Yep, there's a slew of CRM products in the market today. They all tend
to follow the same concepts.
In fact we're currently completing development on one that will run on
iSeries, Windows, Linux and AIX.
I remember when we simply used to call them Contact Management products
:-)
Regards,
Richard Schoen
RJS Software Systems Inc.
"Get the information you need. Now!"
Document Management, Workflow, Report Delivery, Forms and Business
Intelligence
Email: richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web Site:
http://www.rjssoftware.com
Tel: (952) 736-5800
Fax: (952) 736-5801
Toll Free: (888) RJSSOFT
-----Original Message-----
------------------------------
message: 3
date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:56:21 -0700
from: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
subject: [WEB400] CRM on Demand
Customer Relationship Management must be the poster child application
for 'Cloud Computing', 'Software as a Service', 'On Demand Computing',
'Software, plus Service', or whatever the latest catch phrase that folks
are calling Web applications these days.
I was just about ready to create source file QRPGLESRC in library RDCRM.
'RD' is the prefix for my product libraries, which is an abbreviation
for my company name, and 'CRM' would be an abbreviation for a product.
I'd also need IFS folders '/rdweb/apps/rdcrm/...' for applicable HTML,
CSS, and JavaScript files. But then I began reviewing on demand CRM
offerings from a few of the major players:
http://crm.dynamics.com
http://www.salesforce.com
http://www.37signals.com
http://crmondemand.oracle.com/en/index.htm
http://www.sugarcrm.com/crm/
Their Webinar and Media Player presentations pound in the idea that if
you don't do CRM then you're nobody.
Microsoft Dynamics Online is a Web application. But they specifically
target Outlook as a Client, and even promote that interface over IE. So
you can continue using Outlook and Exchange for email, but when a new
message arrives, it can also be posted to the CRM database, and shared
with other users.
I understand software bundling as a business model, but question
Microsoft's approach to bundling as a design pattern. Outlook is
already a convoluted user interface - then you add CRM on top? That
takes me back to how they integrated IE into the OS, not realizing that
the design would lead to future OS virus penetration. I'd rather make
email a Web application, and integrate it with CRM through a portal.
Well, at least they really know how to give a polished sales
presentation.
One remarkable thing is that 4 of the players referenced above share
quite a bit of common terminology. It's as though they all followed the
lead of Siebel CRM, which was later acquired by Oracle.
Accounts are companies. The sales process involves 'leads', which after
some effort may become 'opportunities', which may be included in a
'campaign' and added to the 'pipeline', for review in the executive
'dashboard'.
Coming from an accounting background, I would probably refer to
companies as 'Organizations' rather than 'Accounts'. To me, Accounts
are something that show up on financial statements, or something you
store your money in. How do they integrate CRM with the financial
system when Account has such different meaning under each?
37 Signals took a bit different approach to CRM in their product
(HighRise). The scope is scaled back, which was actually somewhat
refreshing. Who you talk to, and when to follow-up with something.
Just musing, as I contemplate setting up my 'Organizations' table in
file QDDSSRC in library RDCRM.
Nathan.
midrange.com
