Project Management Central

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread

Topics: CRM
CRM assessment
We are working with a client that is considering moving to an enterprise CRM solution from its current call center configuration. It is thinking Siebel. Our first recommendation is to perform a CRM Assessment with key client team members to better understand needs, requirements, as it/to be, and get everyone on the same page moving forward.

Does anyone have a good template to drive this discussion? Thanks in advance
Sort By:

Be sure to check out gantthead's new Project Plans page. We have Siebel implementation project plans available. Also, run an advanced deliverables search on the words CRM assessment. We have 23 templates of potential interest and help.

I work for a large and diverse enterprise, and Siebel is being implemented in several of our companies. We are hearing mixed reviews. Generally, we hear that marketing people like the application, but sales folks are not especially enamored. No surprise there.

Strongly suggest you include a review applications that include a Sales Resource Portal, such as Pivotal. This would help insure a successful implementation.

File attached.


Clearly you are on the right track. Consider that a change in your CRM approach and systems means that management sees room for improvement in that area. A change of this magnitude will affect all stakeholders not just customers. It has large cross functional implications. I suggest starting by defining the Value Gap that management sees with the current CRM. Quantify this gap in terms that have real operational meaning. Then create a team of knowledge workers that represent the processes impacted and farm their knowledge as to why the gap exists and what changes can be made to achieve management's expectations. Then, with that same group design new process models that would achieve the objectives defined. Now you have the knowledge and hard hitting information needed to assess CRM tools. You also have developed a constituency that will be supportive of the impending changes. Good Luck
I am on a Project that is implementing Vantive as it's CRM solution. I work for a large consulting firm. Most folks from my firm want to steer clear of this project because it is not Siebel or Clarify. Vantive was bought over by PeopleSoft a while back. I do not have much direct exposure to the product, but I can pass on the following information:
> Entity Relationship Diagrams for Vantive are not up to date, this leads to having to draw up our own ERDs on the project to assist development of interfaces in particular. Peoplesoft folks are available to assist in this.
> Vantive has a Vantive-On-The-Go application for field personnel. This has to be the last place in development, because it requires the corporate database to be setup before it can develop.
> SAP is being used as the Financials and Logistics backend
> TIBCO is the middleware

I have an opportunity to create a brand new area in order to delivery CRM solutions for brazilian market. At this time I'm verifying the vendors, doing marketing research and economic viability. I wanna to known from you, what would be a good plus to market ( change managment, loyalt program, etc. ), what the customers looking for and anothers insights that you can have.

I recently saw an implementation of CRM from a Houston Company, Interlucent that you might consider. They have focused historically on high-end service CRM for their Restaurant and Golf Course Management company ReservationSource but they have a solid understanding of the customer management relationship and do good customwork as well.
What would be considered as the recommended approach for gathering user requirements on Siebel CRM projects? One suggested approach that has been mentioned is "shadowing" the job functions that a key employee might do on a daily basis. Another approach is conducting single interviews. Another approach has been mentioned as "consensus" gathering where key employees gather together and together they flush out the current and future business flows under the direction of a facilitator.

Which approach is better and why? What are the risks of each? Are there other approaches to consider?

A third approach is to first quantify the gap the exists between the current value being delivered to customers and the value that is expected to be delivered once the CRM is implemented. Leaving this fuzzy results in building requirements around the software instead of building business solutions that the software will need to support. Defining the GAP is management’s responsibility. Then, once that is done, I suggest you identify the value delivery systems and processes that need to be improved to close the gap. Enter cross-functional work groups who, once presented with the quantified objectives can be facilitated to develop the new workflows and processes needed to achieve the customer relationship improvement goals. From the outcomes of those facilitations you can now begin tailoring the supporting CRM application to fit the business need. Of course it would be better had all this been done prior to selecting a CRM system.

I have always and will continue to recommend education first. The problem with most projects is that the implementation team starts by engaging in business requirements. I think an important step before that should be education of the technology.

If you have already selected the product make sure that you have a detailed demo of the product. Educate the users on the trends and how the software can be leveraged.

Of course after that you lead into business requirements and the way you ensure scope control is by ranking each requirement into three categories; Business benefit, technical complexity and organizational readiness (H/M/L).

If you are rolling out to several departments make sure you have representative from each department during the requirements gathering stage. When interviewing executives I prefer one on one interviews. However when it comes time to get down into it I prefer a facilitated session.

Please login or join to reply

Content ID:

"Let us be thankful for fools. But for them the rest of us could not succeed."

- Mark Twain