How collaboration technology is shaping the client experience · 2020-04-02 · How collaboration technology is shaping the client experience: Professional services & accountancy

How collaboration technology is shaping the client experienceProfessional services & accountancy analysis

THIS DOCUMENT AND THE INFORMATION IN IT ARE PROVIDED IN CONFIDENCE, AND MAY NOT BE DISCLOSED TO ANY THIRD PART Y OR USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE WITHOUT THE E XPRESS WRIT TEN PERMISSION OF HUDDLE. © Huddle June 20162

How collaboration technology is shaping the client experience: Professional services & accountancy analysis

Contents1 Executive Summary 3

2 Winning Business 4

3 Servicing Clients 8

4 Retaining Business 14

5 The Future 17

6 Key Learnings 18

7 Appendix 19

3


1. Executive Summary

While expertise and efficiency appear to be two distinct goals,

they fundamentally rely on the same single capability;

effective collaboration.

Many professional services firms will read this and feel they

have already ticked off their collaboration objectives. They

may have implemented internal file-sharing systems,

document workflows and perhaps even client portals.

The problem that this research has discovered is that in the

vast majority of cases, teams find their current collaboration

set-ups to be so restrictive, unintuitive or simply not fit-for-

purpose that they are actively circumventing them. On the

face of it, this appears to be a case of wasted investment,

perhaps solved by internal education. However, the impact

is actually further reaching; deviating from defined

workflows creates an instant lack of transparency,

auditability and in many cases, IT security.

More worryingly, the research indicates that many of these

impacts then manifest as reasons for actually losing clients.

Whole accounts can be lost through a lack of transparency,

missed deadlines, poor account management and an inability

to demonstrate expertise.

Suddenly, successful collaboration moves from being a way

of making a business run smoothly, to being an indisputable

necessity for winning and retaining business.

This Huddle research paper examines the impact that

technology has on the lifecycle of a professional services client,

from the initial win, through servicing and even loss. To what

extent is collaboration technology assisting or undermining

the client experience? How can the right technology make the

pursuit of new business more efficient and successful? And

ultimately, how can collaboration technology help businesses

generate more revenue and grow?

Finally, we examine the longer-term strategic objectives of

the professional services sector, and show how these too can

be supported by the same technology mindset.

The findings of the research are clear and boil down to a simple

point; professional services firms have to date done the right

thing in trying to improve their collaboration capabilities.

They have identified its importance and have invested in

technology and training. However, any deployed solution must

meet the needs of multiple stakeholders; from business users

who demand usability and accessibility, to clients who expect

transparency, and IT who expect robust security and data

governance. In many cases, the research suggests that firms

have failed to find this balance and have created new, and

often unforeseen, problems as a result.

This was an independent market research project conducted

in Q2 2016 by Opinionography on behalf of Huddle. It should be

noted that in the context of this report, “professional services”

includes Accounting, Advisory and Management Consulting

firms. Full research methodology can be found in the appendix.

The success of any professional services organization hinges on two factors – expertise and efficiency.



2. Winning Business

Across professional services firms, the primary key to

winning new business is the ability to demonstrate

expertise – with management consultants and

advisory professionals considering it absolutely

critical to success.

Meanwhile, accounting professionals rank this of almost

equal importance with competitive fees and the ability

to offer wider services. And while transparency and data

security are not ranked as most important, neither

should be considered immaterial. Enterprise CIOs, for

example, are being made painfully aware of the need to

secure the organization’s data and processes. In theory

therefore, these factors for winning business should be

considered “table stakes”.

Firms have been quick to recognize that demonstrating

organizational expertise and service breadth is key to

differentiation. It stands to reason, therefore, that an ability

to collaborate and share knowledge internally is of critical

importance not only to winning business, but retaining it.

Key factors in winning new business(Respondents asked to selected top three)

How are firms positioning themselves during new business pursuits?

Being able to demonstrate expertise

AllAccountancy FirmsManagement Consultancies

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

62%

53%

70%

Competitive fees

52%

50%

54%

Ability to offer wider services

49%

50%

47%

Being able to demonstrate transparency

42%

47%

37%

Being able to demonstrate data security credentials

40%

45%

35%

5


Pursuing new business can be a costly process for professional services firms. The research discovered that a typical new business

bid today involves an average of seven people with each senior member of the team dedicating, on average, 12 hours.

This equates to an average of 84 hours of senior management time being dedicated to each bid, and with the average

personal hourly rate of $296, a typical bid consumes $24,864 of otherwise billable time.

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%3% 3%

Just me

4%

44%

36%

2-5

52%

36%42%

6-10

31%

12%16%

11-15

9%4% 4%

16+

4%

All Accountancy Firms Management Consultancies

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%3% 3%

Just me

4%

44%

36%

2-5

52%

36%42%

6-10

31%

12%16%

11-15

9%4% 4%

16+

4%


30%

20%

10%

0%

1-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 21-2516-20 26-30 31+

5% 6% 5%

17%12%

21% 23% 22% 24% 23% 24% 21%

8% 6%11%

17%22%

12%

2%4%

0%5% 4%

6%

How many hours do you typically spend on a new business bid? Mean: 12 hours

Number of people involved in a new business bid. Mean: 7 people

All

Accountancy Firms

Management Consultancies

How can the cost and time demands of pursuing new business be reduced?

U.S UK Global Avg (mean)

Average hourly rate $265 £204 $296

Average hours per bid 8 13 12

Average bid team size 7 7 7



What could help reduce the hours spent on a typical new business pursuit? (Respondents asked to selected top three)

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Easier collection of information from

across the business

Clearerapproval process

Clearer document workflows

Greater control over versions of

the same document

Clearer task-setting

process

Better access to

subject matter experts’ input

Removing duplication

of effort

Clearer project

mangement

33% 33%34%

32% 31%33%

30% 29%31%

29%

25%

32%

28% 28% 27%28%

33%

23%

27% 28%26% 26%

31%

20%

Other

1%0%

3%

Unsurprisingly, professional services firms all want to improve

efficiency (and remove cost) in this process, with 33% identifying

that an improvement in how information is collected from across

the business could reduce the time burden

To meet their need for demonstrating expertise and service

breadth when pursuing new business, accountancy firms in

particular are keen to improve access to subject matter experts’

input and collect information from across the business.

Meanwhile, management consultancy and advisory

professionals have more process-orientated concerns,

with document approvals, workflows and version control

all ranking amongst the highest.

Managing organizational knowledge

Management of organizational knowledge has become a key

topic across the professional services sector. As organizations

grow, their ability to mange knowledge becomes harder and

information and expertise risks being siloed across the

business, or lost altogether.

There is clearly an urgent need for improved document

management and information sharing across the entirety of the

industry. The precise needs and opportunities for improvement

may differ between accountancy firms, management

consultancies and advisory professionals, but the solution is

the same for all; prudent selection of collaboration platforms

to mobilize organizational knowledge.

Without this, work documents (and the associated intelligence)

risk being trapped. 38% of respondents admitted to storing the

majority of their work documents on their local computer hard

drive. A further 23% routinely kept documents as attachments

in their email client and 27% in a personal cloud file sharing

service. 27% also admitted to regularly storing work on

unsecured USB thumb drives. In each of these scenarios, the

ability for the wider business to benefit from these documents

has been restricted. Worse still, when these individuals leave

an organization, this data leaves with them, or is deleted along

with their email accounts.

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%3% 3%

Just me

4%

44%

36%

2-5

52%

36%42%

6-10

31%

12%16%

11-15

9%4% 4%

16+

4%


7


How do you store work documents?

Network drive

Company cloud file sharing

service

Your local hard drive

On a USB thumb drive

SharePointPersonal cloud file sharing service(eg. Box, Dropbox

Google Drive)

As attachments in email

47%

42%

38%

27% 27%

23% 23%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%



3. Servicing Clients

For many in professional services, the technology solution

of choice for improving transparency, day-to-day

engagement with clients, and the practical two-way

sharing of documents is a client portal. Indeed, their

perceived value to client relationships is clear, with

92% agreement among respondents.

Do you see value in having a secure, client portal that can be used to gather client documentation, manage conversations and tasks and deliver documents back to the client?

But regardless of the investment, sharing of

documents between client and firm (in both

directions) is typically still email-driven

(75% client-to-consultant; 71% in reverse).

How are documents shared between you and your clients?(Respondents asked to selected top three)

How is collaboration technology being used to support client servicing?

4% 4%

92%

Yes

No

Undecided

4% 4%

92%

Yes

No

Undecided

As attachment in email

Client-to-Firm Firm-to-Client

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Upload to your company’s cloud sharing service / client portal

75%

70%

44%

42%

Upload to clients’ own cloud file sharing service / portal

35%

36%

Hardcopy via post


31%

31%

Upload to a personal cloud sharing service (eg. Box, Dropbox, Google Drive)

28%

22%

22%

16%

9


The dominance of email attachments above corporate file-

sharing platforms not only suggests a difficulty in breaking

old habits, but also suggests that the heavy learning curve

associated with using some file-sharing platforms is

inhibiting wider adoption.

Given that respondents highlighted data security as crucial in

new business opportunities, it is particularly vexing to see that

22% of firms use personal cloud file-sharing tools to share

files with clients (22% in the other direction). In the case of

personal file-sharing systems, this immediately exposes the

firm to a potential breach in data confidentiality.

So why is this the case? If investments are being made in

client portals for external file sharing and collaboration,

why are employees still risking client confidentiality by using

less secure methods?

Why do you use a personal cloud file sharing service? (select all that apply)

The picture is no better for internal file-sharing and

collaboration. Company-mandated tools are used regularly

by fewer than half of respondents (46%) and they are

regularly being circumvented and often in ways that undermine

security and productivity. Factors including ease-of-use and

mobility are often cited as reasons for circumventing

company-mandated tools.

How do you share digital documents with colleagues? (select all that apply)

Again, the overall preferred method of sharing files

internally is via email (69%) – notorious for creating

document versioning issues. Indeed, 68% confirmed

that within the last six months, they had worked on a

document only to discover it wasn’t the latest version.

This is not only a frustration but, when extrapolated

across a business, a gross drain on productivity.

Other methods of internal file-sharing include over

a quarter (29%) preferring to use a personal file sharing

account, while more people will opt to use a USB

thumb drive (35%) than the company-provided

SharePoint platform (25%).

The company solution for file sharing (including SharePoint if applicable) is not used by the whole team

The company solution for file sharing (including SharePoint if applicable) is too difficult to use

The company solution for file sharing (including SharePoint if applicable) is not permitted by the client

My company doesn’t offer an appropriate alternative, so I use my own

Other

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

53%

29%

22%

18%

2%


Company cloud file sharing service


Personal cloud file sharing service (eg Box, Dropbox, Google Drive)

Other

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

69%

46%

35%

29%

2%

SharePoint

25%



The problem with SharePoint

SharePoint remains a common technology in the

professional services industry (62% of organizations use it

in some capacity, rising to 70% in the accountancy sector),

though while 81% claim to use it regularly, there appear to

be dramatic issues with its use and efficiency.

Does your company use SharePoint as a client portal?

So while SharePoint is commonplace, adoption remains

hampered by perceived usability, both for employees

and clients.

These difficulties are then mirrored in its limited use for

internal collaboration. Looking solely at those whose

companies have rolled out SharePoint, only 35% actually

use it for internal sharing and collaboration, with the

majority preferring to use email, other company file-

sharing services and even USB thumb drives.

SharePoint users: How do you typically share documents with colleagues

All

Yes No Unsure

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

62%

34%

4%

Accountancy Firms

70%

25%

5%

Management Consultancies

53%

44%

3%

50%40%30%20%10%

0%

Clients don’t know how to

use it

It takes too long to have IT set up clients in the system

The rest of my team doesn’t use it, so I don’t

It doesn’t look professional

It takes too long to have IT set up new team members to

the system

It’s too complicated

Other

37% 32%26% 21%

16% 16%

5%

Reasons for not using an available SharePoint deployment?(Respondents asked to selected top three)


Company cloud file sharing service

On a thumb drive

SharePoint

Personal cloud file sharing service (eg Box, Dropbox, Google Drive)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

69%

46%

38%

35%

Other

3%

34%

11


The issue of circumventing broken processes and a lack of

technology usability point to one constant – billable utilization

is being negatively impacted.

Flooded by an ever increasing volume of data and documents,

and an increase in the number of potential locations in which

they can stored as per above, the time taken to find a single

work-related document has become unacceptably high.

Poor naming conventions, version control and search

functionality, as well as information silos across the business,

mean that 24% of respondents are regularly taking more than

five minutes to find and retrieve documents, and 15% are taking

more than 10 minutes. The average is 1 minute 41 seconds

per document spent searching.

On average, how long do you typically take to find a single document? (median: 1 min 41 seconds)

How many documents do you work on during a typical day? (median: 27)

Taking into account the average number of documents

worked on per day and average hourly rates, the cost (in lost

productivity) of poor document management can be calculated.

In the UK, the average number of documents worked on each

day is 25, each taking an average 136 seconds to find. At an

average hourly rate of £204 per hour for the UK respondents,

finding and retrieving documents is costing firms £4,238 per

individual, per month.

In the U.S. respondents work on 26 documents every day

and spend 89 seconds looking for each one. Their average

hourly rate is $265, meaning $3,747 of lost productivity just from

poor document management.

Less than 10 seconds

10-30 seconds

31-60 seconds

1-2 minutes

2-5 minutes

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

3%

17%

17%

20%

10-30 minutes

12%

5-10 minutes

9%

30 minutes to an hour

3%

19%

The cost of searching for documents is unacceptable

0-10

11-20

21-30

31-50

51-75

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

12%

26%

26%

17%

101+

4%

76-100

6%

9%



The ubiquity of smartphones and tablets has dramatically

improved the ability of today’s professionals to remain

productive while on the move or working from a remote location.

However, while 93% of respondents use a mobile device in their

daily working lives, usage remains largely contained to basic

email (73%).

While this may correlate to the nature of the respondent’s

role (largely desk / office based with key document-based

activity managed through a work desktop or laptop), further

examination reveals significant deficiencies in the ability to

perform more sophisticated collaborative activities when the

need for remote / field working arises.

What do you use a smartphone or tablet for in your working day? Email

Internet research

Accessing corporate / client documents (beyond via an email attachment)

Scheduling meetings

Sharing documents with team / client (beyond via email response)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Approving and ‘signing’ documents (beyond via email response)

Setting a task (beyond email instructions)

I don’t use a smartphone / tablet in my working day

Other

73%

37%

34%

33%

32%

25%

24%

7%

2%

The broken promises of enterprise mobility

13


How does working remotely impact your ability to do the following?

When working remotely a significant number of respondents

suggested that their ability to perform certain collaborative

activities was significantly hampered, or stopped altogether.

21% felt completely unable to access company documents,

25% unable to share documents and 10% unable to approve

documents. In each of these scenarios, only 37%, 29% and 31%

(respectively) felt no negative impact to their productivity.

The ethos of enterprise mobility is that mobile workers should

not be tethered to a single place of work, or a single device.

Hopping between location and device should allow seamless (and

contextual) access to workflows, tasks and documents.

A lack of suitable mobile applications to support legacy

collaborative platforms, or concerns over security may be

responsible for this restriction on productivity.

Again this suggests a need to review technology candidates and

make selections based on both employee requirements and

security requirements (for example, selecting tools that support

Mobile Device Management and Mobile Application Management to

mitigate the risk of data loss).

Accessing documents (beyond via an email attachment)

It stops me entirely

It restricts my productivity considerably

It restricts my productivity a little

No negative impact

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

21%

19%

23%

37%

Sharing documents (beyond sending as email attachments)

25%

26%

30%

29%

Approving documents (beyond via email response)

10%

33%

25%

31%



4. Retaining Business

All professional services organizations want to make client engagements more efficient. The more efficient each engagement is,

the more capacity becomes available for growth. However, this growth opportunity is being undermined by avoidable errors and

inadequacies in collaboration processes.

Management consultancies in particular are stymied by the difficulty in extracting information from their clients, while accountants

report a lack of clarity in workflows, approvals and too much duplication of effort – the three probably being strongly connected.

Which of the following would make your client engagements more efficient?(Respondents asked to select top three)

These findings show that the need for improved collaboration is not simply a matter of cost reductions, security, compliance

or wasted investment. A failure to have robust processes in place, supported by a technology platform with a user’s experience

in mind, can have devastating effects on efficiency and team performance.

However, this is not a situation that simply limits growth and the firm’s ambition. These failings can have an equally dramatic impact

on client satisfaction and even retention.

Frustrations when working on client engagements are familiar. However, too often they are created by entirely

inadequate processes surrounding communication and updates, task management and document management. Ironically,

and perhaps more frustratingly, these are often accentuated by the inaccessibility of the platforms put in place.

Where are the failures in client servicing?

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Easier collection of documents

from the client

Clearerapproval process

Clearer document workflows

Clearer project

management

Easier collection of documents

from across the business

Removing duplication

of effort

Greater control over document versions

Better access to subject

matter experts’ input

32%27%

37% 32% 32% 32% 31% 33%28% 30%

28%31%

25% 23%26%26%

32%

19%24% 25% 23%

21%25%

17%

Clearer task-setting

process

19%16%

22%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%3% 3%

Just me

4%

44%

36%

2-5

52%

36%42%

6-10

31%

12%16%

11-15

9%4% 4%

16+

4%


15


When working on a client engagement, what are your principal frustrations? (Respondents asked to select top three)

What are the principle reasons for missing client deadlines?(Respondents asked to select top three)

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

The client changes the

project requirements

Managing tasks across

the team

Client requires constant updates

Sourcing documents

/ data

Internal approvals take

too long

Client approvals take

too long

Documents are moved / their names are changed

Consolidating feedback and

document versions across

multiple stakeholders

35% 34% 36%31% 31% 31% 31%

35%

26%29% 31%

27% 26%30%

22%

29% 32%25% 26% 27% 25% 24% 24% 23%

Finding experts

internally to assist

16%1�%

14%

Other

0% 1%0%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%3% 3%

Just me

4%

44%

36%

2-5

52%

36%42%

6-10

31%

12%16%

11-15

9%4% 4%

16+

4%


60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%3% 3%

Just me

4%

44%

36%

2-5

52%

36%42%

6-10

31%

12%16%

11-15

9%4% 4%

16+

4%


What professional services firms must understand is that these are not just frustrations felt on their side. They manifest equally

on the client side as they lead to client deadlines being missed. The difficulties in communication over needs and requirements

reappears as a principal source of disappointed clients, while document management appears as a fundamental root cause

of client frustration – whether in terms of file sharing, approval workflows, version controls or editing.

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Waiting on clients to deliver

documents

The client changes the

project requirements

Internal approvals take

too long

Client approvals take too long

Documents are lost

Takes too long to consolidate

feedback internally and

manage document edits / versions

Other

46% 46% 46% 45%42%

49%

35% 36% 35% 35% 36% 34%

22%27%

17%

26%31%

21%

1% 0% 2%



Aside from high or unexpected fees, all of these issues

can be addressed by making improvements to internal and

external collaboration. Misunderstanding the client’s issues

and client management failings stem from the same failing –

not being close enough with the client, which is tackled

through better two-way collaboration and information sharing.

Meanwhile an inability to demonstrate expertise is a symptom

of not being able to mobilize organizational knowledge from

across the business or gain access to input from subject

matter experts – both of which are key frustrations cited

by respondents.

Missed deadlines and work quality issues point to poor

internal workflows and task setting, while the appearance

of data breaches in the reasons for losing clients suggests

that the theoretical dangers of consultants circumventing

secure file-sharing platforms are very real indeed.

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

High fees Failure to understand the issues

Client management

failings

Unexpected fees

Not demonstrating

expertise

Deadlines being missed / projects

being delayed

Poor quality work

Not being transparent

in the engagement

Data breach Other

33%

40%

26%

30%

29%

31%

30%27%

33%28%

31%

24%27% 22%

31%

24%28%

19% 18%

24%

12% 12% 14% 11%

2%1%

3%

27%30%

24%

High fees


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Failure to understand the issues

Client management failings

Unexpected fees

Deadlines being missed / projects being delayed

Not demonstrating expertise

Poor quality work

Not being transparent in the engagement

Data breach

30%

27%

33%

28%

31%

24%

27%

22%

31%

24%

28%

19%

18%

24%

12%

12%

14%

11%

27%

30%

24%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

High fees Failure to understand the issues

Client management

failings

Unexpected fees

Not demonstrating

expertise

Deadlines being missed / projects

being delayed

Poor quality work

Not being transparent

in the engagement

Data breach Other

33%

40%

26%

30%

29%

31%

30%27%

33%28%

31%

24%27% 22%

31%

24%28%

19% 18%

24%

12% 12% 14% 11%

2%1%

3%

27%30%

24%

High fees


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Failure to understand the issues

Client management failings

Unexpected fees

Deadlines being missed / projects being delayed

Not demonstrating expertise

Poor quality work

Not being transparent in the engagement

Data breach

30%

27%

33%

28%

31%

24%

27%

22%

31%

24%

28%

19%

18%

24%

12%

12%

14%

11%

27%

30%

24%

Unsurprisingly, when left unchecked, these same frustrations

escalate to the point of being mirrored in the top reasons

for losing clients.

What are the top reasons for losing clients? (Respondents asked to select top three)

17


5. The Future

Professional services is one of the most under-pressure

sectors. Many services are becoming commoditized,

threatened by offshoring and in the case of accounting firms,

even automation. Differentiation becomes vital, not just

among competitors, but also against new threats such as

technology or other service sectors.

This mirrors much of what has come before in this paper.

Exhibiting expertise and value becomes essential in order

to combat these threats, as do efficiency in client servicing

and offering wider services. But the internal impact of

improving these capabilities is that daily tasks are easier

to perform, and that the enterprise IT stack is fit for purpose –

particularly for the growing millennial workforce who expect

usable technology to be deployed as a means of overcoming

simple problems. Indeed, the research shows that the principle

concern for the future is the need to retain staff (45%).

Increased domestic (40%) and global (36%) competition

come second and third.

These three concerns are readily addressed by improved

efficiency in day-to-day workflows and removing all friction

and obstacles in collaboration.

What are your main strategic concerns over the next three-five years? (Respondents asked to select top three)

The future of professional services

Retaining staff

Increased domestic competition

Increased global competition

Attraction of staff

Stagnating fees

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Automation

Regulation

Other

24%

23%

25%

30%

32%

36%

40%

45%



6. Key Learnings

The need for robust mechanisms to support collaboration,

information sharing (internal and external), mobile data

access and security has been recognized, and seemingly

addressed. However the difficult challenge of building on legacy

technology investments, balancing ease-of-use with security,

and enabling a more mobile suite of collaboration tools means

that many solutions to date have been unsuccessful. It has left

workers often discontent with the usability, functionality and

performance of the platforms they are being equipped with.

In such scenarios, the instances of workers finding their own

solutions (shadow IT) to collaboration challenges is high.

On a more strategic level there seems to be a chasm between

the way in which firms believe they can win business (greater

transparency, demonstration of expertise etc.), and their ability

to meet this need once business is won.

Such deviation leads to lost transparency, broken audit trails,

siloed information, duplicated effort and even regulatory non-

compliance. While the latter has its own penalties, the penalty

for the other symptoms is reduced billable utlization,

inefficient client management, and even lost business.

Collaboration technologies have matured significantly in

the last three years. Increased confidence in the cloud has

allowed organizations to look beyond legacy, on-premise

technology investments and to SaaS vendors such as

Huddle as an alternative.

However, successful collaboration remains a challenge that is

solved not simply by throwing technology at it. The technology

has to actively support the user - be usable, user-friendly and

accessible – while also serving the business by being secure,

transparent and mobile. Importantly better collaboration is

often a change management challenge for the business, with

wider education being required to help workers understand

how a piece of technology augments (or replaces) their

existing workflows.

Too often, technology is deployed without recognizing this

need, resulting in poor adoption rates and driving many of the

criticisms uncovered in this research. That’s why tools such

as Huddle come with the support of a world-class Customer

Success team to ensure adoption and ROI metrics are met.

In an industry where individual firms rely on the expertise of their

employees, the satisfaction of their clients and the efficiency

of their teams for success, better collaboration is of strategic

importance and must be at the heart of the business.

huddle.com

Better collaboration is of strategic importance

19


7. Appendix

This was an independent market research project conducted

in Q2 2016 by Opinionography on behalf of Huddle. The research

canvassed the attitudes towards collaboration technology, and

its use, across 206 accountancy and professional services firms

in both the US and UK. There was an approximately even split

between firms with sub-500 employees and 500 or more and

the respondents themselves are also evenly split across

upper-mid and senior levels.

Breakdown of respondents

Background and Methodology

UK Management Consultancy and Advisory47

50-500 employees 500+ employees

30 17

Senior Mgmt / Director Senior Partner – Manager

25 22

US Management Consultancy and Advisory56


36 20


28 28

UK Accountancy Firms53


28 25


31 22

US Accountancy Firms50


23 27


22 28



About HuddleHuddle is the cloud collaboration solution that makes it easy

for teams to stay productive and to work securely beyond the

firewall with colleagues, partners and clients.

Trusted by government organizations and the leader in

collaborative technology for the accounting and advisory

market, our clients report measurable improvements to billable

utilization and client satisfaction.

No other solution delivers the security of Huddle while delivering

a user experience that employees and clients love.

Better ResultsFrom client engagements to internal collaboration across teams,

Huddle means you spend less time organizing documents,

managing feedback and searching through email, and more

time delivering exceptional results.

One PlaceCreate secure Huddle workspaces for your teams and clients

in minutes. Huddle pulls together files, tasks and team

communication into one place that’s accessible wherever

you are.

Always SynchronizedIn the office, travelling, or at a client’s site, our mobile and

desktop apps keep you connected to team and client activity

and synchronized to the latest documents and tasks.

• A single tool to manage the collaborative nature of today’s work.

• Sophisticated permissions. Lock workspaces across geographical teams or lines of business.

• Native mobile apps with MDM support for added security.

• Greater visibility for managers who need to oversee activity and track deliverables.

• Robust security assures the integrity of client data.

• All document and user activity is auditable and trackable.

• Check clients have viewed key documents and tasks.

• Infinite roll-back to past document versions.

• Built-in approval workflow.

• Integration with existing Content Management Systems, including Microsoft SharePoint.

• Securely upload and download files without email.

• Cloud-based, allows easy access for audit staff in the field.

• Ability to meet NDA requirements for control and removal of sensitive reference materials.

• Centralized calendar to schedule project activity and manage tasks.

• Fully integrated with Microsoft Office tools (Excel, Word, Outlook, and PowerPoint). Save and open Huddle documents within Microsoft tools, add and review document comments.

For more information, or to request a demo, please visit huddle.com

21


Notes

Some space to make notes...



Locations

London2 Leman Street2nd Floor Aldgate TowerLondon, E1 8FA

New York315 W 36th StreetNew York, NY 10018

Washington DC7910 Woodmont Avenue #1250Bethesda, MD 20814

San Francisco835 Howard Street, 3rd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94103

THIS DOCUMENT AND THE INFORMATION IN IT ARE PROVIDED IN CONFIDENCE, AND MAY NOT BE DISCLOSED TO ANY THIRD PART Y OR USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION OF HUDDLE.

© Huddle 2016

Ninian Solutions Ltd (trading as Huddle) is registered in England & Wales at 2 Leman Street, 2nd Floor Aldgate Tower, London E1 8FA, UK (company number 057 7 7111) and its U.S subsidiary Huddle Inc, a Delaware Corporation, at 835 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA, U.S.