Outsourced CRM administration...

Ever since InsideCRM rightly observed that my blog postings were somewhat erratic, I’ve attempted to maintain a certain level of regularity, even if the posts are hardly prolific. However I’ve be on holiday in a rather remote part of France where internet access proved taxing to say the least, so despite my best intentions, blogging was put on hold for a few weeks, so forgive me, but I'm back now!

One of the last conversations I had before I left was around the question of administrative resources for a project due to go live in December. I always ask prospective vendors how much time they recommend a client should allow for administering a system. I rarely get a sensible answer. This perhaps reflects that vendors lack the experience/interest in the real world application of their technologies, and that since most CRM systems are largely unstructured the administrative requirements appear light.

The administrative requirement for CRM systems that ‘do’ things for clients by contrast can be significant. Supporting users so that they are able to follow defined processes in a structured and consistent manner can be both time-consuming and challenging (please note I’m talking about user rather than system administration here, so this point is applicable regardless as to whether it’s a hosted or on premise solution). It is also a critical role; get the wrong person doing it and it can be ‘game over’ in terms of a productive and high pay-back system.

One critical decision that companies need to make when implementing CRM systems, ideally early on in the process – hence my conversation six months ahead of live - is whether this role can and should be performed in-house or outsourced. I think there are four basic considerations in deciding whether to keep administration in house:

Do we have/can we get the right person to do the job? – as I mentioned this is a pivotal role and is often the weakest link in many system deployments. The skills required to be effective are invariably underestimated as the person has to be both comfortable working with the technology, but perhaps more importantly has to be able to win friends and influence people in the battle for effective user adoption.

Do they have the time to perform the role? – as I suggested earlier, ask many vendors and you’d figure this was a minor chore. In practice high pay-back systems are generally demanding on administrative resource, particularly in the early days. Consequently many systems founder because the administrator isn’t allocated sufficient time to perform the role effectively.

Are they motivated to perform the role? – this is a particular issue where administrative responsibilities are shared with other duties. I see many talented administrators who see the non-administration parts of their job as more interesting/rewarding and consequently this is their area of focus to the detriment of the CRM system.

Can we retain them? – as Warren Buffett observed – and I’m paraphrasing here – I like companies that can be run profitably by an idiot, because one day they may be. As I’ve touched on before weak administration is the point of failure for many otherwise successful systems. If you have a constantly revolving door because it’s impossible to maintain interest in the administration role for any duration, so the odds of recruiting a rogue administrator increase.

As a general rule the administrative requirements of effective systems are considerably higher than people realise. In light of this, organisations tend to assign the role in-house because it’s seen as a minor inconsequential chore. A better appreciation of the administration function might lead many organisations to conclude this function was better outsourced. As organisations start to make better use of CRM technology it will be interesting to see if outsourced administration becomes a significant growth market.

Nine ways to improve CRM software demonstrations...

I may well have covered this topic before, but as someone asked me my thoughts on this topic this week, and as I’ve been both sides of the table more times that I’d care to think about, I thought I’d draft a ‘x ways to improve CRM software demonstrations’ post, so here goes:

1. Go SLOW – there’s a strange effect where some of the best CRM software demonstrations I’ve seen are by people new to the organisation because their still getting to grips with the software and as such they move about the application slowly. Invariably you see the same person in action 12 months later, and their presentation is nowhere near as effective for the simple reason that they have reached a point of proficiency with the software such that they now outpace their audience’s ability to keep up. I’ve rarely seen a demonstration done too slowly, but I figure 80% plus are presented too fast.

2.Keep it relevent – the audience want to know how the software will make their lives easier, they really don’t want to spend time looking at arcane capabilities that have nothing to do with their day to day jobs, yet time and time again I see vendors showcasing ‘really cool’ features that are irrelevant to the people they are presenting to.

3. Cut the ‘about us’ presentation right down – yes we need to know who you are and your credentials, but this should be a two to five minute exercise not an hour. Most of these presentations blend into each other with different vendors spending a lot of time saying exactly the same thing. This is the opportunity for vendors to crisply set out why they are different, but 95% of vendors go on way, and I mean waaaaaay too long in this area.

4. Keep to the time-lines – there will either be an explicit or implicit duration for the demonstration, be sure you know what it is and stick to it. Again some vendors, once in full flow, fail to register their audience has either mentally or physically left the building.

5. Interact – the most effective demonstrators foster a dialogue with their audience. They get people involved and talking, and when they are involved they are actively listening, and when they are actively listening they are open to the key messages you are looking to convey (assuming you have key messages of course – see point nine)

6. Check it all works - for every four presentations I see I’d estimate at least one suffers some sort of technical breakdown that badly disrupts the flow of the presentation. Yes, these things happen, but I suspect better preparation would reduce the incidence considerably, and if it does happen the impact is considerably mitigated if the presenter keeps the audience in the loop as to what’s happening rather than staring manically at the lap-top screen muttering over and over ‘but it was working earlier, but it was working earlier’.

7. Don’t answer a question with a demonstration – if someone asks ‘does your software do X?’ the reflex response is to show them just how well it does X – which generally dissuades other people from asking any other questions for fear of landing up with an equally long-winded response. The better answer is ‘yes, would you like me to show you ?’

8. Differentiate – the purpose of the CRM software demonstration should be to explain ‘why you’. Most get used to explain why the software is just the same as everyone else’s.

9. Have knowledge or bring it with you – too many demonstrations founder on the rocks of ‘I’ll have to get back you on that one’. You may get away with it once or twice, but after that your credibility is shot. If the presenter is weak on in depth knowledge, or the audience is likely to be demanding, it’s wise to bring back up. If you do however make a promise to come back to people, keep it.