To create a firestorm...
If you want to create a firestorm, just post on one of the CRM forums indicating you are looking to purchase a CRM package and ask if anyone have any recommendations. Within minutes you’ll have a few dozen posts extolling the virtues of various packages, some mainstream, and others previously unknown outside the author’s back bedroom. Aside from a range of sensible well argued opinions (albeit proferred with relative ignorance of what you are trying to achieve), you will inevitably see posts from Rob (rob@megacrm.com) saying that he’s just purchased this package called MegaCRM which is truly, unbelievably fantastic, and pretty much sells your products for you – which will in turn be countered by Mary (mary@superdupercrm.com) who has just purchased SuperDuper CRM, which is replacing the MegaCRM system they threw out because it was utter manure, and here’s a list of all the features it has (bearing an uncanny resemblance to the SuperDuper CRM product brochure). And by the way please note here these are fictional products and any resemblance to products, either existing or dead, is completely unintended.
Anyway you get the picture – there are a lot of packages out there, and no shortage of people to argue passionately on which they believe to be the best. For SME’s there is considerably more complexity, because not only do they need to choose a technology, but because most of these technologies are sold through a network of resellers, they need to choose an implementation partner as well. As a result, a lot of the work we do is around helping our clients judge the most appropriate combination of technology and implementer to meet their needs.
Just to re-iterate a point we’ve made in the past, and one I fully expect to be making again in the future – the vendor selection process is largely a lottery, unless you have a clear understanding of what you are trying to achieve. It’s hard to gauge functionality if you are uncertain about what functionality you need. In addition, it’s very difficult to get comparative pricing if the requirements are fuzzy, because the vendors can only give you an estimate, which may bear no resemblance to the final invoice figure.
Traditionally in the CRM selection process, the technology tends to be the star of the show. If you were to analyse the split of focus between technological capability and implementation capability, I’d estimate it to be about 90% - 10%. This seems to me somewhat imbalanced, given that I would expect a good implementation of a mediocre technology to vastly outperform a poor implementation of an excellent technology. While we are very conscious of getting the technology decision right, we also place a lot of emphasis on the choice of implementation partner. We believe this is just as important in achieving high returns for the client. It’s an area I don’t feel gets a lot of attention, so this post functions as a brief introduction to several more over the coming months, where I’m going to set out some of the things we look for when assessing the implementer rather than the technology.
Anyway you get the picture – there are a lot of packages out there, and no shortage of people to argue passionately on which they believe to be the best. For SME’s there is considerably more complexity, because not only do they need to choose a technology, but because most of these technologies are sold through a network of resellers, they need to choose an implementation partner as well. As a result, a lot of the work we do is around helping our clients judge the most appropriate combination of technology and implementer to meet their needs.
Just to re-iterate a point we’ve made in the past, and one I fully expect to be making again in the future – the vendor selection process is largely a lottery, unless you have a clear understanding of what you are trying to achieve. It’s hard to gauge functionality if you are uncertain about what functionality you need. In addition, it’s very difficult to get comparative pricing if the requirements are fuzzy, because the vendors can only give you an estimate, which may bear no resemblance to the final invoice figure.
Traditionally in the CRM selection process, the technology tends to be the star of the show. If you were to analyse the split of focus between technological capability and implementation capability, I’d estimate it to be about 90% - 10%. This seems to me somewhat imbalanced, given that I would expect a good implementation of a mediocre technology to vastly outperform a poor implementation of an excellent technology. While we are very conscious of getting the technology decision right, we also place a lot of emphasis on the choice of implementation partner. We believe this is just as important in achieving high returns for the client. It’s an area I don’t feel gets a lot of attention, so this post functions as a brief introduction to several more over the coming months, where I’m going to set out some of the things we look for when assessing the implementer rather than the technology.
posted by Richard Boardman at 11:14 am
<< Home