Multiple Perspectives on Social CRM: The Consultant, Analyst, Vendor, and Client

November 21st, 2010

If you put a consultant, an analyst, a vendor, and an end user client together in the same room and ask them to explain or discuss social CRM or social business (or pretty much anything else), you will get very different answers and explanations. Nothing is ever one-sided so why bother trying to look at things from one perspective?  At the Attensity panel I participated in a few weeks ago, one of the attendees asked “what is social CRM?” to which I replied, “it depends on who you ask.”  That response got a few chuckles from the room but I was actually serious when I said it.  There are multiple players in the space that do different things and approach social CRM differently.

If you ask a consultant, you will get a response that resonates (or should resonate) with various clients that may or may not even include the term “social” anything (this can also mean that there isn’t really one answer).  Chess and Metz have a series of use cases and social customer scenarios that we walk clients through.  If the use cases and scenarios resonate with the client, then we call it social CRM (internally).  Analysts will most likely come back with a complicated answer that is based on their research.  The problem with their answer is that it is not always practical and is not something that clients can understand (trust me I have tried dozens of times).  Vendors will explain things in terms of how their product works or what it does, and are oftentimes frustrated with analysts because it’s a lot easier to write about social CRM than it is to actually build a product around it (but then again, if you are a vendor you shouldn’t be building a product around a buzz word now should you?).  Clients can actually care less about what you call anything as long as you can solve their problem.

Clearly there is a lot more that can be said here and every perspective has its pros and cons, but the point is that when talking about anything in this “social” ecosystem, it’s important to understand where the viewpoint is coming from because that’s going to shape the conversation.

Just my 2 cents…maybe 3 :)

Why the Enterprise 2.0 Vs Social Business Debate is Really Going On

November 15th, 2010

(Chess puzzle, white to move and mate in 2, can you figure it out?)

There’s been some interesting blog fodder as of late around whether or not the terms Enterprise 2.0 or Social Business are more applicable in describing this shift towards emergent collaborative tools being used within the enterprise.  Let’s start things off with a few links to re-cap what’s going on.  This was started by a post by Andrew McAfee who is of course biased since created the whole Enterprise 2.0 “thing.”

Social Business is Past Retirement Age- Andrew McAfee

Enterprise 2.0: The Prodigal Parent- Martijn Linssen

Enterprise 2.0 or Social Business: Who Cares?!- Larry Hawes

Enterprise 2.0 is beyond a crock. It’s dead- Dennis Howlett

Does any of this debate really matter?  No not really because at the end of the day very few people and companies in the world know what social business or enterprise 2.0 is and even fewer of them are actually calling it such.  But hey, it’s fun to talk about.  So why is this whole debate even going on?  Personally, I think it’s because of limitations.  Let me try to explain what I mean and hopefully it will make sense. When most people hear or talk about Enterprise 2.0 they think of the use of new and emergent collaboration tools INTERNALLY within the organization.  When people hear the term Social CRM they think of customer collaboration and engagement.

Social business on the other hand refers to the organization as a whole and can encompass pretty much anything, whether it be collaboration with employees, partners, and/or customers.  In fact, social business also encompasses Social CRM.  Why does this matter?  Well think about it.  If you’re in the “enterprise 2.0″ or “social CRM” space do you want to be seen as being limited to one or the other or do you want people to think that you can offer a full range of products and services?  Chances are, the latter.

This is why vendors (and pretty much everyone else) are no longer calling themselves Enterprise 2.0 vendors because they have expanded their product offering to move from BEYOND just an internal or external platform to offering BOTH.  Does that make sense?  Basically what’s happening is vendors are seeing that there is more money to be made (as are consultants/vendors/and anyone else) by serving both areas, internal and external and they don’t want to be limited by a term which puts them into one or the other.  Calling yourself a “social business” provider means you can do anything you want as it pertains to social.  Why limit yourself to something when you don’t need to?  It’s akin to having a skeleton key that can open any door.

Simple right?

The Many Faces of Social CRM

November 8th, 2010

I thought it would be very interesting to look at how other people in the world are talking about, describing, and visualizing Social Customer Relationship Management (Social CRM).  I found some pretty interesting images out there and compiled some of them below.  I also included an image from Chess Media Group.  It’s interesting to see [...]

From Fans and Followers to Customers and Advocates: A Social CRM Presentation at Blog World

October 19th, 2010

A few days ago Brent Leary and I presented the first ever Social Customer Relationships Management (Social CRM) session at Blog World Expo.  We didn’t talk about twitter, facebook, or any other social tools or social media.  We focused on business applications which many people found re-freshing, especially at a social media conference.  Here is [...]

Facebook: The Greatest CRM Platform in the World?

October 6th, 2010

Ok, so it’s not exactly a fully fledged CRM system (yet) but when you compare the information you have on a client or lead in Salesforce with the information that Facebook has on the same person the difference and quality of information is mind-boggling.  Not only that but Facebook permeates across the online world like [...]