The Selected Item Cannot Be Tracked in Microsoft Dynamics CRM

I had an interesting problem this week. For one project we are at the ‘pointy end’; go-live is upon us and training is underway. The client is loving the Outlook integration and so, while I normally train through the web client, in this case, it was done through the Outlook client.

Everything was going fine. As is often the case there had been some feedback from those in the room regarding their security privileges and what they would need to do in their role and these would need to be tweaked.

At the end of one session one of the users reported not being able to track appointments. Sure enough, they created the appointment in Outlook and when they right-clicked and Tracked, the error reported “The selected item cannot be tracked in Microsoft Dynamics CRM.Item Name=<Appointment Name>”. Usually when there is a security permissions error, the error shown calls this out but this was different.

What was also strange was if I opened the appointment it claimed it would be tracked once it was saved which, of course, it already was. Forcing a CRM sync tried to track the item but produced the usual ‘unable’ error.

Checking the user’s permissions everything checked out. They had User Delete and Create for Activities so they could untrack and had basic access to the Service Calendar entities to allow for the tracking of Appointments.

So I thought I would try to add an appointment and track with the trainer user account, which had System Administrator permissions. The result?

• If I opened a Contact in CRM and created an appointment, the Outlook form opened, as per user permissions, and everything worked fine
• If I created an appointment directly in Outlook and tried to track it through right-clicking on it in the calendar (the track button did not appear in the ribbon for it unless I opened the record) it produced the same error

This was a bit of a mystery and resorting to Google/Bing did not yield any joy either.

The Breakthrough

I remembered, back when I was playing with TwInbox that custom items in Outlook could not be tracked to CRM. I also noticed that rather than the usual ‘New Appointment’ button on the calendar in Outlook it read ‘New MeetingConference’, which looked plain wrong.

(what the button should look like)

A bit of internet searching and chats with the client’s IT folk revealed they had, in fact, used a conference scheduling add-on for Outlook in the past but this had been abandoned quite a while ago. It seemed its legacy was still within their standard operating environment (SOE).

Extensive playing about in Outlook to find the right setting eventually yielded gold. By right-clicking the calendar and selecting “IPM.Appointment” for the ‘When posting’ option, suddenly everything started working as expected.

All we needed to do was get the users to apply this setting in future training sessions, fix up those who had been in the class (about ten users) and adjust the SOE. Given the next training session was with the executives, I was glad we had discovered it sooner, rather than later.

Conclusions

Generally, if you cannot track an Outlook item into CRM it is going to be a permissions issue. Some things to check are

• the Append To privileges for Users, Contacts, Accounts and whatever you want to Set Regarding to
• Create rights for Activities
• Appropriate access to the role Service Management privileges so CRM can write the appointment to the Service Calendar (using the privileges of a standard role such as salesperson is a good place to start)
• User Activity delete permissions if you want the user to be able to untrack and remove from CRM

Failing this, it may be that Outlook is behaving in a non-standard way under the influence of an add-in. If so, see if you can create an Activity from a CRM record using the Outlook forms (this can be set in the user options on the first tab). If this works, given CRM spawns the correct form, it is likely the problem is Outlook has had its default forms messed with and this is where the problems lies.

Good luck and my hope is this post saves you a few hours of heartache troubleshooting Outlook-CRM tracking

Import Tricks For Dynamics CRM 2011

One of my most popular posts is from four years ago, Import Tricks For Dynamics 3.0 and 4.0. Having just done another multi-lingual import for a client, I thought this is a good time to update with my latest discoveries and tricks.

This blog is NOT a review of the features of the import tool as this has already been covered in multiple places elsewhere. This is a few tips and tricks when working with the import tool to make your life a little easier.

Templates and Lookups

A lot of work was done with the Import Wizard in 2011 and it is greatly improved. Back in version 4, there were two ways of getting data into CRM: the Import Wizard and the Data Migration Manager. The version 4 Import Wizard was not as powerful but much easier to use. The Data Migration Manager was a little unfriendly but potentially quite powerful (or so I was told, I always managed to get away with using the version 4 Import Wizard). In 2011, there is no longer a Data Migration Manager but the power of the Import Wizard has greatly improved.

You can now import practically any entity and CRM will provide you an Excel-compatible XML template to use which tells you handy things like field lengths and which fields are mandatory. You can also import lookup fields and link off any unique value you like. For details of both of these features check out this previous blog post of mine.

One thing that I will add to my previous post is that, while you can often click the Import Data down triangle and get a template, the behaviour is not always completely consistent.

Therefore, if you are having troubles accessing a template for a specific entity, you can always go to Settings – Data Management – Templates For Data Import and download any possible template from there.

Information That Cannot Be Imported

Unfortunately it is still not possible to import non-printable characters such as carriage returns and line feeds and these must be stripped out of things like the description text before importing. In my most recent import, the data came from an Oracle source and had SYN signal characters through it which caused no end of grief until they were purged. My old Import Tricks For Dynamics 3.0 and 4.0 post has an Excel formula for removing such characters, once you have identified the column, if this is causing you problems.

While you can now bring in the Owner of the records, you cannot bring in Inactive records (***STOP PRESS*** See Jukka’s comment below for how to work around this). While the template and mapping allow you to select ‘Inactive’ as an option for the Status Reason, the records will fail on import as the Import Wizard assumes all records have a Status of Active and the combination of an Active Status and an Inactive Status Reason is forbidden. My workaround was to create a new Status Reason of ‘Inactive_Temp’ for the Active Status. I also created a workflow which, when a record is created, checks the Status Reason and, if it is ‘Inactive_Temp’, deactivates the record with the Change Status step. This completely automated the importing of inactive records once I had adjusted the mapping to import records with an Inactive Status Reason to be ‘Inactive_Temp’ in CRM.

Another thing that cannot be imported are relationships across N:N links. There is, however, a codeplex project by L33t coder and fellow CRM MVP Andrii Butenko (a33ik) which promises to get around this. I am yet to try it but I do have this requirement on another project so it may come in handy very soon.

The Old Chicken and Egg Problem

One of the problems I mentioned in my previous post was that Accounts and Contacts have a 1:N relationship with each other through the Parent Customer lookup on the Contact and the Primary Contact lookup on the Account. This always caused problems as, with the version 4 Import Wizard, you could link one but not the other. I am now told you can link both (I did not need to do it on this project). The trick is to zip both the Contact source file and the Account source file together and point the Import Wizard to this zip file.

There is also a system mapping for ‘Generic Contact and Account Data’. While I had some difficulties using this (but in the end did not need to) the idea is if you have a big spreadsheet of Contacts, you can use this as a source file to create both the Accounts and the Contacts at once. While untested, I expect if this had a Primary Contact column in it, CRM would do the right thing linking Contacts to Accounts and also populating the Primary Contact field.

Unicode Data

As with version 4, you can still import unicode data, allowing you to populate fields with Chinese, Korean, Japanese or any other unicode text. The xml templates generated by CRM are unicode compliant BUT Excel is really bad at dealing with unicode files. If you plan to save your xml file as, say, CSV, Excel will make this a non-unicode compliant CSV file. The only option you can save the xml file to in Excel and preserve the unicode data is ‘Unicode Text’ which is a tab delimited text file (which the CRM Import Wizard is happy to deal with and was the source format for most of my imports).

One ‘feature’ of Excel 2010 which was very embarrassing was if you double-click a unicode-compliant CSV file generated elsewhere, Excel opens it but strips out the encapsulating double quotes on the first column. The upshot is if the text in the first column contains a comma, this shifts that row’s data out of sync. This was embarrassing in that I was accusing the client of not encapsulating the data properly when it was simply Excel screwing it up. What is more bizarre is that if you open Excel and click File-Open… to access the file (rather than double-clicking the file in the folder) it treats the unicode CSV file properly and does not strip out the encapsulating quotes.

Size Limits

While most of the news with the 2011 Import Wizard is good, one very frustrating feature of the new tool is the source file size limit. Your source files cannot be larger than eight megabytes. This limit is really frustrating, especially with unicode files. You have no choice but to split the files into sets of, say 10,000 records and queue them up for importing. In my case I was only importing in about 100,000 records so while a little annoying it was not a show-stopper.

Here are a few tips for getting your files down below the eight megabyte limit:

• The XML file, given it contains a lot of metadata about the source fields, is larger than a CSV or Unicode TXT file. Therefore, before importing, try saving your source file in a ‘simpler’ format
• Delete empty columns as this can save a few hundred kilobytes from the file

Error Export Bug

There is a great feature in the Import Wizard where you can export the rows which failed to import. CRM will package these rows up ready for re-importing once you have sorted out the issue.

However, the feature has a bug. In my case one row had caused an error due to a lookup failure. I exported and noticed all the data had shifted relative to the column headers. My culprit was the first column which was the salutation field and this particular record had an empty salutation. Therefore, my suggestion is to ensure whichever column you have first in your source file, make sure it is always populated e.g. the Last Name field for Contacts. Otherwise there is the risk that the data will be corrupted i.e. shifted if you Export Error Rows.

Similarly, I did see occasion where the Import Wizard got confused, when reviewing the import file, by the number of columns because the last column was not completely populated (something that also used to happen in version 4). So I would also recommend the last column in your source file be always populated. Status or Status Reason are good fields for this.

Slowness of Importing

Any tool used to import data into CRM, if it is using supported methods, needs to go through the web service layer. Unfortunately, the web service layer can only insert one record at a time causing a bit of a bottleneck for mass imports. Discussions on the web indicate the best you can hope for is about 50 records per second. If validations come into play or you have a slower server, this can go down to 10 records per second or lower. In my case, depending on server load, I was getting as low as 3-4 records per second in some cases.

I know no way of improving this in any significant way, other than using unsupported import methods i.e. direct SQL writes which I would not recommend given the potential for long-term disaster. It is simply something to be aware of and plan for.

Conclusions

Overall, the 2011 Import Wizard is a great tool and a huge improvement over its predecessor. However, like the previous version, it also has a few peccadillos which can cause headache if you are not aware of them. My hope is, with the above, you can get your data into CRM and avoid too many problems.

Salesforce Second Quarter Results for 2012

You have played the quarterly conference call drinking game now it is time to look at the numbers. Is growth still king or has Salesforce moved its gaze towards reining in its costs?

Where Do I Get My Numbers From?

As usual all number are brought to you from the Salesforce detailed financials PDF. If the numbers in this PDF seem at odds to what you heard on the conference call or in the multitude of lazy media updates, this is because the numbers Salesforce push are their non-GAAP numbers. These are numbers which Salesforce believe more accurately reflect the health of their business but are completely unregulated. The numbers I use are the GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) which use conventions enforced across all companies to ensure meaningful comparisons can be made and to ensure a base set of conventions are used across the reporting.

Try and Explain This GAAP/Non-GAAP Thing To Me One More Time

The biggest controversy is when it comes to profit. The non-GAAP revenue Salesforce reports is similar to the GAAP revenue but Salesforce turns its GAAP loss into a healthy non-GAAP profit. How does this work? The fourth page of the PDF tells all. Here is the summary of the big differences:

• GAAP loss from operations turns into a non-GAAP profit
• GAAP net loss turns into a non-GAAP net income
• GAAP Diluted earnings per share goes from a negative to a non-GAAP positive

The big-ticket item that does this transformation is the ‘stock-based expenses’, at $85 million for the quarter.

What is Stock-Based Expense?

This comes from employee options. An option is a right to buy an share at a certain price at some date. In many companies, Salesforce included, options are given to employees to ‘align them’. The logic goes if an employee has the option to buy stock at a certain price, they are motivated to get the share price as high as possible on the date they can ‘exercise’ the option. The logic is reasonable but, as Warren Buffett points out, the difference between an employee option and a shareholder’s share is the employee spent nothing to get it; they have no skin in the game and nothing to lose.

From a GAAP perspective, working out what to do with options is easy. You value the options as if they have been ‘cashed in’ and treat them as an expense. Because the employee will give you money when they do exercise them, you also include the incoming cash in your cash statement. Other than the fact you have more shares in the pool and have therefore diluted the value of each individual share, everything, cash-wise, balances out.

The biggest difference in Salesforce’s GAAP/non-GAAP reporting is this ‘stock-based expense’. I understand the logic: “To see how sales is going, look at the customer transactions, not the employee transactions”. This is well and good but it does not remove the fact that to generate those customer transactions, options were thrown at employees and those options have a value, otherwise they would not have the power to ‘align’.

Salesforce are big at quoting revenue growth, non-GAAP profit and operating cash flow (see buzzword bingo for details). Revenue growth is real and cannot be denied. However, as mentioned in this article, the operating cash flow Salesforce quotes includes the value of the options value as a positive cash value but the non-GAAP profit does not include the expense. In other words, they recognise the money generated from the options in their reporting but not the expense. This is in no way illegal but can, understandably, cause confusion.

The questions to ask are simple: “If Salesforce reports non-GAAP to more accurately reflect the health of their business, why exclude option expense but include the related cash inflows?” and “If Salesforce are using non-GAAP for another purpose, what is it?”

But enough of my soap-boxing and onto the numbers.

Salesforce Made Another Loss (But Not As Big As It Was Last Quarter)

Salesforce halved their loss this quarter going from a loss of almost $20 million last quarter to $9.8 million this quarter but about double what it was for the same quarter last year. No loss is good so hopefully this is Salesforce turning a corner (as suggested by comparison with the previous quarter) rather than descending further into loss.

Salesforce is Starting to Control its Expenses (Sort Of)

This shows the percentage year on year growth of revenue (red) and costs (green). Before the start of 2010 (2011 Q1) revenue outpaced costs. Then costs started to blow out until their worst around the middle of 2011 (2012 Q2). This quarter gets us back to where we were two years ago with revenues growing faster than costs. Well done Salesforce. Let us hope this trend continues.

Margins, while still in the negatives, are also heading in the right direction, now at –1.34%. Another positive sign, although still negative.

Subscription Speculation

The good news is Microsoft have reported their CRM numbers, now having, as of July 2012, 2.7 million users and 36,000 companies using Dynamics CRM. This means the average company using Dynamics CRM has 75 users, about double my estimated average company size for Salesforce of around 35 users.

My prediction is Microsoft will break through the three million user mark some time around the end of this year (say November to January).

Again, using the Salesforce revenues as a guide, we can estimate the Salesforce subscription base at around 4.9 million users with just shy of 140,000 companies.

The subscription revenue continues to hover around two meaning Salesforce has around twice as many users as Dynamics CRM.

However, the actual difference in the subscriber numbers has flattened, although we have seen this flattening before, as per the chart below, just not for such a long period.

Conclusions

Salesforce is still on shaky financial ground. They are making a loss, but never talk about it, talking about non-GAAP profits and operational cashflows instead. However, costs are not growing as quickly as they were previously and, with revenues still growing there is the possibility Salesforce will return to profit in the future.

In terms of subscription, Microsoft still has about half the users of Salesforce but the difference is flat at around 2.2 million. It will be interesting to see if this difference reduces in the future.

My thoughts are it would be nice for Salesforce to be consistent in the messages they send out i.e. treat the stock-based expense consistently across their measures but that does not make for rosy numbers. However, even if their outward messages cause confusion there does seem to be an effort internally to control expense. Competition is good so the healthier Salesforce can make themselves financially the better for the consumer. As usual, I look forward to the next quarter to see if Salesforce can return to profitability.

Salesforce Buzzword Bingo

It’s that time of the year again when Santa Benioff delivers us another little present in the form of the quarterly results for Salesforce. I will do the financials (but not this week).

In the past I have tried to summarise what is becoming a dull financial transcript (dull in the sense the numbers are Non-GAAP and there is never reflection on what could be improved e.g. profitability, cost reduction etc.) So I thought I would try something different this time.

Using the historical quarterly update transcripts and an online text analyser we can see the top ten buzzwords in the pre-question monologues of Marc Benioff, CEO and Graham Smith, CFO. I have excluded the safe harbor and Dorothy Dixer questions from the analysts so specific topics raised by analysts do not skew the results. I have also applied my own filter to eliminate things like ‘the’ and ‘year’. Here I present the top 12 keywords. The reason for 12? This way you can put them on a 4x3 grid, grab a bottle of your favourite tipple and, with some mates, play the Salesforce Quarterly Results Drinking Game next quarter.

This Quarter’s Keywords (total words: 3200)	Last Quarter’s Keywords (total words: 3200)	Last Year’s Keywords (total words: 4400)
revenue (39 times)	revenue (38 times)	social (42 times)
social (21 times)	social (32 times)	revenue (30 times)
cloud (20 times)	cloud (23 times)	customers (27 times)
growth (19 times)	enterprise (21 times)	enterprise (25 times)
cash (17 times)	customers (17 times)	cloud (25 times)
operating (17 times)	sales (14 times)	growth (21 times)
service (15 times)	cash (13 times)	cash (15 times)
enterprise (10 times)	service (11 times)	sales (13 times)
customers (9 times)	customer (11 times)	dreamforce (13 times)
dreamforce (9 times)	growth (11 times)	customer (12 times)
marketing (8 times)	operating (10 times)	radian6 (12 times)
sales (8 times)	eps (8 times)	service (10 times)

Key phrases (two words or more) for this quarter included:

• ‘cash flow’ (mentioned fifteen times)
• ‘deferred revenue’ (mentioned ten times)
• ‘operating cash’ (mentioned eight times)
• ‘revenue growth’ mentioned eight times)
• ‘revenue run rate’ (mentioned seven times)
• ‘acquisition of Buddy Media’ (mentioned four times)
• ‘the undisputed leader in Gartner’s magic quadrant’ (mentioned twice, Forrester was not mentioned funnily enough)

New Topics At the Front of Mind

Obviously cash flow and revenue are the key measures being promoted (which is nothing new really). The recent purchase of Buddy Media rated a mention along with hints of something brewing in combination with Radian6 (maybe we will see something more at Dreamforce). The Gartner results were also pushed a little given Gartner strongly believes in the social vision of Salesforce.

Topics in Decline

• Social: mentions of social have halved from a year ago, which surprised me. I am wondering if this is a result of the recent #notinourname campaign of Australian and UK not-for-profit organisations which take exception to Salesforce attempting to trademark the term ‘Social Enterprise’.
• Customers: Marc prefers to cite specific examples of big deals these days which may account for ‘customers’ dropping so significantly in their mentions as a whole. This begs the question whether Salesforce is now focussed on the big deals rather than all customers though.
• Enterprise: The other half of the phrase ‘social enterprise’, this has also dropped. In fact, the term ‘social enterprise’ has gone from 20 mentions a year ago to less than a third at six mentions today.
• Mentions of the ‘cloud’ has also reduced but not as much as some of his other key phrases.

The big surprise here for me is the downplay of the ‘social enterprise’ compared to last year. As far as I know, this is still key to the Salesforce strategy and yet it is not being driven home as strongly as it once was.

Topics on the Rise

• Revenue: Not a huge increase, but an increase anyway. A cynic would suggest they are shouting about revenue to distract from the lack of profits for five quarters in a row. I just think they are talking up the one statistic which makes them look healthy.
• Service: Most of the mentions of ‘Service’ refer to their Service Cloud offering. I am wondering if something is on the horizon with their service products at the upcoming Dreamforce

Conclusions

From reviewing the transcripts, it seems to me there is a lot to be seen at Dreamforce. There are the possibilities of a marketing and a service product vision (as well as an HR one which is getting a lot of air time at the moment) which is very exciting.

The phrase ‘social enterprise’ appears to be on the decline, which I still cannot fully explain. Is there something new on the horizon for Marc to sell a vision for?

While this could be argued as taking the data too far, there is a reduced focus on ‘customers’ and therefore, potentially, a reduced focus on customers in general. In the past, Salesforce was proud of its efforts to ensure all companies of all sizes could access the Salesforce products and they proudly advertised the fact.  The days, all we hear is ‘Salesforce + <company> = Like’ and the Social Enterprise License Agreement.

Revenue mentions have increased and are likely to continue to dominate the mention tables. Revenue growth looks good (hopefully profits will soon as well) so it makes sense to talk it up.

In conclusion it is fair to say the keywords paint a picture of an organisation at an inflexion point with new products coming soon and old ideas fading as their usefulness dwindles. Similarly they paint a picture of an organisation at an inflexion point in terms of the kinds of customers they pursue. Do they go after the big deals with big household names? Or do they go after smaller deals, as in the past?

The one conclusion that comes through loud and clear is that it is all about revenue and growth and not about profits and sustainability. When I have raised this with Salesforce employees in the past, the answer is always ‘we are pursuing a growth strategy’. I will respond to my thoughts on that when I review the financials in an upcoming blog article.

Battle of the Contact Information Sources: Jigsaw vs Dunn and Bradstreet vs LinkedIn

Back in January 2011 I railed against the nonsense FUD being put out by our old friend Salesforce. Incidentally, they still have the US version of the FUD page still up but have changed the FUD headers. No direct comments regarding Dynamics CRM, just a bunch of rhetoric nonsense (and the ‘ninja Bill’ Gold partner video, pure champagne comedy). Seriously though, “Born Cloud” as a competitive advantage?

Do not bother with the PDF download either. It is a PDF version of the web page designed to get your details so they can cold call you without actually adding any value (social marketing at its best). I am eagerly awaiting my call tomorrow morning.

But I digress, back in 2011 I called out the ordinary quality of the data available via Jigsaw, Salesforce’s crowd sourced contact information database.

In fact, Salesforce offers two priced services for ‘cloud data’ via their data.com site. One is our old friend Jigsaw ($250 for 350 contacts) and the other is a Dunn and Bradstreet feed for $125 per user per month to get account information (contact information still coming from Jigsaw if I read the site correctly).

For Dynamics CRM we still have Hoovers for accounts AND contacts which appears to be similarly priced to the Salesforce Dunn and Bradstreet solution and, ultimately, both point to the same set of data i.e. the Dunn and Bradstreet datasource.

Given both the Jigsaw and the D&B feeds are paid services, I thought it would be interesting to see how they fare against a free alternative (which also can be easily integrated with most CRMs) i.e. LinkedIn.

Sample Contacts

For the sample contacts, I need people who are reasonably well-known. I have taken the top ten people from Dynamics World Top 100 Most Influential People in Microsoft Dynamics list for 2012. It is fair to say these people are ‘known entities’ in the Dynamics world. I assume that the blurbs on the top 100 site are correct i.e. none of them have changed jobs in the past three months since the list was published.

The Method

For each of the ten contacts, I’ll put them into Jigsaw, Hoovers and LinkedIn (all of which offer free searching with limited information returned) to see if they find the person at the right company.

The Results

Contact	Jigsaw	D&B	LinkedIn
Adam Warby, Avanade	Found, position CEO, in Chicago, IL, USA	Found, position CEO and Director, aged 51	Found, position CEO, in Reading, UK
Mike Gillis, Hitachi Solutions	Not found	Found, position Managing VP, Microsoft Global Alliance	Not found
Kirill Tatarinov, Microsoft	Found, position President, Microsoft Business Solutions, in Redmond, WA, USA	Found, position Corporate VP, Microsoft Business Solutions	Found, position President, in Greater Seattle, WA, USA
Poul Kjaer, Partner Power	Not found	Not found	Found, position Owner, in Denmark
Fred Studer, Microsoft	Not found	Found, position Administration Executive; General Manager US Information Worker BMO	Found, position GM, Microsoft Dynamics, in Greater Seattle, WA, USA
Jon Roskill, Microsoft	Found, position Corporate Vice President, Worldwide Partner Sales, in Redmond, WA, USA	Found, position Corporate VP, Worldwide Partner Group	Not found
Preben Damgaard, Damgaard Company A/S	Not found	Found, position Acting Managing Director	Found, position CEO
Jesper Balser, Independent	Not found	Found, position Acting Managing Director at Milestone Systems A/S	Found, Independent
Doug Kennedy, Microsoft	Found, position Vice President, Dynamics Partners, in Redmond, WA, USA	Found, position Vice President, Microsoft Dynamics Partners	Not found
Claus Hansen, AlfaPeople	Found, position COO, in New York, NY, USA	Found, position Direktor	Found, position Group COO, in Copenhagen Area, Denmark

So, in terms of getting hits, we have:

• Jigsaw: 5/10
• D&B (Hoovers): 9/10
• LinkedIn: 7/10

In terms of data quality, the major difference was in Claus Hansen and Adam Warby’s location. The Alfapeople website and Adam’s blog suggest LinkedIn got it right.

Conclusions

If you are looking to enrich your existing contact data with an internet service Jigsaw seems to be a poor choice. According to the Jigsaw homepage they have 35 million contacts in their database but for our sample set, 50% of them did not appear. Of the five which did get a hit, two had the wrong location.

LinkedIn did not do too bad but it should be remembered that, unless you are a direct link to the person in question, it is unlikely you will be able to find out details such as their email address. You could get a paid account with LinkedIn though, which allows you to send InMail messages which guarantee a reply. The big advantage of LinkedIn is that you can see how you are connected to the people you are seeking out (and this aspect costs you nothing). In terms of turning ‘unknowns’ into ‘knowns’, your professional network is an excellent option.

For pure data enrichment of contacts, Hoovers is the big winner albeit with a price tag. Their database also dwarfs Jigsaw’s with 100 million people in their database.

My take on it is, for salesforce, forget data.com if it uses D&B for accounts and Jigsaw for contacts. For the $125 per user per month you can get the Hoovers integration to salesforce and eliminate the risk of Jigsaw giving you false data. For Dynamics CRM, Hoovers also provides an excellent option if you need data enrichment.

However, for most businesses, regardless of the CRM product being used, signing up to LinkedIn provides a wealth of information for nothing. Frankly, I struggle to see what value $125 per user per month can bring to make it worthwhile when there is a wealth of information out there for free.

Maintaining Marketing Lists When Qualifying Leads

As with any packaged software, we reap the benefits of not having to rebuild everything from scratch but sometimes have to work around the limits of the assumptions put into the product. One example of this is with Marketing Lists in Dynamics CRM. Marketing Lists can be lists of Leads, Contacts or Accounts but cannot be mixed i.e. a specific list can have one type of records but not different types.

A couple of my clients have newsletter subscriptions for their Leads and Accounts but have a common problem; what happens to the Lead when it is qualified i.e. moves from being a Lead to an Account, Contact and Opportunity? What happens in reality is our Lead, now qualified and inactive, is no longer of use to us but the new Account is not part of any Marketing List.

Back in the old days of version 4 this was a problem which could only be resolved by throwing code at the problem or manually re-adding them to a new subscription list. However, in CRM 2011, if we set things up right, we can resolve the problem without code or manual intervention.

Managing Subscriptions

To manage our subscriptions, we are going to use check-boxes on the Lead and Account record.

We also adjust the mapping so that the value for this field gets brought across when qualifying the Lead.

This means if the Lead is marked as receiving the newsletter, the Account will be as well. You can do the same thing for Contacts by adding the field and doing the mapping to the Contact entity, rather than the Account, if this makes more sense for your business process.

Managing the Marketing List

A new feature of Marketing Lists for CRM 2011 is the ability to have ‘dynamic’ Marketing Lists. In other words, Marketing Lists whose membership is determined by rules, in much the same way views list records based on the rules set up for them via the Advanced Find tool.

Therefore, if we set up two Marketing Lists, one for Leads and one for Accounts whose membership is based on the flag on the respective records, we no longer have to manually add or remove records from the Marketing List, we simply update the Lead or Account subscription flag.

We could also put in a rule for the Do Not Bulk E-mail rule, or put in a workflow to unsubscribe from the newsletter if the appropriate marketing preferences are marked.

The Net Result

The effect of all this is if we take our Lead from above (Yvonne McKay), we see she is subscribed to the newsletter. We can also see her in the appropriate Marketing List.

If we now qualify her, she will no longer be an open Lead and will drop off the subscription Marketing List for Leads.

but her company, Practical Supply Company, has been automatically created through the qualification process, subscribed through the mapping and now appears on the Account Marketing List.

No manual intervention, no code and it just works.

Conclusions

If you use a newsletter or a similar subscription as part of your nurture marketing, you may have come across this problem. In the past, the best solution was to throw reasonably complex code at the problem to administer the automatic adding and removal of memberships from the subscription Marketing Lists. With the introduction of dynamic Marketing Lists, the need for coding is eliminated.

One thing to note though is the solution I present is really only practical for a few subscription lists, say, no more than a dozen. The reason being that, if you have more than this, the volume of tickboxes on the records may prove to be distracting or undesirable and you may need to use, say, a child entity and some code to manage the issue.

Enjoy!

Forrester and Gartner Trajectories for CRM

Last year I did the Forrester and Gartner trajectories for large organisations and sales force automation. With reports coming out for both, now is a good time to revisit. For those of you unfamiliar with the idea, I basically take a series of Gartner and Forrester reports and see how the CRM products have moved over time. The idea is no so much to see which product the two research houses consider the best but to see which direction the products are moving in, relative to their competitors.

Forrester

Here is the latest Forrester quadrant for large organisations Q3 2012.

So there are four horses in the race: Oracle Siebel CRM, Microsoft Dynamics CRM, SAP CRM and salesforce.com. Coming up the rear are Oracle CRM On Demand, Pegasystems and RightNow. Or are they? This is where we can get insight from the previous years.

Here is what we had in 2008 and 2010 (from the previous Forrester trajectory blog)

So how are the leading solutions travelling?

Solution	Comment
Oracle Siebel CRM	They are still in the same relative position in terms of their offering but have raced forward in terms of their strategy. Ellison has been talking about a comprehensive software and hardware offering involving the cloud which may explain the move in the graphs.
Microsoft Dynamics CRM	Travelling towards the top right but no major movements, just slowly improving.
SAP CRM	Followed a very similar path to Oracle. Despite Ellison’s remarks in the previous link, SAP also have a cloud vision for their suite of products.
salesforce.com	Comparing to the path of Dynamics CRM, we see between 2008 and 2010, salesforce edged past Microsoft in terms of their strategy, no doubt fuelled by their strong social messaging. However, Microsoft has consistently provided a stronger offering, presumably driven by their strong integration to Outlook. In the most recent graph it appears that salesforce is gaining ground in terms of their offering though.

In the last trajectory blog I suggested Oracle and SAP had lost their way. It seems they have hit back with vengeance. So the state of play is all four have strong strategic visions with, arguably, Microsoft slightly behind and all have strong offerings, with, arguably, salesforce slightly behind the pack.

As for the ‘challengers’:

Solution	Comment
Oracle CRM On Demand	While improving over the years, appears to be losing their strategic focus.
Pegasystems	A system I had never heard of until writing this blog, they have come from, basically nowhere, gained market presence (as indicated by the circle size.) One to watch.
RightNow	If we look at them, compared to the path of salesforce, we see that they have improved but have slowed in recent years and salesforce has moved far ahead. With the acquisition by Oracle, their luck may change.

Given the movement, it seems clear that the one to watch is Pegasystems.

In the previous blog I suggested Oracle’s Peoplesoft and E-Business Suite CRM products were falling behind. Both products are now well behind the pack and have, it appears, lost relevance. Perhaps this is a conscious decision by Oracle to focus on CRM On Demand and Siebel and let the others fall behind (although, according to Gartner, CRM On Demand has been replaced by Fusion). Sage has arguably done this with their CRM offerings, focussing on Sage CRM and less so on ACT! and Saleslogix and Microsoft also has, arguably, a strong focus in the ERP suites on AX and NAV and less so on GP and SL (at least, this is how it appears to me in Australia).

I also mentioned the ones to watch were CDC Software’s Pivotal, SugarCRM and Sage CRM. CDC Software appears to be slipping behind, SugarCRM has maintained its relative position and slightly increased its market presence and Sage CRM also appears to have slipped slightly.

Gartner

Here is the 2012 Gartner magic quadrant for sales force automation (I got my copy of this from the salesforce.com web site but, be warned, they will call you and try to sell you software for the privilege). You can also get it from the Microsoft News Center site (sales pitch not included). I mention this because for a social company you would think:

• salesforce wouldn’t resort to such mundane tactics as cold calling white paper downloaders
• given I handed across all my details and, with the world of social at their command, they might think a Microsoft CRM MVP is not their target audience

but I digress…

Here we have the same four horses in the top right quadrant but they are much more spread apart and ordered differently. Salesforce has moved from having the weakest offering of the four to having the strongest ability to execute. Also Oracle, Microsoft and SAP have moved from having a comparable strategic vision to being truly behind salesforce.

I am sure it is no surprise I disagree with Gartner on their belief in the completeness of salesforce’s vision. While it is true they know how to spin a good story and paint a picture or a world of social insights and meaningful customer interactions, the rash of acquisitions with little discussion of the vision for integration leaves me wanting.

In the previous trajectory article, I had five years of quadrants. For simplicity and consistency, I am again going to focus on just the quadrants for 2008 and 2010.

For the leaders:

Solution	Comment
Oracle Siebel CRM	In terms of their ability to execute and their vision, they appear to be falling behind. In terms of vision, this contradicts the Forrester report.
Microsoft Dynamics CRM	Dynamics CRM has moved very fast in terms of their vision and improved slightly in regards to their ability to execute
SAP CRM	While moving in the right direction, they appear to be doing it much slower than their competitors and, again, this conflicts with the Forrester report.
salesforce.com	Gartner’s golden child for SFA. Relative to Dynamics CRM, it can be seen that, while moving in the right direction, Dynamics CRM appears to be catching up, although more slowly in recent years.

There are inconsistencies here between Forrester and Gartner in terms of salesforce’s strength and vision. My guess is Gartner is more enamoured with the salesforce social line than Forrester and, like salesforce, is sceptical on Oracle and SAP’s ability to deliver a social platform.

Time will tell which research house is right.

In terms of challengers, other than SugarCRM which, according to Gartner, has made massive gains on its ability to execute, there are no clear contenders. Looking at the challengers from the Forrester report:

Solution	Comment
Oracle CRM On Demand	Gartner believes this is no longer a competitive product in the market, being replaced by Oracle Fusion Sales.
Pegasystems	Not mentioned by Gartner
RightNow	Not mentioned by Gartner

In terms of market consolidation, the number of products in the magic quadrant and the number of companies has remained consistent with the numbers from 2011 suggesting consolidation of the industry has slowed or, perhaps, stopped.

As with the previous blog article, the Gartner report paints an industry with less movement of products and more stability with the leaders remaining in their dominant position. The one consistency in the two reports is who the dominant players are leading the way in the industry.

Conclusions

There are four players leading the way in the CRM industry:

• Oracle Siebel CRM
• Microsoft Dynamics CRM
• SAP CRM
• Salesforce.com

According to Forrester, all are similarly placed. According to Gartner, dominance is between saleforce.com and Dynamics CRM with salesforce the one to beat. In terms of new players, a close eye should be kept on Pegasystems. Consolidation of the industry has also appears to have slowed down. As stated in my previous piece on the Gartner trajectories, the close rivalry of the four products will only make for better, more competitive products with the winners being the consumers. It is a great time to be in the CRM game.