David Sweikert is two years into building Totalmobile’s sales operation across APAC and spends most of his time in conversations with organisations trying to do more with the people they already have. As Regional Sales Director, his perspective is grounded in what customers are actually asking for week to week, not what the industry thinks they should be asking for.
In this latest blog, David explores workforce scarcity, why the cost conversation has flipped, and what separates the organisations getting it right from those falling further behind.
Why the conversation has shifted from cost to growth
The conversation has changed. It used to be about cutting costs and driving efficiency. While that’s still in the mix, the reason behind it has changed completely. Now it’s about growth. If I have 100 field service engineers doing 100 jobs a day, how do I get to 105 jobs without hiring anyone new? How do I support my back-office team better so the people in the field can unlock more capacity? It’s the same efficiency focus but pointed at top line revenue rather than bottom line cost reduction.
The other thing that comes up in almost every conversation is the scarcity of skilled workers. These people are genuinely hard to find. When you lose someone with specialised skills, replacing them is a real challenge. So organisations are thinking about two things at once: getting more from the workforce they have and protecting those workers so they don’t leave in the first place. Giving people modern tools that make their job easier is as much a retention strategy as anything else.
Where the cost and compliance pressure really lands
Fuel and labour costs are the obvious ones. On the labour side, the skills shortage has created a supply and demand problem. Every time organisations have to hire, they’re offering above market rate just to secure someone, and costs keep going up. But if you can unlock 15 or 20% more capacity from your existing workforce without adding more to the workload, the economics still work in your favour. The revenue from additional jobs outweighs the marginal increase in what you‘re paying people. That’s the argument we‘re making, and it’s landing because the numbers back it up.
And compliance is the other one. A lot of these organisations are locked into contracts with SLA penalty clauses. Managing all of that consistently, so you’re not paying out penalties, is a significant pressure point that doesn’t get talked about enough.
Why buyers are being more forensic than ever
I won’t speculate on the broader state of the world, but I can evaluate what it’s doing at the buying level. Customers are being far more forensic. Evaluation processes are longer, questions go deeper, and senior leadership is involved in ways they typically weren’t a couple of years ago. We’ve got deals right now where we’ve been named preferred vendor and it’s still going up for board sign-off. Everyone is more careful. And honestly, that’s probably the right response when every investment is being scrutinised more closely
Where AI and digital pressure is actually landing
This depends on the industry. For emergency services, not really – paramedics respond regardless of energy prices. Where it matters is in asset-heavy industries like transportation, mining, and oil and gas. There, fuel is a significant cost variable and it drives a very specific set of needs: better routing, smarter job allocation, getting the right person with the right tools to the right place the first time. Each of those things sounds modest on its own, but at scale they add up to real savings.
A patchwork of systems, and where the real work is
It’s a mixed picture. Some customers have a lot figured out and just need help with one specific gap. Others are at a much earlier stage. However, the common thread is that most organisations have accumulated a patchwork of systems over the years – some built in-house, some procured, some ageing, and some that don’t talk to each other. What we’re typically helping them do at Totalmobile is simplify that, with fewer systems, a better user experience, and an end to the practice of making operational workers use enterprise platforms that were never built for them.
Where the operational edges keep getting squeezed
Most organisations have the core engine sorted – asset management and work order management, which are usually handled through an ERP or enterprise system. That market is mature enough that decent solutions exist. Where they consistently struggle is the operational edges: planners, schedulers, field technicians, trades workers. Forcing those people to use ERP systems for very hands-on, day-to-day work almost never goes well. The tools weren’t designed for them in the first place.
The gaps we see most often are around dynamic scheduling, capacity planning, managing urgent in-day work with tight SLAs, and giving field workers a mobile experience that actually fits how they work. That’s where the pain is, and that’s where the biggest gains tend to be.
What separates organisations getting it right
It comes down to two things. First, understand the problem before you buy anything. Know what’s broken, measure what it’s costing you, and evaluate solutions against that specific gap. Don’t just buy on a good demo – if you can’t quantify the improvement, you’re guessing.
Second, invest in tools built for the people who actually use them. A field technician shouldn’t be navigating an ERP on a job site. They should have something designed for the way they work, on the device they carry, that guides them through the job and cuts the admin time. It’s better for productivity and honestly better for retention. Nobody wants to sit in their van at the end of the day writing up paperwork.
