Discussion
Currently getting Salesforce implemented at my workplace. We have an implementation partner. I was just wondering whether it would be worth getting a PM to help with the delivery?
Having never been involved in the implementation of SF, I don't know how many hours / work would be required for delivery.
Is this something I can manage myself along side a demanding day job? Is it just a lot of chasing people up for the information the integration partner needs? We already have a tech who is dealing with the IT requirements.
Interested to hear peoples opinions.
Thanks
Having never been involved in the implementation of SF, I don't know how many hours / work would be required for delivery.
Is this something I can manage myself along side a demanding day job? Is it just a lot of chasing people up for the information the integration partner needs? We already have a tech who is dealing with the IT requirements.
Interested to hear peoples opinions.
Thanks
Depends how big and complex the implementation - can you put some numbers around it?
Personally I'd say yes, unless it's a small project - it will be more complex than you think.
Have you put in a change management plan for the users? It has a high chance of failing to return the ROI unless you really concentrate on this. This is often overlooked as people concentrate purely on the technical side of the implementation and save money / skimp on what arguably is more important - user buy in and adoption.
Personally I'd say yes, unless it's a small project - it will be more complex than you think.
Have you put in a change management plan for the users? It has a high chance of failing to return the ROI unless you really concentrate on this. This is often overlooked as people concentrate purely on the technical side of the implementation and save money / skimp on what arguably is more important - user buy in and adoption.
A former client decided to replace the 20 year old system I wrote with a SF system. They started before I retired and they are still using my decrepit old system 18 months later. To be fair mine works but they do seem to struggle doing stuff in SF.
I would get an external PM in with direct SF experience - but it will cost.
Mike
I would get an external PM in with direct SF experience - but it will cost.
Mike
foliedouce said:
Have you put in a change management plan for the users? It has a high chance of failing to return the ROI unless you really concentrate on this.
This is 50% of your challenge - Data migration and Data Quality remediation is the other 50% - If you don't do the DQ bit right at migration time you will struggle with it for your lifetimeI would do the following:
- Define a very clear scope and sign this off before the implementation partner is fully engaged. This way you are less likely to have expanded scope
- get some people to define how you really want to work rather than "this is what we do today" otherwise you will have a shiny tool
- get the data right..... don't compromise
- Get in a real PM who can communicate (I mean someone who can negotiate, send out weekly reports, runs a proper steering meeting not a project update meeting)
- get the data right again...... you do want the value from this work?
- Align the benefits and how to measure them and at every stage gate, check you are still on track to deliver the benefits
- get change management involved in the kick off meeting not at the end of the project
- Accept this is a culture change as well as a process/tool change
- Do not run this as an IT project..... It's a massive capability /culture change so it needs a "business" leader
Enjoy !!
- Define a very clear scope and sign this off before the implementation partner is fully engaged. This way you are less likely to have expanded scope
- get some people to define how you really want to work rather than "this is what we do today" otherwise you will have a shiny tool
- get the data right..... don't compromise
- Get in a real PM who can communicate (I mean someone who can negotiate, send out weekly reports, runs a proper steering meeting not a project update meeting)
- get the data right again...... you do want the value from this work?
- Align the benefits and how to measure them and at every stage gate, check you are still on track to deliver the benefits
- get change management involved in the kick off meeting not at the end of the project
- Accept this is a culture change as well as a process/tool change
- Do not run this as an IT project..... It's a massive capability /culture change so it needs a "business" leader
Enjoy !!
Thanks for the responses.
The company to date doesn’t have a CRM system, and with an ageing sales force we really need to start capturing the data we have on customers. It also means we can actively start marketing / segmenting customer groups / targeting products etc.
We only have 30 users (UK & International) so it’s not a huge enterprise wide roll out. Not sure if that makes it more manageable?
We do have an integration partner on board who are doing the integration bits, aligning everything with our ERP and will also being doing the training / onboarding. We have been exceptionally prescriptive in terms of what we want and to help with onboarding the workforce have kept the SF build pretty straight forward, so it’s easier for them to adapt to the new way. As has been said this is a huge culture change for some of the workforce.
The data is being reviewed now – it hasn’t been refreshed for 10 years, and what we hold at HO is likely very different to what the workforce use in the field.
Sounds like I am indirectly doing the PM’s job at the moment anyway, and have been leading the project to date, so sounds like I will just need to find the time and add it to the list of deliverables!
The company to date doesn’t have a CRM system, and with an ageing sales force we really need to start capturing the data we have on customers. It also means we can actively start marketing / segmenting customer groups / targeting products etc.
We only have 30 users (UK & International) so it’s not a huge enterprise wide roll out. Not sure if that makes it more manageable?
We do have an integration partner on board who are doing the integration bits, aligning everything with our ERP and will also being doing the training / onboarding. We have been exceptionally prescriptive in terms of what we want and to help with onboarding the workforce have kept the SF build pretty straight forward, so it’s easier for them to adapt to the new way. As has been said this is a huge culture change for some of the workforce.
The data is being reviewed now – it hasn’t been refreshed for 10 years, and what we hold at HO is likely very different to what the workforce use in the field.
Sounds like I am indirectly doing the PM’s job at the moment anyway, and have been leading the project to date, so sounds like I will just need to find the time and add it to the list of deliverables!
We are in a similar position. In the process of implementing Salesforce service cloud for about 35 users. We got a company in to do the build but at the same time we hired and trained a Salesforce admin who is doing the PM work.
Great product and support but like anything, it's only as good as the way you build it. Getting your user stories and build right from the off makes all the difference.
Great product and support but like anything, it's only as good as the way you build it. Getting your user stories and build right from the off makes all the difference.
The jiffle king said:
I would do the following:
- Define a very clear scope and sign this off before the implementation partner is fully engaged. This way you are less likely to have expanded scope
- get some people to define how you really want to work rather than "this is what we do today" otherwise you will have a shiny tool
- get the data right..... don't compromise
- Get in a real PM who can communicate (I mean someone who can negotiate, send out weekly reports, runs a proper steering meeting not a project update meeting)
- get the data right again...... you do want the value from this work?
- Align the benefits and how to measure them and at every stage gate, check you are still on track to deliver the benefits
- get change management involved in the kick off meeting not at the end of the project
- Accept this is a culture change as well as a process/tool change
- Do not run this as an IT project..... It's a massive capability /culture change so it needs a "business" leader
Enjoy !!
100% concur with the above. Make sure you have the "right" senior people on the steering committee, not just the director with responsibility. - Define a very clear scope and sign this off before the implementation partner is fully engaged. This way you are less likely to have expanded scope
- get some people to define how you really want to work rather than "this is what we do today" otherwise you will have a shiny tool
- get the data right..... don't compromise
- Get in a real PM who can communicate (I mean someone who can negotiate, send out weekly reports, runs a proper steering meeting not a project update meeting)
- get the data right again...... you do want the value from this work?
- Align the benefits and how to measure them and at every stage gate, check you are still on track to deliver the benefits
- get change management involved in the kick off meeting not at the end of the project
- Accept this is a culture change as well as a process/tool change
- Do not run this as an IT project..... It's a massive capability /culture change so it needs a "business" leader
Enjoy !!
On your PM question, appoint someone on "your side" with responsibility for managing the supplier delivery as their own project. The supplier will need stuff from your company as the client: engaging of the right people to make decisions, people to design processes, people to feed into workshops, people to start configuring things, to make transition plans, to decide training approaches and generally to hold them to account. It would be better if this was someone with specific SF experience but it’s generally not a deal breaker if you have someone internally who has done a similar role on a different project/programme/context. For context I work as a Business Change/IT Project Manager, and in recent years have worked "client side" (technically i'm a consultant/contractor myself) as the "internal PM" for supplier delivery.
On the Jiffle King’s last point, here's a couple of lightweight reads to ponder (no affiliation to projectone just like their output:
https://projectone.com/creating-and-communicating-...
https://projectone.com/real-change-is-always-busin...
My advice is do not let the organisation think they can put a new system in and then just carry on as they were, or worse “change things after”. The org will be too fatigued to change anything afterwards.
Thanks for the advice everyone. Decided to go for a PM in the end. Some of the day rates were astronomical, however managed to secure some PM resource through out SF integration partner, which was more affordable. The PM is also working on the integration as well, so no issues getting them up to speed on the project.
[quote]Indeed - my last company we spent 6 figures on updating a terrible system into an even more costly terrible system!
[/quote]
Interested to know what issues you had with SF? Thankfully we aren't in it to 6 figures. But a CRM was something we desperately needed to get into place.
[quote]Indeed - my last company we spent 6 figures on updating a terrible system into an even more costly terrible system!
[/quote]
Interested to know what issues you had with SF? Thankfully we aren't in it to 6 figures. But a CRM was something we desperately needed to get into place.
moustachebandit said:
Interested to know what issues you had with SF? Thankfully we aren't in it to 6 figures. But a CRM was something we desperately needed to get into place.
We were using it in a property developer capacity as a sales database (developing and selling circa 1,000 units in London)The problems were many but to name a few :
The business naively bought into the system believing it could do everything, in all areas of the business and solve all of our problems, forever.
We started developing the system from the sales database aspect (pre my time) which was a badly designed system ultimately developed by non-sales ppl trying to imagine what sales ppl would like/need.
The business (ppl involved in the mk1 incarnation) were too scared of starting afresh (admitting it was crap) once we realised how bad it was, and instead tried to improve the system making the same mistakes again (end users had minimal say in developing it, instead leaders of respective departments each chipping in to create a frankinstein)
The terminology used on the system may be popular in America, but related little to the UK property sales terminology that everyone was used to, leading to confusion.
Too many departments wanting to pull information out of the system (endless tables and graphs to explain x, y and z) making it confusing from the get go rather than starting with an effective but basic system and improving it gradually
Far, far better property specific databases already existed, but couldn't promise the earth like Salesforce did (the idea was accounts, after sales, build etc would all start working off the same system!)
It didn't look logical and the most menial tasks took too long and were beyond most users (great salesmen, but with low interest, tech understanding and patience thresholds) Is was a chore to use and not 'enjoyable' if thats possible. Hence; everyone started using old bits of A4 paper to record applicants under the radar etc!
You were at the mercy of the SF developer understanding what you wanted to get out of the system, and understanding your particular business.
We were told about these other brilliant SF property databases that were the full fandango, but because they were the 'property' of those companies who had spent a fortune on developing them - we weren't allowed to see them and had to believe it was true...
I could go on and on! My brother uses SF in a completely different capacity and concurs with all of the above.
Unlimitedly, I always though of it along the lines of why buy a chassis and build you're own car that would do everything (racing tracks, 4x4) out of cobbled together bits (SF) when you can buy excellent off the shelf cars that can't promise everything, but have been thoroughly developed over years (specialist, industry specific CRM)
moustachebandit said:
We only have 30 users (UK & International) so it’s not a huge enterprise wide roll out.
We have Sales Cloud for 30 people across Europe but we basically use it as a glorified spreadsheet. All we do is sales on behalf of other people so we don't have any internal operations of our own to hook up to or integrate. We chose Salesforce as several of the companies we work for use it, and they all said we could integrate, but when it came down to it none of them wanted to do it, and everyone else's systems (in basically the same business) were very different from each other. Plus some of those companies have dropped Salesforce and moved on to other systems, such as Oracle and Dynamics.We did ours in house by one of our guys, who also acts as the admin. We looked at using partners but the cost was too uncertain - and they wanted to do things like fly around Europe and meet each used f2f etc.
I think for what we do with it, it works well. We've worked hard to keep it simple - it would be too easy to keep throwing stuff in there and make it massively complicated.
Daughter just got TUPE'd from the NHS to a company and they use Salesforce. She said it's an utter nightmare to use to the extent that it's obstructive to their day-to-day work. They don't seem to have anyone to support it. I read somewhere that non-profit companies get Salesforce licences for next to nothing.
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff