I need to begin with the following: I have the highest respect for the authors and contributors to the recently released Gartner Magic Quadrant for Social CRM. I am disagreeing with the ideas and concepts, not people. I am more troubled that what was published is so off the mark, as it leads to further confusion in an already confused space. This is not to say that the companies included in various locations are right or wrong either, it is simply the apples to oranges comparison of ‘things’.
Desperate to Call it a Strategy, yet Describe it as an Application
At the outset, the authors describe Social CRM as a” business strategy that generates opportunities”. While I agree with the first part, it is the second part that is the struggle as it takes an inside-out company centric view. The single most important part of Social CRM is that it needs to start with an outside-in view (organizational benefits can still be realized). The focus should be on the needs of the customer, on their jobs-to-be-done, the outcome they want and their experience – it is about the customer, not the company – this is what the social part is about. While many parts of traditional CRM might remain about the company, Social extends it in the right way.
“Social CRM is based on the simple premise that you are able to interact with your customers based on their needs, not your rules. It is an extension of CRM, not a replacement, and among the important benefits is that it adds value back to the users and customers.” (Mitch Lieberman June 2010)
Social CRM is, and always has been about extending CRM, not replacing it. It is about the integrations, the connections; it is about the space between the applications, the enterprise and the customer. It is not itself another enterprise application – certainly not another silo. It is not whether a new class of application can capture content. It is whether the current processes can become more practical and interesting for customers to share content, the capture part is easy and there are lots of applications which already do it. I apologize in advance, but I have never met a software application that can “Build Trust” (Sorry Siri).
“Social CRM, from the technology perspective, is about integration of new channels, Social Media is a channel. Properly, Social Media is dozens of channels, where you need to choose the ones right for your business. The hard part, the real work, is choosing which channels to integrate and then designing the processes around these channels – the people part.” (Previous Post)
In Social, People are the Stars, Applications take a Supporting Role
It is because of the focus on technology and applications that Gartner loses its way here. In many of their other Magic Quadrants, the maturity of the application and/or the technology is critical to the success of the initiative. In Social, people trump technology every time. I struggle to see how any application can “improve self-esteem”. When used properly, I suppose I can stretch a little to understand the thought, but it is much more about the people. Giving access to more information and better information is critical of course, but why is that “social”. Customers do not want to feel more involved in their decisions, they want to be more involved in their decisions.
“Social CRM is a strategy first, but it will not be successful if it is not supported by people, processes and technology with defined goals and objectives. The way customers are interacting with companies and a companies’ brands is changing and this poses a challenge; a challenge of volume of new data, scale and speed.”(previous post)
In the digital age, information flows easily in directions you cannot predict and pathways you cannot control. Your customers have questions, they need answers and they want to be heard; they are a little short on patience as well. At the click of the mouse, people expect answers, solutions and resolutions. Social CRM is about humanizing your organization, it is an enabler of positive customer experience and meeting expectations. The benefits to you are tangible, in the form of loyalty and advocacy.
Social CRM does NOT need a quadrant. What companies need is help understanding how to humanize their CRM practices.
Mitch, I’m with you on this … I don’t see why Social CRM needs a MQ.
In my interview with Ed Thompson of Gartner earlier this year, he acknowledged they may have jumped the gun a bit in creating a Social CRM MQ. Most of the revenue comes from social media monitoring tools:
I still don’t get how community solutions (e.g. Jive), social monitoring tools (e.g. Radian6) and social selling (e.g. Nimble) belong on the same page. Apples, oranges and cumquats! Gartner believes the market will converge some day. That may be, but then we can just go back to calling it CRM!
Louis Columbus has a nice write up about the Social CRM MQ on Forbes. He closes with this:
Thanks Bob – makes sense to me…Now if we could only convince Gartner.
Your point about how can they all be on the same page for comparison is the key concept that people choosing need to consider. The solution that is chosen needs to meet the business objectives, does not really matter which ‘quadrant’ they live in.
Mitch