Category Archives: CRM best practices

The One Thing you MUST do Before Account Deduping

Duduping a CRM is like an equation waiting to be solved.  Just like a high school math, the more variables you know the values for, the easier the problem is to solve and the more likely you will come up with the correct answer.

CRMs include is a vast number of “Data Markers”.  These markers are a literal road map to filling in missing data.   For example, if 100% of the emails for a particular company have the email format of Firstname.Lastname@domain.com, then you can probably fill in missing emails for other contacts with confidence.  If you have the email domains for contacts, but the account record is lacking a website, that can be filled in too.

A company’s website address is a unique identifier.  It is more important than the company name.  Look at Peoplesoft as an example:  long after the company was acquired by Oracle, you could navigate to www.peoplesoft.com.  A few years later, it was totally absorbed…but the website did outlive the company.

Done properly, leveraging data markers within a CRM allows the properly trained consultant to pre-fill data for a more complete picture…BEFORE deduping.   In addition the data should be standardized (sometimes called Normalized) before the dedupe process is done.

If you take the correct measures of:  (1) data normalization and (2) data fill before deduping,  your dedupe process will be greatly improved.

 

Titles in CRM: The standardization debate

I’ve often talked about the importance of having a Data Plan for a healthy CRM. A data plan is simply a set of standards for CRM data. For example, review the following ways to write:

Director of Human Resources
Director, Human Resources
Director of HR
DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Director HR
Human Resources Director
HR Director

Lack of standards is a problem. Why does it happen? These examples are from a live CRM. What were the sources of data?

  • User entered data
  • Web form connected to CRM
  • D&B
  • Jigsaw
  • Trade show directory
  • Broadlook
  • InsideView
  • NetProspex

Each source provides valuable data, but what is the indirect cost? For example, the data tagged “source= D&B” had the title in ALL CAPS. The data from Broadlook was standardized to “HR Director”. Jigsaw and NetProspex had the title in different formats. The worst case scenario: each source provides titles in different format.

This is a CRM nightmare.

The solution is to provide a system that enforces data standards. Some companies get by with an agreed-upon set of standards, but that is not enough. Enforce is the key word. Having an agreed-upon data standard is a great idea, but in reality you:

  1. Can’t control how your vendors deliver data
  2. Can’t force your sales reps to enter data correctly
  3. Can’t force users filling in web forms to change what they type
  4. Can’t prevent marketing from importing that latest trade show directory

So, again, the only answer is *enforced* Data standards. How do you do this?

The only way to accomplish true standards is via technology enforcement. One example of this is Broadlook’s CRM Shield, which simply allows you to pick a set of standards. Once a standard is built, then all data passing through the CRM is standardized.

So what is the debate?

Recently, one of my partners pointed out that his clients “Don’t want to change the titles”. He believed to save the titles in the way that they were provided. A “Vice President of Sales” did not want to be listed as “VP Sales”. Thus the debate began about Normalization/Standardization of titles.

Now if the client is always right, we want to accomplish this, but what is the true, best solution?

First, there are two types of Normalization, destructive and non-destructive. Destructive means that when the data is changed, something is lost and the change cannot be reverted from. An example would be truncating a title from “Director of Systems Automation” to “Director of Systems”. Once the “automation piece is gone, it cannot be recovered. A non-destructive example would be changing “Vice President of Sales” to “VP Sales”. The litmus test for non-destructive normalization is whether the change can be reverted. Starting from the shortest form, “VP Sales”, normalization rules would allow any variation of the title to be modified and re-modified without any loss.

The Counter-Argument

“If someone lists themselves as ‘Chief Executive Officer’ on their business card or email signature, they don’t want to be listed as ‘CEO’.” This is the counter-argument; to maintain the original state of the data. This is a valid point. Yes, we can change ‘CEO’ to ‘Chief Executive Officer’ and back again, but once it is changed, how do we know what the original title was? The answer is you don’t know.

Personally, I don’t believe in the counter-argument, but my job is not to judge what my clients want, but to deliver results that help them run their businesses more efficiently. I don’t believe in it for two reasons. (1) Really? someone is that vain that they get miffed about their title being correct, but not in the exact format? (yes, opinion only). (2) Non-standard data is a culprit in creating Dupes in the CRM. Dupes are ugly. Dupes costs companies millions of dollars each year in lost efficiency, data cleanup costs, skewed KPI’s and failed analytical reports. You can’t report on non-standard data. Just think about it.

The answer

Take my advice and normalize your data. However, if you must retain the original source of titles, you are THAT fickle CRM admin, here is what you should do.

Have 2 title fields in your CRM.

Field 1: The normalized title. Use this for search, KPI’s, reporting and deduping. Having a single standard by which to measure. This will keep your CRM tuned and your sales and marketing teams will love you.

Field 2: The Original title. Use this for display, mailing and client/suspect/client outreach. If you mail, use this field.

Caveat

Even the Original title should be normalized to a certain degree. Example: “Vice — President of Sales.”. This example has extra spaces, dashes and a period at the end. A simple clean up would yield “Vice President of Sales”.

Last word

Regarding Normalization. I am right, the detractors are wrong (especially Gregg) and eventually they will come around to my way of thinking. Until then, I’ve done my job and outlined best practices that can make everyone happy.

Donato Diorio

Chief*** Executive***Officer!! , Data Guru (yes, Normalization can fix this too)