The Perfect Match: Long-Term Partnerships Over One-Time Sales

At this year's Texas IT Leadership Forum, public- and private-sector leaders offered practical advice to vendors on how to build durable, trust-based relationships with government buyers.

The session, titled “The Perfect Match: Creating Partnership Ecosystems,” centered on the importance of moving beyond transactional engagements to build relationships grounded in trust, transparency and shared understanding.

Casey Kennedy, in his last public appearance as director of information services for the Office of Court Administration before his retirement, opened the discussion with a metaphor comparing vendor relationships to personal ones, describing the process as a kind of courtship that can lead to contract marriages and sometimes divorces.

“Sometimes our procurement folks feel like when us people in IT are buying IT products, they treat it like it's a commodity, like I'm ordering a pallet of paper,” Kennedy said. “There needs to be a relationship between the government side of the house and whoever's providing that solution for us.”

Jorge Cardenas, CIO for the city of Brownsville, emphasized the need for vendors to understand how cities operate before trying to sell products or services.

“A lot of times, vendors want to sell you things, but they don't understand what you want,” he said. “So I think it's a benefit between the two. And if we get to that level where we can understand each other, then a deal can be done.”

Paul Gonzales, senior strategic account executive at Comcast Business, urged vendors to prioritize learning an agency’s broader goals.

“A lot of vendors are very transactional, and want to see that transaction,” he said. “But I think the bigger picture for vendors with working with public-sector entities, I think the biggest thing is understanding your big picture.”

Vendors also have a responsibility to guide agencies through unfamiliar territory, the panelists said.

“I don't know what I don't know,” Kennedy added, explaining how his team often leans on vendors for expertise in areas such as broadband procurement or emerging technologies.

Steve Troxel, field CTO at SHI, drew parallels between government contracting and home improvement projects.

“I can go to Home Depot or Lowe's and buy a bunch of stuff and get the best price for each component. But I might not really know what I'm doing,” he said. “The expectation is that those folks that are there are going to give me a good product at a good price, but they're not really going to tell me how to be good at doing that remodeling project, versus a full-service vendor that does that.”

Good vendors, he added, take the time to understand the full scope of an agency’s needs and help them navigate complexity, even during staff turnover.

“When a person leaves, it doesn't change the entire dynamic. It's one person leaving, but you already understand business continuity,” he said.

All panelists agreed that strong partnerships depend on communication at every stage, and not just with IT. Troxel stressed the importance of involving procurement, legal and line-of-business teams early on.

That interdependence also applies to the vendor community. Gonzales described collaborating with other vendors, including competitors, to deliver comprehensive solutions.

Cardenas emphasized that he looks for vendors who actively listen, have the right resources and demonstrate innovation.

“People make that company,” he said. “So the team that I engage with needs to be engaged all around.”

He added that pricing must be realistic and aligned with known market rates.

“If you're gonna ... come to me and sell it to me for $100 and I know the price is $30, I'm gonna pay you $30, right? Because I know,” he said. “We work with very low resources, and I'm stretching every dollar, right, because I live in that city. I live, I work there, and I want to make sure that every taxpayer dollar gets used.”

Kennedy responded by acknowledging that vendors may still have room to add value even when budget constraints are clear.

“But at the same time, if I've done my research as a vendor and [know] Jorge is not going to pay anything more than $30 for it, do I still have the ability to say, 'Jorge, I know you're short-staffed on resources. If you pay me $35, we'll get it to you, and we'll put it in for you ourselves, so that you don't have to lift a finger,'" he said.

The moment highlighted a critical distinction in procurement dynamics. For cities like Brownsville, budget ceilings are often inflexible, and pricing must be tightly managed. For larger state agencies, there may be more latitude to evaluate cost against operational efficiency, particularly when in-house capacity is limited.

Creative approaches such as pursuing grants or vendor co-investment may help bridge gaps, especially for smaller or resource-constrained jurisdictions.

“You might be doing something innovative, might be something that you haven't done anywhere else,” Cardenas said. “You want to benefit from what I'm doing, because now you can tell the story, and I'm going to say, 'I made this happen with a good partnership.'”

In closing, Kennedy reinforced the value of honesty in public-private partnerships. “Radical honesty,” he called it, a theme that resonated throughout the discussion. Vendors who embrace transparency, understand the budgeting and procurement cycles, and invest in long-term collaboration rather than short-term wins are better positioned to succeed in Texas’ public-sector marketplace.