Practical CRM

What's the Point?

2010-02-26T04:04:00Z

If ever there were a double edge sword it has to be the world of Customer Relationship Management. If you lead a sales or service team there have probably been times that you wonder how did I ever get along without CRM and other times when you wonder why you even bothered. Oh, the highs and lows. If you have not implemented CRM or have been scared off in the past the horror stories you have heard may be the justification as to why you keep staying away. I thought about this topic today as I was dealing with an implementation and one of the project managers asked me a question as to whether the company we were implementing was a good candidate for an "implementation".

To answer this question I had to dissect the what was really being asked. Is CRM beneficial to this customer? Does it always have to be complex? Is the system too much to handle for this operation? In reality it is a little bit of everything. The customer only really has a background in putting in their accounting system with various modules appropriate to their type of operation. If modules are appropriate they acquire and implement them and if not it is a non issue. When you deploy CRM the system comes complete with sales, marketing, and service tightly integrated together.

Because of the way CRM works it is challenging to take a plug and play approach to any implementation. If you have not implemented one of these systems before it is important to understand that you may not necessarily roll out the application to all parts of your operation but you do need to take the time to consider those other pieces during the setup and configuration of the system. In much the same way you may setup a chart of accounts as the foundation of an accounting system the CRM foundation of your customer footprint and the account structure are very important for how the system will eventually work for everyone who will use the system some day.

The best approach to ending up with a successful launch of the CRM platform is to be focused on the operational goals you are trying to achieve. It is best to sort these out before engaging with an IT consultant or a software vendor so that you do not get caught up in everything that CRM can do for you. I couldn't tell you number of times we get engaged in these discussions regarding systems and people get caught up in features and functions they don't need or that may be a second or third phase of the project at best.

It is important to understand the long term vision of where you can go with CRM, whether or not you envision different integration points with different systems, and the type of workflow you would like to eventually deploy. It is also very important take stock in your top two or three priorities and then focus on those elements in the initial phase of your deployment and setup of your CRM structure.

So, what's the point? The point is that if you have a map and plan you will be able to execute. As someone much smarter than me told me once, "If you don't know where you are going you will probably end up somewhere else. And the worst part is that you never get a second chance with the users of any system. Life is hard enough for front line sales and service people and when you spend time on non-value added capabilities people are likely to resist adoption and make the process of change much harder than it has to be.

CRM is not simple but it can be straight forward. If you are uncertain on your approach find someone with the experience to help you get this done and do it right.

Substance or Style...It's Like the Chicken or the Egg for CRM

2010-02-10T20:29:00Z

For the past four or five years I have been dealing with more and more scenarios where there are internal struggles between the various approaches to CRM and the best approach to take when it comes to making a customer successful. When I say internal struggles people ask me if I am talking about the consulting approach or the customer's approach to the implementation...and the answer is...YES! This applies to both CRM implementation methodology and the customer approach.

In exploring this topic I really want to dive into three areas around CRM that I think exacerbate the preexisting challenges with deploying this type of technology. The first point of contention is structure of the implementation and whether or not to include analysis. If you can get around that hurdle then you must deal with a likely organizational shift regarding the foundation of CRM. And, if you get past all of that, you then need to deal with creating a systemic feedback cycle that will keep your implementation relevant and critical.

Believe it or not there are still many companies operating in the small-medium enterprise (SME) marketplace without a structured and valid CRM implementation. My first question as a management consultant would be, "How is this even possible?" Unfortunately I get to see how in dozens of companies every year so this is more of a rhetorical question for me. Therefore, when these companies make a formal move to CRM through advice internal enlightenment, the transition is going to be a struggle.

The reason that the transition is going to be a challenge is that you are dealing with changing behavior in adults, applying formal structure where there previously was none, and doing all of this around the people responsible for a company's revenue and/or customer retention. Enter the business analyst or technology consultant with lots of questions to question long time processes or question business practices. Hopefully you are starting to see where the competing forces at play here.

Principally, the consultant has relevant experience and can make a positive impact on the customer. The challenge is that the customer is already dealing with significant internal challenges and conflict while trying to do the right thing to improve their business. I know it sounds like an impossible situation but it is one that I literally see every week. And the possible resolutions are somewhat straight forward but take some agreement on both sides.

I have long been a proponent of doing a core implementation in these cases to put in place a foundation for a customer in order for them to get their foot in the door with CRM and deal with the more challenging people and cultural challenges that may have a larger impact on whether the deployment will be a success or failure. I am not saying that every CRM platform can be deployed in this manner because there does need to be some effort up front in the selection process to make sure that the core solution is scalable to the long term goals. But you need a clean break from the decision and the long term vision when starting a basic implementation.

The challenge to the consultant is two fold. First, the consultant has to be strong and disciplined in staying to the basics and not actually consulting. This will come in later phases. The other challenge is that the customer also must buy into a a phased approach and that the CRM implementation is perpetual. That's right! A CRM implementation is never completed and always in a transition to the next phase because customers and markets are ever changing.

This is where things get tricky. If you get beyond the first set of challenges then you usually have a power struggle on your hands. It's not really a power struggle in a literal sense but it is a power struggle in terms of the mindset of a company. All of us that have worked in this industry for some time know that technology is only about one third of the formula for success. So what is this "power struggle" all about?

When you deploy CRM there is a unique opportunity to make this implementation your operational heartbeat and let all other systems flow information in and out of this system so that it becomes the blue print for operational success. Many audiences that I have spoken to understand that in the age of "service" it is "just-in-time information" that will empower employees and create relevant value to your business. If all of this sounds great then here is the challenge that you will face.

Somewhere in the organization there is a manufacturing system, project management system, ERP system, some system that houses the financial and transactional information. It is these systems that many SME customers see as the "Holy Grail" within their organizations. The problem is that these systems do not have any "context" to the transactions and the customers. Sure, some have limited CRM and/or the ability to add or record notes or attach documents.

If you are truly going to elevate your company to the next level there will need to be a centralized capture of not only the transactions but also the conversations, follow up, and operational handoffs with both customer and prospect. This means that the CRM database will be the central system and not a "front office" module. I always get a chuckle that many times people in the "back office" talk about CRM like business development and customer service are optional items.

Unless there is a dynamic shift in the importance of the CRM database the customer's ability to continually improve operations and customer facing execution will be challenging for both the customer and the CRM consultant. I think this is where many people on my side of the table have a problem implementing a core solution without extensive analysis and modifications that elevate the investment and the importance of CRM.

As a life long baseball fan I have always loved the movie Field of Dreams with that classic line, "If you build it they will come." And that is the faith that I have in implementing some systems with core functionality and the understanding and agreement with the customer that the system will, over time, become the operational framework. When the customer starts to see value quickly they will want to continue to optimize and modify the core foundation....if the feedback cycle was established before the first piece of software was ever installed.

The feedback cycle, vetting of proposed enhancements, and the validation of prior enhancements and workflows is where a CRM consultant will make their money over time. I have continued to see stronger relationships and more profitable customers using this approach over the past few years...even in tough times. In fact, some customers have spent more during the downturn because they actually had the time to work on more complicated changes to the execution in their operations and workflows.

Now I wonder what you think is your best approach the next time you deploy a system as a customer or a consultant. Will you go big and complex and throw everything in but the kitchen sink or will you start small and build over time. Drop me a line and let me know.

You Can Lead a Sales Person to Water...

2010-01-31T23:48:00Z

...But you can't make them "drink". As in, drink the CRM Kool-Aid.

And why not? I have some time on my hands so let's go through why not and the anatomy of a sales producer's livelihood and a day in the life of your better than average producer. Hmmm, shouldn't that be a day in the life of your average sales producer? Not in sales, we call those people unemployed or on their way to unemployed. So anyway...back to the analysis of a sales person's week and how they get through it.

Monday morning comes and the first thing that a real producer is engaged in usually involves customers and moving their deals down the pipeline. At some point during the weekend our producer put together a game plan on how to attack the week and make the most out of it The thought process of a "work week" is any day that you wake up and you manage to squeeze in a work/life balance along the way.

By mid-day on Monday the previous weeks reports on activities and deals have already been submitted to management and even more time on the weekend was spent to pulling the information together to keep from draining precious selling time. A call from a manager just to confirm the validity of the information and to review deals is the only thing that steals from selling time at the begin of each week.

When Tuesday arrives the selling week is in full swing and meetings are scheduled most of the day. Part of the day is reserved for meeting with internal team members on reviewing existing customer projects because there is no visibility into the project management system. Without getting these updates and helping resolve some of some of the customers' issues the profitability and compensation plan could take a hit.

On Wednesday on the way to a meeting things start to go sideways. A couple of unexpected requests come in and then a string of phone calls ensue back and forth between customer and one of the project teams. Before you know it several hours of prospecting are gone and at the end of the day nothing is resolved.

As Thursday starts up things calm down and the previous day's emergencies don't impact setting up appointments and developing some proposals. The day is going smoothly until two of the most recent proposals begin circulating back and forth between the producer, his manager and project managers. When everything is settled another day is gone.

Finally, the end of the week is filled with setting a few more meetings and negotiating a few contract points with several prospects. As Friday winds down the cycle gets ready to begin anew.

So, why would I go through this narrative and how does it relate to CRM? I went through this because it is a typical situation that I see time and time again. The people that have to use and make the most out of these systems don't care about technology and don't care about using a CRM. What they do care about is anything that can make their world more efficient and free up more selling time.

If you are buying, implementing or selling CRM systems you need to take the end user into consideration. CRM success will be measured by what the system actually does to make a difference in day to day life of the people that use the system. In the scenario above CRM could make a significant difference to this producer's production, happiness, and effectiveness.

CRM can be used to generate reporting automatically so that activity and call reports don't need to be generated. Project teams can use systems that are extensions of CRM and sales and deployment teams can utilize the document storage features of a CRM to stay on the same page. If you add in mobile access to CRM data and providing more access to internal data sources the real power of CRM comes alive.

If our mythical producer had a well designed solution he would be a proponent of CRM because it would create more opportunities to sell and easier ways to work through internal team members on customer issues. He would also see more time on weekends with friends and family instead of generating time consuming reports and have a better work life balance and better attitude and morale while performing his selling functions.

The problem with this entire scenario is that many sales people have been made to use these systems in the past with little or no input into what they need or how the system will make a difference in how they reach their goals.

So, the next time you find yourself having problems with adoption or hear people complaining about a system, then look at how the system came about and who was given an opportunity to provide input or feedback.

Here We Go Again...What's Going to be Different?

2010-01-13T03:22:00Z

Now the holidays are gone and we have come to the close of another business cycle. It is particularly interesting that there are many new planning sessions going on and people are recounting what has gone right and what has gone wrong and some will even come up with a list of things they will do differently. The reality is that most people might make a few small adjustments but for the most part next year‘s efforts and results will be within a stone’s throw of this year.

What I just wrote can either be potentially sobering or uplifting or neither. So why did I write it? Truthfully, it needed to be said. And why did it need to be said? Hopefully, because someone will read this blog and understand that the way to exponential change is not through incremental thinking. If you want next year to be significantly different then spend the next two weeks ripping through every process you have and question everything that you do and question everyone else on their processes and ask them why they do things a certain way.

The best part of working in the world of CRM and the worst part of working in the world of CRM is the lack of rules and the stringent structure in other business applications. If you approach CRM with the knowledge that everything is up for change then you might have a fighting chance to make this year a game changer. How in the world would you do that? Rather than ranting about process, process, process and change management and twenty other buzz words I will simply start my blog this year with a simple survey that you take as a self assessment to find out whether you will land within a rock's throw of last year's numbers or if you will, in fact, look back at 2010 and say, "Why in the hell didn't we do this sooner?"

Here goes:

1. When was the last time you had a group of your customers sit down in a room together with the "gloves off" to give you a real picture of how they see your organization and just sit and listen to their opinion of the customer experience?

2. Better yet, when was the last time you invited in a group of customers that fired you in the last couple of years to do the same thing?

3. Have you ever taken the approach to manage the different customer "buying processes" rather than trying to figure out the magic pill to the optimal "sales process"?

4. If you locked your top 10 producers in a room and told them that they were only going to be comped if their revenue split between new accounts and existing accounts was 50/50 this year how would they react?

5. Have you actually taken an inventory of how people actually spend their week and then worked backwards through what it would take to remove all of the non-value added activities to worry about only getting them in front of customers and prospects?

6. Did you ever evaluate your bottom 10 percent of your installed base customers and consider firing them based on the lack of profitability to your firm?

7. Do you know exactly how your marketing efforts track back to sales and are you willing to cut certain marketing efforts and put money into others midstream rather than just sinking money into these efforts until their conclusion?

8. Can you identify the deals in your pipeline when they turn against you and decide whether or not you need to bail out or do something drastic to try and change the outcome?

9. Are your producers spending way too much time being overpaid lead qualifiers or do they have a list of target accounts that match the profile of your most profitable customers?

10. The best for last. Will you simply read this blog and go back to your same old routines and reach the same results or will you do something drastically different this year to reach your goals?

Is Implementing a CRM Project Really That Different

2009-11-06T02:30:00Z

After years and years of working in this industry one of the things that clients tell me is that the method in which consulting firms approach implementing a CRM system has a great deal to do with whether or not that particular firm is considered to be a standalone CRM shop or if they implement CRM as one of a few different types of technology. I have worked for both types of firms, software publisher as well as reseller, and been on the other side as part of the project team for an implementation. In my humble opinion these firms absolutely take different approaches in trying to reach the same goals of taking a customer live.

I don't want to be too simplistic but after a decade of doing this I am of the firm belief that implementing CRM is a completely different animal than putting in an accounting system or deploying a warehouse management system. The challenge then becomes whether or not the consulting organization can deliver projects in a different way or if it makes management of the process and the people too difficult. The answer is...it depends.

Ironically, I think this entire discussion comes down to people and not technology. If the consultants and project managers are focused on solely executing CRM and they management projects according to those standards I think the outcome can be as good or better than a consulting firm that only does CRM. If, however, the consultants are jumping back and forth and implement CRM as one of three or four types of projects they work on I think your results will be much different.

I am not sure whether or not there is a great analogy to use here but I am going to use two to try and get my point across. Consider a CRM consultant more like a scientist working on a hypothesis. That person starts out with the assumption that they are trying to prove something (hypothesis) and they use process of elimination to figure out the best way (because there are unlimited ways to execute various deliverables in CRM). The ERP consultant is much more like an Architect. That person must understand and know all of the requirements in order to build an acceptable solution that meets specification within the limitations of that particular ERP package.

As you can see if I am a person charged with implementing both of these types of technology it is very hard to take learned processes on how to approach a project and apply a different approach to another. Also take into account many consultants that "double-dip" have done one type of project for much longer and that is what you will find as far as where they lean in their tendencies. Next time you start into a project you should find out a little more about the people who will be working on it and how long they have been doing CRM.

Maybe CRM Is Not For Everyone

2009-11-05T03:20:00Z

So after not posting anything since around Labor Day I decided to come back with a splash. I know that in order to have a following that you need to have consistency and you have to be relevant doing this. I also know that when the time calls for it the priorities in business call for doing the right thing and not necessarily doing what comes more comfortable.

In the past year or so I have attempted to go deep into a number of different areas the have relevance in the world of implementing CRM and now I would like to play a more of a hit and run type of game and post some of the items I run into on a day to basis that are more spontaneous topics that I think are relevant in the world of CRM without some of the depth. If I like the pace and receive good feedback on this new format I may stick to it for the long term. But, I still reserve the right to go on a rant if I feel like it once in a while.

Now that we have that out of the way I would like to discuss a couple of new elements of CRM that I am kicking around. The first one I call CRM IQ. I will get into that a little more but it is basically the level of understanding of the client of the methodology around CRM and its fit into the operational cycle of a business. The second element that I think I should talk about is the CRM Temperature. This temperature deals with a companies willingness to embrace CRM, culture and management aspects, and apply executive sponsorship.

First, I want to talk IQ. As I go into more and more board rooms I am finding that many organizations currently have done some type of CRM initiative and some of them have done two or three. They are trying to address CRM issues with new technology but many of them do not have a real understanding of the underlying value to the customer of deploying CRM (whether or not the "customer" is an internal user or the actual customer). Lacking this understanding will likely produce the same results with any new technology because the issues are systemic to the people that have to manage and use the system on a daily basis.

So how do we address issues with CRM IQ? I don't know that you can unless the customer has a relatively high CRM Temperature. By this I mean that in order to get people to change behavior then you have to change the way they think. The only way to change thought is to educate. If the executives of an organization realize they need to do things differently or expand their myopic view of what the CRM tools benefits are then you may have an opportunity for success.

If you come across a company that expresses the desire to implement CRM but is very rigid in how they want to interact with your consultancy you may be headed for a very unhappy customer where the results were predetermined by their attitudes or unwillingness to learn about CRM and change their processes or culture. When the CRM Temperature is very low then it is very hard to get the critical buy in from a customer as to the approach, the implementation methodology, and their willingness to take advice regarding best practices when rolling out a project.

I think five years from now CRM may be more of a standard for many organizations with much more understanding of the value within a given business model but for now I suggest that you try to establish a method for establishing the CRM IQ and CRM Temperature whenever you engage in discovery for a new project. If you know what you are getting into before you start you are much more likely to be able to predict the chance at project success.

One Size Does Not Fit All When It Comes to CRM!

2009-08-27T03:44:14Z

So it has been a while since I managed a post. I know, I know, it's the cardinal sin in the world of blogging. After two pretty major family emergencies and a whirlwind tour through Scottsdale, Boston and Toronto I figured the world could live with a few less pieces of data littering the information superhighway. For those of you who appreciate the ramblings of a CRM idealist I appreciate your patience and hope you continue to frequent my postings. Enough banter and time to discuss the issue of the day...users and the CRM interface they dialoge with.

For some reason there are a number of software publishers that have chosen to design products that have a somewhat inflexible capability of designing the various interfaces within a single CRM structure to coincide with the user experience necessary to meet the goals of individual groups within the CRM structure based on the role they execute for the organization. Thankfully, some of these publishers have at least enabled some decent workflow and business process tools to help different departments tighten their systems operationally.

One of the recent conversations I had this week had to do with a selection process that is happening where both of the software publishers are well known. One particular application is about half the age of the other but many of the capabilities and development tools are rather similar. So one of the driving questions among the team selecting the application centers around the interface that various groups will use in their day to day roles. I certainly understand their concern. And this raises anothe key point. If the level of concern is great enough there you may have a good reason to go with more reliance on your user opinions of the CRM alternatives you are considering.

The first and most important thing to remember in the world of CRM is that there are many various alternatives out there that seem somewhat similar in their deliverables. The reality is that if we were having this selection process around the time of the .com bubble a vast number of these technologies didn't exist. Does that matter? Depends. I would argue that when you look at what you are trying to accomplish think about whether or not a CRM publisher would have faced those same challenges ten years ago. It is likely that the answer is yes.

What do you get in entertaining one of the more seasoned technologies in the space? Experience. The experience of the user community and the publisher that has taken feedback over a ten to twenty year period to make the user experience easy and meaningful. If many of your tasks and teams operate in a very homogeneous fashion then having a common interface may not make much of a difference. The problem for most of us is that the roles between marketing, sales, service and support are very different in their day to day needs.

At the end of the day there is no one perfect application for most of us and that is the reason that development tools and the right internal team or implementation partner to optimize any technology to a meaningful business system. That being said there is no reason to take a particular publisher just based on their name if the interface or the architecture isn't very close to where you need to be. Here is a quick check list for you to consider if you are in the process of selecting a system and want to make sure the interface works the way you need it to.

1. System Interface Options - Does the solution you are looking at provide a unique view for each team that will use the system that can be further modified to meet the specification for each user group?

2. User Interface Options - Does each user also have the ability to change the interface for their particular tastes in the way that they see the information without relying on reports or dashboards?

3. Point Solution or Business System - How many different teams will be using the system and how different are their roles in the organization?

4. Natural Fit - How close does the interface match the natural job description of your teams and how much development will be needed to reach the optimal solution?

5. 3rd Party Buffet - What percentage of the solution will be served by 3rd party or ISV solutions in order to reach your desired result?

These are some of the more logical questions to ask to help you feel better about whatever direction you decide in a solution. If you already have a solution and feel like you are challenged in your current implementation it might not be a bad idea to take the same inventory to justify looking at other options for confirming your original selection.

Should You "Fix" Your CRM or Start From Scratch?

2009-08-07T13:32:00Z

Today I am spending the day today giving a keynote speech to an ERP user group conference called Evolutions 2009. I love talking to people that are passionate about their business and many of the people at this conference have been running their systems for many years. Ironically, only a few of them have any kind of customer database that they are very happy with. As it so happens they are not vastly different than the general population of mid-market customers. The question now becomes, "what do I do if I already have a customer database and I feel like I need to do CRM?"

More and more companies are being faced with similar challenges now that most firms have made some type of attempt at rolling out a CRM initiative or customer database. Gone are the days where customers are implementing from scratch so there is an entire level of discussion on how to deal with any existing systems and how to move forward with any new initiative. We need to assume in most instances that there will be some "system of record" and then assess the solution based on its operational value today and not the time or investment made in deploying the solution initially.

History also tells us that it is usually not all or nothing when it comes to making decisions on the both the database and the data. I guess what I am saying is that the decision to start from scratch or ehance/modify/re-implement will really be dictated by what the existing capabilities are and how they align with your needs going forward. Too many people confuse the data in a database with the actual value of the system that houses it.

One of the most confusing elements of a project is dealing with the various data sources and tying the data into any new initiative. Understanding the technologies that exist today the ability to deal with data is nowhere near the bear that we used to deal with in the past. The better news is that if the database design or the data being tracked needs to be significantly changed then you can clean data as you move it into your new environment. It is OK that you weren't perfect on your first attempt and people always appreciate getting the opportunity to attack CRM after they have knowledge of what it actually is and the value to an organization.

Are CRM Opportunities An Assembly Line or A Construction Project?

2009-08-07T04:41:00Z

Every now and then I need to refer back to the reason that I started this blog and go back into questioning the practical aspects of how certain elements of various technologies work and then relate that back to the real world and how people should approach the usage of these tools in the real world. The first place I decided to take a look was in the area of Opportunities.

Managing deals and working sales opportunities has been a part of CRM basics since the beginning of time. Well, maybe not the very beginning (like when my dad was selling), but close to it. And, I constantly see the way teams are utliizing the opportunities and managing rather poorly the positive outcomes they are looking for in these opportunities. In fact, the more and more that I look at Opportunities of most CRM products I don't get a warm and fuzzy on the structure of Sales Force Automation (SFA) of most products in the marketplace.

So what's the big deal? The big deal is that the concept of an Opportunity/Project/Job in most organizations is that the elements of the deal are very dynamic and the structure of Opportunities in most software packages is very rigid. I will give you an example (without naming a product):

Company ABC is put into my CRM system. I qualify them and then promote them to be an Account with a Contact and then create an Opportunity on the Account. I have five steps in my sales process (Qualify, Scope, Demonstrate, Propose, Close). As I complete each on of the technical steps in this five step process I will promote the Opportunity one level and change the appropriate percentage to close for "reaching" that level. All reports, forecasts, and demand planning is being monitored off of these Opportunities and the products/services represented in each of the stages.

I know this is a simplified look at Opportunities but think about the way Opportunity develops in reality and then analyze if your deals and the systems that you use to track them. If you know your market well and your forecasting is somewhat suspect the system may be the problem. In more recent times I have started to diverge in my opinion of rigid structures of Opportunity management. Most of my customers who have shifted the way they structure their systems to handle the variance in the way their deals go down are seeing much better results.

The question asked in the title of this article relates to the fact that the world of sales and business development is part art and part science. We would all love to have a world of automation and predictability in making business happen but if it were that easy sales people wouldn't be among the most highly paid people in the world. It's not about just working hard but often times more important to work smart. Using the concept of a construction project to manage an Opportunity is much more realistic.

If you are contracted to build something you have a plan and a blue print and resources to make it happen (starting to sound familiar?). When you start a project life gets in the way and things rarely play out according to the plan. The weather impacts delivery (competitors), raw materials don't always show up on time (gaps in your solution), and getting the job completed and still making money often mens negotiating (price). So, if you have a system that handles the variances of your Opportunities and the workflow to keep things on track you will find that success will be more predictable and repetitive.

When It All Comes Together

2009-07-17T03:15:00Z

So it has been two weeks since I last posted. It's O.K. I actually had a real vacation (during which I was sick as a dog) but the get away was good nonetheless. Jumping back into the rat race in the middle of New York City I decided to lighten it up a bit. The economy is challenging, competition is fierce, and making a buck seems harder and harder. So why am I so chipper? It is because in these challenging times I am actually seeing a fair number of customers thrive rather than just survive.

I spend lots of time in the board room discussing the impact of CRM with prospective customers but I also get to spend time visiting existing customers to discuss everything about CRM after the fact. I get to see things post implementation and some of the immediate impact. And then there are some of the companies that are five and six years removed from their first deployment of CRM. When you see some of these installations and how some firms have really embraced the concepts of Customer Relationship Management it give me a sense of making a difference. But who cares about how I feel. The users, managers and executives of these companies feel great and they show off what they have done with a sense of pride and accomplishment.

In recent discussions with one firm the COO told me about how they had posted record profits three years in a row and how they have been on a hiring binge during this year when many are making tough decisions. Wanting to know the origins of the results I suggested that the market must be really "rocking" in his industry. He said that that there had been an uptick in his line of financial services but said that the solution that they put in back in 2007 was killing his competitors. I asked for an explanation. He said that timing and response and not necessarily price were the keys to winning in his game.

When prodded to explain how the system did anything to help in those areas he said that the combination of two things related to the system made all of the difference. First, he mentioned that the system itself with the workflow engine and the notifications and business rules made it very easily operationally to run a deal through the cycle. More importantly, he added, is that the changes made in the first two years at the suggestions of employees helped to accelerate many processes and cut the time to process a transaction in half from two years ago.

I was curious to see how long the process used to take in the pre "CRM" days. He said, "I can't even remember back that far but I know it was brutal. Everything we do today is completely electronic and every handoff is handled in the system. In the old days we could take a call and they might have two teams of people working on the same deal. It might take a few days to even get the right documents out to people and then there was a huge file that made its way from department to department. When someone would call in for a status everyone would run around looking for a file like it was a scavenger hunt. The entire process of pricing and funding a deal was normally ten days to two weeks."

Talk about an eye opener. When we went through the discovery process several years earlier they mentioned various pains and desires but we didnt' get into the particulars of the impact of exactly how long these tasks took to complete. The customer was surrendering to technology out of despearation but with no real ROI expectations. I really started to smile when he told me how long the end to end process takes today. He said that if they get documents back same day they can price and move to closing the following day and fund on day three.

As we wrapped up our conversation my customer explained that his competitors live in the "old world" and still live in the world of working deals from start to finish in two weeks. He explained, "They just can't compete and when people are dealing with money they don't want to wait a long time. So now the brokers in the industry bring their clients to us first and our competitors only if their clients force them to shop around. Life is good when you get to see the deals before everyone else. As more people find out we continue to grow."

Talk about a happy customer. He deployed a system and his employees embraced the technology and made it a part of their culture to look for constant change and improvement. I love hearing stories like this in the midst of tough times because that is when the strongest companies thrive. It is a beautiful thing when it all comes together.

Would You Be First in the Water?

2009-06-29T02:40:00Z

Over the past couple of years I have been interviewed by Web CPA (Source Media) regarding the topic of CRM in the accounting industry. And surprisingly, over the past couple of years not a great amount has changed in an industry that has been very resistant to adopt CRM. The question that arises in my head is that definition of insanity and doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. I wanted to get into a bit deeper discussion because there are some significant circumstances we can analyze about any industry that is in this same quandry (like manufacturing).

For as long as I have been writing or giving speeches about CRM I always talk about how difficult it is to really be successful with a project when the approach is all about technology. Technology is but one tool and it is people and process that make the technology seem to come alive. When this magic happens employees know the value of their system becuase it makes them better at their given job description. The challenge here is the inherent ability or inability to get peope to accept change to adhere to a process for the good of all. Therefore, unless you change the way people think then you will not be able to change their behaviors.

So let's jump into the structure of the accounting industry and sluggish adoption of CRM into this industry. By the way, your firm may be as resistant to change but this example is one that I dealt with most recently. Most CPA firms are setup in a heirarchy of partners and associates doing much of the day to day work in an attempt to "earn their stripes" and achieve partnership. The business development is handled by the more seasoned partners and the work is handed out to the associates who are concentrated in billable time and completing the various projects.

For most accounting firms the partners work on client acquisition and build their clientele over a long period of time. Historically, these clients have also stayed for 10 to 20 years and that is the frame of reference that most partners have in their frame of reference for their perceptions of building and maintaining a firm. Fast forward to today's reality and change is in the air. Clients have become more and more willing to change accounting firms and partners have had a hard time changing their behavior to meet the existing challenges.

So, how does CRM come into the mix? First, form many of these firms, rather than try and introduce a concept of formal business development teams, it really hasn't been an option. In order to grow many accounting firms have chosen to either be swallowed up by a larger firm and other firms have been the acquirer in order to meet growth objectives. Those firms that have chosen to introduce the concept of CRM they have done so with limited understanding of what mainstream customer relationship management is all about.

The firms that have chosen to take the leap into CRM have been doing so with technology partners focused on technology packages centric to the accounting industry. The challenge is that the concept of many of these technology firms also have a very myopic view of what CRM is as well. The end result has been many firms that perceive themselves to be involved with CRM when they have done little more than enhance their abiliy to do improved mass communications or centralize documents related to certain accounts.

The most interesting circumstance in this particular industry is that when you analyze their critical needs many of these firms would be best served by implementing more of best of breed technologies from technologies companies that specialize in the CRM space. These firms have the need to deal with customer service types of issues, market to their prospects and client base, and also to have formal processes around developing new business. These are the pillars of CRM as we know it today.

Why then, are so many firms unwilling to jump into the mainstream? No one can say exactly but I would suggest that the group decision making that handles new initiatives for many firms is centered in their own frame of reference. When introduced to a new concept that may be the most beneficial partners of these firms tend to fall back to what is known in their industry rather than what may be the best solution.

If you find yourself in this type of situation I suggest that you take the time to evaluate what may be best for your firm not just the most convenient or well known alternative.

Is CRM ROI Really Within Your Grasp?

2009-06-22T14:00:00Z

I know it is not the most enticing title for this article but I figured it would be good enough to grab the audience that I wanted to reach. The topic for today is return on investment as it relates to Customer Relationship Management and why that has historically been a challenge in this particular industry. I have seen attempt after attempt at trying to quantify everything from clicks to order processing time and some of those elements can be locked down. What cannot be locked down are some of the most important elements of your success, profitability, and viability in the marketplace.

One of the most challenging areas of any CRM initiative is that specific components that are goals of the project relate to Customer Experience, best practices in operations, and the creation of measurable areas that were previously undocumented or not tied to any particular type of technology. The divergence from areas like ERP or Document Management are that many of those projects have such concrete capabilities and outputs that there are tangible and hard costs that are tracked. In fact, when many of these systems are implemented there is a change taking place to replace an outdated or older system with many of the same functional capabilities (albeit with new bells and whistles).

Many of prospects that come to our firm to replace an ERP system come armed with very specific capabilties and these customers have highly evolved requirements. When this is the case there are specific capabilities with specific transactions that are documented and the savings to the firm are obvious and measuarable. For instance, if a company has a "sales" arm and a "manufacturing" arm a new ERP system might handle all of the "due to" and "due from" transactions. If there are a couple of people that do these transactions full time that are no longer needed then the savings are highly visible.

When consolidating data into easy to find locations and eliminating filing cabinets full of paper the savings by implementing a document management system the return is pretty easy to calculate. There is the savings on paper and toner. Space is saved from eliminating filing cabinets and the time it takes for people to retrieve information can be easily documented.

So why then, is CRM ROI so hard to track down? I think the answer depends on two critical elements relating to what you are trying to accomplish and whether the goal for the project is transactional or relational? Yep, I said it, relational. You know, as it the "R" in CRM?

The point here is really all about the the "Customer Experience" that everyone is touting and not so much about the technical ability to say that sales, marketing and service all operate out of one particular database. I would like to use exaggeration to make my point through a couple of hypothetical situations.

In hypothecial situation number one the sales team is working their pipeline and constantly looking to get more deals in the pipeline so the marketing team is proactively sending more and more email campaigns to try and increase lead flow. The sales people are also responsible for some existing customer account management and light service tasks. As the marketing team executes to get more leads into the pipeline the number and then the percentage of deals drops sharply and there is a spike in the number of service requests.

Analyzing what happened and then losing a key customer the president of the company calls the customer to try and get them back and receives the following feedback, "Since the beginning of the year we have seen more and more requests from you about more products and services. Honestly, we began to have problems getting a hold of your representative to help us wiht the core products we already buy. And then, we just decided to move to someone else that wasn't trying to be everything to everone."

Putting the Practical CRM spin on this I think that this company hit a situation where they approached CRM from a very mechanical way and not in a way that makes a difference in creating a truly exceptional customer experience. Instead the customer began to perceive the company as more interested in themselves rather than their customers. From an ROI perspecitive the company could certainly track more leads, track customer resolution time and measure the number of deals closed to reach an ROI argument.

In hypothetical situation number two the company also has moved onto a CRM system and did so with the goal of improving the effectiveness of its team to deal with the customer at all levels. Trust me, you won't be putting that one in a CRM calculator. But let's look at the net effect on what happened in their business when their teams worked together.

First, the sales teams were able to provide feedback on the quality of leads for marketing to put more money into some programs and discontinue others. When the service team completed dealing with any issue a survey was sent out to find out how the customer felt and to also find out what other products and services they were interested in. And finally, the sales team was able to get involved in the right type of selling opportunities rather than just working a higher volume. The company stayed focused and listened to their customers and revenues grew across the board.

So, in one situation a company was able to drive lots of activity and measure lots of things, and another company utilized tools to better at execution of their corporate mission. One drove revenue and growth while the other began to see many unanticipated challenges. And, the kicker??? The first situation was the easier to measure from an ROI perspective.

If you want to get right down to it. None of us are delivering the level of service and execute the way that we think we are. If we choose to go down the path to improving these areas the statistics tell us that doing the right thing will matter on the bottom line. So what if you can't always measure it.

Be Careful What You Wish For...

2009-06-15T16:01:00Z

After you get past the shock of me posting only 3 days after my last post I am hoping that some of you will take a long hard look at one of the other impacts of reaching out into this frontier of CRM 2.0 and social networking. I have tagged this in many different categories becuase it is hard to figure out where this topic applies. Without keeping you in suspense any further this posting has to do with two incidents that occured in the past two weeks. At first they seem very disconnected but then I figured out this morning what was annoying me about them this morning.

The events we are talking about happen to be related to email, marketing, and the messaging that hits the people you are trying to reach. In partcular, with the title of this email and the fervor around CRM 2.0, it is this concept that we are going to not only trust the messaging going out but also have to live with the consequences...good or bad!

Around a week or so ago I received a message from an organization that was addressed to me by first name (not a big deal but it did get my attention). Apparently this person (whose email address was a company@company.com) had been trying to reach me but been unable to do so. I felt badly. Had I not returned a message? Had I neglected to call someone back? I checked my missed calls on the phone system and nothing from that company or their area code and no messages?

I assumed I had done nothing wrong and decided not to respond to the email because the information didn't seem relevant to me...we will come back to this one later.

Then, in the middle of last week another message from a different company. This one was easier to understand because I am a customer of this health care provider. But, the message was an open invitation to a very nice and expensive steak house here in the city. Now this is health care coverage I could get used to. I even called the steak house and asked if I needed to respond and they said, "No, there is room reserved, just show up!". Wow, I don't know what they are selling but I will certainly take them up on the pitch while I enjoy a free steak.

One day later I get a second email which explained that this invitation was erroneously sent to all contacts in the database and to disregard the invitation. Not a big deal since I was surprised that I would be mysteriously invited to a $100 dinner for no reason from a very large health care provider. But, it did get me thinking about the impact of what the impact would be when all of my CRM users have the capacity to send the same type of blunder to my customers.

Now, back to the first situation. After disregarding the prior email I went on my merry way and didn't think twice about it until this morning. I received yet another request for a meeting from this company this morning and this person who still does not have their own email address at this company mentioned more attempts to try and reach me. And yep, you guessed it, I went back through last weeks calls to find nothing from this company and no messages.

As I read throught he second email I began to laugh out loud at the content of the second email (although I am sure it was not intended that way). If I may, here are a couple of the key points that struck me to be funny. First, this person said that in just the past week they had "dozens of conversations with executives". Really??? Dozens??? Since they couldn't pick up the phone to call me once I thought that was incredible (or at least incredibly funny). Next, the company made claims of being able to produce incredible results for many household names. I thought this was funny because we aren't exactly a household name and would immediately shy away from solutions that are targeted for larger organizations (it's a price thing that I am sure many of you can understand).

I couldn't help myself and responded to the company with a terse email stating that they should evaluate their messaging, methods, and target list. I also wished them well and said that I hoped the rep would be able to make a living with the way that they market themselves. And finally, I told them that if they were able to connect with "dozens" of executives on a weekly basis they should be in telemarketing and not the line of business they currently promote.

So how does all of this tie back to Socal Media and CRM 2.0? Well, quite frankly, it is the concept that whether you are marketing directly or enabling front line people to represent your company, there is an inherent danger in exposing your reputation and your company to careless and/or misguided messages to the prospects and clients that you work with. More importantly, with many of these people you will not get a second chance at making a first impression (especially if the message is poor or misguided).

When people use technology and tools as part of their craft there is an overall responsiblity to understand who you are trying to reach, whether or not they fit your target, and to make sure that the person receiving these messages will be positively impacted by your efforts. In one instance the company has what I believe to be poor marketing knowledge and in the other an unintended error may have impacted their customer base negatively. While I was not surprised that the invitation was sent in error there may have been other executives at much larger customers that have a sour taste in their mouth from this incident.

There is no zero sum game in the world of sales and marketing. Everything you do will ultimately have a positive or negative effect on your prospects and clients. At a minimum there should be a vetting process with others in your organization before team members engage in various initiatives. There is no doubt that in both these cases that if other people had been involved the results could have been much better.

In the world of CRM 2.0 people are spending way too much time worrying about connecting to people. Maybe they should take just as much time worrying about the messages that they send to those same people. To the best of my knowledge no one has created a method for how to use CRM to connect with people that no longer want anything to do with you.

Do You Need a CRM Reality Check?

2009-06-10T21:29:00Z

Working in the area of sales and sales operations for the past 20 years has been both enjoyable and frustrating. It is amazing how far apart expectations and reality can be in any organization. Taking technology out of it there are historically many disconnects in the world of Marketing, Sales, Operations and Finance. So why bring this up now? Well, why not...

I decided to write this posting because there is so much conversation going on right now about CRM 2.0 and Web 2.0 that it is hard to get a word in regarding all of the other issues that have been traditional barriers to successful CRM initiatives. Throwing that fuel on an already raging fire just seems like we are asking for trouble. Don't get me wrong. Five years ago it was hard getting anyone to talk about CRM (much less the versions of it).

The thing that keeps rubbing me the wrong way with all of these social media and other extensions of CRM into the market place is that much of this discussion is assuming that all the rest of CRM and its operational capabilities are already being met. I am as big of a tech junkie as you can find. When the new gadget comes out I am camped out the night before with the rest of the geeks. I blog and belong to many of the social networking venues.

I guess that is why I am having such a hard time making the connection. It reminds me of my kid asking me how to make a wheelie (hope I spelled that right) before he can even ride without training wheels. There is no doubt that these new CRM 2.0 "wheelies" will sell an awful lot of software...now that people are bored with dashboards and sales funnels.

So here is my checklist of the top value added initiatives that you need to have a handle on before you worry about walking around your shop and find sales reps staring at Facebook entries while logged into CRM:

1. Solidify Marketing - Make sure that all of your marketing initiaitives are well defined within CRM and that you have optimized the current technologies to be able to see when people are opening the messages you send them or when they are hitting your web site. If you also are able to track the effectiveness of campaigns you can put more money into some efforts and discontinue others mid stream.

2. Lock down Proposals & Quotes - Show me a sales team and I will show you people frustrated with generating quotes and orders, using multiple systems, and cutting and pasting proposals together every time they have a real deal. In most organizations this equates to a day or two a month. If you automated quote and proposal generation with professional looking documents how would your sales team use an extra day or two a month?

3. Connect Systems Like Leggos - So now your team has orders or customer inquiries and people are running around like crazy double entering information or spending lots of time explaining things to order entry or customer service personnel. Really??? Haven't we gotten past the concept that data entered once should never have to be entered again! If you give people information or integrated systems then you are just given them the opportunity to succeed.

4. Why Recipes Work - Did you ever bite into a brownie the first time your mom let your little sister make them? If you managed to keep it down then you are brave. The point is that recipes, like workflow, enable us to do things the same way over and over again wiht predictable results.

5. Be the Night Guard - Assuming you are entering and tracking valuable information then you should be able to treat that data like gold. The night guard at a Bank walks around and is looking for specific things that look right or look wrong every time he passes through. If you don't have Key Performance Indicators monitoring and notifying you so that you can manage proactively then how valuable is that data people take so much time to enter?

OK, so I think I have gone far enough for now. If you can email me and tell me that you have all of these things in line with your CRM then CRM 2.0 until the cows come home. Hopefully I am not just a rambling idiot but addressing internal operations and sales operational excellence should be a priority before you worry about how you are connecting to everyone outside your company walls.

Understanding Your CRM Software Publisher

2009-05-28T00:54:00Z

Going through the process of deciding that you need a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) package is a difficult enough process and when going out to the market to research the alternatives there are certainly plenty of software publishers and their representatives on the other side willing to tell you why their packages are superior and how they will satisfy solving your business concerns.

In the traditional process either someone convinces a business owner or manager that they need a solution or they somehow come to that conclusion on their own. The company then tasks someone with doing the research around alternatives and many of them go to web and start to poke and prod around various web sites and start to put together a list of people to talk to. At the end of this cycle a number of people are asked to show how their solutions will meet an organizations objectives for putting in a new system. The one missing element in the process is an understanding of how these various solutions evolved to their current state.

Some people would argue that understanding the history of a particular application stack is an exercise in futility because any given project is about what exists today and how that capability matches up with current needs. If you use the economic principle that in a free market economy all information is perfect I would agree with that argument. We live, however, in market that is imperfect and during the process of selecting a system the people providing a solution demonstration often show us exactly what they want us to see and stay away from places that may cause us difficulties in reaching the optimal solution.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think that doing trials or pilot programs to learn everything possible about a particular technology will solve the problem. There is a happy middle ground that I think can provide you a comfort level when selecting a system. If you simply ask each vendor to give you a historical context of how the technology was created and how it evolved then you can at least get a baseline to understand where you might have greater concerns or want more information in a particular capability or the publisher's commitment to certain functionality. This will make you feel comfortable around the future commitment of R&D dollars and how likely you will be successful moving forward.

Here are a number of the areas that I would be concerned about when researching a new technology:

Underlying Technology - When you look at any new system it is valuable to take stock of which technology foundation that technology was originally built upon and where it is today. An example is a CRM system built as an in house client/server system and then "enabled" for the web but not rebuilt or built natively for today's web capabilities. There are a number of challenges and customization issues that may arise from this type of offering.

Development Timeline - The first concern here is to understand when a particular system was created and how long it has been proven in the marketplace. Along with this understanding of how something has been around is the need to understand that publisher's pace at which they come out with new revisions and the technology road map moving forward. A perfect example is some of the newer systems that have come about in the post-.com era. Many of these technologies are still playing catch up on features and functions that are valuable to a sales or service team (especially in high transactional environments) and when you pay for a system the price paid should reflect an apples to apples comparison of what you are paying for. If you couple in the timing on new releases for a vendor to catch up there could be a serious impact on ROI.

Target Audience - When any new application is developed there is a specific target audience or ideal customer for that software publisher. The impact of knowing the original target helps in understanding how the technology has evolved to its current state. The most common example that I can think of are the lower end technologies that are focused on primarily contact management or sales force automation and then add some account management or marketing functionalities to try and satisfy customer demand. Many of these technologies have a lower price point but their existing capabilties for marketing and service may be superficial at best.

Delivery Options - This particular concern is one that has evolved more as the world of Software as a Service (SaaS) options have flooded the market over the past few years. Many prospective customers need to know if those underlying technologies utlize one large shared instance of the technology or if they are basically renting their own instance of a database out in the cloud. The impact here is that there are inherently more options to modify and customize an application so that it can meet a particular company's objectives.

Frankenstein Effect - One of the biggest challenges in understanding the history of some applications is to also know how/if some of the capabilities were originally developed by the publisher or if they have "bolted" on products that were build in their tool set and then subsequently purchased and made to be part of the application. The most obvious challenges are that sometimes the functionality was not part of the original design and creates either performance or customization challenges

While there are other areas to try and understand like integration or mobile capabilities I think you get the gist of this posting. When you have a baseline of understanding of the technology and the context of how it has evolved this will enable better decision making when making a final selection. As the saying goes...those who don't know history are bound to repeat it. And, in the world of technology, nothing could be closer to the truth.

The Biggest "Deal Breakers" in Achieving CRM Adoption

2009-05-13T14:55:00Z

Every year at this time I head off to a week long conference to spend time with a room full of colleagues that evangelize CRM in their respective markets. I love attending this event because it gives me the opportunity to talk to people that are in the same mind set and a great sounding board when it comes to discussing the issues of the day. There is no better venue to test my perceptions of issues and challenges in the CRM space and to get validation from my peers. The side benefit is that my peers and I get a better understanding from the software manufacturer's regarding their perceptions as well.

When I started writing this blog the intent was always to give a real world approach and to give advice in a practical way. Being here for a week I tried to take a high level view to get my thoughts together and communicate what I learned. If you would have asked me what I thought I would be writing about I would have come up with a completely different response.

The biggest bombshell that I found is the disconnect between the rush to CRM 2.0 and how little that has to do with what the man on the street and what they need to succeed. CRM adoption still continues to be the big gotcha that all technology consulting firms like the one I work for. Many of my colleagues in the industry feel the same way. So I decided to air some of our grievances related to how CRM technology breaks with CRM culture.

The good news is that the core challenges with CRM adoption are not the same issues we faced 5 or 10 years ago. The bad news is that there continues to be more and more barriers to realizing user adoption because more variables continue to be introduced into the market place. Here are my top 5 deal breakers as I see them.

1. Works the Way I Do - There is a lot of marketing and spin from a number of publishers about CRM working the way people do. Well, here is a tip then. Regardless of how much we claim to have internet access around the clock the reality is that we don't. If we really want people to use CRM then give them ALL of CRM on my desktop/laptop regardless of my connectivity. I don't want paired down functionality or to have to make choices about which customers I can cache and carry.

2. Works Like Everything Else I Use - No offense to any developers out there but if you think that having 5 to 10 screens pop up in a 30 to 60 minute session of using a CRM application is "acceptable" you are out of your mind. There is no technology in use today in corporate America that pleasures the user with pop up after pop up. It does not happen in Word or Excel and it does not happen when I buy something from Amazon.com. Enough said, I think you get the frustration of CRM users.

3. Mobile is Mobile - Here we go back to the same concepts that relate to how people work. Don't shrink an application into a browser and then call it a mobile CRM application. The point of being mobile and using CRM is so that I can work (yes, even sometimes we don't always have 5 bars of signal strength) in a plane, train, or automobile no matter what connectivity happens to be. Internet accessible mobile is not mobile CRM.

4. As Reliable as the Toilet - The overwhelming frustration of people using technology as part of making a living is that there can be no question about the stability and reliability of the application. Think about it. What if your toilet worked successfully most of the time. How ugly would that get? People that wake up and get introduced to a piece of technology need to know that it will work with all the common tools most likely to be on any given desktop in big or small companies. Outlook is the best example I can think of.

5. Don't Penalize the User - Once people are introduced to CRM they should be given less and less manual duties in the technology over time. It is amazing that as people put in more and better information they are almost always penalized by being hit with more and more duties as it relates to CRM. No one woke up today and said "I hope my entire day is taken up with meaningless data entry that has nothing to do with my job function." If we don't grasp the use of process automation and workflow soon our users will just flat out revolt or go find somewhere else to work.

Off to the airport now but I hope that people that design and publish technology take some of these things to heart. It was a good week with lots of learning and lots of laughs.

CRM 2.0: Are You Ready for the Next Generation?

2009-05-06T00:53:00Z

It was bound to happen...and then finally it did! I was sitting in a meeting and then a prospective customer starting asking me about CRM 2.0. After a decade submersed in the world of CRM I kind of chuckled to myself that an organization that had not even begun to grasp the real impact of a CRM initiative that this person was already down a path that most of the colleagues that I trust in the industry have not even fully agreed upon. If you want to get some insight on the discussion you may want to visit the CRM 2.0 Wiki.

I have pretty much stayed out of the fray up to now because every time I get involved in this discussion it seems like I am trying to figure out how to fly to the Sun using a Mountain Dew powered rocket ship. If that last reference meant nothing to you then you completely get my point. It really does not mean anything to me either. Don't get me wrong. It's not that I don't care about CRM 2.0 or Social CRM or my coined phrase, "2nd Generation CRM". It is such a big topic that I don't really know how to encapsulate the discussion into silos that will provide my clients a relevant and actionable method of resolving what it should mean to them.

So, rather than talking in circles, I guess this will be my initial jaunt into this discussion on what I know and what I don't know about CRM 2.0. I do have a head start because I also started to discuss this concept in a blog article from earlier this year Integrating CRM to Social Networking Not a Reality Just Yet. That particular blog posting had to do with a panel that I was a part of at the Small Business Summit 2009. There were so many questions related to how to engage Social Media into business development efforts and it was clear to me that this concept is going to start heating up sooner rather than later.

First, let me start my comments by explaining that in the past 10 years I have seen so many inefficient internal sales and service operations that I think I will show some bias with regards to what I think the immediate opportunity is for CRM 2.0 for most organizations. Time after time I continue to get engaged in projects with management teams that are trying to consider CRM as a functional step primarily in the context of sales and service teams and not inclusive of the interoperability of those teams within the organization as a whole.

There is a paradox here that I want to make sure I don't confuse. I do believe that initial CRM initiatives should be focused on a few critical deliverable elements and expanded over time. However, there should be a blue print on the master plan for organizational operational excellence before diving into the CRM project itself. How does this relate to the concept of CRM 2.0? I guess the initial challenge that I have with most CRM 2.0 discussions is that the focus is external and most organizations haven't conquered their internal challenges yet.

I believe that CRM 2.0 is the essence of merging how customers live and work and bridging those tools into a common customer experience that our internal teams see and understand in order to be able to sell more products and keep those customers for life. I discuss the customer experience in many of my seminars and I try to impress on my audience that people want to have the same experience no matter how they engage with our organization. Knowing as much about your customer and messaging to them in a meaningful way is a key part of executing this vision.

The one thing that I don't know how to encapsulate into the CRM 2.0 discussion is how we take the day to day tools and transactions in our corporate environments and mold them into this panacea where we are at one with our customer. Moreover, the one thing that I don't see involved in this Social CRM discussion is what I currently think is the real opportunity in the next generation of CRM.

I guess a better way to explain this is that I think we need certain building blocks (of which many of the elements of CRM 1.0 are just flat out essential). I do see the path to CRM 2.0 but I think that you need to get the foundation set and then concentrate on my vision of CRM 2.0. The next generation of CRM for my customers that have gotten the foundation in place is all about workflow and business automation combined with the right level of business analytics and key performance indicators.

At the end of the day if these initiatives I just explained as my concept of CRM 2.0 are not incorporated into the existing definition I think that trying to make the next steps of the evolving customer experience will not provide us with what we would all expect this next wave of CRM to be all about.

Who's Driving the Opportunity?

2009-04-28T04:01:00Z

I am not sure exactly how to start this posting but I had to write something after having the same type of discussion 3 or 4 times over the past couple of weeks. The issues I had been discussing with several senior sales people and sales leadership at a few accounts centered around the concept of an Opportunity and a Lead. After jumping up and down over the "technical" definition of a Lead versus an Opportunity I decided to take out something from my old bag of tricks.

Many years ago I was working for a consulting firm and the firm had evolved primarily from the roots of an accounting technology organization. As such, the company had developed a formal methodology when deploying its internal CRM system. When marketing started to work with the sales organization there was all kinds of chaos trying to develop who was responsible for what and where the ultimate ownership of the opportunity fell. Since the company had evolved into a company selling everything from e-commerce to human resource solutions in addition to accounting and CRM the question of ownership had stalled several times because no one could agree.

Since our CRM practice was consulting on our client engagements and helping customers with many of these same issues we were asked to help give some guidance that would help us deploy a system that would work when selling to small companies or very large complex clients. What we came up with and the process that we worked through I found to be very helpful for anyone who reads this blog and has run into this issue in the past.

First, lets discuss the concept of a Lead. If you ask most marketing people they would tell you that a Lead is a nothing more than a name on a list. If you ask a sales person they would probably tell you that a Lead is something that is qualified that came from something that probably started on a list. There is truth in both answers but we need to talk about when things change and the impact to the users within an organization.

The marketing team will decide to move forward on a target list of some kind and this is done in a one-to-many format. It really won't matter whether it is an existing client or a prospect but when there is a response the inquiry is still unqualified and in the Lead category. Once people start to get involved that is where the concept of ownership will come into play. There are two types of people interaction to concern yourself with. One type of interaction is the qualification process and the other will be the activities that will proceed to work a qualified deal through the Opportunity process.

Our CEO at the time had a great spin on this and the focal point that you should have when it relates to ownership of the Opportunity. Once a deal is qualified the "owner" of the deal should be your internal advocate that will coordinate all resources and spearhead activity with the client/prospect to bring the deal to a conclusion. He called it being "CEO of the Deal". That person will do whatever it takes in order to reach a conclusion and work diligently to make things happen.

Since many organizations work on teams or have multiple sales people selling different products and services within the same account this is where the confusion comes into play. I constantly hear about the owner of a Lead or Opportunity being the owner of the account and this may or may not be the case. The owner of an Account should only be the owner of an Opportunity if they have the authorization, skills and resources to bring a deal to closure.

How the deals finally reach a conclusion is a totally different story. Opportunities are like goals. They need to be attainable, measurable, and have some expectation of time period. IF you run Opportunities open ended or you don't have specified sales processes then it is likely that you are trying to manage Leads mixed in with Opportunities and susceptible to lots of inefficiency and frustration.

How Much Actual Value is There in CRM Dashboards?

2009-04-21T04:01:00Z

Ten years ago when you walked in a room with a projector the size of some small refrigerators and sat down to show a CRM package all everyone wanted to know was “Do you have a sales funnel?” Throw it up on the screen and your CRM package was half way sold. Now we have come full circle and when we sit down with prospects the projector barely comes into focus before the “D Word” comes out. I am not saying that dashboards are bad, but them in context of the bigger picture.

If you start to break down the concept of Dashboards and their purpose then you must also define what a dashboard is versus other components of Business Intelligence. In simple terms Business Intelligence or “Smart Data” is any subset of information provided in a way that accelerates decision making or management of a business.

The traditional methods of Business Intelligence for CRM purposes can be broken down into a few simple buckets. This first category is what I call Informational (like a gauge in your car). The better format is using Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s are have intelligence already built in). And the final category is what I would call Status Indicators (more like the lights that come on in your car when something is wrong).

Like the sales funnel from days gone by the Informational dashboards are cool to look at and they do provide some demographic information like your lead/close breakdown or the different categories for your customer service tickets. The problem is that most of them don’t give you an action to take or a place to go from there without running additional reports to see the devil in the details.

Key Performance Indicators are far and away the best alternative because the data has been pre-screened for exactly the indicators that you are looking for so that additional reports are not necessary. The challenge is knowing your business well enough to know what situations in the database would raise a positive or negative flag that need attention. For instance, if you have a KPI for Activities weekly per Sales Representative it doesn’t tell you the root cause for the issue…just that the issue needs attention.

The Status dashboards are probably the most worthless of all. Using these types of dashboards assumes that all of your processes are outlined and you get to see where things are “stuck” in an assembly line. If you have complicated processes then these types of dashboards have even less relevance. If you have seven different sales processes then looking at one funnel that shows the Stage of Opportunities you have a lot of work to do to get to some valuable data on a given process.

So what is my point in telling you all of this? Well, in all of these scenarios there is a need for the user of the dashboard to have a fair amount of internal savvy regarding the data and what to do in order to find something actionable that is meaningful to him or her in their daily role. I tend to lean towards a different approach when dealing with data.

If you know how you want to run the business and the conditions in your database that require an actionable event then your answer is probably not in the world of dashboards but in the world of workflow and automation. This is a bigger discussion for another blog article so I won’t delve into it here.

At the end of the day we all have more data that we will ever be able to go through and we will all be better served through notifications and alerts tied together with meaningful reports before we go buying a CRM application based on who has the prettiest dashboards.