Subscriber Discussion

Who Should Be Responsible For End-User Support? The Manufacturer Or The Integrator/Var?

As security technologies become more complex for the end-user to manage, with abundant features and tools, end-user require more "hand holding" in implementing features, handling events, etc.

Manufacturers argue that they spend considerable amounts of resources in training their VAR's, on product certified technician training, online tools and libraries, etc.

Integrators argue that it is the manufacturers job to make support available to the end users as part of the product release package, while it is the integrator's job to support end-users only for the initial install.

Who should the end-user turn to?

I believe it should be the installers job. They should know the system best.

I think that the entity that sells to the end user and installs the system is the entity that should supply the support.

If that is the dealer/integrator, then that's who should give the end-user support.

If the system is a do-it-yourself sold through some kind of non-servicing distributor, then the manufacturer has the responsability of supporting the products

At all stages of the chain, you're responsible to the person/entity that wrote the check to you.

The end user pays the integrator, not the manufacturer. If integrators expect manufacturers to support and train their end-user customers, don't be surprised when the manufacturer eventually decides to just sell everything direct.

I believe the answer is both. Although the Integrator should be the first level and handle initial support requests, the manufacturer should provide backup support, especially for large and complicated systems. I've found that in some cases, only the manufacturer can provide solutions to complex problems. Also, over the years I've found that Integrators come and go and end users can't always count on their ability to support the systems they sell over the long term.