Salesforce Partner NexGen Consultants Acquired By Chicago Firm

The professional services firm, which fields an IT division focused on emerging technologies and industry expertise, looks to stand out in the CRM leader's ecosystem by delivering artificial intelligence and multivendor integration.

Sikich, a large professional services firm, Tuesday completed its purchase of Salesforce partner NexGen Consultants as it looks to boost a CRM practice powered by advanced analytics and artificial intelligence.

The Chicago-based company's tech practice (it also has a large accounting division) focuses on bringing to the upper midmarket a diverse array of digital transformation technologies, including Oracle NetSuite and Microsoft Dynamics, Jim Drumm, leader of the Sikich technology team, told CRN.

"We use a lot of the extended solutions out there, so that's why we wanted to get in the lanes with Salesforce," Drumm said. Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.

[Related: Salesforce Wants 250,000 Channel Partners To Realize Benioff's Growth Vision]

NexGen was a great fit, he told CRN.

The Salesforce Gold partner, based in Cincinnati, has only remote workers who serve about a thousand customers across the U.S. NexGen's roughly $6 million annual Salesforce practice is focused on financial services, manufacturing and supply chain.

Sikich only had a nominal Salesforce practice before the acquisition and saw benefit in moving fast to become a player in that ecosystem.

"Within the next couple years, Salesforce will probably become one of our largest practice areas," Drumm said.

The CRM leader is an increasingly attractive partner because of its ambitious strategy and integration capabilities, he said.

"I think with [Salesforce CEO Marc] Benioff's aggressive acquisition mentality and where he's looking to go, you can't help but be excited about Salesforce," Drumm said. "We see them in our existing client base all the time, so the synergies we will pick up there will be incredible."

While negotiations with NexGen began before Salesforce revealed plans to acquire Tableau, that nearly $16 billion mega-deal sweetened the pot, as Sikich was already a Tableau partner.

The data visualization giant, coupled with Salesforce's emerging AI and integration capabilities, create new opportunities in the market, he said.

"You lay Tableau on top of [Salesforce] Einstein and you've got this very innovative way to extend the enterprise solution to any back office," Drumm said, including environments powered by SAP, Microsoft Dynamics and Oracle NetSuite.

Sikich's technology division remains focused on subject-matter and industry expertise, not specific vendors or solutions. That approach has led the company to embrace and bring to market emerging technologies, from artificial intelligence to blockchain to robotic process automation.

The industry is veering back toward best-of-breed solutions, Drumm said, after an era where heterogenous environments dominated due to the lack of good integration tools.

How credible are lie detector tests?

By Gareth EvansBBC News

In a secure basement room of the US Capitol building, senators are reading a secretive FBI report into allegations of sexual misconduct made against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

The contents of the report are not meant to be revealed, and there has been some criticism that the scope of the investigation has not been wide enough.

Throughout the investigation senior Democrats have called for Mr Kavanaugh to take a lie detector test. One of his accusers, Christine Blasey Ford, has already done so.

But how accurate are these tests? And how do they work? Let's start with the basics...

In short, polygraph tests record a number of different bodily responses which can then be used to determine whether someone is telling the truth.

They usually measure things like blood pressure, changes in a person's breathing, and sweating on the palms.

"The polygraph, like any other lie detection technique, measures an indirect effect of lying," says Dr Sophie van der Zee, who has expertise in forensic psychology and has researched deception for many years.

"There's no human equivalent of Pinocchio's nose," she says. "But lying can increase stress... and with lie detection techniques you can measure the behavioural and physiological changes that occur when you feel stress."

So polygraph tests do not measure deception or lying directly, but rather possible signs that a person could be deceiving the interviewer.

This information is then used in conjunction with everything else that is known about the person to form a clearer picture of whether or not they are being truthful.

Polygraphs have been used around the world, in countries such as Japan, Russia and China, but the technology remains largely the same.

"There's a fairly long pre-test interview that lasts for about an hour," says Prof Don Grubin, who has trained polygraph examiners in the UK. "This focuses the individual on the questions they're going to be asked and tries to remove any outside distractions."

This is followed by a practice test, which usually involves a number of straightforward questions. The aim is to relax the individual so they are comfortable and able to understand how the process works.

"There are no surprise questions because that in itself will trigger a response," Prof Grubin says. "What you're going to be asked is known."

The equipment is then attached, and it usually includes a blood pressure monitor, electrodes which are placed on the fingers or palm, and two tubes which are wrapped around the chest and stomach.

"There may be something that's put on the tip of the finger that records blood flow and we also use something called a movement detector which is on the seat and picks up if you're trying to beat the test," Prof Grubin explains.

"You'll probably be attached to the equipment for 10-15 minutes but you'll be in the room for about two hours," he says.

Interviewers ask a number of control questions during the test and then compare the responses to the key questions. It finishes with a post-test interview, where the person will be able to explain any responses they showed.

Yes, according to the experts.

"There's no question that you can beat a polygraph test but you really need the training to do it," says Prof Grubin.

"You see websites telling you how to, but the reality is if you just go in and take a polygraph while hoping to beat it then you're not going to."

He says that it requires sitting down and practising with a trained examiner. But for those who don't have a qualified questioner to hand - what methods can work?

"You might put a tack in your shoe which will cause, for example, a big increase in your sweating response," Prof Grubin says. "Any sort of muscular activity or movement because you need to sit still."

"There are various drugs that people try but they tend not to be successful," he adds.

But he cautions that most examiners will be able to spot any covert attempt to beat the test.

The credibility of the polygraph was challenged almost as soon as it was invented in 1921, and there is much debate about its accuracy.

Some experts say the fundamental premise is flawed.

"It does not measure deception, which is the core problem," says Prof Aldert Vrij, who has written extensively on the subject. "The idea is that liars will show increased arousal when answering the key questions, whereas truth tellers will not.

"But there is no sound theory to back this up."

Dr van der Zee says that, because taking a lie detector test can be a stressful experience, it can sometimes present innocent people as guilty.

"People being interviewed with a polygraph are likely to feel stressed. So whilst the polygraph is quite good at identifying lies, it is not very good at identifying truths," she says.

But Prof Grubin says there are a number of different reasons why a test may be inaccurate. These include the questions being poorly formulated and the interviewer misreading the results.

"If the examiner is well-trained, if the test is properly carried out, and if there's proper quality controls, the accuracy is estimated between 80%-90%," he says, adding that this is higher than the average person's ability to tell if someone is lying.

However, he says that interviewing victims presents a separate problem.

"Testing victims is a whole different ball game because of the nature of what they're being asked about, you would expect a lot of arousal anyway," he says.

This means a victim, especially one recounting a traumatic experience, may appear as if they are lying because they are in an emotional state.

Ultimately, experts say there are many caveats to polygraphs and a number of different factors which can lead to an inaccurate result.

Copyright 2024 BBC. All rights reserved.  The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.

Beta Terms By using the Beta Site, you agree that such use is at your own risk and you know that the Beta Site may include known or unknown bugs or errors, that we have no obligation to make this Beta Site available with or without charge for any period of time, nor to make it available at all, and that nothing in these Beta Terms or your use of the Beta Site creates any employment relationship between you and us. The Beta Site is provided on an “as is” and “as available” basis and we make no warranty to you of any kind, express or implied.

In case of conflict between these Beta Terms and the BBC Terms of Use these Beta Terms shall prevail.

How to Use Practice Tests to Study for the LSAT