I'd like to kick off the "Big Questions" page that contains a set of questions, some of which will hopefully turn into discussions, that would lead us to better definition of the vision for the next gen CRM (Dan Itkis)

 

  1. (DI) Should CRM be limited by Sales, Marketing and Support functions or will it merge with the ERP system?

 

(Axel Schultze) I believe that in the next 2 years we will put CRM/ERP... into the category "Bureau Software" Software that was written for a specific user or functionality. To help sales and marketing related people to better deal with customers - all constituencies INCLUDING THE CUSTOMER HIMSELF should be part of the solution. And if so is "management" the right term? Isn't it more a customer interaction model (CIM)? I vote neither CRM nor the morphing with ERP is the way to go into the CRM 2.0 future but a networking and interaction approach.

(Ginger Conlon) Many companies talk about end-to-end customer processes, which include both front- and back-end processes. I believe that executives must think that way when implementing systems and processes (e.g. if I improve my sales, can shipping keep up). But I think that integration will be the glue for a long time to come because although these systems need to "talk," there are many detailed functionalities in each area that may be best left to hone in on their key processes.

(Andrew Boyd) I believe that vendor consolidation will continue to homogenize the "transactional" CRM feature set and ultimately result in tighter back office integration. However, I think that next wave of CRM (2.0) will be less concerned with the transactional elements of the customer relationship. This stuff has become a functional imperative of the organization. Real competitive advantage is going to come from managing the non-linear and messy processes. For that we'll see the adoption of a new set of tools that "natively" collaborative in nature. It is doubtful that these will be rolled into the ERP system any time soon (if ever).

 

(Chuck Schaeffer) Managing and automating enterprise-wide business processes are often key in achieving or advancing CRM business strategies. Sales history, inventory returns, customer credit, product promotions, item availability, shipping costs, sales commission payments and a plethora of other customer-relevant information typically associated with back-office ERP systems are necessary for many customer facing knowledge workers. CRM and ERP applications will eventually merge to become enterprise-wide business software applications with seamless front and back office integration and without a limited business function delineation or other debarkation point.

 

 

 

 

(DI) Is it going to go the way of vertical integration with comprehensive solutions responding to highly segmented industry needs or will it go sideways with CRM becoming the database with a middleware layers and bunch of other companies (contributors) adding the logic? Maybe both? (Axel Schultze) I trust it will go "simplicity is king". Parts of CIM may be even seen as a Google gadget. We need to keep in mind that about 97% of ALL registered US businesses use spreadsheets to track their customers. Only 3% use CRM - because it is too complex, too expensive.

 

 

  1. Have we reached the “dominant design” stage in the CRM? What would the dominant design look like?

(Axel Schultze) With 3% market coverage (if at all) we are light years away from a dominant design stage. We are today where Rudalph Diesel was before Henry Ford invented the conveyor belt.

  1. Integration with PIM systems (personal information managers) seems to be key for adoption. Will CRM replace existing PIMs (read Microsoft Outlook) or will the interfaces become standardized enough to plug in easily?

(Axel Schultze) Should that be on the "Big Question List"?

(Ginger Conlon) this may be a key for adoption on the sales side. I've certainly heard from vendors that it's helping among their customers. on the internal customer service side its not as relevant (field service is a different animal).

 

(AS) Will the networked, collaborating and 'always on' world push CRM to the side in a way that people use entirely different and very personal tools to track their sales and simply 'allow' company management to keep track on progress and reports? Will new online tools and services replace CRM with networked nodes of contact and progress tracker and company independent hubs coordinate the customer interaction model in a way that customers, alliances, partners, VARs, dealers, brokers, consultants and others jointly work on the best of bread solution for a customer? **

 

 

  1. In a world where the value is in the co-created experience and co-created products/services; who “owns” the resulting value?


Page Information

  • Changed 9 months ago [show history]
  • View page source
  • You're not logged in
  • Recent comments:
    Christy Shows:The question of networked nodes is an interesting thought to ponder. I think it ties back to the question of the participation of the customer. From a service provider's perspective, the customer must be involved throughout the project management, accounting, resource management, etc. However, looking at the sales and marketing services, is the customer prepared to become so invested in the CRM process, actively participating in networked nodes that some level of assumed or perceived obligation is developed? What happens to the culture of customers which still approach the buying or contracting experience with a stand-offish, competitive environment? Will customers attempt to build a Best of Breed without the competitive value? Or try to build Best of Breed between competitors - eventually picking one over the other? Am I misunderstanding the original intent of the post? Thoughts?
    Kim Kobza:Does CRM have to change? Yes. Because the nature of the business problem has changed. The transactional cost of a consumer's product research has fallen to almost zero - as has the cost of service and product delivery. A consumer's change cost is likewise almost zero - so if one vendor or service provider fails to deliver, consumers, partners, and employees have limited cost of finding another enterprise. The transformative disruption in the economic model for product delivery and acquisition means that the customer relationship with the enterprise is forever altered. The good news - for economists - is that the markets function with more perfect information. Also consider that not only has the cost of customer communication and product acquistion fallen to almost zero, but business models for delivery of goods and services have dramatically changed as well. This means that tradtional definitions of CRM have to evolve or they will be increasingly out of step with business processes that are evolving to reflect the new customer relationship. But that is usually how it goes - the world changes and then we figure out how to define what just happened.
    Dan Itkis:Christopher, the term "dominant design" refers to a design prior to which there's a high degree of differentiation and after which, the product differentiation is low and competition switches into the volume/cost/service realm. Think VCRs, DVDs, in software I'd say that spreadsheets and text editors fit that notion (although I'm sure I'll hear some comments to the contrary :)
  • No tags yet learn more

Wiki Information

Recent PBwiki Blog Posts