Customer Experience Management Vs

8/4/2019 Customer Experience Management Vs

1/5

Customer Experience Management vs. CRM

Are they the same thing?

This article describes the similarities and differences

between Customer Experience Management and Customer

Relationship Management. While the two require similar

skills, the terms are often used interchangeably, which is a

mistake.

LinkCitationEmailPrint FavoriteCollect this page

As the fourth part of this series on Customer Experience Management (CEM) deals a lotwith perception, and the complexities thereof... making this a slightly difficult topic to tackle.

Many individuals equate CEM with Customer Relationship Management, or CRM. While the

two are closely aligned and experts tend to agree that Most experts would agree that the original

intention of CRM was to focus strategically on the core five components of customer experience,that is:

Customers Environments Brand(s) Platform (systems)

Interfaces

However, while many CRM initiatives attempt to address the components above, many assume ahighly operational, quantitative or technical bias. To illustrate this point, ask any executive to

describe the tasks associated with CRM. You'll likely receive answers that align CRM with

activities such as:

Establishing/managing a customer management platform Installing/configuring hardware, software, systems Enabling use of customer management & response tools Assessing, consolidating & organizing (cust./sales) data

Operationally connecting & synchronizing channels Attempting to align internal business process and policies Translating programs & campaigns into new toolsets Enabling centralized metrics & analytics capabilities

Perceptions of CRM
http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%28window.print%28%29%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/http://void%280%29/


2/5

Perceptions about CRM vary a little, but have been partially created by systems integrators, who

have served as active leaders in the development of CRM capabilities. Such firms place a strongemphasis on technology, data management, quantitative analytics and operational alignment.

These activities are necessary to lay the groundwork for technology-enabled customer

management, and have often overshadowed strategic branding, marketing, program

development, interaction design and other tasks.

The operational, quantitative and technical perceptions of CRM are also shaped significantly byhistorical focus. Over the past several years, CRM efforts have centered on establishing andrefining the infrastructures necessary to enable solid customer management. The work has been

highly operational in nature, and involves the resolution of complex technology, process and

people issues.

Realities of CRM

In the context of establishing infrastructures for customer management, CRM practitioners have

fought many important battles. A large number continue to rage today - and focus on removing

internal barriers (human, technology, policy, data, process) that cancompromise customerexperience. Unfortunately, resolving these challenges forces so much attention on getting the

corporate internal house in order, they often compromise corporate efforts to develop, executeand measure broad, cross-channel, cross-program, customer-centric strategies and plans.

While many practitioners and CRM consultancies specialize in customer management andmarketing strategy, much of this work is too narrow in scope and execution. Detailed customer

analysis; designing and improving marketing strategies, programs and campaigns; developing

analytic models and reporting; supporting tactical execution; and other important tasks often

occur as an adjunct to larger, more technical implementations. The engagements are often too

quick or too narrow (e.g. within a single or few departments) to impact large-scale customer

experience or customer centricity within companies. At times, this work can even be done in a

manner that is disengaged from the larger CRM initiative (e.g. disparate strategies created by

different parties), creating disconnects that can hamper progress on a number of fronts.

Unfortunately, within many CRM initiatives, comprehensive strategic planning activites are

simply incomplete, insufficient, delayed or non-existant. Some key activities include:

o Designing the broad picture for customer experience (CE)o Designing integrated programs to support the CEo Aligning programs & campaigns with each other & CEo Developing customer-centric touch management strategyo Defining company-wide, customer-centric, cascading metrics

Failure to engage in comprehensive strategic planning can compromise CRM results and

negatively impact return-on-investment. It can also create gaps that negatively impact customers

and reinforce a fragmented view of customers. Insufficient strategic planning and alignment canhelp explain why it is common to find CRM implementations that drive benefits within
http://livepath.blogspot.com/2005/07/compromising-experience.htmlhttp://livepath.blogspot.com/2005/07/compromising-experience.htmlhttp://livepath.blogspot.com/2005/07/compromising-experience.htmlhttp://livepath.blogspot.com/2005/07/compromising-experience.htmlhttp://livepath.blogspot.com/2005/07/compromising-experience.htmlhttp://livepath.blogspot.com/2005/07/compromising-experience.html


3/5

individual programs and/or departments while larger benefits, remain unrealized. This occurs

because plans for narrow execution exist, while a broad, seamless, measurable customerexperience strategy is absent. This is somewhat common today, and why some critics believe

CRM initiatives miss the mark.

The future of CRMOur progress-to-date may be a natural outcome of CRM (and corporate) evolution. Even so, the

mounting dissatisfaction with strategic outcomes is a key driver in the growth of the CEM

movement. A proliferation of books and articles on the topic can now be found. Customerexperience has become a hot topic in industry publications, and on weblogs like this one.

Gartner's Q4 2005 report states that four of the top 10 CRM topics include: Building and

managing customer loyalty; creating a single view of the customer; creating a customer centricenterprise; and managing/improving customer experience.* These trends continue into 2008, as

business intelligence and content mining initiatives, which help companies improve customer

listening and better measure customer experience, have also hit the corporate radar en masse.

Traditionally, CRM has had a largely "inside out" focus, which is highly operations- centric.However today, the need for more customer-centric focus is unquestionably present. In many

companies today, an increased demand for strategic support in the areas of customer strategy,planning and execution is mounting. Gartner predicts that, in 2006, the number of organizations

with "single view of the customer" projects will actually double.*

The development of broad, strategic plans for customer management, cross-channel integrated

marketing and customer experience requires skills and knowledge that are often lacking in

organizations today. This is especially true with regard to marketing organizations.**Recent

studies reveal that, while CEOs view the CMO and marketing organizations as critical tobottom-line growth, many CMOs feel their organizations are underperforming, and lack the

organizational credibility necessary to influence strategic transformation. Gartner also reports

that one of the top, C-level enterprise-wide concerns today is that skill gaps will impede

growth.*

To build new core competencies, create more customer-centric strategies and transform

businesses, it's necessary to teach business owners how to manage customers and marketdifferently. The scope of work goes well beyond the strategy work that occurs within the

marketing organization. It must begin with the development of high-level strategies that drive a

coordinated, cohesive cross-organizational approach to managing customers.

Because of the broad scope of need, analysts seem to agree that outsourcing will play a critical

role in augmenting missing strategic skill sets, and helping companies develop more

comprehensive plans that drive marketing, customer management and customer-centricity to thenext level.* This creates a window of opportunity for consultancies, and has driven, in part, the

use of new terminology and business approaches --> and the rise in popularity of CEM.

CRM VS.CEMThe terms CRM and CEM are used inconsistently within the industry. Initially, this was

prevalent even within the analyst arena, where term use seems varies slightly. Forrester


4/5

Research initially separated CEM as a unique discipline that is distinct from, but related to CRM.

Gartner leveraged CEM as a skill set or practice within CRM. Regardless of the interpretationand subsequent evolution of these views, the analysts do seem to define CEM in a consistent

manner - and one that is consistent with the definitions in this article series.

In short, CEM practitioners attempt to address emerging market needs directly, whilecircumventing current perceptual biases of CRM. CRM practitioners have traditionally assumed

an "inside out", or operationally centric approach to customer management and strategy. CEM

practitioners distinguish themselves by assuming an "outside in, or highly customer centricwork approach.

CEM strategy focuses heavily on conducting detailed customer (demographic, behavioral,ethnographic, profitability, etc.) and environmental (market, channels, competition) exploration

and analysis. This analysis is used to design broad, detailed, integrated experience strategies

that answer customer needs and market opportunity. These strategies are accompanied bydetailed plans comprised of multiple, integrated programs and campaigns. CEM strategies and

plans are used as the drivers that shape product and service offerings, refine and align customerinterfaces and conform the operational platform (people, process, technology) for experiencedelivery, management and measurement - across channels, and over time.

Proponents of CEM assert their approaches can help remedy many of the issues created by

operationally focused CRM implementations. CEM practitioners argue their methodologiesenable business stakeholders to effectively conceive, own and manage next-generation customer

experiences, executing them across channels effectively with CRM tools. CEM evangelists

promote the work has having a transformative impact on companies, asserting the customer-

centric alignment and planning will naturally help focus business effort and drive operationalalignment.

Whether it's for marketing reasons - or to draw a real distinction in executional approach,

everyone seems to be jumping on the CEM band wagon today. This includes the systemsintegrators, who are developing solution sets (and entire practices) dedicated solely to CEM. A

growing number of agencies and consulting firms are claiming expertise in CEM. As a case-in-

point, try a keyword search on Google to see what you get...

Are CEM and CRM the Same?Some CRM practitioners dismiss CEM claims as a glossy repositioning of traditional CRMmethodologies. Others argue CEM methodologies differ greatly from CRM. Individuals with a

philosophical bent may argue that CEM is a "next generation" term that symbolizes a focus shift

in CRM. Individual positions will vary, shaped by personal perspective, approach, scope of

knowledge, area of experience and objectives.

In this author's opinion, it doesnt really matter what side you land on. I am supporter of CRM

and a proponent of CEM. I believe strongly in the "outside in" approach described in this article,because it helps mould the organization around customer need more effectively. Using CEM as

an umbrella term to describe this approach, and circumvent undesirable perceptions of CRM can

be a smart move, depending on your audience. However, when I can help it, I really try not to


5/5

get caught up in the overuse of buzz words and industry acronyms. I'd rather speak to the needs

of my client and how best to meet them in more natural terms.

Looking back, many of us "old timers" have been trying to get executives to support robust

customer experience strategy within CRM engagements for years. Sadly, we've suffered from

narrowed scope, limited resources, and we've watched as the lion's share of corporate investmenthas been allocated to costly technology implementations and operational work.

Whether you agree or disagree with the perceptions of CRM or the assertions about CEM -there's good news: Support for broad strategy and integrated customer experience planning is

growing; Operational environments are maturing; Organizations are becoming more open to

customer-centric transformation. Now matter how you spin the work, helping businessestransform, and comprehensively align to manage, measure and improve customer experience is

the right thing to do. We may indeed be better positioned to do this today than ever before. If we

do our work right, drive corporate success and make life better for customers.

Documents

Customer Experience Management Vs