Go-Live Support 2015
Consistency Required to Stay on Top

1. KEY DIFFERENTIATORS OF TOP PERFORMERS: QUALITY RESOURCES, ATTENTIVE SERVICE, METHODOLOGY, COST

Divurgent tops the market, with rave reviews for an impressive methodology, very responsive communication, and knowledgeable consultants who come in understanding clients’ go-live support needs. Santa Rosa clients tout attentive service, with multiple customers saying the firm’s executive leadership is highly engaged and always attuned to their needs. Santa Rosa wins many repeat clients by providing strong engagements that cause clients to view Santa Rosa as their top go-to firm for go-live support. Both have clients who praise their firm’s willingness to do whatever it takes to exceed expectations and resolve issues. CSI stands out because of their attractive pricing and flexibility in working with clients. Some clients report that even though some resources aren’t a good fit, CSI quickly responds to solve any issues. ESD scores above average in most areas measured in this report, but as will be explained later, they demonstrate some inconsistency the other top performers do not.

2. WHICH FIRMS PROVIDE A RELIABLE AND CONSISTENT EXPERIENCE

HIGH CONSISTENCY

Divurgent and Santa Rosa – Vast majority of clients scoring in 90s. Consistent in almost every way, from service and communication to consultant quality and cultural fit. No misses with any clients KLAS spoke with. Santa Rosa has near perfect scores from clinical respondents due to high level of collaboration and exceptional project management. CSI and Encore – Consistently deliver quality consultants and service, though fewer clients report a wow experience. Encore praised by some IT respondents for coordinating complex go-lives across multiple sites but is slightly below average in project management and 24/7 support. CSI praised by several for coming into engagement with strong understanding of provider needs and how to meet them.

SOME INCONSISTENCY

Leidos and ESD – Leidos and ESD also perform well, though each has a few providers who rate them as average, mainly due to inconsistency in consultant quality. ESD clients highlight strong elbow-to-elbow support and physician engagement from experienced clinical consultants in large organizations. A few small organizations cite issues coordinating with ESD and inconsistency in consultant quality. Leidos, traditionally strong with complex go-lives, is lauded for providing consultants who have extensive experience and are easy to work with on complicated golives at multiple ambulatory sites. A couple of clients had a mixed bag of consultant quality, with one feeling the bad ones weren’t replaced quickly enough.

ONE OR TWO BIG MISSES

HCI Group - IT respondents cite a consistent, positive experience with quality consultants who go out of their way to satisfy client needs. Conversely, clinical respondents at one large organization complain of low-quality clinical consultants.

Optimum - IT respondents describe flexible, strong resources and high engagement with client leadership; a couple of clinical respondents report weak project managers or average consultants.

PTP – One client feels they were given “B-team” resources, unpolished project managers, and inconsistent resources in command center. Clinical respondents are especially impressed with high-quality physician consultants that enable strong physician adoption.