"Our Take" - Questions You Wish You Asked Your Vendor Before You Bought

(Past Editions by: Date, Title, Topic)

 
About "Our Take" 
"Our Take" is a collection of daily vignettes covering a wide range of CRM topics. It's an attempt to add our own spin to the world of CRM. We will use the column to share our perspectives, opinions, epiphanies, web nuggets, or quite frankly anything that moves us. Get ready to expect the unexpected. And, don't be shy about sharing your thoughts.
 
 
2/2/07 - What You Should Have Asked
My next topic is a natural extension of the discussion about CRM successes and failures that we had last month in this column. I believe this topic is best handled as a group project. Therefore, I am asking for your active participation. So pay attention, this is your homework assignment.
 
Here is my question to you: What question or questions do you wish you had asked before you bought your CRM solution(s)? We talked about critical success factors as they influence success and failures of implementations and one of those factors involves dealing with surprises. Of course, minimizing surprises often means asking the right questions up front so you know what you are getting in to.
 
I encourage you to spend a moment to share your experience and that one or two questions you wished you had asked. Your input could help your colleagues be more successful. Also, if all of us are asking these questions of our suppliers, it might affect positive change in the solutions that are brought to market. I’ll start to share responses next week.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/5/07 - Questions You Should Have Asked
This week, we are going to use this column to share your responses to the following question: "What do you wish you had asked your CRM vendor before you bought their solution?" Please take a moment to share your thoughts.
 
One reader shared two question he feels should be asked. The first is "Precisely what workflow and individual work processes should this application support? The second one is "Is this the best application to support these functions?
 
The first question really resonates with me. It seems there is often a disconnect between process and technology and that disconnect is often discovered during implementation - after the purchase. While the question is important to ask the vendor, it is just as important for you to ask and answer yourself. So, let's expand the scope of this week's topic and add a second question: "What questions do you wish you had answered yourself before you purchased a CRM solution?"
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/6/07 - No Compromise
I was overwhelmed with emails from readers yesterday wondering why I failed to mention or acknowledge the Super Bowl victory of our Indianapolis Colts. I could have. I just did. Behind the final MASH episode in 1983, this Super Bowl was the most watched show in history. And what did we see?
 
We saw a great game (by this fan's standards) but we also witnessed a testament to unwavering standards as exemplified by coach Tony Dungy. If you know nothing of the man's story, what I write might not mean very much. If it were possible to describe a man with one idea it would be "no compromise." Like everyone playing on one of sport's biggest stage, there is an unwavering focus on winning but not at the expense of dignity, class, and pride. In Mr. Dungy's words, "It was about winning the right way." This is a man that was overlooked for other jobs because he was not willing to put football first. When asked, he said football was third on his list of priorities behind faith and family.
 
Indeed, it's a win for the team and a win for the city. But mostly it is a win for doing it the right way. So when you think about this Super Bowl, think about a great achievement achieved the "right way." Think about doing CRM the right way - with dignity, class, and pride - and hopefully you will find achievement on your big stage.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/7/07 - More Questions
What do you wish you had asked your vendor before you purchased your CRM solution? That is the question of the week and I hope you will share your experience. Because this is hard earned knowledge that only comes from experience.
 
Interestingly, we are running about even on questions we should ask ourselves versus questions we should ask our vendors. Here are a few read submissions for your consideration. "First, have we adequately mapped all our processes as they relate to outputs and outcomes? Have we also mapped rework time or processes that are not efficient or effective? Next, do we understand our work, technology and organizational topologies and how they interact? In addition, have we included the external customer into our organizational environment - have we built a segmented relationship with our customers that would be considered a co-development of value environment?"
 
More questions include: "What is our strategic intent and how does it relate to our mission, goals, objectives and strategies? Is the mission a shared mission at the personal level of every employee and other stakeholder? Have we supplied an empowering organizational environment to achieve our short and long-term goals and objectives?" I particularly like these last three questions. They are the foundation for a successful strategy. Do you agree?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/8/07 - Questions for the Vendors
By the type and volume of responses from readers, it appears there isn't much interest in the questions an organization should ask of themselves before they buy a CRM solution. So today, we will turn our attention back to the questions that you should ask vendors. Allow me to share more reader input.
 
Here is a set of questions from one reader: "How do our current organizational processes align with your CRM offering? And what is the "total-cost" of alignment? How does your solution improve the customer experience? What metrics are used to determine improvement and what is the ROI from organic growth or retention perspective? What metrics have other organizations used to quantify the returns in both output and outcome metrics? Does the vendor offer a payment schedule predicated on pre-agreed output metrics?"
 
That is certainly a handful. Do you think this is a fair set of questions? Vendors, what do you think?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/9/07 - Are You Clueless?
Yesterday's column generated some very passionate responses. One consultant responded with some darn serious claims. I thought you deserved to read it. Brace yourself.
 
"Gary, who do these people think they're kidding when they talk about ROI? How in hell can they answer ROI questions when none, *none* of them know what their own operational costs are? From the vendor side, there are two types of vendors who make specific ROI promises to prospects: the ignorant, and the less-than-honest. Absent verified cost data for current-state operations, there can be no true ROI projections. And how do managers expect to compare the vendor's workflow with their operational workflow when they don't know what the latter really is? When I do an assessment, I always ask each level (VP, Dir, Mgr, Superv, Rep) separately to draw their center's work/callflow. None of the diagrams ever match in some significant details. I've taken many companies through the CRM vendor/product selection process. Not one has ever made the final choice based on alignment between the product's designed workflow & functionality and the contact center documented specs. There are a number of reasons why most CRM projects fail to deliver on their promises. One is that management people are not the decision makers on product selection. Another is that most of them have no clue as to either what they are supposed to be doing in terms of process, costs or meaningful results."
 
I apologize for the length but the remarks are consistent with many selection processes I see. Help me out here. Why the big disconnect?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/12/07 - Of Course You're Not Clueless
The title of last Friday's column was a bit strong. Titles are supposed to be that way if you want to grab people's attention. Well, I did. Not only was the title a bit strong but the words reprinted from one of CRMAdvocate's readers was pointed as well. That certainly sparked more comments that I will share today.
 
One reader responded by saying, "I have been on both sides of the table, as a customer and as a vendor on the issue of ROI and from both situations I have come to a reality about ROI. The technology is about 30% of the ROI solution. It needs to do what the vendor promised it would do. The remaining 70% are comprised of the processes and people that the customer puts around the technology. A good example of this was the blood bath days of CRM. All the emphasis was put on the technology and little if any on the processes and the results were terrible. Why is it that some companies get great results with technology and others don't with the exact same stuff? It all points back to the same answer, if your processes are outdated or poorly designed you are going to have a problem. ROI should be a partnership between the customer and the vendor. The vendor needs to have the resources to help the customer with the process side of the equation."
 
That is why it is easy to throw arrows at both the vendor and the end user. Both have a stake in the success of the project and either one or both can be the culprit when things don't go well. Regardless, it is the end user that ends up holding the bag so in my mind the responsibility is ultimately with the buying entity, not the selling entity. Do you agree?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/13/07 - Is It Just Too Hard?
As we continue to work through the great thoughts from our readers about what questions to ask vendors, there is a common theme of the importance of understanding work flows and business processes. We have been told that it is important to ask the vendor if their products will support your work flows. The key assumption is that an organization has a common understanding of how business is conducted. Some readers have suggested that a good understanding of business process is more the exception than the rule. One reader chimed in saying:
 
"I would have to say that the reason for the disconnect is that determining your workflow/processes is too much work for most companies. For years now, you and others have been hammering home the mantra that process and workflow analysis and redesign are essential before attempting to implement software, so if that message isn't getting through, there's got to be a very basic reason. I think most companies look at it as too difficult. In an age when everybody is attempting to get by with minimal staff and people are already stretched thin, the thought of spending time doing self-analysis, and asking your people to take time to document what's going on -- or to have somebody else watching them to see what's going on -- is just daunting, and your staff is going to view it as extra "busy work" that interferes with their jobs and gets them nothing."
 
Figuring out your process isn't always easy. However, I'm getting the feeling that it is not viewed with the importance it should. The reader concludes by saying, "With most companies struggling to simply catch their breath, I'm sure it's the rare company that finds the strength to take a deep breath, step back, realize it's necessary to take a short-term hit to achieve long-term results, analyze everything that's going on, and only then decide on the next step." ." I bet following that advice might on many occasions actually lead to something besides implementing more CRM software.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/14/07 - A Matter of Accountability
Today, we continue the discussion of "what questions do you wish you had asked your vendors before you bought their solution." The outpouring of response tells us this is a hot, hot topic. Here's another response:
 
"The problem with business today is nobody wants to accept responsibility. Sellers need to be honest and forthright with their proposals. Buyers need to be wary of doing business with a vendor that isn't willing to be a partner and absorb some cost of install and implementation if they misrepresented something. Yes, sellers can walk away, but should they? No. Ethics in business is hard to find. It is sad you have to ask the question as to who is accountable. Good business partnerships share accountability."
 
I realize there are some instances when people "get burned" by their vendor. However, the vast majority of the time the blame can be equally shared between vendor and customer. As mama used to say, "It takes two to fight." When things go wrong, I find vendors doing quite noble things to remedy a bad situation. As stated in the column earlier this week, the problem is often the elusive nature of defining work flows and business processes. Hang on. We've got some great stuff coming up in the ext few days about this topic.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/15/07 - First Tier Versus Second Tier Criteria
Do we spend too much time finding the best CRM solution rather than the best way to implement it? In many cases, the answer is "yes." One reader summarized this thought by saying, "Most of the major CRM tools will work for most firms. Most of the major CRM tools will support most of the processes and workflows that these firms define. It is true that one tool may be a better fit than another, but I view that as a second-tier issue. A more important question is whether the implementer is a good fit. I would rather have the second-best CRM tool implemented by the very best VAR than the second best VAR implementing the best CRM tool."
 
He goes on to offer these steps: "1. Define the workflows at a fairly high level. 2. Select a CRM tool that will meet the requirements. 3. Now use your experience to drill down and find a small subset of the processes that produce the greatest perceived value TO THE USERS. This will typically NOT be the greatest ROI. 4. Design the system to support these processes with the greatest possible ease of learning and ease of use for the users. 5. Launch the system. Define success as utilization. 6. Introduce areas with higher ROI over time.
 
This approach suggests that success is initially defined simply as getting people to use it rather than ROI. Can you sell that definition of success to your managers? Also, what do you think about selecting an implementation partner before you select the vendor?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/16/07 - Everyone Loses
The losses from a failed CRM implementation are obvious - lost investment in the project as well as the loss of the hoped ROI. Does anyone else lose? The company's customers may indeed be losers as well. But let's not forget the vendor. Sometimes, they are the biggest loser. One reader wrote:
 
"The vendor could very well take the same if not a greater loss if he ends up not getting paid, or spends his own time and money trying to make things right, regardless of fault. A small vendor who relies heavily on his reputation to promote sales ends up taking a harsh blow because his very large client demands him to fix the problem even when it is clearly (or not so clearly) the fault of the client. When we've been brought in to correct a failed project, we do 'post project forensics' in order to determine the causes of failure. Most often than not, both parties have to share some of the blame. I wouldn't forgive myself if I did not also state that 90% of the time the root cause of the problem is a lack of accurate scoping of the project, which causes project management issues that plague the project from the start and doom it to failure."
 
He goes on to say, "The client needs to be COMPLETE and PRECISE in describing his requirements and goals. The vendor needs to assume the client is forgetting something and go beyond Q&A and delve into the business processes as if it were his own business. All this needs to be nailed down in an airtight Statement of Work in order to exclude the possibility of 'scope-creep' which is the bane of every project, both internal and outsourced. 'Scope-creep' is the fungus that erodes project success, resulting in a festering boil of failure that explodes and leaves anger, stress, and despair in its wake." The emotional words are the battle scars of experience. We can all do without anger, stress and despair.
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/20/07 - Taking Sides
It seems that some of you think that I'm "taking the vendor's side" in the discussion about who is to blame when things go wrong. Let me be clear - there is typically enough blame to go around. So there's no need to take sides. I'm all for a "win-win."
 
The common theme during the last week has been a lack of attention to really, I mean really, understanding business processes and work flows. There are no short cuts. If you don't think you have time to stop and figure them out, why do you think you have time to clean up the mess when the CRM project fails? You are going to have to do it sooner or later. You might as well do it sooner.
 
Let's get over the sales pitches that position implementations as easy. If they were easy, you would have done them already. And your competition would have done it too. I would love to see a vendor pitch that said something to like, “This is going to be hard. Really hard. But if you do it right, it will be worth it. If you are willing to make the investment, so are we."
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)
 
2/22/07 - When Should Vendors Promise ROI
Probably never. If you look back at the discussion regarding "questions you wish you had asked your CRM vendor," it is very apparent that many feel they didn't have good expectations about how the implementation would impact their business processes. Many of you also chimed in that they wish they had a better expectation of the ROI potential.
 
Who doesn't like a guarantee? But is it fair, or even realistic, to expect a guarantee when much of the expected ROI is outside the control of the vendor or the implementer? Does asking for a guarantee take your eye off the ball by focusing more attention on outside vendors rather than on your own internal business processes, work flows, and corporate culture?
 
And, does a vendor guarantee make you more confident in their ability to deliver or does it raise more questions about their credibility? To be precise, if success is often defined by things outside of the control of the vendor, does a guaranteeing vendor lose credibility because a guarantee demonstrates a lack of understanding about the critical success factors? Vendors: what guarantees do you think you should make and what guarantees do you think you should not make?
 
Gary Lemke, Publisher
(Share your thoughts)