Why Social CRM Is Not the Answer for Social Media
There is no doubt that Social CRM is the future for traditional CRM. CRM tools are swarming to build functionality to monitor your brand across the various social networks. There are lots of great blog articles out there discussing this topic, including posts by Jeremiah Owyang (”The Future of Twitter: Social CRM”), Brent Leary (”Social CRM in Pictures….and Words” and “Social CRM: Not Your Father’s Customer Relationship Management“) and many others. I really like Brent’s definition of Social CRM which is as follows:
“Social CRM adds a whole new dimension to the traditional view of customer relationship management. The focus is undoubtedly on people and not technology. It’s about joining the ongoing conversations our customers and prospects are already engaged in — not trying to control them.”
The key statement to me from Brent’s post is about joining ongoing conversations and the value in building relationships. However, what is missing here is the fact that this is still CRM, social or not. The ultimate goal is to manage your customers, partners, etc. to obtain the most value you can out of that relationship and to build that 360 degree view of the customer. Don’t get me wrong. CRM has value. Social media needs a different approach, though. Companies should come to these conversations as participants and not overseers using tools to monitor the social networks to help fix a customer’s problem or clean-up after a PR debacle. The real answer is to give users the tools to manage these relationships and not just the organizations themselves. Users should have the capability to share information with their vendors on their terms and not the vendor’s terms. These tools should still give vendors the ability to easily participate in those conversations and extract the value needed from them, but I do not see the same value for Twitter providing the Social CRM capabilities that Jeremiah outlines. Twitter’s value comes from the users and not the brands. Twitter should instead focus on providing improved capabilities for users to be able to express their preferences and issues. Admittedly, I’m still not sure how you monetize this any more that what they have now, though.
So, is this Vendor Relationship Management (VRM)? Doc Searls leads ProjectVRM at Harvard University to support the development of VRM tools and methodologies. Wikipedia defines VRM as:
“VRM, or Vendor Relationship Management, is the reciprocal of CRM or Customer Relationship Management. VRM describes a set of tools, technologies and services that help individuals go to market and manage relationships with vendors. In turn, vendors who align themselves to these tools, technologies and services will have the opportunity to build better relationships with their customers.”
Sounds like it. Or does it? VRM advocates putting tools in the user’s hands. VRM also describes transactions, relationships, conversations, user-based control, etc. Paul Greenberg presents a good case for VRM and Social CRM being the same thing in his “Vendor Relationship Management: Jumpin’ On The Three Wheeled Bandwagon” post. VRM, however, has its own set of challenges. In Graham Hill’s post on “Four Fallacies of Vendor Relationship Management” he outlines a strong set of reason why VRM is overly extreme. Ultimately it comes down to the management of information and whether or not the VRM economic model works. So, perhaps VRM is not the answer for social media either. This makes sense if Social CRM is the same as VRM as Paul describes.
So what capabilities really are needed for social media tools so that both users and organizations can get the most value. Here is my high-level feature list for this new type of tool:
- Designed for users and not organizations
- Organizations should be equal participants in the conversations and not observers
- Inherently free so that everyone can gain value with value-added services provided on top of the core system
- Exposes interfaces so that organizations can extract data approved by the users
- Social network independent
Perhaps this is what Graham calls “Customer Managed Relationships?” I’m not sure. I do know that this type of tool needs to focus on collaboration more than just relationship management. Perhaps the best name for this is Social Collaboration Management instead.
Todd
