Dion,
You make one great point: SCRM is no more than a part
of a good E2.0 strategy (in what I call the proper
definition of E2.0 as set by McAfee -- not the
commonly implemented technology-only model of Wikis
and Internal Collaboration). I have to applaud that,
as not too many of the E2.0 proponents stop to think
about it sufficiently. Yes, the talk about Customer-
Centricity (a tenet of E2.0 really), but they don't go
far enough implementing it -- they just die at the IT-
level discussion and implementation of the tools
without truly engaging the customer. It is in that
model that SCRM engages the customer and brings it
into the E2.0 deployment.
I think you get that and I agree there... Alas (or
However, or But if you prefer -- and you probably knew
this was coming) your description of SCRM falls short
of the potential of it. You are simply calling a
community a SCRM implementation (a definition that is
favored and pushed on by some of the vendors) -- which
basically stalls it at the same level as those E2.0
implementations I mentioned before. There is much you
are missing in that perspective.
SCRM is about communities, but that is only one of the
layers for it. It is about identifying customers as
part of multiple communities, and about engaging them
via those communities to provide ideas, feedback,
complaints, and support each other. But stopping
there is doing the same disservice as saying that E2.0
is about implementing Sharepoint.
The real value that SCRM provides is the aggregation
of that "feedback" (all the contributions from the
customers via their communities of choice -- and I
have a broader definition for community that simply a
forum) and processing it via analytical tools (the
most underutilized component of a CRM implementation -
whether SCRM or CRM), creating Actionable Insights,
and feeding those insights to the organizations
systems and processes involved in making the
organization customer Centric (I would usually call it
E2.0 at this point, but that would not fit with your
definition of it above) as food for improving the
processes and products that are then given back to the
customer in the form of better experiences -- on which
we then capture feedback again.
This continuum is what I call the Experience Continuum
and the true essence of the value of the properly
defined E2.0 (or, in the poorly defined E2.0 as back-
office and SCRM as front-office, I call it
convergence).
This is a critical differentiation because it is where
all this implementations and strategies show the value
-- in the ability to actually implement a customer-
centric organization using the tools and methodologies
we are commonly referring to as SCRM or E2.0. This
model is what a social business is all about (as much
as I don't like the term, describes well the
organization that engages socially both internally and
externally with the purpose of serving customers
better and fulfilling the purpose of the organization
better).
So, getting off my soapbox -- Bravo for using E2.0
properly, and for including SCRM as the customer-
facing portion of that -- but please make sure to take
SCRM all the way back into the organization, and the
organization all the way out to the customer to
describe the value they both provide to the social
business.
Just two cents more to add to the pot... and we are
still way short from making that first dollar.
Discussion on:
Message 11 of 1
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
