I provided my thoughts on the Gartner CRM Summit these posts. But I was recently quoted on CRMBuyer.com for my thoughts on the conference. You can read that here.

Other posts on the Cartner CRM Summit 2007 can be found here.

Now that I've discussed all the take-aways from the Gartner CRM Summit, I have to rant about a couple of issues that came up during the conference (and offer kudos on one item). I'm putting on my meeting planning hat, here (and I was a terrible meeting planner).

1. Have the Gartner analysts never read a single tip on appropriate use of Powerpoint? Without exception, every Gartner presenter had about ten times as much information on their slides as could be reasonably read. I typically sat in the middle of the room and usually was unable to read most of the slides. I can't imagine what it was like in the back of the room. Here's a sample of what I'm talking about:

   

2. Staff walking in front of rear projectors.  At nearly every session where rear projection screens were being used (meaning the Powerpoint slides were being projected from behind the screen, rather than from in the room), someone behind the curtain would walk in front of the projector, casting a big "shadow puppet" on the display. Disconcerting, to say the least. Had it only happened once, I wouldn't have commented, but it happened three times in one session, and once in two other sessions! Overall, the Westin Diplomat had outstanding service, and I don't know if these people were Westin staff or Gartner staff, but my goodness, don't walk in front of the projector!
3. Music in the rooms prior to the session's beginning. A long time ago I read a meeting planner's tip that in effect said "Play music in the room before the speaker starts, because low music encourages discussion among attendees. In a dead-silent room, no one wants to speak." Prior to each speaker, the sound system would play some great classic pop music (think Motown) while the attendees sat and waited. It's a nice touch, and one I don't see at too many conferences.

Other posts on the Gartner CRM Summit 2007 can be found here.

One of the Gartner presenters made the point that CRM strategy can be implemented without technology, but that without technology, it is not easily scalable. Put another way, while you can implement a good customer relationship management strategy on note cards, it's going to be pretty hard to manage thousands or tens of thousands of customers that way.

I think a lot of associations face this issue, without realizing it. I run into a lot of associations that are managing their data on Excel spreadsheets or home-grown Access or Filemaker databases. There is nothing inherently wrong with managing your data this way. But as the speaker above points out, scalability becomes a problem rather quickly. Even with just a few hundred members, it becomes increasingly difficult to keep track of all the little details: membership join and renew, name and contact information, meeting attendance, committee participation. You can see why having a "real" association management system (AMS) can be beneficial.

I think what organizations in this situation need to realize is that having a real AMS is a cost of doing business and the board should be educated on how much these systems cost, what it takes to manage them, and most importantly, why it's important to have a solid data management system in place.

For those associations that may still be running on home-grown systems, there are now many options available at a relatively low cost. Products such as affiniscape, Avectra's netForum OnDemand and Memberclicks are all designed to provide high functionality at a relatively low price.

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. 

Note: This post is especially for Ben Martin.

Other posts on the Cartner CRM Summit 2007 can be found here.

Paul Greenberg, author of CRM at the Speed of Light, spoke on CRM 2.0 and how social networking must integrate with CRM strategy. The session had all the usual web 2.0 items, like blogs, podcasts, wikis, etc. But Greenberg made two points I thought worth repeating.

1. "We no longer live in a business ecosystem, we live in a customer ecosystem." What he means is that the systems in which we operate are now dominated by what the customer needs, rather than what the business needs. This is because even a single customer now has the ability to greatly affect the operations of the largest businesses through the power of blogs and other social networks. So everything we do must be customer-focused, including all of the systems and processes we employ.
2. "Companies that succeed will give the customer a sense of importance, self-control, and ownership." That "ownership" caught my attention, because after all, your members "own" your association. But are we doing what we should be to make them "feel" that ownership? Social networking tools like wikis, blogs, and other tools that create transparency will help your members feel that ownership, that importance, that sense of self-control. And conversely, those who don't offer this transparency will begin to see it in lower retention and decreased participation from members.

Here's more from SearchCRM. 

So what is your association doing about it?

Other posts on the Gartner CRM Summit 2007 can be found here.

One of the Gartner presenters identified three areas where CRM implementations face the most "pain":

1. Employee Turnover
2. Metrics
3. Processes

I think associations face these problems, as well, but to varying degrees.

Employee turnover: Because AMS implementations can take so long (sometimes more than a year), employee turnover is somewhat likely and can be problematic, especially if key players from the implementation team leave.

Metrics: Associations need to have clear measurements for success of an AMS implementation. What things can you measure that will show success? How about turnaround time on membership joins and renewals, events registrations, and product orders? What other metrics can you track?

Processes: This is by far the number one issue faced by associations. Simply put, most organizations I encounter do not have well-documented processes for handling the majority of their data management issues. And frequently I find that staff aren't even in agreement as to how certain data and processes should be managed. This is a huge problem for associations, which I talk about here, and here, and here.

So which of these pain points are you addressing?

Other posts on the Cartner CRM Summit 2007 can be found here.

A prediction from the Gartner conference: Up to 25% of CRM implementations in 2008 will be postponed due to human resource shortages. Simply put, there are not enough "CRM experts" available to meet the demand. The result will be not only delayed implementations, but increased consulting costs (i.e., higher hourly rates).

Anecdotally I'm already seeing this in the association management system (AMS) market. In the past six weeks I've sent out three separate RFPs on behalf of clients. Typically I send RFPs to no more than five vendors (sometimes fewer). For the first time in my many years of sending RFPs, in one case, I actually received only one response on time. Three of the vendors were late responding, and the fourth chose not to respond. With the other two RFPs, I also had vendors choose not to respond and had late responses from some of the vendors.

I always give vendors two full weeks to respond. In the case of the late and non-responders, almost all of the vendors said they were so busy they were having trouble responding. This is good for the vendors, but a potential problem for associations. As the talent glut er…shortage (h/t David Gammel) continues, vendors will have even more trouble responding to the needs of their current customers.

How about you? Are you noticing a greater delay in response from your vendor? Is there a noticeable degradation in customer service?

Other posts on the Gartner CRM Summit 2007 can be found here.

According to one of the speakers during the Summit, there are only four possible goals for implementing a new CRM system:

1. Increase revenue
2. Decrease costs
3. Enhance brand
4. Improve customer loyalty

Based on my experience, I've found that most associations implement new association management systems (AMS) to primarily decrease costs and improve customer loyalty.

Decreasing costs: In most cases, this one is pretty obvious. Frequently associations are managing multiple sets of data. As a result, there are inefficiencies (such as redundant data) that result is increased costs to the association (in the form of higher staff costs or increased outsourcing costs). Implementing a new centralized AMS can help reduce these redundancies and decrease costs.

For example, I had a client several years ago to a web-based product which allowed their members to purchase membership online rather than through the mail. That "simple" change resulted in a dramatic reduction in overhead costs to the association, as well as a dramatic increase in turnaround time to member orders. (You can read more about it here.)

Improving Customer Loyalty: This one may not seem as obvious. How can a new AMS improve customer loyalty? The assumption is that the new AMS will allow your staff to better serve the member. Better service should equate to greater customer loyalty. (Certainly the obverse is true: worse service will create poorer customer loyalty.)

So how will a new AMS improve customer service? Presumably your new system will, among other things, provide staff with a "holistic" view of your members and customers, giving staff a complete picture of the individual or organization he or she is working with. This holistic view can allow the staff member to better understand the interactions the customer has had with your association (e.g., they've been a member for 12 years, they buy all of our products, they attend every annual meeting, etc.) and can help your organization tailor your message and products for that member or customer. All of this leads to great customer loyalty.

So what's your reason for implementing a new AMS?

These next several posts will focus on issues raised during the Gartner CRM Conference Summit 2007 which I think are particularly applicable to the association market.

In a session on "Lessons Learned" from 1000 CRM implementations, three points were identified as key success factors:

1. Establish a project objective (i.e., why are you bothering with a CRM implementation? Are you trying to raise more revenue, lower costs, improve customer loyalty?).
2. Focus project on fewer functional areas. (i.e., don't try to implement sales force automation, contact management, email marketing management, and ERP all at once).
3. Focus on fewer channels (i.e., phone, web, physical store, kiosks, etc.).

How do these apply at your association? Let's take them one at a time:

1. Establish a project objective. You need to ask yourself why you're going to the trouble of implementing a new association management system (AMS). Are you trying to increase staff efficiency? Are you trying to provide better self-service options for your members and customers? Are you trying to increase revenue? What do you hope to accomplish with a new AMS? You need to establish this to serve as a guidepost for all of your decisions moving forward.
2. Focus on fewer functional areas. A typical AMS implementation may include membership, events registration, product sales, exhibits sales, sponsorship, certification, and more. One option to consider is implementing only selected functional areas for the initial go-live. For example, I've had clients who have gone live with only membership functionality, choosing to add other functionality later, once more time and resources could be allocated to the project.
3. Focus on fewer channels. For most associations, the channels are limited to back-office (i.e., staff view) and web integration (although there are certainly exceptions, as some larger associations have IVR and kiosks, for example). But even if you only have two channels, the suggestion of focusing on fewer channels (i.e., only one channel) is worth consideration. Implementing an AMS, regardless of your staff size, is a huge task. Narrowing the scope of the implementation by focusing on the back-office first, with web integration as a second, post-go-live phase, may be something worth considering.