• case study 2

    A mid-sized business unit / operating company of the world’s most comprehensive and broadly based manufacturer of health care products.

    The client had adopted Siebel CRM as its sales management and reporting platform, and introduced a new Integrated Selling Process (ISP); it deployed both the system and the process to its 750 sales reps. Following the initial implementation, adoption and use of the system did not reach the original intended levels, and the number of users continued to decline. As a result, the potential business results achievable through the process and system behaviors were not achieved.

    The client retained us to conduct an assessment of the existing Integrated Selling Process (ISP) and Siebel System, and its capabilities; and assess gaps in alignment with the business needs, and define a strategy for moving forward with the existing process and application or a new process and/or application.

    Immediately following project definition, we conducted “Voice of the Customer” interviews with a cross-section of the sales organization from Vice Presidents to rookie sales reps, in order to gain insight into their unique perspectives. We also developed and utilized interview and survey questions designed to gather current process and technology performance data, and highlight opportunities for improvement.

    As part of the analysis, we developed a current process map identifying the actual sets of processes being used by the sales force (as opposed to the ISP-defined process), identified the reasons behind the divergence between the intended and actual process, and defined the capabilities gaps that were driving the sales force away from using the Siebel CRM system.


    frameworkterritory plans

    In order to set the stage for the evaluation and selection of a new (or redesigned) CRM solution, we defined a set of re-engineered, future state business processes, and mapped the gaps between the current state and future state in terms of people (e.g., skills, training and behaviors), business processes, and technology. we identified a number of strategic alternatives (e.g., re-training, re-implementation, implementation of additional Siebel functionality, integration of existing platform with other systems, migration to a new CRM platform) that might be used alone or in combination to satisfy the gaps.


    Screen Shot 2015-03-19 at 4.21.12 PM


    To assist in developing and justifying a recommendation, we developed a decision model that was used to evaluate the alternatives on the basis of multiple decision criteria. We developed a comprehensive CRM strategy “roadmap” document including recommendations for providing value-added solutions for the sales force rank ordered by priority — for example, defining initiatives to provide better integration between the sales compensation system and the forecasting and opportunity management processes.

    By focusing on the process and technology requirements of its sales force in terms of what’s needed in the field as well as in the boardroom, the client was able to undertake a series of projects to provide its sales reps with needed capabilities. We defined four initiative areas in which the client has completed or is undertaking projects:

    • Territory Briefcase: providing relevant information to the sales force about customers, products and accounts by assessing and mapping data needs

    • Account Potential and Sales Opportunities: enabling more accurate determination of account potential and prioritization of sales opportunities by integrating disparate data sources

    • Trends and Forecasts: expanding focus from lagging sales indicators (e.g. revenues and %
    growth) to include leading indicators (e.g. trends and forecasts)

    • Information Anywhere: enabling sales reps to proactively address customer needs by providing pertinent information through the use of mobile technologies

    focus areas


    The client is confident in its ability to continue the execution of these targeted point solutions that address the real needs of the sales force, and the circle back to a re-implementation of the core once (integrated with the tools) once enough value has been delivered.

    Key Takeaways:

    • Just because you build it, that doesn’t mean they’ll come. In this instance, the CRM system was viewed by the field sales force – and much of the management hierarchy – as cumbersome to use, in conflict with some of the key messaging communicated by management, and not at all focused on the areas that would help the organization’s sales reps to sell more products.
    • Same goes for the implementation of a standard process. If the process is viewed as cumbersome or somehow out of sync with the messages from top management and what employees believe to be in their own self-interest — especially when it comes to things like compensation and advancement — people will find a way to ignore it or circumvent it.