Jason Nash, Microsoft UK CRM product manager, denied that the CRM initiative had stalled: We are more than happy with the solution’s progress to date, he said, citing the current 3,500-strong customer base, work being done to support 21 languages and its presence in 53 countries.
However, in an interview with ComputerWire in November 2004, the company said it had 3,500 customers at that point.
Addressing the issue of the delay he said it was a question of choosing the right trade off. With any software you have the option of choosing between being time boxed or feature boxed. As we engaged with our partners and customer base [they highlighted] features we had not considered important. We delayed to get the right feature set, he said. When we release the version, it will be the right version.
The initial release was launched in January 2003. The internationalized 1.2 version was announced in December 2003 and available internationally during Q1 2004. Version 2.0 was expected in April or May 2005 but Microsoft now says it will not be released to manufacturing until Q4 2005.
The application is unlikely to be generally available until the end of the year which would put almost two full years between launches and while customers generally tend to be concerned about too fast a rate of change, a gap of this size is too long especially considering the base level functionality of the version 1.x products.
There could be a worse case scenario where we do not see it [version 2.0] until the latter part of this year but we did put out a feature pack during the year. We are looking at how we make sure we do the best thing by our customers, said Nash, pointing out that customers would be disappointed if Microsoft put out below par product.
The feature pack was announced in June, with general availability in the October to November timeframe, and introduced productivity and integration oriented functionality including the Information Bridge Framework. This tool enabled the creation of a bridge between Office applications and the CRM system, enabling smart tags to be inserted in an Office document for example that called information from the CRM system and also allowed users to query the database from within the Office document.
Nash said that the delay to version 2.0 was not related to the Longhorn operating system delays and confirmed that 2.0 is not dependent on Longhorn.
Although Microsoft is building up functionality, much of the work on 2.0 is architectural and integration related, with work being done to improve the level of integration between the CRM application and Microsoft’s infrastructure components.
Slow progress on the integration front was given by Microsoft earlier this month as part of the reason for Microsoft Business Solutions’ flat year on year performance.
The CRM application requires Small Business Server so one aim is to get the two components working together. Currently they need to be implemented separately but Nash said work is being done to enable simple, seamless and simultaneous installation of both.
Work is also being done to increase flexibility and ensure that customization work carried out by customers and partners within the SDK environment can be maintained through product upgrades, which is part of Microsoft’s commitment to make upgrading seamless as possible. Nash said these sorts of changes had led to the need for longer testing periods.
Work on providing integration between CRM and other applications in the MBS portfolio appears to be less advanced however. There are integration points between CRM and ERP applications, said Nash. There is one for Great Plains, for the others there are available via third party developments and VARs. They do exist today. As we go forward they will happen.
Additional functionality is planned too such as improving reporting and querying capabilities. The current versions use Crystal Reports but version 2.0 will also support SQL Reporting Services.
We are delivering the next level of availability to query the database and make it easier to gain insight into the system, said Nash.
Campaign and existing marketing management will also be enhanced with tracking to be built into the core application plus the addition of tools to help maintain data accuracy within the system.
The product roadmap has undergone several changes. Version 1.2 was scheduled to ship with back office functionality but when it came to it functionality such as VAT and multi-currency capabilities were ditched and language support was more limited than initially planned.
Microsoft did provide extra capability in other areas however, such as data-evaluation capabilities and support for lead-tracking and sales territory effectiveness, delivered through the application’s workflow facility. It also made improvements to the user interface and simplified installation.
Nor is it just the product roadmap that has undergone changes, the management structure has undergone a major shift. Roughly a year ago Jeff Young, who headed up the CRM operation, moved over to Great Plains leaving the position of GM for CRM vacant.
In November 2004 David Batt came on board as GM for CRM but appears never to have got into the role because Brad Wilson who joined MBS earlier this week has taken that role.
Nash was unable to comment of the position regarding Batt but confirmed that Wilson had replaced him. Just where Batt stands is uncertain and Nash described it as an ongoing situation, declining to say whether he was still with the company or not. The future of CRM is in the hands of Wilson, who previously headed up PeopleSoft CRM, and David Thacher who heads up the development team and has been in position since the early days.
Nash conceded that the management changes might have changed the way the strategy was implemented but stressed that the product strategy and marketing was clear and compelling and that the presence of Thacher had been consistent throughout the changes.
The strategy is to give the mid market a CRM tool that delivers ROI, lowers TCO and makes CRM available for masses not just the elite. It has never been any more clear than it is now. There is a delay because we are moving forwards towards an aspiratinal goal, said Nash.
