Not the technology, but the buzzword.
Ten years ago, “Customer Relationship Management (CRM)” was called “Sales
Force Automation (SFA).” Then SFA started getting a bad name because so many
of the systems turned out to be expensive mistakes. Vendors switched to CRM
buzzword to avoid the taint.
Same thing is now happening with CRM buzzword. Many CRM systems are
implemented simply to supply management with data; very few systems actually
help sales pros in the day-to-day task of selling. Many sales pros feel as
if they’re being asked to be data entry clerks — and give away their
contacts, simply to help their managers make fancy reports.
Now that CRM is starting to get a bad reputation, providers of
sales-oriented technology are struggling to dump the acronym. Today, about
half the websites selling some kind of sales technology already avoid the
“CRM” moniker. Instead, they sport a variety of terms like “Sales 2.0″ or
“Sales Enhancement Technology” or “Sales Productivity Improvement Tools.”
Eventually, a new term for “CRM” will crowd the other terms out. By that
time, the number of self-identified “CRM” providers (like the SFA brethren)
will dwindle to a handful. The technology will still be around, of course,
but it will be sold under a different buzzword. And probably encounter the
same problems with user adoption that SFA and CRM encountered.
Product names are important. Companies spend millions of dollars trying to
come up with product names that give buyers a positive feeling or describe
what the buyers are buying in a positive way. If you want people to use a
product, the last thing you want it name it something that annoys them from
the very start.
CRM was originally called “Sales Force Automation (SFA)” — an incredibly
stupid and insulting name that implies that the purpose of the technology is
to automate the sales rep out of a job. And, in fact, the people who
invented SFA were largely propeller-head types who hated sales professionals
and considered them deadwood who could and should be eliminated. No wonder
it flopped.
SFA, of course, begat “Customer Relationship Management (CRM),” which is
almost as bad. The “CRM” term implies that the software, not the sales pro,
will be “managing” the customer relationship, which is the essence of the
job. It also implies that the real reason for having the software is to
reduce the cost of selling. And, indeed, the main thrust of all CRM
marketing is to give lip service to selling and then focus completely on
cost-savings and providing reports to managers.
Neither of the terms SFA nor CRM have any natural appeal to the sales
professional. They’re off-putting and irritating. So let’s dump them, since
they’re not helping and they’re probably making things worse.
Instead, let’s come up with a moniker that has some appeal. Sales pros want
to sell. Sales pros are always interested in technology that helps them sell
(like cell phones and GPS). So, if you want sales pros to use a technology,
you name it something that appeals to THEM, not sales management. I suggest:
“Computer Assisted Selling (CAS).”
I’m sure that some of you could probably come up with an even better term,
but “Computer Assisted Selling” puts the emphasis on the right thing, which
is selling. CAS describes what the CRM and SFA was supposed to do (but
mostly didn’t), which is assist sales pros to sell. To help; not to replace.
To implement this first step in fixing “CRM,” you decide that, whatever
technology you install in your shop, you aren’t going to call it “CRM.” You
tell the sales pros explicitly: “WE DON’T BELIEVE IN CRM; WE’RE DOING
SOMETHING DIFFERENT.”
By: Geoffrey James
link
Contact us for a free sales and marketing consultation on the effectiveness of your current go-to-market strategies and to discuss how our RevGen
Sales Systems can improve your bottom line.
