Don't forget, in addition to these great posts, I also post new articles to my website once a month or so. You can sign up to receive notices of the new articles here.

I was attending a demo for one of my clients recently. They were taking a look at the IMPAK database from Integrated Software Systems, Inc. (ISSI).

During the demo, the ISSI staff pointed out that there is online help on each screen of the database. But what really caught my attention is a simple utility within the database that allows the client to edit the online help screens. In other words, for each screen in the database (and sometimes for multiple sections within the screen) there is an online help tool that the client can edit to add any of their own business rules and processes. What a great idea!

As I have written many times (here and here, for example), documentation is absolutely critical to long-term data management success. Yet very few organizations ever bother to document what they do. Now, at least one vendor is making it very easy to do that.

Kudos to ISSI for implementing this concept.

UPDATE: Full disclosure: EDM is an independent third-party consulting firm. This means we have no financial relationship with any of the vendors mentioned in this blog. We provide unbiased opinions on what we see.

Here's a nice article on selecting a CRM solution, from InsideCRM. I know it's a nice article, because I'm quoted in it.  (You'll find me under point #2.)

There really is a lot of good information in here, even when it's not me being quoted. If you're in the market for a new CRM system (or association management system), this article is worth a read.

TAUG is TMA Resources Annual Users Group meeting. This year they met in Louisville, and it was, once again, a successful event.

I’ve mentioned this users group meeting before, but what I wanted to highlight this year is how TMA Resources treats the consultants who work in the association software space. There are three specific things TMA Resources does that I think are very smart:

1. They allow industry consultants to attend the users group conference for free.
2. They hold two sessions specifically for industry consultants (by invitation only) designed to update the consultants on what is happening at TMAR.
3. They recognize all the consultants in attendance during one of the general sessions.

These are all very easy, low- to no-cost ideas that make me think that TMAR really does care about working with industry consultants. I’ve not encountered this kind of positive treatment at any of the other users group meetings I’ve attended. (Hint, hint to the other vendors!)

UPDATE: Full disclosure: EDM is an independent third-party consulting firm. This means we have no financial relationship with any of the vendors mentioned in this blog. We provide unbiased opinions on what we see.

This article in TechNewsWorld, discusses the recent decision by the Census Bureau to abandon its use of handheld computers to take the census in 2010.  E-Commerce Times asked me why these kinds of projects fail. My answer:

"In my experience, the primary reason for large IT failures is a lack of clear business objectives — or a lack of agreement on those objectives," he told the E-Commerce Times.

"For example, the explicit objective for the census project was to have more accurate data. It was believed that technology could make that happen. Without knowing the details, I'd bet that when it came right down to it, the primary objective was lost in the details of implementing the technologies," he conjectured. "In other words, while everyone agreed that more accurate data was the goal, they couldn't agree [on] how to make that happen."

As I've said in another post, failure of projects is certainly not limited to smaller organizations.  

In the retail world, marketers often speak of "channels." Channels are the different methods of purchasing interaction between the customer and the seller. For example, the web, the phone, and storefronts are all examples of different channels.

In a recent issue of Customer Relationship Managament magazine, an article noted that retail outlets with multiple channels for purchase have two to four times the spend of those with only one channel. In other words, the more purchase avenues and opportunities you offer your customer, the more they spend with you.

I'm wondering how much thought associations give to this concept. What are your channels? Most associations offer sales through their website, through the phone, and possibly through brochure/catalog sales. Some associations (though not all) may also have "retail" operations during their annual meeting or other meetings.

What about you? What channels are you using? And are all the channels integrated (i.e., you're managing all the sales through one unified database)?

Many years ago I was sitting in a meeting between a vendor and an association client. The vendor asked "How many members do you have?" The client, with a straight face, answered "It depends on who is asking."

Without a pause, I blurted out "That's insane! There should only be one answer to that question."

If you can't be honest about something as simple as "how many members do you have?" how can you be honest with the actual members? And how can you expect anyone to be honest with you?

So what do you think? Am I making too big a deal out of this? Are there times when the answer to a question as specific as "how many members do you have?" can be "It depends"?

I think there is a common misconception among smaller organizations that somehow "big" companies don't have the same kinds of challenges with systems implementations. That is, while smaller companies struggle with selecting and implementing new systems, big companies don't because they've got so much more in the way of resources.

The reality, of course, is that regardless of your organization's size, system implementation can be a challenge. Here's just the latest example: "Waste Management Sues SAP Over 'complete failure.'" (First seen at Panopea Consulting's iMIS blog.)

In the article, Waste Management claims SAP delivered software that was "untested, undeveloped, and defective." I've heard similar claims made among my clients, on occasion (though none have ever led to a lawsuit). 

Without knowing the details of this particular engagement, I'd be willing to bet there's a lot of blame to be laid on both sides of the project. And I can say with near certainty that neither party will be happy with the outcome of this dispute. 

So the next time you think "Man, this would be so much easier if we were a bigger company," think again. 

When I work with my clients on system selection, one thing I strongly advise them to do is limit the number of systems they actually consider. While more choices sounds better than fewer, the reality is that too many choices creates more confusion. I've written about this here.

But as I discussed this issue with a client recently, she said something that got my attention. As I explained how looking at too many systems would lead staff to confuse one system with another, she responded "Yeah. It's just like trying on too many perfumes at the perfume counter. After a while, you can't tell one from the other."

Well put.