CRM - cost of success, cost of error, cost of ownership
Discussing CRM, above all else, it should be noted that the automation of CRM is a non-regulated market. In contrast, for example, from the market for automation of accounting. The accountant has a PBU and a bunch of regulatory documents that regulate accounting, there is no such thing in CRM and he, CRM is different from customer to customer. Moreover, in understanding, in relation, and in implementation, as an implementation project.
Based on this, truly critical parameters emerge, such as the level of justified resistance during implementation, the survival rate of the system, and the use of the system in the long term. All these indicators lead to a subsequent ROI calculation. And since we are talking about investments, then considering that all (!) Organizations are differently prepared for automation, a preliminary ROI calculation for a client by a CRM supplier / integrator is semi-credited, an advertising move having no basis.
Let's return to the title of the topic. Cost of success. It is made up of different parameters. The most effective parameter is the availability / readiness of the system to the current tasks of the customer CRM. If the system is suitable and the business of the customer does not plan to change in reality, then this is success. Otherwise, such a parameter as a compromise is important. The compromise of the customer on the lack of compliance of the system with the expectations of its ultimate capabilities.
If the system is not 100% fit, this will lead to justified resistance in the implementation. Some data is not fully entered / analyzed, the staff is forced to put up and express discontent, the management spends additional administrative resources to ensure the usability of the system, as a result, the system is used for some time. What time is the question of resource and resistance. If the resource is infinite, the system will be used for a long time, and investment in it may even pay off - you need to look at the effect of the results of the implementation of CRM.
Actually, what's the problem? The fact that any inconvenience causes a protest, which at a great inconvenience or a large level of compromise can lead to the rejection of the use of the system and, consequently, the loss of investment in the project implementation of CRM. It is good if at the same time experience is gained for the “second attempt” and there is a budget for it.
What to do if the market does not find a project system / integrator, where the level of compliance with the expectations of the final functionality is acceptable for return on investment and corresponds to the level of administrative resources for implementation in the organization? Here comes the "cost of success." A class of customizable and / or programmable platforms has been developed for it, where suppliers promise to do anything and everything, as the customer expects. Often, the choice of platforms - this is not the first CRM system at the customer and he roughly understands what he wants to see at the exit.
Link to the article “Five stages of the evolution of users of CRM systems”
The cost of project success by the time it is completed is the sum of the cost of adaptation work and the cost of error. After the implementation is complete, there is a cost of ownership
The “cost of the error” itself is frightening, however, this key parameter is very important, since a very small part of the CRM customers can provide the project TOR or even explain to the integrator what he expects to see at the output. Based on this, the cost of the error, the cost of corrections, the cost of deviating from the TK in the direction of what was expected is very important. What will be the correction of errors, omissions, misunderstandings, underrepresentations, etc.? That is the question.
Those. 1st question. Improvements to the system can be made available to the customer WITHOUT the vendor / integrator, and how much is the system open? 2nd question. Since different systems adaptation tools allow you to make changes at different speeds, the cost parameter for 1 hour of the engineer’s work does not make much sense. In some systems, tools of any changes can be opened to advanced users and due to their functionality, changes can go 2 to 4 times faster than in systems that require a trained programmer to change.
Let's return to the cost of the error. As already written above - there are cases when even a beautifully written TK does not lead to the fact that the customer receives at the output what he expected. It may not even be the fault of the customer or the integrator. In complex projects, getting what you expect is proportionally difficult. And in all of this, the cost of an error is very much dependent on the flexibility of the system in terms of making changes to it at all stages: in data connections, processes, events, algorithms, reports and analytics. How much more automated is the labor of the implementer and tools are made for him - so the cost of the error is lower. In systems where most of it is in scripts and languages, or in systems where adaptation comes at the expense of plug-ins created by the vendor - the cost of an error can only be higher and higher. And here again the cost of a standard hour is not the first
How much the CRM system should be open to the customer is up to the customer to decide.
Another question: the time that is associated with waiting for the result or turn to the vendor / integrator. After all, if some of the advanced users of the customer can make changes promptly - there is no queue and changes are made from the first person. If there is an intermediate link - vendor / integrator - there is a queue and you have to wait until it reaches your task.
The same applies to the cost of ownership. If the system is available for changes only by the vendor / integrator, you will have to pay for everything and everyone. If the tools for making changes are available to their knowledge holders about internal business processes, the cost of ownership will be significantly lower.
So. Low cost of the initial creation of the automation system - implementation of a CRM project, low cost of error, high speed of project development, low cost of ownership are provided not just by open systems, but by systems in which this openness is complete and accessible to its advanced users, systems in which implementers work as much as possible automated and facilitated.
Based on this, truly critical parameters emerge, such as the level of justified resistance during implementation, the survival rate of the system, and the use of the system in the long term. All these indicators lead to a subsequent ROI calculation. And since we are talking about investments, then considering that all (!) Organizations are differently prepared for automation, a preliminary ROI calculation for a client by a CRM supplier / integrator is semi-credited, an advertising move having no basis.
Let's return to the title of the topic. Cost of success. It is made up of different parameters. The most effective parameter is the availability / readiness of the system to the current tasks of the customer CRM. If the system is suitable and the business of the customer does not plan to change in reality, then this is success. Otherwise, such a parameter as a compromise is important. The compromise of the customer on the lack of compliance of the system with the expectations of its ultimate capabilities.
If the system is not 100% fit, this will lead to justified resistance in the implementation. Some data is not fully entered / analyzed, the staff is forced to put up and express discontent, the management spends additional administrative resources to ensure the usability of the system, as a result, the system is used for some time. What time is the question of resource and resistance. If the resource is infinite, the system will be used for a long time, and investment in it may even pay off - you need to look at the effect of the results of the implementation of CRM.
Actually, what's the problem? The fact that any inconvenience causes a protest, which at a great inconvenience or a large level of compromise can lead to the rejection of the use of the system and, consequently, the loss of investment in the project implementation of CRM. It is good if at the same time experience is gained for the “second attempt” and there is a budget for it.
What to do if the market does not find a project system / integrator, where the level of compliance with the expectations of the final functionality is acceptable for return on investment and corresponds to the level of administrative resources for implementation in the organization? Here comes the "cost of success." A class of customizable and / or programmable platforms has been developed for it, where suppliers promise to do anything and everything, as the customer expects. Often, the choice of platforms - this is not the first CRM system at the customer and he roughly understands what he wants to see at the exit.
Link to the article “Five stages of the evolution of users of CRM systems”
The cost of project success by the time it is completed is the sum of the cost of adaptation work and the cost of error. After the implementation is complete, there is a cost of ownership
The “cost of the error” itself is frightening, however, this key parameter is very important, since a very small part of the CRM customers can provide the project TOR or even explain to the integrator what he expects to see at the output. Based on this, the cost of the error, the cost of corrections, the cost of deviating from the TK in the direction of what was expected is very important. What will be the correction of errors, omissions, misunderstandings, underrepresentations, etc.? That is the question.
Those. 1st question. Improvements to the system can be made available to the customer WITHOUT the vendor / integrator, and how much is the system open? 2nd question. Since different systems adaptation tools allow you to make changes at different speeds, the cost parameter for 1 hour of the engineer’s work does not make much sense. In some systems, tools of any changes can be opened to advanced users and due to their functionality, changes can go 2 to 4 times faster than in systems that require a trained programmer to change.
Let's return to the cost of the error. As already written above - there are cases when even a beautifully written TK does not lead to the fact that the customer receives at the output what he expected. It may not even be the fault of the customer or the integrator. In complex projects, getting what you expect is proportionally difficult. And in all of this, the cost of an error is very much dependent on the flexibility of the system in terms of making changes to it at all stages: in data connections, processes, events, algorithms, reports and analytics. How much more automated is the labor of the implementer and tools are made for him - so the cost of the error is lower. In systems where most of it is in scripts and languages, or in systems where adaptation comes at the expense of plug-ins created by the vendor - the cost of an error can only be higher and higher. And here again the cost of a standard hour is not the first
How much the CRM system should be open to the customer is up to the customer to decide.
Another question: the time that is associated with waiting for the result or turn to the vendor / integrator. After all, if some of the advanced users of the customer can make changes promptly - there is no queue and changes are made from the first person. If there is an intermediate link - vendor / integrator - there is a queue and you have to wait until it reaches your task.
The same applies to the cost of ownership. If the system is available for changes only by the vendor / integrator, you will have to pay for everything and everyone. If the tools for making changes are available to their knowledge holders about internal business processes, the cost of ownership will be significantly lower.
So. Low cost of the initial creation of the automation system - implementation of a CRM project, low cost of error, high speed of project development, low cost of ownership are provided not just by open systems, but by systems in which this openness is complete and accessible to its advanced users, systems in which implementers work as much as possible automated and facilitated.