Even though I’m technically not a beat reporter on matters of virtualization, I wind up writing about the topic a fair amount because of my interest in green IT (few technologies are greener, when you think about it, in their ability to get companies to decrease their dependence on hardware). And because when anything becomes more mainstream in the software world, Microsoft declares war on the market.

So, it was with interest that I reported a story for TechTarget about whether or not VMware’s recent repackaging for its small business technology (more stuff for slightly more money) will be enough to inspire defections among the Microsoft channel. The answer is, not yet.

But that doesn’t mean Microsoft partners won’t sell VMware solutions opportunistically. Even though many will FOCUS on Microsoft’s virtualization story first, they are keeping their options open by certifying at least some personnel on VMware’s technology. Some are even prioritizing VMware, like Guy Baroan, president of Baroan Technologies, a technology services company in Clifton, N.J. He says he will lead with VMware because of the incredible value in its lowend packages. With the VMware VMware vSphere 4.1 release in July, the company moved to add the VMotion live migration technology to both the Essentials Plus and Standard editions. Essentials Plus now costs $3,495 for three hosts (up from $2,995) and Standard is now priced at $995 per processor (up from $795).

But Baroan isn’t dropping Microsoft: “We have to do both for the foreseeable future,” he said.

The one wild card in all this is the impending overhaul come October of what it takes to become a Microsoft Silver or Gold Certified partner. Moving forward, you’ll only be able to earn the Gold designation for certain competencies (not for an entire company). AND, you’ll need four separate technicians certified on the competency in questions PLUS someone on the sales and marketing end. Some smaller partners say that investment is too steep for their taste, which will change the nature of their relationship with Microsoft.

VMware has a golden opportunity to capitalize on the transition confusion, pun intended. We’ll have to see what the company has up its sleeve in the weeks to come but if I was one of their channel managers I would be on the offense — especially since Microsoft plans to offer deal registration points for virtualization wins, come fall 2010.

I help out SWOT Management Group principal Bill Brandt by posting to this blog from time to time. If you want to read some of my other writing, visit http://www.heatherclancy.com. And, of course, you can follow me on Twitter.

BLOG UPDATED 7:44 P.M. EST (DEC. 18) TO REFLECT REQUESTED CLARIFICATIONS BY MICROSOFT

Just spoke with Julie Bennani, general manager of the Microsoft Partner Network, for the company’s Worldwide Partner Group about changes the developer is making to its customer satisfaction research process and how it relates to attaining a Gold partner designation.

For starters, customer satisfaction surveys are now a mandatory part of becoming a Microsoft Gold partner.

The changes are part of the company’s evolution of the current program into the Microsoft Partner Network.

Surveys can be sent under a number of different auspices. For example, they could be sent out jointly (identified as a project being conducted by Microsoft AND Specific Partner) or they could be sent out just branded with the Specific Partner’s name. A third-party research company will monitor which businesses and organizations are being surveyed on behalf of partners, so that they don’t get survey-weary.

Another change is that surveys are more random in the past. There is no “minimum” level of satisfaction that is required in terms of customer satisfaction ONLY that the partner complete 10 surveys for EACH area where they hold to receive a Microsoft Gold designation. So, they need 10 surveys for Security, 10 surveys for Unified Communications and so on. A particular business could be surveyed about more than one different area.

Bennani says the idea behind keeping the surveys more random is that the partner and Microsoft will receive a truer reading of customer satisfaction across a given partner’s customer base. When a partner is responsible for meeting a certain customer satisfaction level, they might be tempted to game the results a little bit by providing the research firm with a list of their “best” customers. Now, the only real requirement is that the customers are ACTIVE: That they have worked with the Microsoft partner in the 12 months prior to a given survey date.

Partners that submit to this process will receive their scores, specific comments and an analysis of how they perform against similar partners. They can also add their own custom questions. What’s more, if they are really ambitious, partners can actually run surveys on a quarterly basis to keep better tabs on how they are doing.

On the face of it, I like the idea of making customer satisfaction process part of how high a tier a partner can attain in a vendor’s channel program. Although I personally think more attention should be paid to how a partner actually does, I guess that will sort of take care of itself. I mean, how willing would YOU be to fill out a survey if someone had done a really bad job. Maybe there become degrees of Gold-ness, with Gold partners holding a higher customer satisfaction score entitled to more field benefits or more attention from partner account managers.

I also like the fact that satisfaction is being more ingrained into the partner consciousness AND that the survey process forces ongoing activity. Satisfaction is more likely to reflect a long-term relationship, rather than a one-off tactical success story.

Now that customer satisfaction surveys as a partner measurement tool have been in place for roughly seven or eight years now across the channel (not just at Microsoft), I’m betting we’ll see some more adjustments in the year to come from other vendors.

VAR. Reseller. ISV. Systems integrator. Consultant.

You may be familiar with these high-tech partner labels, but channel managers must get ready to become comfortable with an entirely different set of technology solutions influencers.

The transformation of Microsoft’s partner program into a beast called the Microsoft Partner Network (come on they have 640,000 partners, the program IS a beast) is a harbinger of things to come across the channel. Not tomorrow, necessarily, but over the next 12 to 18 months as businesses come out of their shells and start investing in technology again.

When I spoke with Allison Watson, Microsoft corporate vice president, Worldwide Partner Group, before the company’s partner gathering earlier this month, she said Microsoft has been segmenting its partner types even moreso than it has done in the past based on changes in the way that customers buy or acquire technology. If a 20-something is only familiar with free applications, then Microsoft better figure out how to get inside his or her head. Stat.

As an example, Web design firms and developers are of keen interest, especially as Web sites and Web 2.0 applications increasingly become the front door to businesses. Of course, hosting companies are another focus, because of the influence they hold in small and midsize businesses who are considering cloud-based software options. Here’s some detail on Microsoft’s new effort with hosting providers. Routes to market surrounding home media continue to be evaluated.

Julie Bennani, general manager of the Microsoft worldwide partner program, figures there are 9 or 10 major business models that technology companies now must consider as routes to market, especially as the industry moves to what Microsoft calls “software plus services” and the rest of the world calls software as a service. You think 640,000 partners is a lot, the company could grow up to 1 million by pulling in these next-generation influencers, Bennani figures.

Who knows who these partners are? Your guess is as good as theirs, but you can believe the Microsoft is very busy finding out.

Of course, supporting all these partners will be a tricky matter indeed.

That’s why you’ll see more money being spent on tools and resources that address two major areas:

1. Embracing social media and social networks to communicate. Watson estimates that Microsoft has about 3,500 followers and the company is looking closely at how social networks can accelerate and improve customer support. (Here’s a separate blog I did for my Business Brains platform that discusses Microsoft’s plans.)
2. Business development resources for partners transitioning from an old model to a new model. Let’s face it, it’s easy to stick with what works until it doesn’t work anymore. Problem is that is happening rather quickly. An example of something that could help soften the blow is the Profitability Modeler, a Microsoft tool that helps partners estimate three-year profit and loss impacts for moving into new business areas. A similar resource is an updated Practice Builder and Services Ready Initiative.

Everywhere I look, some high-tech vendor is engineering the design of a private social network especially for its channel partners.

While the overwhelming adoption of networks like LinkedIn or Facebook is doubtless the reason for this enthusiasm, there still really is very little much information about how businesses are using social networks for classic business-to-business interactions.

I should disclose that I’ve been thinking about this in the context of some work I’ve been doing for the worldwide channels group at Cisco Systems. But the move by IBM to establish its own social network with PartnerWorld Communities AND the impending launch of a similar mechanism by Microsoft have got me thinking a lot about this particular issue. This whole conversation reminds me of the huge push behind partner portals a few years back, as high-tech vendors (rightly so) looked at ways of improving communications to and with their channel partners. I ask anyone reading this: How fruitful were those investments?

While I am a huge fan of social networks and other social media applications, such as the micro-blogging service Twitter, I hope these vendors have the patience and persistence to make these investments in closed channel communities worthwhile. Here’s some context for my concern.

1. A recent study by Forrester Research (“The Social Technographics of Business Buyers,” Feb. 20, 2009) shows the use of blogs, social networks and other so-called social technology decreases “on the job.” So, for now, participation in closed channel social networks is likely to be limited. The survey base included 1,217 people in IT buying and recommendation roles across North America and Europe.
2. As to who actually uses social networks, penetration in the United States is about 35 percent. It’s lower in Europe and higher in some Asia Pacific countries, such as Korea, according to some separate data from Forrester Research.
3. Here’s the clincher for me though: Right now, Forrester Research reveals that 42 percent of U.S. online adults juggle at least two social network identities; and 63 percent also participate in some sort of discussion forum.

I don’t know about you, but considering the time that social networking takes, something has got to give and I’m betting it’s not the Facebook account. The vendors who are building these networks need to remember the following:

1. It takes MONTHS for a following to develop, which means you need to appoint credible subject matter experts who will spend months nurturing the network with great content and helping guide conversations.
2. Anecdotally speaking, many VARs and IT solution providers tell me they’re not all that eager to share marketing or sales tips that could help their competitors. There, I’ve said it. HOWEVER, interestingly enough, systems engineers and support personnel have little problem sharing tidbits that can help make everyone’s job a little easier.
3. Mobility is a big deal. When you’re out at client sites or prospective client sites selling for most of the day, you’re less likely to spend time catching up on social network conversations.
4. VARs and resellers have more than one vendor vying for their time online. Why is your social network the most relevant one for them? Is it because you help them market or sell the entire solution rather than a point product?

Here’s how I think closed social business networks could be VERY useful for a high-tech company hoping to forge closer ties to its channel partners:

• They could be used to create a way for your channel account managers and field teams to interact more seamlessly with partners in their geography. Why limit the “closed” network to your partners? In fact you shouldn’t. This might be a great way for them to be more in touch with teams across your company, to stay in closer step with deals that are in the works or be alerted about local activity that might be of mutual interest.
• Systems engineers could contribute real-world insight into real-world problems. In some cases, social business networks are already being used as a collaboration tool for product development. As a real example, I’ll point you to the case of Chordiant Software, which uses a platform from Jive.
• Success stories (and therefore best practices information) can be shared by your channel marketing team, especially in the form of video. In the brief experiments I’ve done with some of SWOT’s clients, I’ve found that the right video (in the form of a partner testimonial) usually gets more attention than written version of same.
• By adding the right information widgets in the form of RSS feeds, you can all stay on top of competitive threats or developments.

With certainty, I can say that every high-tech vendor SHOULD be evaluating a social networking or broader social media strategy. But I definitely wouldn’t advise them all to build their own platform. Your team might be better served applying some of the concepts I’ve mentioned above to a group on LinkedIn. Personally, I believe Facebook will have a hard time overcoming its roots as something focused on personal connections. I refrain from adding professional contacts there myself, unless I’ve met them at a conference or they’ve been good enough to read stuff that I write (like this!)

If you want to chat more about social networks and B2B social media strategy, I welcome your outreach. I can be reached at this e-mail, or you can find me on both Facebook and LinkedIn.