If you’re thinking of moving to one of the cloud-based MIS in the market, the concept of TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) will definitely be on your mind. If not, the cloud suppliers will certainly be making a big point about it. But what’s the real effect on TCO when you make the move?

What does TCO mean?

For a start, it’s worth defining exactly what TCO is so we understand what we’re dealing with. The Investopedia’s definition is:

“The total cost of ownership (TCO) is the purchase price of an asset plus the costs of operation. Assessing the total cost of ownership represents taking a bigger picture look at what the product is and what its value is over time.”

This means that, to understand the TCO of your existing non-cloud based MIS you need to add together the annual software costs, the hardware and networks costs and any training, professional services and hardware support costs.  You also need to take into account the actual time it takes your staff to operate it as a client-based solutions (we’re not talking day-to-day users here, we’re talking running updates and that sort of thing).

Now you have a baseline you can start looking at how moving to a cloud-based MIS will look for you.

Maintaining hardware

Let’s look at the physical environment first. Cloud-based MIS means you have zero need for a server. You just need devices that are able to access the internet using whatever browser that MIS requires. All the decent MIS providers support all the main ones so you will likely already have devices in your school.  The human cost of maintaining servers is also reduced so your IT staff will be free to work on other things.

(As an aside, it’s also worth talking about the fact that, if you go completely cloud-based as a school for all systems, there is a huge energy saving to be had. You’re not running servers in special rooms with aircon so there are massive financial and economical advantages! If you want to understand how much you could save drop us a line as we can point you in the direction of a couple of great companies who can help with this).

Buying your MIS

Cloud-based MIS means you’re also moving to a SaaS model of buying your MIS. SaaS means Subscription-as-a-Service; you’re not having to pay out huge amounts at the beginning for licences, you simply sign a contract for the number of months/years you want it for. A bit like Netflix or a gym membership.

But moving to a new MIS always has a cost associated as you’re ultimately asking people to start using a brand new system they’re unfamiliar with.  You’ll need to factor in training time and costs.

The thing is, your staff may not know the new cloud MIS inside out but they do know MIS!  They just need to find out what’s different in the new system and get used to using it. And the big benefit about tech moving on and cloud-based systems is that they are much more intuitive and easier to use than learning legacy systems.

Overall, the TCO of moving to cloud MIS always reduces and there are lots of schools, academies and MATs out there who will testify to the cost saving.

I think what’s really overlooked is how much you gain. The flexibility of being able to access everything everywhere and the IT/admin workload you take away from staff frees them up to be able to do much, much more for you school.

Just think about it, how many systems do you know of that are not in the cloud?

There was a time when LA teams provided pretty much all IT solutions and services to their schools and the schools bought into them without question. They tended to be the only local solution available and, historically, this is what had always been done.

But, as the way authorities and schools were funded was gradually changed (and mostly reduced), the dynamic between schools and support teams changed. Sadly some LAs decided they no longer wanted to fund support teams at all and I know there were cases where teams were disbanded altogether or acquired by a third party. Independent teams started to form out of the old authority-schools-only teams and they were happy to work with schools outside of the traditional LA boundaries.  This was great news for schools for two reasons:

1. For many schools, the relationship they had with individuals at local support teams would have been a key part in their school development plan and dynamic. They wanted to be able to keep working with the same colleagues that they have for 20+ years and this meant they were still able to do so.
2. For other schools, they wanted a support choice and they finally had it! Geographical boundaries stopped being an issue. E.g. if you were a school in the South East who wanted to use a service in the North West as they had a good reputation it was now possible.

By and large, the evolving support team dynamic worked.

What it did do, however, is leave a big question mark over the MIS services they provide and the options open to schools. A big chunk of LA teams were SIMS support teams. This meant that, each year, they committed to Capita to provide SIMS support for all their maintained schools and, in return, their maintained schools were able to access the authority-owned SIMS licence for a certain amount of money (each support team then traded their own SIMS licence and support SLA with their own schools, Capita did not get involved in the support of these maintained schools).

When academisation started to happen it meant schools were no longer maintained, LA-led schools but individual entities in their own right. They could no longer access the LA-owned SIMS licence so had to purchase an MIS themselves. It caught many off-guard to begin with, having done the same thing the same way for so long, but it wasn’t long before MATs and academies started to use the opportunity to look at ALL the MIS available out there and modernise their systems. It’s easy enough to procure a new SaaS MIS, and many saw an opportunity for change to an easy-to-use, cloud-based solution.

And change is exactly what they have done. According to their websites, Bromcom is in over 50 MATs and Arbor work with 73 MATs and groups. On the primary front, Scholarpack have 27 MATs listed on their site and Pupil Asset work with 20% of the largest MATs in England.

So where does this leave the SIMS support teams?  MATs and academies often still want to buy into local support (they still want to work with the colleagues they’ve built such great relationships with) but they want a choice of MIS.

At the end of the day, the progressive support teams understand that it doesn’t really matter which MIS a school or academy uses and they offer multi-MIS support.

As they will tell you, they “support the process not the product!”.  Their priority has always been helping their schools achieve their goals, and it’s something they plan to continue to do in the future – irrespective of the systems they use.

P.S. All the cloud-based MIS suppliers above welcome local teams getting involved with the support for their solutions and have created support partnership programmes. They’re all exhibiting at Bett London in Jan 2020 next month if you’d like to chat with them, or we can put you in touch with them if you’d prefer – just drop us a line.

Sarah & Nick

Last Tuesday I was fortunate enough to be invited to the SNUG MIS day (thank you to John and Dave from OSMIS for inviting me) which gave me the ability to directly compare MIS cloud-based solutions for the UK Edtech market. I have to say a lot of the solutions have moved on and are now direct competitors to SIMS, and it certainly appeared to be the feeling within the room of support team colleagues.  

I have always highlighted to Capita the need to bring out their SIMS8 Primary solution ASAP or the competitor solutions would catch-up and overtake what SIMS is offering schools/MATs (both during my time with SIMS and now as an independent consultant). This has now become a reality!!  

More and more customers are starting to realise this and have either decided to move or are challenging the status quo. You can see with Josh Perry’s analysis that SIMS are losing customers, especially in the Primary market.  This trend is only going to increase over the next 2-3 years in my opinion. 

The different MIS solutions major on different things to support schools, but what all of them are offering is a fully integrated solution where the e-payment (Scholarpack is an exception here) and communication solutions are just part and parcel of the MIS, they are not bolt-ons or third party solutions. In my view, here’s how they differ: 

Arbor

• Highlight how much they want to support the education of students by taking away the administrative burden of staff (incl. teachers).  
• A very clean UI/UX and had a strong MAT offering around analytics 
• The data analytics was not only MIS information, they were also drawing on national data to enable national comparisons.  
• The message coming from the company was very much “we want to work with you” and all about partnership. Great message and one that resonated with the audience.

Bromcom

• Major on their integrated BI analytics, it looks really strong.  
• Their message was a little more corporate.  
• Very simple looking solution (which is a positive!) and had adapted their solution to provide a strong UX and UI for Primary and another UI for Secondary. That said, some of the screens were a little busy. 
• They are definitely listening to their customers, which I am not sure the industry had felt up to this point.  

Pupil Asset

• Major on their tracking solution which is very well received in lots of schools across the country, and many schools go on to switch to the full MIS as a result of their good customer experience 
• Strong reporting functionality with their ‘School On A Page’ and ‘MAT On A Page’ reports 
• They also have something innovative (which, to be honest, I feel they should focus on more) in their ‘Live School’. This gives a visual view of the school e.g. if there is a behaviour issue in the school, in a visual model of the school you can see where the incident occurred. 

Scholarpack

• This is a solution focused purely at the primary school market and this is their strong brand, providing a solution that fits the primary schools. 
• It may not be as deep in functionality as some of the other solutions out in the market, but that light MIS is what primary schools want in my experience (most primary schools don’t use half of what is included in the deeper MIS) 
• Their MAT offering was light.  However, they are bringing out more MAT functionality soon. 
• I think they have hit the Primary segment spot on. They will need to look over their shoulders a little as Bromcom and Arbor also have a Primary solution and as MATs get larger with multi phased schools.  My experience is that they look for a single offering for all phases (most large MATs have either gone to Arbor or Bromcom) so this may become an issue for them in the longer term. 

Now for my request from the different MIS providers (and this includes SIMS): a lot of what I saw was very similar functionality to SIMS7 but it was either implemented better or the UI/UX was a lot stronger.  However, all the presentations continued to refer to SIMS as the standard.  I feel everyone should look to be further on than this. They are already comparative to SIMS – I think schools and academies need them all to think about what the true next generation of MIS is! 

I’d like to see more on workflows, reducing the need for manual intervention. I’d also like to see more on Data Analysis and the use of AI/machine learning to provide true insights as to what is occurring in the school/MAT.    

It’s one thing answering the questions where MATs and schools know they need an answer. But how do you answer the questions they don’t yet know they need to ask??