Sage News and Discussion

However you want to spin it - this is most definitely not a positive for Sage's efforts in the Sage CRM integration space.

Isn't this the synch routine from Faye Business Systems? I think it's been around for a couple years.

I thought bly did their own.

I can't tell whether bly created this (or perhaps licensed it). I'd have to guess they would do their own but not sure.

Sugar and sf.com bring a different set of dynamics to all this And this gets to the heart of my skepticism about Sage's CRM strategy. If a company doesn't already have CRM, and they already have Sage 100, then they'll probably use Sage CRM. Clearly, Sage 300 customers have been adopting Sage CRM. But this installed base potential is ultimately pretty small, because the main question is, ""What sort of company doesn't already have CRM?"" The answer is, companies that don't need it too much. (Broad strokes here.) Companies that do already have Sage 100, but have significant CRM needs are on something substantial, like Sugar or sf.com. They are not going to trade out those CRM's for Sage CRM just for accounting integration. In my view they would be more like to switch ERP. And for most new Sage 100 customers, these folks probably also have a CRM that works for them. With any luck the sData hooks in Sage 100 are actually complete (I can't get a straight answer on this), so web services integration can be done with any modern CRM. Meaning that we can sell Sage 100 to customers with significant CRM ops without worrying about also getting them to switch CRM. So a link like this actually helps keep Sage 100 in the game with these two categories. I think it is in spades with X3 customers; larger firms are more likely to already have CRM that is working ok in their ops, so forcing Sage CRM on them is not good. Unless Sage can up its game on stand alone Sage CRM, it should be actively seeking integration partners with the other CRM's likely to be found in a new Sage customer. I think their view of integrated CRM needs is probably 5 years behind. But I could be wrong.

I politely disagree with several of your points, @JerryNorman. My main disagreement is with the foundation of your argument that most companies that are good CRM candidates already have CRM. I don't think this thinking is correct. Putting aside anecdotal evidence, the market for CRM is projected to continue growing at a decent clip for the next five years. That doesn't happen in a mature or peak market. I would estimate that only a small percent of current Sage 100 and Sage 300 customers have CRM and the need is actually growing for them to get a CRM system as competitive pressures escalate and people simply cannot manage their marketing, sales and services without a centralized system. In fact, I think your comment that businesses are more likely to switch out ERP than switch out CRM should wake up the Sage 100 and 300 partners to get more serious about introducing Sage CRM before another CRM becomes entrenched. Anyone that is interested should call me. :)

Peter, we agree more than it looks. I segment the customers in my head about this question in terms of CurrentlyUsingCRM, RevAboveBelow10mm, and CurrentSageERPUser. If it's prospect to Sage and >$10MM, they are likely (not sure, likely) to have established CRM. And that's where integration to other CRM brands can come in. My thinking is really aimed at what new prospects to Sage would be like. Sage's installed base issue is, I think different. Sage CRM as a natural part is fine, although I think most current customers over ~$30mm will behave differently about CRM than those under $10mm. Anyway, I think bly:Connector is a good thing for Sage, and not a statement about the veracity of Sage CRM or its integration to Sage 100/300.

I concur with @PeterWolf regarding the channel about their commitment to CRM. Very few MAS 90/MAS 200 clients used ACT! and it is about the same percentage for Sage CRM, at least for our clients. ACT!'s integration was less than ideal, and many of us stopped pushing it because of that. In the Sage 100 market segment CRM has not been the primary priority over ERP, so the level of adoption is understandable. We as resellers push the ERP functions, because that's what the prospect/client asked for. We mention that CRM is packaged with it, so they can implement that in a second phase. We don't want to complicate or delay the sale, so that's the most expedient approach.

I do agree about Sage partners underestimating the CRM potential among current Sage 100 customers. Part of the reason is that the sales/marketing functions are not very visible through our normal ERP customer contacts. It is generally a very different sales process.

Back to the Blytheco sugarCRM/Sage100 integration... this may be a replacement for their own home grown contact management system they previuosly marketed. I had a pretty large 200 client that used Blytheco's system and then migrated to Sugar a couple of years ago. Maybe they contracted Bly to do the integration. I'll have to find out.

I call bullshit on most of this constant bellyaching about Sage VARS not having the nerve to take on CRM. Why is nobody taking on the argument that VARS should also get into HRMS and benefit management consulting. The reason is that these are all niche areas that VARS will need specialists for -- and most VARS don't have the volume or work. To portray it as partners being ""afraid"" is gross oversimplification and in my opinion not valid.

100% agreement on that @WayneSchulz. The ironic thing is ... Sage is having a Sage CRM cross-sell workshop in Chicago on April 17th (the day before the Customer Symposium) and I wasn't invited. Thanks to @MichaelMcDonald for giving me the heads up. I was explicitly told that I was not invited and would not be welcome as they want ERP partners to sell CRM themselves. I was told that my business model of helping other partners is not what Sage wants. They want more salespeople in the field selling this stuff and my model limits the growth of CRM. Yeah ... ok. I told them that made no sense as it's not ""just another module"". It has it's own sales process, different buyers (usually), different set of technical skills, etc. etc. Does it make sense for the average partner to spread themselves thin to represent CRM too? Another factor to consider is how first implementations usually are rough for customers and partners. Does an ERP partner really want to risk a good client relationship by trying to figure it out themselves? I'm not saying everyone should stay away from CRM. But realize that it requires an investment and commitment for it to be successful. It's no different than picking up a brand-new ERP system like NetSuite or Intacct. You don't go lightly into those decisions.

I agree, but there are different scales of expertise needed. I think it makes more sense for S100 VARs to cross-qualify on HRMS Payroll than to cross-qualify on CRM. It is easier, closer to their expertise and it it's clear that Sage is moving that payroll to replace MAS Payroll. Peter, don't jump down my throat here; I'm aiming at a grey area, not b&w. For small firms, with ~5 people in s&m&s, and don't have CRM already, they will likely be pushed to Sage CRM because of the influence of Controller. So, a S100 VAR can influence this in a good way, and bringing in Azamba to help makes a lot of sense. But I am skeptical of Sage's push to get the larger, current Sage 100 customers to adopt Sage CRM through the ERP business connection. I think once it rise to the ""we have budget to fix this problem"", a company with 15+ in the s&m&s users will look at many packages, and the driver will be the equivalent of VP Sales. In that situation, being able to hand wave over Sage CRM functionality is good as long as they bring in Azamba. But where Sage 100 VARs can really add value is to be able to realistically advise their customer on the details of CRM-integration scenarios available to the Sage ERP. It fits with the growing trend to integrating various functions to ERP, and the integration part continues the VARs connection to the financial side of the house. Without that emphasis, Sage is at risk to lose the ERP side, too. And talking competitively about the various advantages and challenges to various CRM-ERP integrations is something others dont really do much. And it is a VERY confusing and frustrating area with customers. And this is another explanation why I think Blytheco's SugarCRM integration is good for Sage. But I've disagreed with the way Irvine thinks integration should work for quite awhile....

Wow!. So Azamba is not at risk of winning the Spirit award this year. That is amazingly short sighted. And because Azamba isn't at the symposium, of course none of the attendees will know about your option. Sure. Your observation about first implementations are spot on. This is a very different beast. Does Irvine have any idea of the % of S100 vars who use Sage CRM in-house? That is the first step to selling it. I don't see how their all-or-nothing approach will work for S100. Maybe S300 will be better?

It is my understanding that Sage has eliminated the Spirit award as part of the 2013 ""Excellence through Cost Cutting"" Business Plan.

Well, yeah. The Shareholder Experience Officer recommended that!

>> I was told that my business model of helping other partners is not what Sage wants. They want more salespeople in the field selling this stuff and my model limits the growth of CRM. Don't worry Sage will change their mind on this in the next three months. There's very little that they're able to consistently execute on.

My favorite part was when the Sage person told me that they knew as much about selling Sage CRM to ERP clients as I did and my experiences would just be a distraction to the partners. I wasn't sure if I should laugh or scream at him. I guess it's kind of like if I decided to coach a NBA team. After all, I sure read a lot about basketball and I watch a lot of games on television.

Hey @PeterWolf - just because Sage has no respect for you I just wanted to let you that you get the utmost respect from me and no doubt from the rest of the group. The person you were talking to must have just slept at a Holiday Inn :)

LOL

Don't worry the policy will change as this new stream of VP and EVP get shown the door after the next quarterly earnings reports or two.

When I first saw this I was thinking it must be some sort of April fools joke. I guess the real fool here is Sage.

Usually when a company starts getting ""pure"" about some sales policy, it's because their numbers aren't being met, so they ""get tough."" And yet it never works, especially with channel.

Sage NA is not ""driving the bus"". If the promised $$ are not showing improvement I do not believe any VP/EVP can be shielded from being shown the door.