MikeMuhney.com

The Irony of CRM

As the Co-Inventor of ACT!, which is attributed with being the catalyst creating the CRM industry and still to this day co-existing beside it, I have a truly unique perspective of using software designed to create more effective business relationships that began with ACT!’s release in April, 1987. Beginning with that birth of the whole “relationship management” spectrum from those early days when people relied on their paper systems through to the conflicts and ultimate ironies still surrounding CRM today, many unfortunate complexities still exist. This is a viewpoint from my observations…..

For many years now the business community has learned of, explored, selected, and implemented CRM (Customer Relationship Management) systems with the stated intention of providing better prospecting tools as well as significantly enhancing customer service. Notice I said “stated” intention. And yet, without much, if any, fanfare (for the obvious reasons) an untold, but huge, amount of CRM failures have occurred in many of these organizations many of which are in the millions and multi-millions of wasted investment. So what went, and what goes, wrong? Without simplifying what of course can be a complex set of reasons, it remains that there is one fundamental, and core, reason that this has and will continue to happen.

Amazing how so many well-intentioned people can get something so potentially powerful so wrong. So what is this problem? It is, without a doubt, that the very (primary) people it is intended to help - the sales organization - are the very ones who readily sabotage it. Why is that? Well, maybe despite the fact that it is bought “for them” it is designed “for everyone else” - often without even any input from the the sales organization. This is both a strategic, as well as attitudinal, issue controlled by people outside of the sales realm. No sales means no marketing or customer service. Yet marketing and customer service, along with HR, IT, and just about everyone else is allowed to dictate what they want out of the system that fully depends on the sales people to provide. Kind of like taxation without representation, and we all know the outcome of that scenario.

I actually witnessed a first-hand encounter of this very nature, by a huge Fortune 100 firm. Sitting at the table was the IT Manager, a designated “CRM Project Manager” (part of the HR organization), a Sales Manager, and a Salesman. If it weren’t for the threat of assault charges, the Sales Manager would have strangled the IT and CRM Project Managers. Why? Because they actually disallowed any and all participation from sales in the design of the CRM system. Sales had rejected all prototypes provided, but had not been allowed to contribute their own ideas nor state their needs. Sadly, they never were, and when the final version was given to them it was only a matter of months before the multi-million dollar “investment” collapsed altogether.

CRM systems will only achieve their fully-intended results when sales has ownership and the other cast members serve supportive roles. The items important to them, the design balancing the push-pull of information, and the design incorporation of “Useful Use” features and functions will go a long ways toward achieving success.

This entry was posted on Saturday, August 1st, 2009 at 4:28 pm and is filed under Streetwise Views. The entry is tagged under You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.