even further then, what do you recognize, sitting in these conversations with the manufacturers and the sort of the technology providers on site? What are the biggest shifts that you pick up on that you think are really changing the narrative right now that you haven’t seen before? Or maybe that is just sort of underlining the shifts you’ve already been sort of pinpointing?
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Yeah, I think there’s two big shifts that I come back to after, you know, as I look at the broad set of voices that were being discussed in industries that were covered and maturity levels, because not everyone’s at the same place within their journey, either in field or in parts.
There’s a real understanding that we can no longer be reactive and break fix in the majority of our operations. And, there’s been plenty of models created by plenty of smart people around, you know, moving from reactive, proactive, predictive, and prescriptive level of service models where, you know, you’re not just showing up because someone called you and told you that there’s a failure of an asset or a piece of equipment. You’re actually able to leverage a level of connectivity to predict and then ensure you can, you know, plan capacity appropriately.
And I do think because we most of the companies that I talk to have started their technology journey around some level of connectivity. And there is a recognition that service does matter in mission critical environments. That you had a number of end users on site who are in some very mission critical you know, service models where failure isn’t measured in kind of dollars and cents or euros or pounds. It’s measured in the millions. And you know, you can’t afford to not have properly planned for a future set of downtime and have assets, resources, skills, and people positioned appropriately to ensure that downtime is minimized.
And so I think there’s always been a conversation we can’t be reactive, we can’t be breakfix but there was never the tools and intelligence and insights that enabled enough companies to be able to make that shift away from reacting to things to being more prescriptive in the way in which it triggers service events.
So that would be, you know, if I think back to my data or data that I work on within our IDC primary research, we are starting to document an improvement or an increase in connectivity of assets. So five years ago it was like a third of equipment was connected. Right now, when I asked that same group of organizations that are about 50% of their assets are connected around, you know, having smart connectivity from IoT enabled assets to capture data in real time and support a service event. So that shift is allowing for that, you know, next level of support that can be less reactive because we know what’s happening on the ground now. We can position assets and capacity appropriately. So that’d be one thing that I thought was interesting.
The second point, which is somewhat related, and I’m trying to keep all these thoughts together. We have so much that we talked about over those two days, but revenue creation. So I do think a number of organizations are recognizing the revenue opportunity within service beyond consumables and parts and labor. Like those things matter and that drives a lot of revenue. You make money every time you send a truck out, send a technician out, and selling them consumables is profitable. But there’s a whole new set of offerings that I am beginning to track around remote monitoring capabilities, around, you know, can we offer up dashboards to our customers so we can help align their goals around operational efficiency and what we can do? Can we sell training services to our customers so they don’t always have to wait for that, expert level technician to show up when they have someone on site, a facilities manager or someone who can do enough of the work. Maybe they’re installing a replacement part. So that was another aspect as I pull myself back from, the weeds of what we’re talking about to say, you know, what are companies really thinking about when they’re looking at a shift in their businesses? And it’s all about moving from reactive to something else. Down the road, probably prescriptive. So autonomous triggering of service work that happens without a human. but there’s a lot in between. And then that service revenue piece of, how can we take the technology and insights we have to deliver a new set of value outcomes to customers and align with their needs. So we’re all supporting the same, the same path forward from a KPI improvement.
Lisa Hellqvist:
And I think what you’re saying is really interesting. I saw this brilliant comment from one of the attendees, and I’m afraid I can’t remember his name, so that that’s a shame. I can’t attribute the quote to him, but I will dig it out somehow. And I’m paraphrasing as well. But he made a comment on one of our LinkedIn posts from the event and said, you know, we have the technology to be predictive, conversation is ongoing, right? That’s almost like it’s a universal truth that is the sort of northern star we try to navigate towards, right? But he said what is scary is that the commercial models are still break-fix. So it kind of brings me to the question around, you know, value and monetization because I also hear exactly what you’re saying quite a lot. And I always try to challenge that also with, but do you have a value based selling approach? Do you know how to promote that value to get customers to pay for it? And it’s often one of the testimonials we’re getting from the audience is that we aren’t we can’t onboard the customers on this, or it depends on the customer, or you know, so it seems to be a little bit weak in the actual way it’s delivered in terms of the commercial model around it.
So, what are your takes on this? Because I mean, obviously, as you say, if we’ve increased the connected installed base from like 33% to 50% that’s a real increase, but the ability to monetize it — it’s not just about changing business models, actually, just providing the customer with the potential value. But what do you see here? Do they get paid by the manufacturers?
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Yeah, yeah. So and I’m probably part of the problem on this one. so servitization is a concept that’s been around for a little while now. And I do think there’s, you know, UK-based engine manufacturers that have been doing this for some time, and they sell power by the hour.
And so you’ve had this concept around, let’s not sell a machine, a product, let’s sell the outcome that’s being delivered by that product. The challenge that I find in the market, and again, the reason why executives still struggle with, you know, selling kind of outcome based contracts, is the fact that good is going to evolve over time. The output that is expected today based off of our current parameters is what I’ll pay for. But in six months, I expect you’re gonna get better and I expect you’re gonna help me get better. And so what is that contract now gonna be? Like, do we rip up that contract every quarter? Because now I now I want you to get me 99% availability and uptime. When I signed the contract a year ago, 95% was good enough, right? And so I think a lot of the challenge around monetizing these experiences is the fact that we expect our expectations are going to be that there’s going to be improvement of the outcomes I’m able to achieve based off of working with very smart people.
And so where I try to advise at least the aftermarket and service leaders, is you need to partner with your sales and marketing team. You need to educate your sales and marketing team about the value of service and the value of service evolves over time. You need to work with partners to understand can we contractually make these promises, right? Like you know, what should we be selling? In that scenario, what we do track is less of the outcome-based models, which I do track, but I also track other service offerings that I do think are advancements in the market, which is selling training services. That’s something I can track. I can track how many hours I train your business. I can track how the training of your team improves your performance and improves our efficiency. So that’s one area where, you know, that’s something that’s not a consumable or a standard service contract, but I’m selling you new value.
So my recommendation to teams is let’s take the data we have so we have more intelligence on how you’re using things, how it’s performing, how often it’s failing, and sell back knowledge to the customer, service knowledge which helps improve their business. So aligning all your goals to sell back something that is tangible because selling the intangible is very difficult to do. And I do think there are models and CPQ companies out there that are beginning to establish, you know, ongoing metric evaluations that can help support that. But based off of what I see in the market, we’re still early days on being able to connect all that that dynamically. And the end customer needs to also know what they’re paying for. And so if you can’t provide them with a tangible metric or a tangible set of products you’re delivering, there’s always going to be we know from a negotiation perspective, there’s always going to be that the give and take, right? It’s not I want more for less. And so having to get in that conversation is difficult. And as a service leader, as service companies, we value quality, we value quality delivery. And so having that negotiation on those things, those intangible aspects of service really puts a bad taste in all of our mouth. Like we we really want to do right by our customers. We value our customers. And so I would argue from a service monetization perspective, having things that are tangible that you can measure and align with your customers to say, this is what we promised, this is what we delivered, this is what you’re paying us money.
Lisa Hellqvist:
And I hear more and more, and I would like to know if you agree, but it’s also like so it’s interesting on the technology side of things, we’re quite advanced. We speak about master data management, we speak about uptime, we speak about connectivity, IoT, and it’s all quite, you know, everyone understands what it unlocks in terms of capabilities and possibilities and etc.
But then when we look at the commercial model, and I’m not just saying the monetization, the servitization or as a service, I’m also thinking like, okay, so then we have maybe a service sales team or something that just, waits by the phone for someone to call them and say something broke. I’m obviously, you know, painting a very broad brush here. But I hear more and more that these service organizations are also taking this into more of a proactive sales approach, where they actually have an outbound sort of strategy to have these sort of intermittent meetings with the customers having these checkpoints, can we upsell, cross-sell, add services, change type of premium levels or et cetera. Do you see this as like an advancement in terms of, because it’s always harder to negotiate at the contractual level, right? But sometimes in these aspects, just having someone calling the customer say, okay, we’re doing this service job in three weeks from now, do you also want us to check XYZ whilst we’re there? You know, it’s a subtle upsell, but it also positions you in a way that, hey, we know about your equipment and we know about you, and we actually we’re trying to take care of you now by being a little bit ahead of the curve.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Yeah, it might be semantic or like language, but being that advisor is much easier than being a salesperson. And I do think that organizations I talk to recognize a need to connect different data sets within their technology infrastructure to support that conversation. Because that’s not something that can be done at scale. A salesperson who knows three weeks in advance the fact that I’m scheduling a technician for a PM visit and that customer has these sorts of assets on site that are coming out of warranty or coming out of a service contract. And I want to make sure that my technician’s not having that conversation of I can’t do service on this because it’s out of warranty because the technician’s just going to do the service, right? The technician is on site and wants to, be, you know, that engagement layer. And so they’re just going to do the work. And you, as the manufacturer or service provider, won’t get paid for it because you didn’t have the integrated data tools to know we have a human person on site. Let’s make sure that all of the offerings are up to date.
And so I do see companies look at integrating their CRM tools to ensure they have proper customer profiles, to ensure they can link with sales and marketing teams, to proactively engage customers in advance of having that physical person on site that just wants to do a good job on the work order while still having good conversation with the customer, but their focus is on that aspect of the business. One other note, I do think that companies are realizing that data should flow across a business to inform decisions autonomously. So going back to reactive, proactive and predictive, which in field service it makes sense, but I shouldn’t have to have a technician tell a salesperson, I’m going on site. There’s just be an automated workflow that says we know once we schedule that technician, what are all the other workflows across the enterprise that are gonna be impacted by this? Can we set up a promotion that says, technician’s showing up in two weeks? Here’s a discount on these components, these parts, because your system’s coming end of life and like links back between parts management and field service. I think there’s an opportunity to say we know what we know the defect rates on these assets. We know when there’s an an upgrade to a part or component. Let’s get these parts out of our van stock and sell those to customers based off of having information.
So I think that integrated technology data flow is where I see that the opportunity to drive at a new set of value outcomes. And it’s an enterprise approach to service. Like the whole culture of the business is aligned with delivering outcomes to customers. And everyone on the team needs to be invested in that delivery. But they just don’t need to have to have physical conversations. The technology should support those decisions being made at scale so that we’re not manually having to say, I remember that something, it’s no. I’m autonomously triggered to do a certain action based off of data that’s coming back into the business.
Lisa Hellqvist:
Yeah, and I like what you’re saying there, that it should be a flow. And I think it’s a mindset thing as well, right? where we have to actually maybe look at service as less reactive and aftermarket is not an after thought anymore, right? It’s actually a revenue and profit generator.
But in the end of the day, it’s also like, yeah, but what happens if we can interlink this instead of looking maybe like, okay, we have to send this technician as like a cost and a part of a service contract. So right now, you know, and a few hours spent, we could also look at it as, as you say, an opportunity because it’s a customer interaction. What else can we do, since we’re already spending that money on that technician going to that side? What else can we optimize that visit with? Is that another set of offerings? Is that another sort of, and I also think it goes into the customers, let’s say, how they actually relate to your brand? Because also, if someone is calling me, say, hey, we know that John is coming in two weeks. We also know this, this, and this, it actually is a customer care level. Even if it’s an upsell, it should be subtle, of course, but it at least gives me we know about you, we know what your, you know, the disconnect sometimes between the predictive aspects where customers are paying maybe for predictive data and predictive maintenance. They also expect you to know a little bit more about them because you have all this knowledge about their equipment. And because that comes from our consumer brains, right? That we think that it’s almost like if you drive a car and they know everything about your car. You want them to know, when you serviced it and where and how, that is in the data. So it shouldn’t be that hard for the workshop to pull up.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
And it goes back to the increase in connectivity and our expectation as users, if we’re providing this data back to the manufacturer or you know, to the service provider, they should be doing something with that data.
Like it goes back to the one eight hundred phone customer service line. Like if I call in, you know with your caller ID who I am and you have all this information, just verify that I’m the right person. But after that, I shouldn’t have to give you more information. You have all this data. And I do think in field service there’s an opportunity to to ensure that when you’re having valuable moments, which is a technician gets on site, that’s a valuable moment. All the other stuff should just work. So that they the technician can focus on delivering a differentiable set of engagements with the customer.
And on site, a number of your and I’m not going to quote anyone because again, all the conversations are kind of flowing together, but a number of executives at the field service event specifically said our technicians are beloved by our customers. We need to use that appropriately. Like that, that’s such a differentiating opportunity. Like, yes, we make the best equipment. You know, we’re innovating from an engineering design and quality side on having equipment that doesn’t fail or that it performs optimally. But our technicians are really, really what drives our customer relationship. And let’s make sure that we’re equipping our technicians with the right tools to efficiently do the job. Cause that is number one, like we need to fix the thing when we get on site. But let’s also give them the tools to have the right conversations while they’re on site with customers because that is also what our customers value. They value that interaction and engagement. And let’s ensure that we’re not rushing our technicians off site to hit a productivity number that has value like turning four wrenches in a day as opposed to three or spanners if you’re in the UK is important. But also that 30 minutes on site is really valuable because our salesperson is going to get they’re that customer may not pick up the phone for the salesperson or open in that marketing campaign, but they’ll spend that 30 minutes with the technician. So let’s ensure we’re maximizing the value of that engagement interaction.
Lisa Hellqvist:
And I think it becomes more and more clear as we speak about brand experience in the consumer world, for example, right? But I mean, a lot of the manufacturers in our rooms, they’re like, yeah, we are three hundred years old, and we do the most complicated things, and we have invented this, and that’s all great. And I’m not taking anything away from them. They’re great, leaders and spearheading, development in all ways, shapes and forms. Great. Kudos to them. But in the end of the day, for the customer, it doesn’t really matter.
Because then the one who’s going to operate the equipment is like, okay, now it’s plugged in, it should work. And the higher expectations on the brand, the more you expect of the machine once it’s plugged in, and the more you probably expect from the experience itself. Technicians here really become a prolongation of that experience. So it is sometimes very easy to fall back on the sort of product capabilities of a brand and a manufacturer, but in the end of the day, it’s the way they present that equipment to the customer that’s going to sort of make or break the ongoing relationship. And as we always say, that product sales might sell the first machine, service will sell the the next five.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
And the as equipment becomes both smarter and better, it’s lasting longer. And we, one of the things that I also track at IDC is resiliency of businesses and economic headwinds that globally organizations go through.
And one thing that happens as we look at COVID five years ago downturn economies where we happen to be. Is service becomes more important because the end customer, even in a business-to-business environment, may push off buying that new million dollar piece of equipment because they’re worried about, what is their, economic impact of a variety of things.
So we’re gonna push our things that we have harder for longer, which means service is more important. And I do think companies that I advise and then I look to are recognizing the need to let’s not look at this as an afterthought. This is the thought, right? Service is the thing that is gonna keep us in business. It’s gonna be the thing that keeps us engaging with customers for longer.
And it’s actually something that provides a competitive advantage. I do think, especially in industries that I cover, some of the executives that were on site at your great event were in unique positions where no one could do what they do. Like no one can sell the products they have. They have a monopoly, if you will, in a given market. But most of the companies I talk to, mining equipment, farm ag equipment, med devices for to a certain degree, there are HVAC. You can buy a different cooling unit from a different manufacturer, but the service engagement opportunity, the service quality that I deliver is something that is not a commodity. And I do think companies are starting to realize the fact that let’s look at how we avoid becoming a commodity in industries where historically we didn’t have to feel that pain. Service is the opportunity to get outside of that.
Lisa Hellqvist:
I agree. I need to, of course, pick your brain on the great topic of AI. Because I mean, I guess it comes up in every conversation you have as well. But it was really a part of the discussions in the room. But I think someone actually summarized today and said that the conversation have moved from like almost trying to digest what it is and what it can do to actually being more pragmatic and we speak more about the processes and then AI becomes a part of the solution.
So that has happened already, but from your perspective, speaking about AI, what would you say feels real right now? And where do you think it’s still highly overestimated or overrated? Because I think ambition versus execution here, right?
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Yeah, and I have to talk about it all the time. I do think it’s a transformative technology capability. And by it I mean artificial intelligence, the autonomy that is provided from data flows being captured to data actions being delivered is where I see the opportunity. And that’s how I get past a hype cycle that is if every company’s an AI company, then no one’s an AI company. So let’s think through like what do we actually mean by the terms we’re using.
So I would say near term. And my answers are all long windedly so I need to cut them down. It’s a hot takes of thirty seconds sound bites, but I do see what else. So I think in field service and in aftermarket service, there’s a real opportunity to embed technology to support a level of intelligence that we can have on-demand knowledge at the point of need. And for me, that is what artificial intelligence will be for service. And that can happen today. So that’s taking the wealth of data we have and not only augment data feeds for technicians or service workers, but provide a level of data augmentation that ensures that we have the right answer when we need it. I don’t need to know everything. I don’t need to know an entire PDF manual of you know 400 plus pages of schematics and workflows. AI can support me because it knows what job I’m going to do. It knows what skills I have, it knows how often I did that job before, and it will feed me the insights to solve the problem that I need at that moment in time.
What I think is interesting and more less impactful today, but will be more impactful in a few years from now. I don’t know when. I try not to forecast because you can replay this and tell me in five years that I was wrong. So I try not to say exact dates on stuff. But I do think agentic AI is the next level transformation that I’m excited about for field service. For the reason that our definition at IDC around agentic AI is the orchestration layer of processes that happen based off of a level of autonomous data. So you know without human intervention.
So in my mind, the biggest challenge we’ve always had and why aftermarket has been an afterthought has been that there’s a handoff that needs to occur for something to happen. Agentic AI in my mind, so AI agents going behind the scenes to orchestrate process is where I see a lot of opportunity. And in the room when I’m engaging with executives, I think the first stage is AI. Let’s focus on having data support decisions at a speed that is very contextualized for the job I need done. So that’s a very siloed kind of function thing. The technician needs AI tools to support knowledge.
Next level is agentic AI in my mind, which is orchestrating processes behind the scenes. So I’m not having to call my sales team to tell them I saw these leads, I saw these fire security units that are not to code or out of date. And you now go do something. AI agents should be able to take my work order. Orchestrate that other workflow across the of those other silos that I don’t talk to and trigger a new set of outcomes being delivered. And so that’s where I see kind of AI, maybe not hype.
So I do think there are foundational layer things that need to happen today to ensure you can then make those next leaps into those next levels of where the market is going. From a technology adoption perspective. So it’s less hype and more preparation. Let’s prepare for these next level of innovations that are right around the corner, if I can’t tell you the exact date.
Lisa Hellqvist:
No, because I might hold that against you five years from now, right? And I always say if I get a penny every time I hear the word AI, I can retire early.
Lisa Hellqvist:
Actually, in this context it is quite interesting because I would like to ask you about this as well. Because I mean, obviously you work as I started off saying in the intersection between sort of the technology providers and the manufacturers, you do the analysis, you do the research, you come out with these, reports on sort of maturity and assessment and all of this. So you really have this kind of industry sort of helicopter view on this.
One of the things I see then working more, in the event section segment or for our sort of online content or whatever it might be is that every solution provider, technology provider, consultancy or whatever I work with always want to start the conversation with AI. And I always try to ask them to start with something else, where does AI come into place in this context? But it brings me to the disconnect sometime between the manufacturers and service leaders out there, and the technology providers. And if I may, this is a tough question, but I mean you’re obviously you’re like Switzerland in this, right? So you’re the neutral party.
But what are you what is your take on this? Because I think the technology is so advanced that I actually also believe that the technology provider with all rights should be very excited about the potential they see in their solutions because it has been really transformative. And the disconnect I see is that the reality and the headaches of the service leaders aren’t necessarily all around technology. There’s so many other aspects. So what would you like to say on this?
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Yeah, again, very difficult question there, Lisa. So, I like to think of myself as very optimistic and bullish when it comes to technology, but very cynical in the sense that I do think there is a disconnect between the innovative capabilities that are available and the need on the ground today. And I do think there is a gap between those two pieces.
When I advise technology vendors about messaging and about what they should think about around product roadmaps, I think they need to be able to do two things at the same time. They need to be able to highlight how the innovations that are coming, that disruptive innovations that are needed, while also saying these are the foundational things I know you need to do. I go back to as I’m talking to service leaders. Oftentimes they tell me they are still using spreadsheets to schedule technicians, or they are using whiteboards to figure out which technician needs to go where, and their schedules are great, they are experts. But it is not automated. Like, thare are just kind of working from the seat of their pants.
I had the opportunity in my younger years to work in a warehouse, and it was inventory optimization in my head, right? I didn’t know how many truckloads I was gonna get that day, I knew I need to store whatever I was gonna get. It could be six truckloads or eight truckloads. I didn’t know what, but I needed to know when they showed up on the dock what I was gonna do with it. That’s clearly a role that technology should be able to play. But on the ground, it’s me that’s gonna get in trouble if we have excess inventory or we don’t have enough inventory. So I do think that technology vendors need to understand the maturity of their users and be able to show them the steps to get to that innovation that is down the road. Because in a lot of the industries we cover, there is risk aversion to change, right? And we’ve been giving these service companies lots of technology, then telling them to give that to their technicians, and there is this challenge. Like if it doesn’t work the first time as a technician and I’m the one in front of a customer, in a mission-critical environment, I’m going to work around that application. And then I’ve just wasted all the value of that investment around technology. And so the technology provider could have the best technology, but if it is not used appropriately on the ground in the field, there is not going to be the level of uptick that is required. And so I think the gap between practical usage and innovation is where there’s an educational level. This is a step process. This is a journey. This is not an endpoint. You are not going to be done with your digital journey at any time. You are not just buying something, and you are not going to have to look at it again for five years. You need to continuously think about how we are going to continue to use this for the changing nature of our businesses. And we need technology partners, not solution providers, that can help us around that relationship. And I think that’s what I try to advise, both the users and the technology vendor, because to your point, there is a disconnect between how awesome AI is the dollar, and you know, what we can actually do today and what do we need today? What do we need on the ground? We don’t need what we are seeing where you have humanoids doing awesome stuff, dancing, I guess. I think you need insights at the point of service that contextualized and on demand for the user. If I’m a person in my home life, I don’t want to have to watch twenty YouTube videos to learn how to fix the washer on my faucet. I want I type in my faucet’s leaking. I want the one video that is quality video, short to the point, and can help someone who is not a plumber. And so I think that;s the role that technology should play. It should make sure that the users have the right information for what their needs are today. And that evolves over time.
Lisa Hellqvist:
I think it’s exactly that. And I sometimes say the same advice we give to service leaders, right? That the service is actually in center. If you look at it, technology providers, they are providing a service to the service leaders, right? So they also have to understand what actually ticks the boxes of the service leaders, what makes their life easier, what brings them peace of mind. Because in reality it’s probably twenty percent technology and eighty percent human adoption, right? Otherwise it will fail and the investment as you were alluding to is not going to be worthwhile. So you won’t have that adoption and therefore you will flunk basically. So it’s quite interesting to see that we have to also help technology providers understand the real sort of struggles and pain points of the manufacturers out there. Which I think many do to be honest. But maybe, less focus on the capabilities of the systems and more focus on the potential capabilities and outcomes of the customer / manufacturer in this instance that they can actually achieve, which I think is it’s a part of the narrative nowadays.
But one of the things I can also flip it and say I see a lot of manufacturers that think if I just get a system in place, everything will be fine. Okay, two questions. What should a manufacturer be asking their provider and what are the expectations that you would say are straight off unrealistic that you’ve bumped into?
Aly Pinder Jr.:
I think manufacturers should ask for tools that can be that will be evolving. I’m gonna throw some more technology terms out. So on-premises or, you know, cloud, right? So there’s been a shift over the last, decade or so to move away from highly custom solutions to things that can be configurable. So again, my techie analyst brain here. So as a manufacturer, as you think about working with technology providers, you want to work with technology providers that can bring their wealth of knowledge around working with companies that look like you and give you an out-of-the-box offering that is most of the way there to solve your problem. It might need to be tweaked on the edges for your given industry or subvertical, but for the most point, your expectation should be that there are offerings out there that are service specific that can manage most of the work you do within your industry and be deployed quickly. I think fast deployment is probably one of those bigger things that goes underreported. If you can’t get the technology in the hands of the users quickly and it works for them and they don’t feel like they’re jumping around, then they’re not gonna use it. And not using the technology is a waste of millions of dollars. And many a CIO and CFO have gotten moved on from their business because of a failed technology deployment, right? And so I think the expectation on the manufacturer should be that they work with technology partners that know their business generally, know their industry broadly, and can deploy an offering quickly that your end customer, the technicians or planners, will just it’s intuitive to them. Like it’s just part of their workflow. So that’s one thing.
On the other end of that, what I do think manufacturers should hold technology vendors to a higher standard than they have historically. It’s in our personal lives, we expect technology sometimes to work and sometimes not to work, and it’s not critical to our lives. Like I have a couple of Echo devices, if it gives me a wrong answer, no big deal. Like it said it’s gonna be 65 degrees Fahrenheit, it was only 55, right? It’s wrong. But in mission critical environments, in the businesses that we talk to that are doing really, really critical things, the technology has to work. And I want to make sure that manufacturers on this call and service companies hold your technology vendors to account for the fact that it has to work every time because if it doesn’t, we have lives on the line. We have assets that are multi-million dollars in operations. We have people that are depending on us. One thing that I didn’t mention early on was safety came up a lot and it goes back to the workforce. So the technology tools need to augment those aspects of culture, those aspects of our business that value our workforce to ensure that we’re providing safe environments for our teams to work and live and deliver. And I think holding the technology vendors to that higher level of standards that’s this isn’t a finance and accounting system where a decimal place off the auditor’s gonna catch, but it’s not a big deal, right? Like it like that’s one thing. But for what we do or not me personally, but for what you know, our end users do, it’s really, really important that the technology works because there are the negative mission critical aspects that can be impacted by it being wrong.
Lisa Hellqvist:
And I mean for many of them it’s even like the less people in the field, the better it is. It’s that, critical. So it’s like, the best option is no technicians, but how do we get there? You know, because of the health and safety hazards around the job, right? So I think you’re very on point there.
Lisa Hellqvist:
I’m thinking we’re wrapping things up, but I always like to have like a magic wand question about your future sort of outlook. So, we’ve digested quite a few topics here, which I think was very interesting to touch on and hear your views on. But if you’re going to sort of wave your magic wand and say, okay, here are my thoughts and like, if I could speak to all the service leaders I met in the rooms there, what would you ask them to focus on over the sort of short upcoming future that you sort of that you know you would say if that was me, I would probably focus on these things.
Aly Pinder Jr.:
Yeah, I mean the big thing, and again, I mentioned this up front is talent. I do I would highly advocate that organizations recognize that your workforce is what your customers are paying for. whether it’s just the fact that they’re paying for the fact that someone’s gonna show up at the point of service and fix the thing, that’s important. And so I want as a community, us to understand that our workforce is the value of the business. That’s what’s going to drive at the revenue. That’s going to drive at extending the life of our customers with us as a partnership. That’s going to ensure that we can continue to make really interesting things because the workforce should be bringing back into the organization feedback around usage and that sort of thing. So we’ll continuously evolve and innovate if we continue to value and capture the insights from our field teams and our service teams around their experiences and how we can improve their outcomes they’re delivering. If you don’t have an engaged workforce to the point of the two year attrition of a Gen Z, like if you’re engaging them and they’re happy with what they’re doing and you’re investing in their skills and they feel maybe there’s a sliver of Gen Z that will not be that two year cycle that you’re investing in right? And so that’s what I’m saying. I think if we value our workforce and they’re more than just a labor line item for us to manage, then all those other benefits I would argue will be realized because we’re creating a culture of being a service organization that cares about our people and cares through our people, we’re caring about our customers. That would be the one thing. I know there are different sets of tentacles in there, but I think talent and the workforce is what I’d want to leave everyone with. That should be your North Star. That should be what you care most about because that’s going to impact all of the rest of the stuff.
Lisa Hellqvist:
Yeah, and that’s the only thing we haven’t solved yet, right, Aly? So you know, you have to come back and we can solve this issue in the next conversation.
But I would like to thank you so much for helping me, you know, debrief the experience we had on site, but also, bringing your insights to this conversation. And for the viewers audience here, if you do not know what Aly does, please check it out. I recommend it highly. And as I said, we’ve known each other for many years now. You’ve always been a great contributor to the service discussion.
And yeah, thank you, Aly, for joining me today and hope to have you back soon!