“I’ve never seen a client/sales automation tool that could sign a contract.”
Those were remarks made 20 years ago from a salesperson when asked his opinion about automating sales call
reporting companywide.
Fast-forward to 2011 – and enterprise-wide sales automation implementation is still met with the same
reluctance and skepticism by the sales force.
Reflecting back, what that salesperson was really saying was “salespeople” are integral to closing deals; so if you
expected them to welcome and use automation technology, it had better add real value to their ability to sell.
There is no disputing that the speed of acquiring new business has increased because of advancements in
technology; making communications of voice and data almost instantaneous. Today, sophisticated clients are
requiring more from the sales force than just knowing their service or product lines. The sales force needs
automation tools to effectively engage their organization’s resources in quickly developing integrated solutions
to the client’s business problems.
So why do most companies report challenges in implementing sales automation processes and still get a pushback
from the sales force meant to use them? In many cases, adequately training the sales force to use
technology correctly – and convincing them to use it consistently – can be a serious “culture change” issue
within organizations. The salespeople asks themselves, “Why do we need this process automation tool and what
are our benefits in using it to serve our clients?” Implementation problems can also stem from failing to
properly address the following three key issues:
Alignment of company sales and automation processes that focus on adding value and reducing time wasters for the
sales force
Selection of an automation tool that supports the core sales processes and does not drive additional processes that
are not productive to the company needs analysis or sales force
Providing adequate training for proposed users, as data quality and user acceptance are inversely proportional to
the user’s perception of the friendliness/effectiveness of the software application.
What truly makes a company’s automation processes successful? It depends on each company’s own definition,
which essentially is driven by their internal needs analysis and often further supported by judicious use of
implementation partners.
We have examined three companies that have reported successful implementations of sales automation
software and related sales processes to see what lessons could be learned in the selection and implementation
of automation tools in sales force management.
IBM
IBM is a great example of a company that has designed and implemented a sales force automation system that
reinforces as well as promotes automation aspects within their sales processes and provides benefits to related
departments. Resistance to change will always be a constant issue within organizations and breed the familiar
“I don’t like the new changes, I like the sales process the way it was!” IBM has been delving into these change
issues and over the years has effectively developed an automation system that has clearly engaged a myriad of
salespeople and departmental experts along the way to help ensure and secure future business opportunities.
IBM, in conjunction with SAP (their chosen implementation partner) has won more awards for implementation
than any other partnership since their inception. Why is partnering necessary when most parent companies
would rather keep all their vital information and details in-house? Partnering elevates the platform of
credibility while creating a framework that promotes validity too. IBM utilized its automation cycle of designprototype-
deploy-operate-enhance, rinse and repeat while SAP customized the automation software and
processes to meet IBM’s “needs analysis.” The company has been able to develop self-actualization aspects
within their software design. This essentially means that as the CRM system is updated with new sales
information on a tracked opportunity, the system responds by creating “what if” and “next steps” scenarios.
This creates a window for proactive “push adaptability and functionality,” getting information into the hands of
those throughout the organization that may help strategize solutions to sales obstacles with the client.
An example of how having real-time sales updates has benefited IBM and their partners is their ability to
provide drill down capabilities that essentially allows a company to delve backwards through any and all
processes to determine a root cause of sales problems. This allows for various departments to continuously
drive operational efficiencies and answer questions such as,”Why does the sales force use certain
details/aspects to determine potential clients and what is the relevance of those details toward the desired
results?”
Maersk
Maersk, a leading importing/exporting shipping company, is another example of good implementation of client
relations/sales automation systems. Maersk’s corporate sales function has four main departmental subgroups
that drive all corporate sales agendas and include: sales objective management (sets goals and creates protocols
to meet/exceed those goals), account management (makes sure that the company manages optimistic and
viable revenue streams), opportunity management (procures/facilitates current and future revenue streams, as
well as product diversification), and sales management (implements vertical/ horizontal integration of sales
force and overseas sales force initiatives, programs and protocols).
To achieve a cooperative implementation effort, Maersk conducted a rigorous “needs analysis” coupled with
interactive workshop sessions for the four department sub-groups and departmental managers.
Partnering with Quartz+Co, the two respective giants created various programs and workshops to facilitate the
development of their automation system. Their ability to highlight sales force techniques that have been proven
over the years, coupled with their individual fact based coaching methods, facilitated development of an
application that convinced many within the sales force teams that “change” was not only needed but necessary
to promote the enterprises sales and growth agendas.
The main focus was making sure that all employees, vertically and horizontally, understood that there must be a
desire/need for “change.” Once understood, the desire transforms into questioning, “what implications are
involved and are the benefits attainable/desirable?” If properly posed and answered, the initial developmental
steps necessary, yet sometimes daunting to facilitate, creates the environment to holistically build a CRM
automation system that in-turn provides great implementation leverage.
Siemens
Siemens is another company that has developed a CRM system allowing them to create and virtually modify
any and all aspects of their sales force automation tools. The CRM system was developed with Blackstone &
Cullen to ensure that flexibility, compatibility and implementation support the processes in place. Blackstone &
Cullen, similar to SAP and Quartz+Co, were chosen due to their track record as well as their adherence to
government compliance aspects, which is important to companies seeking worldwide positioning via their sales
force automation processes. Siemens has been able to consolidate approximately 400 knowledge center
locations down to 20 master knowledge centers of their products via their new sales automation system, which
adheres to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002) and promotes government compliance.
So what does this actually mean? Department users analyzing data find information and resources are in such
abundance that leveraging opportunities on a company wide scale equates to increased revenue streams
compliant with Federal Acquisition Regulations. Siemens system creates query lists that immediately cross
references positive and negative outcomes based on what the sales force and top management deems as
acceptable parameters. The system then correlates the aspects that fit the best, based on a given scenario in
addition to information garnered through “needs analysis” which increases the success rates, as well as
procuring vital information as to what can generate higher sales in similar future situations.
All three examples utilize “needs analysis workshops” that promote and reinforce fact-based coaching and
system building tools to stimulate thinking and increase effectiveness/efficiency of problem management. IBM
and Maersk’s global knowledge and expertise of automation/implementation via hub or cloud initiatives have
provided them with a unique offering in regard to implementation. Siemens has opted for an in-house point-ofsale
data delivery system that promotes continually updated global distributor management information across
all levels of the organization.
Even though these companies utilized different processes to accomplish their various goals, a common thread
has been their thought process and methodology. Aligning company sales policies and processes to increase
value, coupled with software that supports core processes, has inevitably created an atmosphere that not only
encourages adequate training, but also encourages independent thinking and helps improve sales force skill
sets.
How can these three companies, comparatively speaking, be so similar but operate successfully in such
different areas of expertise? The methodology is the binding piece that joins the three together. When the
methodology supports the processes but is not solely driving the processes, the implementation of the sales
automation technology can be delivered much smoother and effectively. The automation cycle employed by all
of them promote “needs analysis” in conjunction with partnering with implementation entities.
Being able to understand what the sales force wants and actually needs are two different animals. These
companies ‘get it’ and have been able to design processes that facilitate those needs that have become
benchmarks for other industries.
No comments:
Post a Comment