America’s “cowboy philosopher,” Will Rogers, really understood change. Among his countless, priceless quotes is:

Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there.

The same applies if you move too slowly. The quote so aptly describes where so many companies sit on the road to customer-centricity. They head out into the fast lane, then stop or slow to a crawl. For example:

-How many companies have developed new, customer-centric business strategies—then neglected to redesign process to execute these strategies?

-How many companies have redesigned their processes—then failed to provide sufficient enabling technology?

-How many companies have redesigned their customer service function: focusing on one call resolutions; empowering staff; and providing more training—then breathed a huge sigh of relief and failed to continue on to the next step, addressing whatever issues are triggering service calls?

-How many companies are generating scads of inquiries over the web—then failing to implement the lead management processes necessary to separate the wheat from the chaff and track sales results?

In each case, lots and lots. And we could go on and on with the list.

So often we plan new initiatives, but fail to identify what else has to change to realize the anticipated benefits. Why? To contain the scope of initiatives; to avoid changing too much; to accomplish something new quickly; lots of reasons. Unfortunately, the majority of companies that try to become customer-centric stop or slow on the track—many because they only plan to go far enough to feel they’ve “done enough.” As in only making a token effort for show.

Too bad (for them) these companies don’t see what’s coming. Taking these half-steps leaves them extremely vulnerable to faster moving, bolder organizations. Think about the old “turtle and hair adage.” Then replace the rabbit with a fast moving freight train. Do you want to be that turtle?

Yesterday, I gave a keynote address to operations managers in the life insurance industry. Not much notable here, except that a speaker just before me had contradicted almost everything I was about to say. She managed a large unit of a large life insurance company responsible for all retail customer service. When she’d arrived at the organization several years earlier, she’d begun a Six Sigma implementation encompassing all customer and producer service functions—focusing on the contact center but extending out to the field. And what a gorgeous implementation from a Six Sigma standpoint.

I’ve encountered few Six Sigma implementers so competent, from both the mechanics and metrics standpoints. I thought her implementation flawlessly achieved her goals—foremost among them eliminating all possible variances. Only problem was that I was about to encourage attendees to empower their contact center employees to make context-sensitive decisions, do what they needed to accomplish one call resolutions, and ultimately make customers as happy as reasonably possible—all of which require allowing and even encouraging service reps to vary from standard operating procedures when appropriate.

When you eliminate as much variance as possible, you dis-empower your employees. You can’t have strict uniformity and empowered employees both. Manufacturing-based process approaches like Six Sigma can focus on eliminating variances because manufacturing workers have such limited empowerment compared to office workers. Conversely, most office employees have considerable empowerment—more and more as you move up the ladder—so office process approaches cannot strive to eliminate all variability.

And if you’re wondering how important employee empowerment really is to customers, going back to the study that Dr. David Mangen and I conducted in 2006, customers rate dealing with empowered employees their second-most powerful buying trigger—behind only combined product/service excellence. This underscores the importance of applying an office-based process approach in the office.

Unfortunately, by implementing Six Sigma this company had achieved operational excellence and extreme efficiency at the price of taking away from customers what they cherish most in a contact center—employee empowerment to make context-sensitive decisions to accommodate them when unusual circumstances occur or require an extra level of assistance. Further, adherence to Six Sigma principles eliminates the possibility of “heroic service,” the wonderful recoveries that my late colleague Ron Zemke researched and showed exponentially increased the likelihood of extreme customer loyalty extending to customer advocacy. Just providing consistently good service doesn’t get you there.

Needless to say, I had to be very careful presenting to avoid offending the previous speaker, who I’d met the evening before at a speakers’ dinner and genuinely liked.  But I also had to clearly state to attendees that there are bad variances and good variances. And if you eliminate the good with the bad, you’ll never delight customers, and you’ll often disappoint them.

The title’s a dead giveaway to my frequent readers that something sarcastic is about to happen. You won’t be disappointed. However, rather than prejudicing the case against dear old SalesFORCE, I’m going to first give a straight recitation of the facts without once “slipping it to them.”

A client with whom I’m working on a long-term CRM project asked me to find an interim automation package for the contact center—one that would hold them over until an enterprise-wide shift towards customer-centricity that’s a year to eighteen months away I looked at eight or ten possible packages, focusing on SaaS systems not requiring extensive implementation time/expense. SalesFORCE was one. However, because we typically recommend CRM systems with specific strengths to clients, as opposed to “well-rounded” apps, I needed a SalesFORCE refresher.

Now the fun begins. I went to the SalesFORCE website, which offers a free trial download. Of course I had to complete a form with sales follow-up information to pass “go,” and even then SalesFORCE.com’s free trial system requires direct contact with me before I could download. To give SalesFORCE credit, an inside sales rep called me within minutes. He was happy to oblige with the download info—as long as I would give him sufficient information about the client to assign a sales rep to me plus reveal my client company’s name. We went around in circles for a while, with me declining to divulge information that would set up my client to receive sales calls ad nauseum. Finally, I told the bloke that if really needed this information, than I really needed to focus my investigation elsewhere. He cracked and sent me the download code.

Since then I’ve been virtually attacked by some nameless, faceless, inside sales rep he assigned to me plus another SalesFORCE person invited to the party. Until, that is, I e-mailed them all one of my Dick-o-grams making it painfully clear I expected not to hear from them again. Oh yeah, I also told them we’d already decided to narrow the search to industry verticals that are contact-centric whereas SalesFORCE is company-centric—to the point of shutting off access to any record with a contact name but not company name by anyone but the user entering the record. No point doing workarounds or asking for code changes when the application is essentially a throw-away.

End of story.

SalesFORCE wound up bugging the crap out of me from beginning to end because they want to deal directly with end-user companies, not intervening consultants. Why, when software sellers we frequently work with value our services because we keep the out of competitions they can’t win? In a word, “control.” SalesFORCE is an old school company that believes that effective marketing and sales means forcing its product into as many openings as possible, even wher it doesn’t fit. Typical of this genre of sellers, SalesFORCE also believes in “controlling” customer decisions rather than consultative selling. Hey, looks like Marc Benioff is “out-Siebeling” Tom, or at least the Tom of old.

So what was the endgame here?

First, I found two very obliging vendors willing to work with us on a gap analysis between their out-of-the-box systems and my client’s basic needs—and one of the two could morph into the permanent solution.

Second, I re-remembered why I don’t like trying to do business with SalesFORCE.

Third, SalesFORCE embarrassed itself by once again revealing it doesn’t practice what it sells. There’s a world of difference between building customer relationships, a la CRM, and high-pressure sales tactics. Excuse me, but whatever happened to selling at the customer’s pace? How about selling the way customers want to be sold? Not to mention matching your selling process to the customer buying process? SalesFORCE may fanaticize it has “space age” services. But it’s definitely missing the reality that it has “dark ages” selling process.

And I, for one, am getting tired and cranky over CRM sellers who don’t have a clue about CRM. Five years ago this might have just been “my gripe,” today I’m only one of a growing chorus of complainers. SalesFORCE ought to watch its step.

Okay, I should have kept my powder dry. Better that I tested MIGHTYsoft’s new Dynamics 4.0 package, or tried to, before weighing in on SalesFORCE’s sales overkill. ‘Cause from the sales perspective, turns out the choice is between obnoxious and stone deaf.

I’ve already documented “obnoxious” on my previous SalesFORCE post this week, so let’s skip straight to deaf. I was headed for a Microsoft Dynamics 4.0 demo this morning, except I succumbed to whatever plague seems to have infected half the Twin Cities lately, so no go. But while working in my office, a client for whom we’re developing software requirements e-mailed to ask if Dynamics was a possibility. I replied back that Dynamics 3.0 has a design flaw that ruled it out, but I was, indeed, going to look at V4.0.

I was going to, and that’s about as far as I got.

I started by going up on MIGHTYsoft’s Launch home page. Signed myself up for access to the new Dynamics CRM Live, or so I thought. Only to get the dreaded, “A Microsoft representative will contact you.” Some day.

But I also wanted to see the thick client version, so I clicked on the Free 90-day trial” link. Most CRM vendors offer a free trial or free demo on desktop of their client-server apps, so I wasn’t expecting any difficulty. The link took me to a very poorly designed download site that offered—two flavors of a server-based product but none for a desktop (which is the way most of us test software, keeping it off the network initially). I downloaded the 32-bit server version regardless, in the hopes someone at MIGHTYsoft was well enough versed with customers and consultants to have created something that would run on XP. Low and behold, no executable in the download folder. Just zipped instructional files.

So I clicked on live chat to find out where to find the file. The chat rep said she was in sales, and I was asking a sales operations question. End of session. After trying the download again, with the same results, I decided to try chat again. This second rep obviously didn’t speak English, because she kept coming back to me saying that her station didn’t provide technical support. Technical support – to find a free download file?

Next I decided to use the “Run” option on the download instead of “Save,” which I really don’t like doing. Finally, I did get the executable. Not wired for XP. So I can’t test it.

Fortunately, I have good relationships with several MIGHTYsoft partners who will review the app with me, despite not yet having any skin in the game. But here we go again. Another CRM software seller without a clue about CRM. No effort to align with customers. Pushing product instead of building customer relationships. And especially putting up a distribution wall that forces customers (and consultants) to engage partners long before they’re ready, so that customers will get the same damn sales pressure SalesFORCE exerts. All this for an application that’s a very likely non-starter for my client.

You know, there are days I’d like to stick a lit cherry-bomb in the ears of every MIGHTYsoft exec I can find. Couldn’t do any damage. They can’t hear anyway.

All this reminds me of the long-running Visio issue. Umpteen releases after MIGHTYsoft bought Visio, it still can’t print to Word, which is a terribly important function for us heavy flowcharters. Corel’s iGrafx has done it for years. SmartDraw does it. But Microsoft is so deaf to customers that customer input goes in one ear and out the other. All the cherry-bombs will do is increase the throughput.

But don’t get me started.