According to the experts, many struggling channel management vendors have a tendency to overstate their ability to handle integration.

More often than not, channel strategies ranging from the most tactical and short-term to the most strategic and multiyear fail. It is imperative to note that the success or failure of a channel management strategy has nothing to do with the time horizon and everything to do with perspective, timing and getting away from a "one-and-done" mentality.

Essentially, a channel management strategy is never done or complete, and this is something many tend to ignore. Utmost in any channel manager’s mind should always be that channel management is a continuous, learning and iterative process. However, very often, what leads to the failure or downfall of a channel strategy is the "fix it" mentality which is still surprisingly pervasive. When channel strategies implode, it is often too easy for companies to say that the business model changed and the channel strategies didn't keep up, or that their channel partners rejected strategies because competitors were offering more margin, dollars or attention. It becomes much worse when companies think they can buy their way out of problems. It is very crucial to note that these excuses tend to speak to symptoms rather than causes.

The best practices of channel management have been covered extensively before. Let’s now look at the other side of the coin. Just what are the worst practices in channel management? They include:

• A "one-and-done" mentality about lead management, order capture and service.
  Once a channel management system is put in place, many companies seem to think their job is done and settle back into routines. Organizational life goes on as before, the only change being that there is now a million-dollar in place but the people who were passionate about it or driving it have moved on to new projects or roles. The sad part is that noone uses that great system to have in place to change things for the better.
• Losing touch with sales.
  Ironically, the manufacturers who do have initial success with channel strategies very often take their best managers, directors and VPs and turn them into firefighters first and long-term business process owners second. There are some who are extremely strong at organizing their channel system, but then neglect to devote time to sales.
• Lack of integration expertise.
  Most struggling channel management vendors have a tendency to overstate their ability to handle integration. Don't just check the references that vendors give you: Go find the references they don't want you to know about, because their failures will teach you more than their successes.
• Vendors waiting for the Mergers & Acquisitions (M&A) train.
  Beware of the vendors who are awaiting M & A. Back away from vendors that show signs of battles with investors and boards; rapid turnover at the top; and trading below cash. Vendors that are on the market but have the following positives may survive even if integrated to another company: a large and profitable customer base; process-centric applications that align with how people work; a strong cash position; and established sales and channel organizations.

There is definitely no doubt that manufacturers are becoming and will  become more channel-driven than ever before. In the Asia Pacific especially, it is more often the case that more than 70 percent of all revenue in distribution comes from indirect channels. In order to successfully tap into this revenue stream, consider why some companies have failed and plan accordingly.