Category: so-called CRM

Posted on

Holding Up Your End Of The Conversation (Part 1)

“Fezzik…jog his memory.” – from The Princess Bride

Was tipped off to the BlogPulse “Conversation Tracker” feature today, and yes indeed, it’s nifty. (hat tip: nevon, shel) This is a capability that shows how, where, and when a “conversation” is moving through the blogosphere, by tracking links and how they are disseminated over time. Very sharp.

But then, started thinking more about some of the things discussed here, and started doing some poking around…and tripped across a very interesting bit of research that came out of AT&T within the last couple of years (couldn’t find a pub date in the doc, but some of the cites were as late as 2001, so I’m guessing it was published around ’01 or ’02). Entitled “Managing long term communications: Conversation and Contact Management,” this piece focuses on the different challenges that arise when individuals attempt to have conversations over time, and the coping mechanisms that they employ in order to do so. (No, you’re not the only one who re-sets the “unread” flag on emails in an attempt to remember what to do next.) Fascinating stuff. The key pull-quotes right from the first ‘graph:

“Contact management and conversation management are linked. Many busy professionals discourage voice calls and messages, because email enables them to better manage their time, conversations, and contacts. People also spend large amounts of time transcribing voicemail, browsing email archives and writing todo lists – all of these activities are intended to help track the content and status of outstanding conversations.” (emphasis added)

and

“Key properties of technologically-mediated conversations identified were: (1) they are extended in time, which means (2) people typically engage in multiple concurrent conversations, and (3) conversations often involve multiple participants. These properties led to a significant memory load for our informants: they spoke of the difficulty of keeping tracking of conversational content and status, as well as the identity, contact information, and expertise of their conversational partners.“

Bam. That’s it. That’s the core of what’s wrong with so-called “Customer Relationship Management” or “Contact Management” systems today. It’s not a technology issue. (Well, duh. It rarely is.) It’s a mindset issue.

There needs to be a movement away from the “pipeline” mentality which, by definition, thinks about using a CRM system as solely the means to “manage” the relationship interaction between a customer and a representative as a closed-ended transaction (“the prospect gets to the end of the pipeline, and a discrete, one-time transaction, either a win or a loss, occurs”). Instead, we need to start thinking about these tools (CRM, Sales Force Automation, etc.) as ways to augment our capabilities in remembering where we are in the ongoing conversation with a particular customer.

Update: Conversation continues here.

Posted on

Customer Conversation Management?

Doc just served up a softball with this headline:

“Because ‘Customer Relationship Management” is about management more than customers‘

I’m originally from Chicago, where softball is a religion. Where “softball” is anything but. Where the ball is the size of a grapefruit, hard as granite, and gloves are not allowed (do a search on “mallet finger” some time, if you want the full effect).

I know from softball.

And to that headline I say…absofrigginlutely.

Now, “Customer Relationship Management” is typically thought of along the following three dimensions:

  • Sales Force Automation
  • Marketing Automation
  • Customer Support

And Doc is spot-on. It is the rare occasion that any of those three dimensions is considered from the customer’s point of view.

Focus on just the first point, where “Sales Force Automation” is oftentimes equated with “Customer Relationship Management.” And again, the point is spot-on…SFA is about tracking numbers of leads, it’s about “managing the pipeline,” it’s about pushing a customer through the defined selling process of the vendor. It’s not about the customer at all. It’s about management, and quarter-end roll-ups, and “30% probability of closing.”

We’re at a time where we have the opportunity for a fundamental shift in this thinking, even using the same underlying technologies. And here it is:

Vendors: Stop thinking about moving customers through a “pipeline.” Start thinking about holding up your end of the conversation. Literally.

Yes, the “conversation” term is being overused, and runs the risk of becoming a cliche. (And if anyone has a thought of a better way to distill this concept down, please share it.) But there is the opportunity here for a shift in thinking that doesn’t require any change in the underlying technologies that are in place in order to do this.

How do we do this? Start using these types of systems more, but in a totally different way. Start keeping actual track of the actual conversations that you, as an individual, are involved in. Not from an “I checked off these three steps in the selling process” sort of way, but rather in a “here’s what we were talking about” sort of way.

Danah Boyd has pointed out that there is an increasing amount of research being done in the area of how we, as individuals, can use technology to involve ourselves with persistent conversations. And that’s exactly right.

Christopher Allen (and if he’s not on your blogroll right now, you’re missing a lot) states:

“For instance, my experience with most politicians and many salespeople is that I will be forgotten as soon as I leave the room.”

Bingo. And why does that feeling exist? Because those salespeople and politicians are not really embracing the concept of a relationship. A relationship is a series of linked, persistent conversations.

To be involved, one needs to make a commitment to hold up one’s end.

Posted on

Letter To PeopleSoft Employees

Oracle finally bags PeopleSoft for US$10.3 billion.

The letter that PeopleSoft CEO Dave Duffield sent to employees (from here):

“This is a sad day for me, and I’m sure an equally sad day for you.

It is now clear that Oracle will acquire our company. Over the past few weeks, our independent directors met with individual stockholders to get their views. We were told during these conversations that they believe Oracle’s $24 wasn’t adequate and did not reflect PeopleSoft’s real value. It became clear to us that the vast majority of our stockholders would accept $26.50 and Oracle was willing to pay for it.

You should know, and I hope you would expect, that I am deeply saddened by this outcome. We have come so far under such trying circumstances over the past 18 months, and especially the past two and a half months. PeopleSoft had gained significant momentum in all areas of our company, including with customers, prospects, and in the financial community.

Over the next few weeks, we will be working with Oracle to ensure that you get answers to as many questions as possible that you have. I believe some of you will find interesting opportunities at Oracle, others will take your talents and work elsewhere in the area that you live, while another group may have difficulties finding rewarding job experiences. It is to this last group that I offer my sincerest apologies for not figuring out a different conclusion to our 18-month saga.

I know it is little comfort, but I am extraordinarily proud of what we have accomplished over the past 17-plus years, and longer in the case of JD Edwards. And I am even prouder of you for your perseverance and teamwork over the past 18 months.

I make a final request. And that is to continue our work with our heads held high. Whether it’s serving customers, building products or working on internal operations, PeopleSoft and the people at PeopleSoft have built their reputation as a company with class.

Sincerely,

Dave”

Obviously, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison is betting that PeopleSoft’s existing customers will not act in the manner in which they said they would, according to an AMR Research survey done 10Dec2004, that states

“Almost two-thirds of PeopleSoft Inc. customers said they will cancel their software-support contracts if Oracle Corp. buys PeopleSoft and stops enhancing its programs, according to a survey by AMR Research Inc.

AMR found that 63 percent of PeopleSoft clients will leave Oracle immediately or as soon as it stops adding to the products if they can get support elsewhere, according to a November survey of 150 PeopleSoft customers by the Boston-based researcher.”

That estimate seems high to me. Switching application vendors is a huge undertaking.

Things to watch for:

– SAP and other vendors putting forth aggressive takeaway efforts
– Chaos in PeopleSoft-oriented consultancies as their PeopleSoft teams scramble to position themselves as Oracle shops
– PeopleSoft partners jockeying for position in the Oracle-centric world

Posted on

I Wonder How Jill, Buzz, Ray, and Barry Feel About That

Best Buy is revamping all of their stores to be more "customer centric."  However, here’s what they mean by this:

The
company came up with five prototypical customers, all of whom have been
given names: "Jill," a busy suburban mom; "Buzz," a focused, active
younger male; "Ray," a family man who likes his technology practical;
"BB4B" (short for Best Buy for Business), a small employer; and
"Barry," an affluent professional male who’s likely to drop tens of
thousands of dollars on a home theater system.

They are now training all of their employees to identify which "segment" a customer falls into when that customer walks in the door, and are targeting each store to one or two of those prototypical customers.

Best Buy might want to listen to the heated conversation that is currently approaching a rolling boil.

UPDATE:  Defining Jill, Buzz, Ray, and Barry

Posted on

How To Drive Your Customers Away, The AT&T Wireless Way

Having myself been stung by the AT&T Wireless process and service nightware, I read with great interest the story of their downfall and presumed sale next month. The toll: a significant number of the company’s 31,000+ employees will likely lose their jobs, and the remaining customers will have to migrate. One take on the root cause:

“Years of substandard customer care, spotty coverage and dropped calls had taken their toll.

‘The line from the company was that we lost those people out of bad luck,’ said a regional sales manager. ‘But they walked away flipping us the bird. They aggressively walked away from us. They couldn’t wait to get away from us.'”

Ok, it’s not rocket science, folks. Do these things:

  • Listen to your customers
  • Make sound business decisions based on that input
  • Do what you promise, when you promise to do it
  • When your customers are defecting in droves, don’t spend millions of dollars upgrading the “company’s Falcon 50 jet to a bigger Gulfstream jet for commuting — then put millions of dollars more into a new interior for it.”

(shakes head…)

Posted on

Killing Marketing As We Know It

I love how SUN’s President & COO, Jonathan Schwartz, dispenses with the boring, uber-sterile traditional glossy marketing approach and just tells customers what’s going on.

For example, the organization has recently begun selling their systems directly on eBay. Instead of overdone PR, he states what they are doing, why they are doing it, and how it affects their strategy, customers, and partners (and, not incidently, this move also gives them perfect information on the true market price of their systems). Schwartz also uses it as a bully pulpit to raise doubts about SUN’s competitors. He also dimisses a minor confidentiality leak that took place when the marching orders he gave ended up on a t-shirt wearing dog.

What SUN has done goes beyond simply giving their fromage grand a microphone, however. They actually have set up an environment that is is accessible to any Sun employee to write about anything. Sports. Music. One of their bloggers, “Mary,” even states “I use this blog to explicitly and without apology market to you.”

SUN is in the process of killing Marketing as we know it and, in the process, is getting closer to their customers

(thanks to Rick Klau for the lead)

Posted on

What About Our Relationship?

More voices chiming forth on what really matters in Sales Effectiveness. Are you ready for this? It’s all about…relationships (you know, people getting along together), not technology.

Aberdeen’s Chris Selland has put out a new report on sales effectiveness that shows that collaboration is key. A good point to note is:

“The report also found that it is often lesser-known technologies — such as social networking, incentive management, ‘point of close’ tools and marketing process enablers — which have the greatest impact on sales effectiveness.”

Addtionally, today Denis Pombriant answers the question “What’s Next In CRM?” and again…surprise!…it’s not about technology.

“Although a lot of progress has been made in CRM, the technology suite
is still largely a transaction-oriented one. As I have said before, current CRM does a great job of helping management but not necessarily a very good job of building the customer relationship.”

Bingo.

(BTW…bonus points to the first person who knows what cult classic the phrase “What About Our Relationship?!?!!” came from…)