Just what is Social CRM anyway?
A little over 6 months ago, I stumbled upon the #scrm adhoc community on twitter composed of an excited bunch of very intelligent individuals who are passionate about customers. So passionate, that on a daily basis new blog posts emerged with varying definitions of Social CRM and all of them couldn’t wait to go leave a comment with their interpretation of what Social CRM was, which lead to more posts with their take on the subject, and so on and so forth. The great thing about this is that it helped move the conversation forward and onto more productive discussions: actual use cases of Social CRM.
Truthfully, as I would read and follow these conversations, I thought I understood. But once, I walked away, I couldn’t quite put my finger on what Social CRM really was and how it was different from traditional CRM and how it was possibly (depending on who you talk to) just an additional channel or something entirely different. I struggled with the debate of whether Enterprise 2.0 was the internal strategy and Social CRM was the external strategy, vs. Enterprise 2.0 being the parent and Social CRM being one of the many children of an Enterprise 2.0 strategy.
Deep breath.
So here we are today and if you ask me to define Social CRM, I’m still unsure because it still feels as though there is still a lot of debate over what the “social” implies. And I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels this way.
The purpose of this post is not to stir the pot, but I did want to address a recent debate over a simplified Social CRM definition. Being confused about the subject, I can certainly appreciate someone trying to simplify something that up until now still isn’t clear to me. So I can understand why the author tried.
The problem is:
1. It is too premature to generalize or simplify the definition, since even the people that are in the Social CRM business don’t necessarily agree over what the “social” implies (though they are getting much closer!).
2. The definition in question for Social CRM is IMHO more of a definition for Social Media Marketing (SMM). Now, maybe that’s where I’m confused… and it’s probably thanks to the word “social”: Could SMM be a subset strategy in your Social CRM strategy? What do you think? Am I completely off track?
3. The definition in question implies that Social CRM and CRM are fundamentally different. Ok so from a recent post by Wim Rampen in response to said definition, I get that the Social implies a shift where we place the customer at the center of our strategy, and that this makes Social CRM approach different from traditional CRM. BUT… and this is my understanding… Social CRM still includes elements of traditional CRM, otherwise why would you even consider keeping CRM in your new name? It just doesn’t make sense to me. So my understanding: Social CRM is not different from traditional CRM but they have a different approach.
As you can see, I’m in need of clarification and guidance on the subject. So if you can enlighten me, I would really appreciate it. A note of caution: I don’t mean to re-open the subject of definitions. I agree it is time to move forward and apply the concepts or explain how the concepts are to be applied. In any case, I’d be more enlightened by examples than definitions. 
Hi Frédérique,
I suggest you take a look at Wim Rampen’s post here about the S in SCRM http://contactcenterintelligence.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/the-s-in-scrm-is-not-about-social-media
I also wrote a post to (re)position Enterprise 2.0 & Social CRM in the context of Social Business http://marktamis.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/social-crm-and-social-business/
The time has indeed come to start fleshing this out. The Altimeter repor was a good conversation starter as it provides a framework on which to build http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/2010/03/05/altimeter-report-the-18-use-cases-of-social-crm-the-new-rules-of-relationship-management
The simplified defintion is just that, too simple and restrictitve to serve as something constructive – unless you’re looking to add another megaphone to your marketing toolkit.
Looking forward to reading about how your thoughts evolve
Cheers,
Mark
Hi Mark!
Thanks for taking the time to read and respond to my post!
Actually, I did read and was referring to Wim Rampen’s post above when I mention the bit about putting the customer at the center, but I suppose I should have specified that I was referring to his post (edited original post to include his name now).
I also did see the Altimeter Report and both Wim’s post and the report have made sense to me and have clarified some aspects.
Where I’m unsure is the part about social media. I understand Wim’s point that the Social customer is Social online and offline as well. I completely agree, in fact, we’ve all been social online about products and services LONG before Facebook and Twitter appeared (i.e. tripadvisor, amazon, just to name a few, and even basic discussion forums dating back to the 90’s). And we’ve all been doing it offline since the days of bartering
. So what’s suddenly changed that we’re all jumping on the “social” wagon and adding “social” in front of everything? Why now? Clearly the new “tools” (don’t kill me for dragging technology into this) that have emerged, their widespread popularity and the ability to follow and friend people we know or that we get to know and learn to trust, must have something to do with it. And I think that’s where there is confusion for lots of people (myself included). I mean somewhere in your Social CRM strategy, the use of social media platforms must be present (but agreeably isn’t the only thing making your business ‘social’). Am I understanding this correctly?
And lastly, thanks for pointing me to your post! As I read it, I was glad to read: “Social CRM makes Enterprise 2.0 a necessity for “responding to the customer’s control of the conversation” because that’s what makes sense to me. So those philosophies must overlap. So what do you think? Is Enterprise 2.0 a prerequisite for being able to deploy a proper Social CRM strategy?
Thanks for your input! Much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Frederique
Enterprise 2.0 is a natural partner for Social CRM in the sense that it facilitates information flows and collaboration with and around the customer & the customer experience. (to me the customer experience is actually THE compelling reason for E2.0 implementation). E2.0 is not a necessity, but companies that want to get serious about customer engagement would benefit greatly, as it has great potential for reducing friction in the customer experience.
The social media platforms are enablers as well as accelerators in terms of customer expectancy about the experience they want and the way the company goes about meeting this. The “social” is about interaction and collaboration potential, not just about the channels of social media.
Your thoughts?
Hi Frederique,
I can clearly see that you’re having difficulties understanding what Social CRM is about. And I guess, no I know, you’re not alone in this. I was hoping my last post, you referenced to in your post (thank you very much.. there’s a lot to read on this, so I’m honored you picked mine..
, would do the trick..
Unfortunately it didn’t, so I’m happy you wrote this post and more specifically put on the table the questions you have.
Reading your post I see three questions (please let me know if I interpreted correctly..), and I’ve tried to “cut them to the bone” as well as answering them. If not for you and the readers, than also for straightening out my own thoughts on this.. (yep.. they keep evolving through discussions like these)
Q1: Does Social Media have anything to do with Social CRM at all?
Q2: Could Social Media Marketing be part of a Social CRM strategy?
Q3: How does this all tie in with Enterprise 2.0
A1:
Yes, Social Media has a lot to do with Social CRM. First of all because it is a channel, a powerful one even. And just like phone, e-mail, sms, chat, white mail, self-service IVR, self service web etc etc.. it is part of the options you have to interact with your Customers. What you use the channel for is entirely up to you, and hopefully depending on a strategic view on how you want to interact with your customers, about what and for what purpose.
For clarification: if you are working on your Customer Services Contact strategy, you want to make a decision on what channel you use for what part of the Customer Services functions you have.. Social Media is a relatively new channel companies can add to that mix, and they should..
I hope this answers the first question..
A2:
Much like the example above Social Media Marketing could most definitely be part of a Social CRM Strategy, because it also is another channel, much like in my Customer Services example above.. Much like the Customer Services Contact strategy I think though, it makes sense to incorporate Social Media in your overall marketing strategy and approach.. Think first what you want to achieve, then start thinking how you can do that best, and what channel(s) works best for that purpose.
BUT.. and that’s where my post comes in: please don’t use Social Media for marketing (or for any other parts of your Strategy) like many have been using it before, in the name of CRM. Like Mark says above: “unless you’re looking to add another megaphone to your marketing toolkit”.
And this is also true for the other channels we have used for years. Think of outbound telemarketing.. In the world of CRM we have been using the phone channel to harass people with offers that they did not need and at times of the day that are just not convenient.. hence, e.g. in The Netherlands, already 4 million households (out of some 8 million) have enlisted with the “don’t call me”-register. Companies are not allowed to use phone numbers in the register for their outbound telemarketing campaigns..
Same goes for e-mail-marketing.. We were collecting e-mail addresses when a Customer called Customer Services, not to send them the answer by e-mail (too risky for legal implications) but to use it for e-mail marketing, the Customer did not ask for.. Legal restriction of the use of this channel is happening all over the world, and for good reason.
Worse thing: We said the offer was tailored to the need of the Customer, when we were actually tailoring it to our needs (finding Customers in our database that would fit a demographic profile we thought would fit our product..) We were trying to push products, nothing more, nothing less..
The “new approach” as you name it, is about preventing us from using this wonderful new and powerful channel with the same “disregard” for Customers.
On top I believe this channel has potential that was not there before and I will not elaborate on here. yet, it should never be looked at as a single solution. Use it as part of your tools to solve a problem you have, or a job you need to do. Don’t just rule out the other ways of doing things too. They may even be better than Social Media..
Well.. this just became a rant.. I should move on to the last question..
A3:
This is easy: Mark Tamis provided a good answer in his second comment above.. I hope you think this is satisfactory too. If not, don’t hesitate to ask either him or me for more clarification..
That’s it for now. I hope this helped you understanding Social CRM a little better. If not, I did a poor job and I will try explain it better or differently. I know that if I can help you better understand I can also better explain to my Customers..
Leaving me to say: Thank you very much for writing this great post, thank you for engaging with me through twitter, and thank you for providing this platform to write
Wim
Just one note to add to my comment above.. This is all just my opinion of course..
Let me know if it does or does not make sense to you!
Wim
Sorry for late response! Things have been pretty hectic around here and I only found the time now.
Yes it absolutely makes sense! Collaboration and interaction with your customers doesn’t have to take place over social media to be Social. It’s very clear to me now!
About Enterprise 2.0: When many people talk Enterprise 2.0, they often concentrate more on how they are going to empower the employees through knowledge sharing, collaboration, etc. The idea is to break down the silos internally. They don’t talk about the external a lot (I guess the biggest challenge being change management, they’re tackling one thing at a time) but some people do see how the enterprise addresses the external environment as part of the Enterprise 2.0 philosophy. Actually, if you are familiar with Andrew McAfee’s definition (and I don’t mean to be bringing definitions into this again) for Enterprise 2.0:
“Enterprise 2.0 is the use of emergent social software platforms within companies, or between companies and their partners or customers.” – http://andrewmcafee.org/2009/08/defining-moment/
Can you see where I am coming from? I realize that Social CRM has its own philosophy as well, but if we go with McAfee’s definition, then Social CRM would fall under Enterprise 2.0? My confusion stems from everyone having different takes on this and no one has put a stake in the ground on it yet.
By the way, I also find the customer experience side much more compelling and that is why I’ve developed an interest in Social CRM.
Cheers,
F.
Wim,
You may rant on my blog any time if you continue to bring me some good insights along with it. LOL
A1: Yes! I totally get it now (thanks to you and Mark). I knew it deep down even, but SM channels being so popular right now, we tend to lose sight of all other options when we’re talking about the S word.
A2: I promise not to use social media as marketing in the name of CRM. LOL But shortly after I read your post, I saw an article go around doing exactly that… Is this an example of what you meant? http://www.clickz.com/3639873
And also I see what you mean about abusing the channels. I have to agree there is nothing more irritating than junk mail (direct or email) and telemarketing phone calls (especially those that come in past 9pm – not funny when you have small children who are light sleepers). However, I do LOVE the mail that comes in personalized just for me.
And I wholeheartedly agree, don’t just jump on the social media bandwagon unless it makes sense with your strategy. You are 100% right! Actually, it’s funny because you can really tell we’re in the “peak of inflated expectations” (Gartner’s merging technologies hype cycle) when it comes to this Social trend in business. It will do the world some good when the bubble pops.
A3: Yes he did. But I still see ambiguities. Not with his thinking but mine. Perhaps I need to stop trying to compartmentalize everything.
Thanks for your input! Of course, I picked your post because it was the one that came the closest (that I’d read) to making sense to me at this point in time. You did not do a poor job in your post, it was I that needed to be brought up a level or 2. And also it was pertinent and serendipitous… The ‘S’ really confused me and I was wondering about it.
Thank you once again (and Mark) for taking the time out of your busy days to address my questions.
Cheers,
F.
The problem of Enterprise 2.0 is that it has become a debate centered around the tools, and not the way this is reshaping the way we work, collaborate, do business (notice the emphasis on social _software_ in McAfee’s definition).
Social CRM looks beyond the tools, it is a strategy, philosophy concerning how we should be engaging with customers and improving the customer experience, and this implies collaboration around and with the customer, potentially using social software to improve the information flows. Look at Paul Greenberg’s post here http://the56group.typepad.com/pgreenblog/2009/07/time-to-put-a-stake-in-the-ground-on-social-crm.html for more background
My way of seeing things :
Social Media Marketing : using social media to talk to your prospects and customers
Social CRM : using social media to get a better understanding of your prospects and customers, and get back to them with a taylored offer
Enterprise 2.0 : emphasizing collaboration practices within the company (and why not with your partners; customers and suppliers), mainly through the use of internal social medias
I would also add
Collaborative Marketing : whereas you put up a specific platform for communicating/collaborating with your customers (and eventually prospects)
Just my 2 cents …
Hi Frederique,
I appreciate that position you are in, it is not a simple question. I think that the first definition you referenced misses the core idea, it is not about you (the company) it is about Me (the customer). This is why the Social CRM definition sometimes gets placed into context with SRM or VRM. My own realizations is the following: The companies are changing because the customers are changing. That simple. In Paul’s definition it is about the customer’s control of the conversation – control can mean a lot of things, but the fact that people can have very public conversation about you, in public suggests that we need a way (processes and workflow) to deal with it.
People get very caught up in the channel – I just finished a post, more thinking out loud than anything else, where I suggest the following: “the intent of an interaction speaks much more to the Sociability than the channel used”. What I mean by this is that whether or not something is deemed “Social” is independent of where it was said, rather the intent in saying it.
The Social in front of everything confuses the point a little, but I understand it. Everything that is now said needs to be put in the proper context. Why? So, everyone can understand why it was said in the first place. If I send you a direct mail (or email) I have a specific agenda, I would like some action taken. If I say the same thing on Twitter, I have a secondary motive – either I want you to act faster, or I want recognition of some sort.
My objective is to move beyond the definition – not just because it feels like an academic exercise sometimes – but because I feel that we will have more success in defining the characteristics, goals and objectives of the system – thus being able to push forward.
This may be the canonical discussion about the definition of Social CRM. Frédérique, you should take no small pride in that!
At this late hour, there’s not much I could add to clarify what Wim and Mark have said. (I guess you can tell the Dutch, but you can’t tell them much.)
One thing that I will say about Social CRM’s role in Enterprise 2.0 generally is this: implemented correctly, Social CRM is a battering ram for silos.
Why is this? Because organizations that do it right take the lead from their customers. And customers don’t know about your silos; they don’t care about whether your intent in setting up the program was “support” or “market research” or “brand building;” they don’t have time to invest with you if you’re not flexible enough to meet them half way. That’s one of the core values of Social CRM that’s hardest for people to internalize.
I would certainly like to move beyond the definition (and I have, mostly). But I think there’s still lots of work to be done in articulating the value (and values) of SCRM — even to people who are actually doing it!
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on your blog with these great people.
Businesses, especially large ones, those that call themselves enterprises, formed after the industrialization of manufacturing. When they were formed, they modeled themselves from what inspirations they could get from the other two huge organizations in existence then – government & military. So there is a heavy emphasis on command & control.
The advent of mass media enabled people with big bucks to go broadcast their messages. The common man had no choice but to listen to them because these ads subsidized their viewing costs. As a medium, these did not render to a way discussion (I like Mitch’s way of putting it – dialog, not two one-way communication). Businesses excelled in broadcasting. Since customers voice was not much heard they were thought to be dumb. Any negative messages were squashed by the PR machines with their heavy clout/lobbies with the media houses.
The relationship with the customer weaned to a mere transactional one.
But then comes a great improvement in the computing power, miniaturization, advances in communications, reduction in costs due to outsourcing, globalization, etc. and suddenly there is a big availability of cheap yet power & fast tools that allows people to both create & share content as well as connections at unimaginable speeds & to far reaching audiences.
Unfortunately though, at around the same time that these developments were happening in technology, the CTO/CIOs were busy making their systems – into which heavy CapEx was invested – secure, robust, scalable, provide the maximum ROI by extending the life of the systems (hardware & software) as much as possible.
This meant that people had at home far more powerful, cheaper & usable technology than in the workplace.
Obviously the common man was better equipped & also had the lead in learning the new tools & thus become empowered as an individual as well as become powerful as part of communities. These communities began by being an extension of the offline communities (Facebook was available to dorm mates). They soon started following the geeks & nerds and started forming communities around common interests too, not just their real life acquaintances. So you now have very powerful communities where each individual is empowered more than the enterprises.
What happens?
Humans being humans, the new empowered individual, & thus the communities, doing unto the enterprises what they could not before – talk back. They are ready to take vengeance. Just look at what happens with instances like the Nestle affair.
So, is it the business’ imperative to offer the olive branch & start building the relationship from the ground up.
Merely listening to the social media & engaging through a community manager does not make a social media marketing what it can really be. The listening is still about the two one-way communication and the engaging is about the control/moderation. IMHO, that is not a new beginning to the relationship with the customer. Its still the same old story, but with a new way of imposing yourself onto the customer.
Not sure if I have answered any of your questions like Wim did – by “cutting to the chase”. But these are some fundamental philosophical stuff that the businesses need to realize. If they do, its Social CRM. If they don’t, its Social Media Marketing or Social Support Communities. Social CRM is when the C-level/boardroom are looking at it as a strategy that cuts across various business functions & not restricting it to marketing / support / sales / other.
@Mark Tamis: You’re absolutely right that it has become a discussion centered around the tools but I don’t think that was McAfee’s intent. In fact, he clearly states (and I have to agree) that the desire to collaborate and find eachother is made possible by the combination of people and tools. They go hand in hand. You can’t have one without the other (well people could always collaborate without tools, but the tools have faciliated the process and I don’t think I need to elaborate here).
I agree that the problem is as you state: “a debate centered around the tools”. Those of us who are actually involved in some e2.0 initiatives, have realized that focusing on the tools almost always backfires. It’s 100% about people and their perceptions of how these tools are going to change the way they work. And just like everything else, tools should address a problem or improve something you need to do, otherwise why implement them?
Thanks for Paul Greenberg’s post, some really good stuff there. I feel almost bad for re-opening a discussion on something he put a stake in the ground on.
However, delighted to read crystal clear point #15:
“15. SCRM differs from Enterprise 2.0 though is integrally related to it. Enterprise 2.0 is organized around increasing the productivity of the workforce in all that it does utilizing new collaborative tools to do so. It uses those tools to aggregate and organize information and systems. However, though different, Enterprise 2.0 is integrally related because part of that improvement in productivity increases the effectiveness of employee-customer interactions. It also increases the company’s ability to capture useful information and knowledge about customers, not just boatloads of data. But what it doesn’t do is provide avenues for the customers to engage themselves with the company. That’s not its purpose. That is the purpose of SCRM.”
Thanks again. My thoughts on this are starting to be more solid!
@barthox: thanks for your comment! I, too, thought S in social CRM was about social media however have now been enlightened. If you read some of Mark’s and Wim’s comments, Social CRM is not only about Social Media. Wim’s post is here (good stuff!):
http://contactcenterintelligence.wordpress.com/2010/03/23/the-s-in-scrm-is-not-about-social-media/
Thanks!
F.
@Mitch: You’re right. So I won’t post another blog about this again but the reason why it keeps coming up is because it still isn’t clear to a lot of us (and wasn’t to me but is starting to now).
So actually, by asking questions, we aren’t stopping anyone from moving forward, we’re just trying to “catch up”. It may also be beneficial to also go back sometimes and review our initial vision of things to make sure we haven’t lost sight of some points.
I also believe that the only way to move forward collectively is to help others understand. This way, you can correct me if I am wrong or vice-versa… we complement each other’s way of thinking and we can move forward together. It doesn’t stop you from moving forward with other people who are ahead, of course. You’re just taking a breather sometimes and lending a hand to those that need one
Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. Looking forward to reading about business cases from the SCRM world. If you know of any interesting ones, please send some my way!
Sincerely,
F.
@phil: I think you just touched on an important point about the silos. The silos have to go. The customer doesn’t care as you say and the organization and employees often suffer because of them.
Easier said than done though. This is a common point for both e2.0 and Social CRM.
As you said, the dutch were pretty concise and did a good job of answering my questions. But still appreciate your bit about the silos. It brings more clarity to the relationship between e2.0 and SCRM.
Cheers,
F.
Actually, you are 100% correct – I did not mean to suggest that everyone else has to move on, my apologies if that was the perception (and we all know that perception is the new reality
I did not mean to say exploring should not be done – it needs to be done.
In terms of blogging about it, please do more. The more that people who are entrenched in the conversations understand where we are going to astray (and we are going astray often) the better we will all be for the effort. We do need to move forward – but we can only move forward if we are all clear on the direction we are going. Else, we are going to simply moving fast, for moving fasts sake.
@prem
Truly enjoyed your post. It’s nice to sometimes have a bit of a look back at how things were and how we got here. Sometimes (well most of the time), the root of our problem is locked away in the past (snowball effect).
So, as you say command and control -> Information is power so let’s keep it to ourselves. But as you imply, today this mentality no longer works, especially if you want to deploy a successful Social CRM strategy. I believe you need to empower your employees to have a healthy relationship vis-a-vis your customers.
The organization (starting with the C-levels) needs to communicate this philosophy and lead by example for it to work. But as I write this, I feel a wave of pessimism coming. Its all nice in theory. Change is always welcomed by resistance. This is no easy job.
So what do you think? Do you give up on those enterprises that don’t get it and concentrate on those that have shown interest in changing? What about those that are trying but don’t quite “get it”?
Going a little off topic now, but it is fundamentally about people.
Cheers,
F.
@mitch, of course not, I didn’t think that! I was just feeling a bit bad that I was bringing up something that everyone was trying to move away from because they’d already talked to death about the subject. I wasn’t completely aware.
As I type this, I have to go because I’ve just realized my toddler has undressed herself and there are toys all over the floor in the living room
… Better stop “working (learning)” so to speak and enjoy my weekend before my house is turned upside down.
Have a great weekend! Its nice and sunny here and I believe must be where you are as well.
Cheers,
F.
Frederique,
Some last remarks:
GREAT POST!!
I know you were hesitating to post your opinion in the midst of all the “power-bloggers” around.. Judging from your post, the commentary as well as your insightful answers, you absolutely have nothing to fear, actually you have a lot going for writing more, which I would highly recommend you doing. Not only will it help clarifying the questions or thoughts you may have, it will also help others better understand what this emerging field is and can be about.
What I’m saying: I’d love to read more of your thoughts, ideas and connections you make. There’s a lot of value for all of us. Thx
Now on the Facebook for CRM post you mentioned in your reply to me above: this post is actually a good overview of ways to approach facebook fan-pages for SCRM purposes.
Some companies mentioned there seem to do fine engaging in dialog and sometimes re-directing Customer questions to other channels where they can be dealt with more appropriately. Nothing wrong with that, if it is in the Customers interest.
The ones thinking all these Customer Services related questions, or even negative response from Customers on their fan-page, are a hassle and interfere with their own goal of the fan-page (pushing their products) simply do not get it..
but I know you “got that” and “get it” already
Thx
Wim
Frederique,
I see what you mean … my bad, I mixed up a few definitions …
I also understand Mark and Wim’s position better … after reading them a few times ! ;o)
I see “social media” as using a medium (internet being just one example) to have many-to-many conversations.
Traditional CRM has one-to-many conversations. For example, you may creating a marketing campaign and you (the one) send out broadcasts via e-mail or a tv ad or whatever else to your marketing list (the many).
Social CRM is having many-to-many conversations (e.g., thru Twitter, or thru live debates, etc) and capturing that info into your CRM tool.
Also take a look at Prems’ map. This visual helps a lot understanding that Social CRM involves a lot. http://scorpfromhell.blogspot.com/2008/12/social-crm-for-techie.html
I think he’s making an update right now
Bjørn