Showing posts with label SalesForce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SalesForce. Show all posts

Friday, December 16, 2016

Ten CRM Case Studies for Charities

On the tenth day of Christmas, my truelove gave to me... Ten Useful Case Studies of How NFPs Are Using CRM Systems


Case studies are a useful way to see how charities and the NFP sector have implemented fundraising and CRM systems. The following are ten such examples (in alphabetical order):

NB For clarification: this list in no way indicates that these are the ten best or the only ten systems you should consider. There are many more and you can see a more comprehensive list of Fundraising Software and CRM Systems on my website.


Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Seven Free Apps for CRM Systems

On the seventh day of Christmas, my truelove gave to me... 7 free apps/software which can be used with Charity CRM Systems


I am always cautious about saying that software is free, because so often there are some sort of costs associated with it, even if the price tag itself is zero. With that caveat in mind, here are some free apps/software which I hope could be useful for CRM and fundraising software implementations:

  • Power BI Publisher for Excel: Microsoft's Power BI is a great tool to enhance the visualisation of data. Using it, you can take snapshots of your most important data/insights in Excel, such as PivotTables, charts and ranges and pin them to dashboards in Power BI.
  • Free Raiser's Edge Plug-ins from Zeidman Development and SmartTHING: David Zeidman and Warren Sherliker are both fantastic developers of plug-ins and customisations for The Raiser's Edge. And although they charge for their developments, they also offer some apps and 'lite versions' for free. If you use Raiser's Edge then their websites are both well worth checking out.
  • Free Salesforce apps: The Salesforce AppExchange has lots of free apps, some definitely better and more useful than others, but it's a great resource for Salesforce users. There are email integration tools, dashboard apps, data management apps and more.
  • XrmToolbox for Dynamics CRM: If you already use Dynamics then you may know about this add-on already, but if you don't use it or if you are thinking of using Dynamics then this is a wonderful free tool to know about. As it says on the their website, "it is shipped with more than 30 plugins to make administration, customization or configuration tasks easier and less time consuming". Good stuff.
  • Gift Aid calculator for your website: This is a free piece of Javascript which I designed myself some years ago to show donors how much their donation would be worth with Gift Aid. Anyone is welcome to use, amend and incorporate it as they wish; it is probably used mostly by small-mid size charities who want a quick and easy (if not so beautiful!) solution.
  • Free CRM Software: CiviCRM and KindLink. CiviCRM is an open source CRM solution for NFPs and KindLink is a recent addition to the charity market for cloud CRM software. However, I urge you to remember that just because the software is free, it does not mean it is zero cost - read my specific blog post about this - it's old but still relevant.
  • Talend Data Integration software: Talend has an Open Source version (Open Studio) as well as a paid-for commercial version, but the open source version is still extremely powerful. It will help you integrate data between different sources and your CRM system. But be aware it is not simple software - you almost certainly will need a dedicated expert to use it.
If you want to recommend any other free software/apps etc then please do add them in the Comments below.


Tuesday, December 06, 2016

Two CRM Giants - Now Good Options for Larger Charities Too

On the second day of Christmas, my truelove gave to me... A brief discussion on Microsoft Dynamics 365 and Salesforce.


When I started this blog in 2009, I wrote that I was still reserving judgement on whether Microsoft Dynamics CRM and Salesforce were truly valid options as fundraising systems for charities, especially larger NFP organisations. Since then, I have watched the changes in both systems and there is now little doubt that - implemented well - both platforms now can support charities with their fundraising requirements.

There are good reasons for this: not only has their functionality and configurability improved, and there are now 'NFP templates' which can sit on both platforms, but equally as important (maybe more so), there are increasingly a number of implementation business partners who work with these platforms who now have got a good understanding of the software and fundraising – and that was definitely lacking just a few years ago. Of course, both systems also have excellent software licensing costs for charities (not the be-all-and-end-all of any procurement, but it still helps) and they are almost always recognised by key research companies such as Gartner and Forrester as being amongst the top CRM players.

And although there have been a constant number of small to mid-size charities implementing both systems for fundraising over the last five years, the last couple of years has also seen the first large NFPs go-live with their fundraising implementations on these platforms: first, Barnardo's on Salesforce and then WaterAid on Dynamics. And there are at least a couple of other large charities who I believe should go-live on those platforms in 2017.

They are also terrifically flexible and configurable, so you can of course use them for more than just fundraising if you want to. Indeed, most implementations of both systems were not for fundraising in their earlier versions.

Of course, there are still challenges, most notably the concern of cost for large volumes of data if you go on a Cloud version, and performance for large data-sets for some operations should always be considered (Although, as I have written before, I would question if you do still need all your data online).

And there is still a lot of hype about Salesforce and other CRM Systems (and there are of course alternative CRM platforms to Dynamics/Salesforce) and so don't just go and buy a CRM blindly. Remember that they are not the only option for fundraising: there are also several very good proprietary software solutions which have been designed specifically for the charity sector. So you do need to decide which is right for your requirements.


Monday, January 12, 2015

My Predictions for NFP CRM Systems in 2015

Fortune Teller 

It's that time of year when people predict what's going to happen in the next 12 months and so I thought I would join in. So here goes: these are my predictions for what will happen in the arena of UK NFP fundraising databases and the CRM market in 2015:

1. The increasing adoption of Salesforce and Microsoft CRM Dynamics - especially for the larger charities looking for a new system. In the last 12-18 months, for the tenders for fundraising databases that I know of amongst larger charities, more have been won by a company selling Salesforce or Dynamics - and I think this pattern will continue at the moment. Blackbaud CRM will also be in the mix but it has not been as successful of late here in the UK (outside the Higher Education sector) and ACS's CareNG does not seem to be competing at the same level as the others right now.

So at the moment, for larger charities who are also looking for a development platform, I believe Dynamics and Salesforce will top the sales.

That said, I wouldn't be at all surprised if one or two larger charities implementing CRM systems for fundraising find it tough going. There are still very few sizeable UK charities using such systems for their dedicated fundraising database and I think some may find it takes longer and/or costs more than they expect.
  • As a 'sub-division' prediction on this, I also think that 'templated' versions of Salesforce and Dynamics will grow in popularity - i.e. offerings from third-party suppliers with some built-in charity functionality such as Direct Debit management, Gift Aid etc - both in terms of client adoption and new templates being developed by more companies. Plus Salesforce's own NGO Connect adaptation could be interesting to watch if it is developed for the UK market.
2. The mid-size charity market for fundraising systems will see a battle between Raiser's Edge NXT and Access thankQ CRM. Both Blackbaud and The Access Group are bringing out new products in 2015 as successors to their existing Raiser's Edge and thankQ systems and it will be interesting to see which moves ahead. It looks like The Access Group will release their new offering first so that could give them a head start, but Blackbaud's new technology and financial clout should see them pick up new clients later in the year.

That said, Raiser's Edge NXT still has some questions hanging over it as I have highlighted before in another blog post, so it will be very interesting to see how that does develop.

I also believe that CiviCRM will win deals amongst mid-size charities but it needs one or two more significant implementations in the UK to really get it to be more widely adopted. (And of course Salesforce and Dynamics will also be an option for this level, but for those organisations with 'pure fundraising' needs there would need to be a good reason to be building from 'vanilla' for such systems - hence, again, my prediction for the growth of CRM fundraising templates.)
  •  I also think that Blackbaud's existing Raiser's Edge 7 is not going to disappear for some time. It (like other similar products) still provides solid functionality for charities' operational fundraising requirements, so despite its age and shortcomings it will probably continue to sell for at least this year, and carry on being used for at least the next few years by many existing clients.
3. Extensibility will be increasingly more important. In terms of system flexibility, adaptation and development, charities are now moving on from accepting the limitations that the more traditional fundraising databases have offered historically. The goals, wishes and requirements of fundraisers (and therefore the database team too) means that such restrictions are almost certainly no longer acceptable for mid-size/large NFPs.

Thus the need for the increased power and flexibility of system extensibility has come to the fore. Charities want to be able to change forms and screens, insert entities and fields and add data integrity/business rules etc more easily than they have been able to in the past. And they want to be able to do this themselves, without having to be technical geniuses. But they also want to at least have the option of being able to get down-and-dirty with programming code if they desire to do that and if they are capable of doing so, and to be able to use such code so that they can extend the database beyond what it was originally developed for - but in such a way so that it won't break it in the future when new standard upgrades are released.

The CRM systems are leading the way in this but the new products from Blackbaud and thankQ are catching-up in some (if not all) areas and some degree of extensibility will no longer be a nice-to-have for new implementations.

4. Charities will want to integrate their fundraising/CRM database with their website and other data sources more tightly and with more automation… but they will still find it hard. This fundamental need is not new of course; and my point here is really a bit of an 'anti-prediction' in that although I predict the increasing desire for such integration, I still think it is going to be hard for more automated integration apart for those charities who have a decent budget and good in-house technical skills, or for the more 'common' data sources such as JustGiving.

Ironically, from the point of view of attempting to be Nostradamus, I hope I am wrong about this prediction.

5. Software companies and salespeople will continue to push Mobile/Social Media/Cloud as their innovations. Which is hardly a radical prediction, is it! After all, this is already happening. And of course these technologies do offer the potential of great benefits and the ability to interact with our fundraising/CRM systems.

But why I have highlighted this area is because I want to add that you shouldn't follow these trends blindly and you shouldn't be buying a new system just because it offers such capabilities. Instead, work out why or how such technologies could be used with your database. For example, it is not just a matter of recording tweets in your CRM system (I mean, are fundraisers really going to look through hundreds of tweets on a fundraising database?); it is not just about seeing a supporter's Facebook page from within the CRM (although that can offer some speed of access); and it's not just about accessing your database from your mobile/tablet without a good business reason, no matter how flashy the salespeople make that look. Although, yes, mobile access for event fundraisers at an event, for development staff visiting alumni, for member access - absolutely, that sounds good. So do it where it's right to do so - but not just for the sake of it.



A final note on this: I should add that there are of course many more fundraising databases available (AdvantageNFP, Harlequin, KISSS etc) and CRM systems (Workbooks, SugarCRM etc) - see the itforcharities website for such lists - and my references to the systems above do not mean that they are necessarily right for you or your particular project. If you do look for a new database then you need to do a proper analysis and procurement exercise and select whichever system and supplier is right for your organisation.

Monday, August 18, 2014

The CRM Alternatives to Salesforce and Dynamics for Charities

2010 - April - 25 - NodeXL - Twitter - crm betweenness color 

Salesforce and Microsoft CRM Dynamics are both great solutions but when considering 'generic' CRM systems, it is easy to think that they are the only "CRM systems" available to UK charities, which of course is not the case: there are dozens of similar(ish) systems on the market - and there are of course fundraising database packages. That said, there are some CRM systems which are either more oriented towards the NFP sector or where a supplier has specifically created modules for charities, or where one or more business partners have taken the sector seriously enough to have made an impact with what they can provide, and it is those systems which I thought it would be useful to list here for awareness:
  • CiviCRM: CiviCRM has been designed specifically for the NFP market with appropriate functionality and ethos, and is almost certainly the NFP sector's leading open source CRM system, offering collaboration and joint development. And because it is not oriented at just one "type" of solution for charities (i.e. not just service delivery, not just case management, not just fundraising, volunteer management etc) it has a degree of flexibility similar to that which the CRM solutions also offer, if maybe not quite so in-depth. It has a great ethos for charities, and an ever-growing and broadening community using it and supporting other users. And by its very nature it tends to attract users and developers who believe in not just the software but the whole open source approach. But the fact it is not driven by a commercial organisation means that when statutory or regulatory requirements change, then a user and/or the community needs to get the software updated to manage that.
  • Workbooks.com: Workbooks has gained several UK clients in the membership sector and are offering their solution to charities too. It is a web-based (SAAS) solution designed for small and mid-size businesses, so in terms of solution size their NFP offering should fit many charities. Unlike Salesforce/Dynamics, they (primarily) sell direct to end-user organisations.
  • SugarCRM: Sugar has an open-source and a paid-for commercial offering and has had some adoption with charities and the public sector, partly due to its cost structure but partly because it is a decent system with an especially good interface. It can be hosted or run on-premise and is sold and implemented through a partner network. It has perhaps not made inroads into the sector quite as much as the other systems.
  • NetSuite: A large, CRM vendor in the US, they have created NetSuite.org which is the corporate citizenship arm of NetSuite. They offer product donations, pro bono programs and social solutions to charities and NFPs. Not yet as well adopted in the UK compared to North America.
  • Siebel and Oracle: For the largest charities…
  • And a few others which I know some charities have used:
    • Zoho: Free and paid-for versions of their CRM and other online apps.
    • Sage CRM (what was ACT! years ago) has a Windows and a SAAS solution. 
    • Highrise CRM: SAAS software from the people who brought you Basecamp (although more oriented to contact management and maybe service delivery than fundraising).
As I said above, there are of course many other CRM solutions including a number which appear on Gartner's Magic Quadrant which do well in the commercial sector but which (to my knowledge) don't have any charity implementations. It will be interesting to see if any such systems start to also move into the sector and if any of those in the above list can challenge Salesforce and Microsoft CRM with leading sector offerings.

Monday, August 11, 2014

Why CRM Systems Are Like Icebergs for Charities

Antarctic Iceberg 

There is no doubt that the adoption of the generic CRM systems like Salesforce and Dynamics is increasing amongst charities and NFPs. But in comparison to the commercial sector we are still learning about the use of them. And in comparison to traditional fundraising databases (Raiser's Edge, thankQ et al) we still know less about them. Consequently, although there are definite benefits which the CRM systems bring, there may still be issues which we don't yet know about.

Bring on the iceberg...

My iceberg theory…
The fundraising database packages have of course been around for many years. Many organisations have implemented them, many people have implemented them at multiple charities and of course the suppliers have huge experience of them. And they have a more defined scope.

So we know many of the potential risks and issues with such systems (as well as the benefits of course) and when we start an implementation we can attempt to plan for and mitigate such risks. And even though there will inevitably be new risks/issues which occur during an implementation, I could have a good guess at some of the areas that some of those might occur within.

Whereas the opposite is true for the CRM systems - at least in the specific and critical area of fundraising. Because although there are of course existing charities who have implemented Salesforce, Dynamics et al for their fundraising needs, in comparison to the fundraising packages the number is still low. And those that have done may well have used different approaches to each other and very different configurations of such systems.

This is partly because of their newness, but also because of their flexibility, options, configurability and the breadth of functionality in the base platform. You (we) don't learn that overnight. And even as you do learn the system, so we have to apply that to get the best out of them for sophisticated and sometimes significant fundraising requirements.

And it isn't simply a matter of therefore finding an experienced CRM system supplier because they will also only have limited exposure to implementing their system for fundraising at charities and NFPs.

Hence the iceberg…

Because if it is true that 90% of an iceberg is underwater and thus we can't see it as we approach it, then the same could be said of CRM system implementations. In fact, it could be worse. Because at least we know that we can only see 10% of an iceberg above water, whereas actually we have no idea really as to how much of the "CRM iceberg" is submerged below water, waiting for us to hit it as we plough through the sea of implementation. I hope that in practise that we do know more than just 10% of what the potential risks/issues are, but I can't say for certain right now.

Whereas, with fundraising packages, one can almost turn that on its head (an inverse iceberg?) and say that we probably do know 90% of the potential risks/issues which could occur in a typical implementation of such systems.

So what can we do to plan the safe passage of the good ship CRM?

The good news is that although we may not know exactly what is coming to potentially scrape our bows as we sail past, we can have a good stab at knowing the sort of areas in which any issues might impact and thus even if we can't put a final mitigation plan in place for such risks, we can start now to consider how we should plan for them.

What do I mean by that? Well, let's take a complex income processing scenario. Maybe we know that our ideal requirements can be met by CRM system X only through customisation and coding. In which case, we can watch carefully as we start down that route, plan to take it slowly, test as we go along, re-test as we add further functionality, actually go-live with limited functionality and then build on that, and always have a back-out plan which might mean, say, that if we do find it is getting too complex/costly, then at least for the implementation we will decide to simplify the system itself and substitute the ideal functionality with off-line or manual processes instead.

Similarly, if we find that record volumes are causing a problem which we didn't know about for data migration, then we may decide to initially just migrate more recent data and then transfer older data more slowly over a period after we go-live. Or for gift aid claims, we could even have a third-party package ready to do some initial claims if we do hit a nasty bit of ice. And so on.

And overall we can follow good practise for any CRM implementation: get our requirements straight, make sure it is all documented for client and supplier, manage scope-creep, don't let shiny new whizzy stuff take you off down a path which you don't need to go down (at least not on day one), insist on good project management (internally and with the supplier), never forget your operational needs, look for true benefits and so on. Keep it all as simple as possible.

Reeling it back from the simile…

I realise that I am wandering off down the iceberg simile a bit too much, so let's reel it back to finish this post. What I am really trying to say is that we must not forget that some of the fundraising implementations already done on these CRM systems are still pioneers in their own way. We can do as thorough procurement processes as possible, we can learn as much as possible from commercial organisations who are more experienced in their usage and their business partners/suppliers, and we can learn some things from other charities who have already started to use these systems, but because of their sheer size and capabilities we must keep our eyes open and be ready if we hit a problem that we just hadn't thought of. Be ready for this as much as you can, and if that does happen then hopefully it will just be a slight scrape on our midship and we can avoid replicating the Titanic…

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Salesforce: Why does one person love it and the next hate it?

Why have I written this post?
A few years ago I wrote a blog post called The Raiser's Edge: Why Does One Person Love it and the Next Hate it? Importantly, it wasn't about The Raiser's Edge per se, but it reflected my opinions on all similar fundraising packages - but I used RE as the key example because of its popularity. So, as I decided it was about time to update that post, I also thought I should make it a bit more contemporary and apply my thoughts to the well-liked generic CRM systems - and therefore, this time, use one of the currently most popular and most discussed CRM systems as my headline: Salesforce. But as before - let me emphasise - the points below are not solely about Salesforce; they could be just as true for other, similar CRM systems used by charities today: Microsoft CRM Dynamics, SugarCRM, Workbooks, NetSuite and so on.

I've also written this post because one of the most commonly repeated LinkedIn Discussions/Questions is: What Cloud CRM System Should I Use for my Charity? And then the questioner gets lots of answers about individuals' experiences and beliefs (and even the odd salesperson saying how great their system is…). And I wanted to provide what I hope is a more rounded, independent answer.

As before, with my Raiser's Edge post, I am sure that plenty of people will agree/disagree with my points below - and that's fine! If you want to discuss them then please do so in the Comments.

So, let's get to it:

Why do I think that one person you talk to will love Salesforce (et al) and the next person will hate it?
  • Configuration and Flexibility: One of the most important things about these CRM systems is that they are so flexible, configurable, customisable and extendable, and as a result one implementation may be completely different from the next, even if they are both addressing the same core fundraising functional requirements. It is of course fantastic that this can be done, and if it is done well then anyone using that particular implementation may well love it. But if not, if it didn't deliver what was promised - or perceived to be promised - if it took too long, cost too much and it seemed like it was still not giving someone what they really wanted, then it is hardly surprising that such users will not like it. It's the double-edged sword of such flexibility.
  • The start of the project and then the on-going bit… Following on from the above, it is also quite feasible that the CRM system was implemented well in the first place, and the users liked using it at that point. But for any number of reasons thereafter (e.g. budget, lack of impetus, lack of resources, the wrong resources, lack of understanding of CRM systems), it may not have been maintained well at some sites, and thus its usage at such charities could have dwindled and the users became disillusioned. And this is because if the CRM system was developed for the charity as its needs were at that time, then it is quite feasible that those needs may change over time. The good charities, the good Salesforce users, know this. But that's not everyone.
  • Cost of Start-up and perceived TCO: Salesforce provides 10 free licenses for charities and heavily discounts others thereafter; Microsoft also gives charity discounts for Dynamics; SugarCRM has an open-source option. So it can appear to the less well informed user that the software is free or very cheap. And why wouldn't you think that if you didn't know! And yes, this is a great thing because you can then spend your budget on key things like development, training, consultancy, implementation, data cleaning and so on. Critical things. Unfortunately, although the licenses are free/cheap, the design, development, resources needed and maintenance are not - they cost money, and carry on costing money. And if a charity is not aware of that, or unprepared, or thinks the CRM will do all they need without any of the above, then what did seem a low cost option suddenly is not.
  • Ease of Start-up and Type of User: Salesforce in particular is very easy to start to use: sign-up to a free trial, then buy the licenses (or get them free) and Bob's your uncle (or rather, Marc). No hardware issues, no need to deal with your IT department, no need to talk to any pesky salespeople (!) And Microsoft also offer a similar SAAS option now. Again, all that offers great benefits - it's the Cloud at its best. But it also means that anyone - database-savvy and the non-savvy alike - can start to use Salesforce, regardless of their database or CRM knowledge, their understanding of what it can do, of what you have to do to run such systems well. You would never get that with a "traditional fundraising database" - which shows one of their downsides and conversely their benefits at the same time. But if anyone can start to use Salesforce et al so easily, then there are bound to be people who don't really get it and therefore ultimately won't like it.
  • Different types of usage: All these CRM systems are now extremely flexible and can be used for a multitude of applications: fundraising, membership, client management, grant management, help desks, HR needs, (even sales!!) and many more areas of need. It's a really great thing about the systems and shows just what you can do with them. But if charity X has used it for membership management and says how great their implementation is, then charity Y, who wants to use it for grant management may not realise that it might not be so applicable for them or that they need to address it differently. And that can also lead to disillusionment.
  • The Salesforce and Dynamics fundraising/membership 'templates': Just to add to the complication of some of the above, there are now a number of good and getting-better 'templates' which third-party companies have designed to manage fundraising and membership almost out-of-the-CRM-box. So, not only do you now have the CRM system with all its pros and cons, you have another layer to consider which also offer benefits and downsides. But some people will still think of it as Salesforce, Dynamics etc. On the plus side, if a charity is using template X, then it can at least say how good/bad that template is, and other charities can get some feel for it that way. On the downside, such templates are just starting points which many charities will adapt and enhance which again will lead to differences of implementation; and ironically, as the templates become more package-like, so you then get the potential issues arising which I listed in my original Raiser's Edge Why Does One Person post. Plus ca change…
  • Data, People, Processes (even hardware…): And of course, regardless of everything I have written so far, even if you have the best possible CRM system, it still doesn’t matter a hoot if your data is rubbish, your users not trained, your processes not defined, your project management and implementation managed badly… and so on. All the things I bang on about so often in my other blog posts. As such, charity X, who has a great system with great people managing it and who really understands CRM, will indeed have the potential to have a great CRM system. Unfortunately, even if you gave exactly the same system and configuration to charity Y, who doesn't get CRM, data management, the need for investment in training etc, then that system will soon be hated by its users. Oh, and if you do buy a CRM system which you can install on-premise/hosted, then the hardware still needs to be up to scratch. And yes, this is exactly the same for Traditional Fundraising Databases as well. But just because you buy a CRM system, that doesn't mean those issues disappear.
  • Marketing and the Buzz of the Cloud: Finally, there is also no doubt that some CRM systems are helped by excellent marketing and the belief by some people that the Cloud is the answer for all their needs. The Cloud may well be an answer for some of some people's needs, but it's not quite as simple as that. Personally, I believe that if a system can't provide what you need it to do operationally - say, direct debit management, gift aid, income processing etc - then it doesn't really matter if it's in the Cloud or not. There's no point buying something that isn't right for you even if it does have superb technology (which many of these CRM systems do!) But the CRM suppliers/partners have great marketing staff!
Interestingly, having just re-read all the above myself, it's clear that in some ways some of the above points could apply to The Raiser's Edge and similar systems as well, as some are indeed generic database pros/cons; i.e. different types of user, the start of a new system vs n months/years down the line, ignorance about costs and so on. But it's the specific attributes and differences and approach of the CRM systems that make all these points especially poignant for Salesforce and the like.

Monday, February 03, 2014

What is the best CRM Database for a Small distributed charity or a solo fundraiser?

centre of the storm 
A couple of questions I am regularly asked are: "I am looking for a CRM/fundraising package for a small charity with no central office. So, no server and we probably need something to work across Windows and Mac." And it must be simple to use... Similarly, "What is the best database for a solo fundraiser?" So, I thought I should try to answer these questions here. I will address the 'small distributed charity' first as much of that applies to solo fundraisers too, and then add a shorter, second post with additional details on databases for solo fundraisers.

First: Get your main IT infrastructure sorted out
This is important. Especially if you don't have a central office, and the route you take may partially influence your decisions on which is the best fundraising/CRM system for you. So, first of all, if you haven't done so already, make sure your email system, file access, website etc are all part of a solid strategic approach.

Second: Remember, it's still important to know your fundamental database requirements
This is the same for any database procurement and just because you are a smaller organisation doesn't mean you should completely ignore it. So do document what you want the system to do, even if it's just in a brief Word document. That will help you focus on what is most important to you and you can then weigh-up the system options later. And remember, whatever database you buy, the data you put in it, the business processes and training you put behind it, and the fundraising strategy it is supporting are all more important than the software itself. You can have the best database in the world but it won't help if your data is rubbish, you don't adapt your processes and so on.

You also need to bear in mind just how much time and effort you can or want to allocate to managing your CRM/fundraising database. Remember that all systems will require some initial work, regardless of what the salespeople say! You will have to consider the configuration, maybe data migration, how and where you are going to store your data, how external data files will be loaded, how training will be done, how you will maintain look-up tables to ensure good data consistency and so on. And even though you are a small charity, there could still be a number of people who might well want to access and use your database, especially if it is not just for fundraising. In which case do remember the need to have someone who is data/database savvy so that they can manage these issues.

All that said, I do realise that for many small organisations, your requirements will be similar and comparatively fundamental, so I will use that assumption in the rest of this post. Plus, I am restricting examples of systems to those which should be within the budget of a small charity.

Oh, And it Must Be Simple to Use...
This is possibly one of the most frequently used statements which small (and large!) charities use. So it is important to realise that CRM and fundraising databases are not as simple conceptually as Excel, Outlook etc. They will take time to learn, they will need some looking after and the likelihood is it will cost money to do all that. Sorry. There is no easy answer to that. Software is getting easier to use and more intuitive but at the end of the day some of that is still down to individual preferences and interpretation. Just don't under-estimate the work involved in getting going if you haven't used a CRM system before.

Two technological approaches: Hosting and SAAS
Fundamentally, you have 2 technology approaches which may influence which databases you consider, and which technology is right for you will partially depend on your IT infrastructure. 1

SAAS stands for Software-as-a-Service, where a supplier provides a database which you can access as simply as gmail etc, and from any browser without the need for any additional software. Most such solutions are only offered this way (with a few exceptions); i.e. not with an alternative "on premise" option.

Hosting is similar but one-step removed, where your database will be "hosted" on a remote server in a secure data centre somewhere (i.e. you still won't need a server in your own office to make this work). This is usually done for software which has not been written specifically to run directly through a browser and thus it still needs to be stored on a specific server somewhere. Thus for hosting, a supplier will most likely host the database on the supplier's own server and you access it remotely from your office/home. (Additionally, most such suppliers will also offer clients the option of letting you install their database on your charity's own server).

In theory, you could take any fundraising database and host it on your own server anywhere - but to do that, I would recommend that you need to have taken the IT infrastructure route which already supports that. i.e. you are already using a company to do this for some/all of your other files/software applications.


Examples
Examples of SAAS databases are Salesforce, Microsoft CRM Dynamics, Workbooks and companies offering 'templated' versions of these. Plus, fundraising systems such as eTapestry or DonorPerfect.

With hosting, you have a wider option of solutions. As I mentioned, you could look at almost any database, but some companies already offer Hosted solutions as part of their portfolio, mostly through third-party partners; e.g. CiviCRM, Advantage NFP, thankQ. (Remember these are products more applicable to small charities - there are many more options for larger organisations).

And if as a small charity you have more severe budgetary issues, then the following posts I have written before might also help you: What should you do if you really have zero budget for a new CRM or Fundraising database? and Why Free Software Doesn’t Mean Zero Cost.



1. More technology-savvy readers will no doubt realise I have greatly simplified these descriptions, so please forgive any gross over-simplifications! If you feel I have really misrepresented anything then please let me know by email or in the comments below - thanks.

Sunday, September 29, 2013

Salesforce and Microsoft Dynamics for Fundraising: Are We Nearly There Yet?

social crm dissertation wordle

It's been over 18 months since I last gave my 'state of the nation' view on the shape of the (now not-so) "new" CRM systems in terms of their applicability to fundraising technology needs, and a lot has happened since; so here's my latest opinions:

Who's using Salesforce and MS Dynamics for Fundraising?
It's noticeable that even in the last 6-12 months, there has been a shift in the mindset of some mid-large UK charities which, for the first time, is starting to pay dividends for the CRM suppliers. It's well known that Barnardo's are the first large UK charity to be implementing Salesforce for fundraising, Greenpeace International are now doing so too, another national UK charity is implementing Microsoft CRM Dynamics for their supporter relationship management system with another to start soon, and Leukaemia and Lymphoma Research have been using CiviCRM for a while (as have MSF outside the UK). And there are more in the pipeline for all these systems. Plus, of course, there are many more NFPs using these solutions for non-fundraising applications.

So why now for larger charities?
Although Salesforce, Dynamics et al have been adopted by charities for several years for non-fundraising solutions, and although smaller charities have been using the systems for their fundraising needs, why are we now seeing the mid-large charities start to take this route? There are probably a number of reasons:
  • There are naturally less such projects for the larger charities and those organisations that are/have been looking have taken until now to have made decisions - equally, such projects are not cheap, so there are of course fewer of them.
  • It has still taken until recently for the sector to truly believe, and to have it really shown to them, that these CRM systems can provide the fundraising functionality they need - for too long, suppliers had just been saying "yes, we can do it" without any real supporting evidence or suitable background to make the larger charities comfortable. They aren't all there for all areas of fundraising but there's been huge steps.
  • Inevitably, some charities have waited until someone else took the initial leap into this space, but with Barnardo's, Greenpeace and others now doing so, it makes it that much easier to see the benefits and possibilities.
  • It has taken some time for the resellers and business partners (implementers) - not the software suppliers themselves - to show their credibility in being able to sell and implement these systems for fundraising. Not in terms of technology but in terms of showing the charities that their in-house fundraising knowledge, and how technology can be used for fundraising, is good enough to support such implementations. That said, I think this is still a challenge.
  • The acceptance of the cloud is growing every day in the NFP sector, and there is less concern over security than there used to be. This has probably never been such an issue for IT staff at charities, but it did un-nerve trustees earlier in the cloud's evolution.
  • Amongst the "templated solutions", the functionality itself has improved.
  • The CRM software vendors and their partners are darned good at marketing!
  • And last but possibly not least, some charities have grown tired of waiting for some of the traditional fundraising database suppliers to provide viable, cost-effective new releases and versions which they need for their fundraising. And there are definitely a lower selection of viable options now from such suppliers than there were some years ago.
So are the CRM suppliers having it all their own way?
Certainly not. The traditional fundraising database suppliers for large/mid-size charities, companies such as Blackbaud, thankQ, ACS (ex-IRIS) etc, have also been selling their software, some with good volumes, and so although the CRM systems are denting their sales they still haven't overtaken them. At least not here in the UK. And on the lower end, AdvantageNFP Fundraiser, Harlequin, even KISSS still sell plenty of systems.

Similarly, it is not just Salesforce and Dynamics who are selling 'CRM' systems. CiviCRM, a "CRM" system created especially for NFPs, is definitely growing in popularity here in the UK and even more so worldwide (and I'm going to be dedicating a blog to CiviCRM in the weeks to come); Workbooks.com are becoming an interesting option having recently made several sales to the membership sector; and I hear occasional things about Zoho and vTiger, but not that much. Sadly, SugarCRM doesn't seem to have made the inroads into the sector which I thought it might do (unless anyone can tell me differently?).

What's Next?
So what does all this mean now to other charities who might be looking to replace their existing fundraising database? Is it really any different to a few years ago in terms of what they can get or expect from 'generic' CRM systems?

Well, yes and no.

Yes it is different in that they won't be trailblazing (so much) any more, and they can hear and learn about other charities' experiences. Yes, in that (some of) the resellers and partners implementing these systems are more fundraising savvy now and should offer better professional services. And yes in that the cloud (which many CRM suppliers are tied to) continues to grow in acceptance and popularity.

But No, in that, at the end of the day, it still comes down to what is right for each charity depending on their needs, and the technology is just one aspect of any such decision. As I have expounded many times, there is no point buying a cloud-based solution or a whizzy CRM database just because it is that if it can't deliver what you need to support your fundraising operations. And that hasn't changed. There are still good, solid options for fundraising packages and there are good, solid reasons for charities to buy those, as well as CRM solutions.

I'm going to be blogging a lot in the coming weeks about some of these considerations, and some of the lessons I've learned when helping charities procure and implement both CRM systems and traditional fundraising databases, and those lessons are equally as important - more so? - compared to the software you ultimately use.

Finally, one last thought for now: I think the number of viable, good fundraising database solution suppliers has shrunk in recent years, especially for larger charities, and one great benefit the CRM providers have done is given charities a whole new approach which they can at least consider - and that is definitely a good thing, whatever they end up actually buying.

Monday, September 23, 2013

Why now may be the wrong time to be investing in Fundraising Software for larger charities

Always the wrong Time (reloaded)

These are interesting times for large charities and their fundraising database needs. They are being stretched like never before in terms of delivering technological support to the fundraising teams and they are being asked to do things they didn't have to consider a few years ago - and being expected to deliver it.

But if that means that they - you - are considering replacing your existing fundraising database right now, then I would encourage you to think twice just at this moment.

Why? Well because the suppliers to this market are all in somewhat a state of flux. Take the 'traditional fundraising database' suppliers: Blackbaud are still selling The Raiser's Edge 7, which, although still provides solid functionality, is showing its age, and Blackbaud know they need to release some sort of replacement - or replacements - whether that is called RE8 or something else. But that's unlikely to happen quickly. Yes there is also Blackbaud CRM but that is probably still just for the largest users and still to really make in-roads into the UK market.

And two of their main competitors, thankQ and what was IRIS, have both relatively recently been acquired by other companies: thankQ by the Access Group, and IRIS by Advanced Computer Software (ACS). I think, in the long run, both acquisitions should be good news for their clients and prospective clients, but we are still in the early days of both takeovers, and they are still finding their feet in terms of business approach and in terms of their own next generation of software.

Which surely then means that the new (generic) CRM solutions should be the right thing to consider? Well maybe, but maybe not. They too are going through a few changes. Yes, they are growing their customer base (not quickly for fundraising applications, but steadily), but they both have their own challenges in terms of applying their technology and platforms to fundraising needs, and there is also the question of knowing which reseller or partner one should use if one does want to buy one of these systems.

Because there are a lot CRM partners out there. You could go for one of the big consulting firms, many of which have an arm specialising in, say, Salesforce and who have huge development skills and CRM backgrounds, but what is their experience of fundraising and working with charities? So think instead of a smaller, specialist partner, who knows, say, Dynamics and who also (says they) know fundraising. Could be good if you choose the right company but there are so many around and even those with some sort of track record in the sector still have minimal experience of implementing these CRM systems compared to the likes of Blackbaud, thankQ and ACS.

And we are all still learning about the CRM systems' true capabilities as of today - and what developments in CRM systems really means for us tomorrow as a large charity in terms of commitment, resources and budget.

So what do you do if you are a large, or even mid-size charity and you do need to replace your fundraising database now? Well, if you genuinely have a burning platform then you of course need to get moving. Or if there are other, genuine risks to the continued use of your existing system or you can positively show that your fundraising income is being hurt by using your current system (and I mean really show that - not just maybe, sort of just think that because it, say, can't "do social media"), then yes, again, you should start planning.

But if not, if you just think you might need to be moving soon, or you've heard that someone else has replaced their database with X or Y, then I would caution you to consider. I think that in another 12 to18 months, some of the above questions will be ironing themselves out. Blackbaud should hopefully be able to publicly give some timescales for their next steps, we will know more about the acquisitions of thankQ and ACS, and Salesforce and Dynamics should have more live sites up and running and actually doing their fundraising on their platforms.

Of course, in 12 to 18 months time, some other great unknown will raise its head and I'll be saying wait until… Nah, surely not.

Monday, November 05, 2012

Do Generic CRM systems make "Volunteer Developed" databases a viable option now?

Volunteer Corral Building 
Historically, I have never promoted volunteer developed fundraising databases (as much as I respect the time, effort and great intentions of such volunteers). i.e. taking MS Access, SQL Server et al and creating a fundraising system from scratch. But with the recent availability and flexibility of the generic CRM systems (MS CRM, Salesforce, CiviCRM et al), I am wondering if there is now a new 'volunteer developed' model which smaller charities can instigate.

My concerns historically about volunteer-developed databases are based on fundamental issues with such an approach. For example: volunteers may not understand fundraising or fundraisers' needs and thus not design systems in the most appropriate way; volunteers may not be around tomorrow to maintain, change and improve their databases; volunteers may not provide on-going support or training; the system will probably be a bespoke development and will therefore only provide what the charity wanted at that time; and the underlying database may need to be upgraded but without anyone to do it.

And equally important, such approaches are almost always re-inventing the wheel. Traditional fundraising packages have been available for 20+ years, and even if some are expensive, with fundraising packages such as KISS Software costing from only £100, why would you consider bespoke development for small charities' fundamental fundraising needs. Indeed, I know many NFPs who have started with volunteer-developed databases but have found such systems stopped being useful, even to the extent that they found they stopped using them any more in their organisation.

However, as per my introduction above, with the 'new' generic CRM systems, this may be something we can now review.

The reason for this is because of the cost structure of these systems and the central core of their data models. Cost-wise, the software prices of CRM systems such as these are very low indeed; e.g. CiviCRM is open-source, Salesforce offer NFPs 10 licenses for free, Microsoft offer heavily discounted pricing for charities. And thus the majority of the costs are in the database implementation. And if a volunteer can therefore configure such systems for a charity's needs (hence avoiding/reducing some costs) then some of my previous concerns about volunteer-developed systems may be negated completely or to a large degree. i.e.:
  • These CRM systems have a standard structure which means that fundamental contact management requirements are already there, and thus reporting and mailing functionality is taken care of.
  • These CRM suppliers will (for the foreseeable future) certainly be providing upgrades, bug fixes, improvements to central functionality/technology platforms and so on.
  • Even if the volunteer stops volunteering for your charity, the wide adoption of these CRM systems - within and outside the NFP sector - and their standard approach, should mean you can find someone else to help and support you. And there are many online discussion boards which can supplement such support too.
I should add that there are caveats to this approach: it is probably still best suited to small charities with low budgets; I would ideally want such volunteers to be "configuring" the systems as much as possible as opposed to "customisation" (i.e. no heavy coding - instead use the system's in-built tools and third-party apps as much as possible - "keep it as vanilla as possible"); and get them to document whatever they do for you.

And it still doesn't fully negate the need for them to understand your fundamental fundraising needs. Some of these systems will have some fundraising functionality but it won't be the same as buying a traditional fundraising database or even paying for one of the ever-increasing "fundraising templates" you can now get for these CRM systems.

And this approach is, still, to a degree re-inventing the wheel. But only to a degree. And certainly nothing like developing an Access or SQL Server database from scratch.

So, as much as I realise I may be setting myself up here, I think that now, for the first time for some time, for smaller charities with low budgets, using a volunteer for such database developments may again be a viable option.

Friday, August 10, 2012

The Impact of the New CRM Systems for Fundraising Database Solutions: Free eBook

Earlier this year, I wrote a short series of posts about the impact that the New CRM Systems are having on the Fundraising Database Market (i.e. Salesforce, Microsoft CRM Dynamics et al). I have now compiled those posts into a free, downloadable eBook which brings all the information into one easy-to-read document.

You can download a PDF copy from here.

The book covers:

  1. An overview on where we are now with such systems;
  2. What are the potential benefits of the systems;
  3. A guide to the different ways in which you can implement the systems;
  4. How do costs and implementation timescales compare with dedicated fundraising databases?
  5. What you should specifically consider if you are considering buying such a system.

Tuesday, May 01, 2012

Is There Any Need to Develop Bespoke Database Applications anymore?

bespoke
I was interested to see a recent article on ComputerWorld which detailed how the charity, Freedom from Torture has developed a bespoke case management system because they couldn't find an off-the-shelf system which was suitable for their needs.

Now, I of course have no knowledge of the charity's requirements, so it might well be the case that they did need to develop their own system and it sounds as though they have ended up with a good solution for their needs.

But what is interesting is that, for database applications such as this, the bespoke approach is becoming a rare occurrence these days, primarily because of the flexibility, adaptability and affordability of many "generic" CRM systems which are now available to charities and NFPs.

The rise of the CRM system
I have discussed before on this blog how systems such as Salesforce, Microsoft CRM Dynamics, SugarCRM, civiCRM and others are all great solutions which, although they have their roots in sales and contact management from years ago, have progressed way beyond that now and have been enthusiastically embraced by the nonprofit sector worldwide (and by other vertical sectors too) because they can be adapted to so many requirements which are essentially based around contact management - but of course can provide so much more around that, be it fundraising and income, membership, volunteer management, case management and so on.

This is the case for large NFPs such as Barnardo's and the Alzheimers Society, who are both implementing Salesforce for their 'cause related' database, and there are many, many small charities who are using all these systems for all sorts of applications and requirements. And just recently, I was talking with a senior manager of another large UK charity who are considering using one of the above CRM systems for their entire volunteer management because it will be so much easier to do than write one from scratch - and that will support part of their core work.

There are also many examples of companies who have developed 'templates' for various charity requirements on these CRM systems - and I know of at least two companies (HomelessLink and Vera Solutions) who have developed case management systems based on the Salesforce platform.

The Probable Decline of Bespoke Database Developments...
So whilst I appreciate that bespoke database solutions are not going to disappear overnight, and there may be good reasons and occasions when they could be right to use - and I am sure that there will still be thousands of Microsoft Access implementations in the sector for years to come - I would still almost always at least consider first if a charity could use a generic CRM system as the benefits are so great: speed of implementation, flexibility, third-party apps and tools, reporting, email integration are just a few which immediately spring to mind; plus, importantly, a better chance of future-proofing (and future enhancements) and, of course the bottom line, they can very well be more cost-effective.

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

What should you do if you really have zero budget for a new CRM or Fundraising database?

As much as I always promote having an appropriate budget for your fundraising or CRM database, and as much as I try to enforce the understanding that free software doesn’t mean zero cost, I also realise that sometimes, in particular for smaller charities of course, you just don’t have a budget for a new system. So what should you do then?

Below are the key things I believe you need to consider and act on in such circumstances. They won’t cost you anything except your time and attention. Although even with that said, I struggle to truly say the whole implementation will be free. There are always additional costs: you will still need PCs, an internet connection, probably hosting for your database, maybe additional software and so on – so you either need to have a great benefactor or be a great fundraiser/negotiator, otherwise you will still need to spend money on those things.

Do note that these tips are primarily aimed at organisations who really don’t and cannot expect to have an appropriate budget for their database – so if you are a charity of any reasonable size but you are struggling to acquire a budget for a new system then, even though the following may help you, my first piece of advice is to re-visit your business case and determine why it isn’t deemed to be so important at your organisation. There is no point – for any size organisation – in getting any system, free or paid-for, which is not right for you, even if it is the cheapest one, even if it is free.

1. Get the basics right before you start looking for a new system
Remember that any database software is an enabler to help your fundraising strategy. Ensure you know what your strategy is now and for the next few years in order that you will know which CRM system is appropriate for you and what you need from it. And remember too that the database software is only one aspect of any database implementation – don’t think that you can just install a database and that will solve all your answers! i.e. a database is only as good as the data in it (i.e. how you collect it, data consistency/accuracy etc), it will only be used as well as your staff are trained to use it and with appropriate processes, and you will still need fast enough hardware and, if appropriate, a fast enough internet connection.

2. Treat your process for getting your new system as a ‘formal procurement process’, even if you’re not spending any money on it
I would still advise you create a document showing your requirements, I would still advise you research and find out about possible suppliers and, if appropriate, people who can help you (see below), even try prototyping one or two of the systems (assuming they're free, c.f. below), create a plan, engage the rest of your organisation and so on. Don’t just start using the first free system you find just because it is free.

3. Ideally, use a well-used package or CRM system – not a bespoke development
One of the key problems which charities have suffered from over the years is when a (well meaning) volunteer or “someone’s friend” has created a bespoke database in Access/Filkemaker etc. The problem with this is that they may not be around forever, they won’t necessarily understand your needs and they are re-inventing the wheel.

I would therefore look at systems such as Salesforce (free for the first 10 users), Zoho, CiviCRM, SugarCRM. They will all need time and assistance with setting up (see below) but they are all good, established systems; and they all have good online communities to help you. This means that if you or any other key people in your organisation leave in the future, then someone else will be able to pick-up your implementation much more easily than if it was a bespoke development. And you will get support and future enhancements. They are also good systems so that if in the future you increase your needs (and budget) then you will be able to build on them potentially without needing to change system again.

4. Keep it simple
Complexity (and over-complexity) brings cost. If you are looking for a free system then I will generally assume you do not need sophistication. If you do require more advanced solutions then free may not be right for you. So keep it simple: it will be quicker to implement, easier to use, easier to support and change in the future and you will get better results. And that has to be your ultimate goal.

5. If you don’t understand databases, don’t set it up yourself
Whilst I normally don’t advocate the use of volunteers for any significant database implementation, if you have never used a database before or you don’t know best practises in this area or what they can really do for you, then find someone who does and get them to help you. You may have a database-savvy staff member in which case they may be able to help. Otherwise/additionally, there are a number of places you can find free support and assistance from professional IT staff, including IT4Communities, the Do-it Volunteering database or even the WCIT. Or for really small charities, maybe even approach your local college for students requiring work experience? And don’t forget your trustees for contacts and input!

6. Document everything – the configuration of your new system and your processes
During and after the implementation, if you get someone to document what they have done then anyone else following them will be able to make changes and support your databasse much more easily. If you get someone to create proper, written down processes for you, then you will be able to use the system more efficiently and your current and future new staff can be trained.

7. Commit to the project
I have come across too many organisations who have started to use a free database without really committing to it, and in no time it has become a white elephant (all be it a no/low-cost one). But that won’t help you, your charity, your fundraising or ultimately the cause you are trying to support. So don’t think that just because you are spending no money on it, it will all work beautifully, immediately, first time and without any of your time. You won’t be able to press one button and get the database to tell you who are your best donors, or send a targeted email campaign or find out who you should be speaking to next week if you don’t do the groundwork. Sorry! Commit - it's really worth it.



Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Possible suppliers of Generic CRM Systems for Charities and NFPs

Rodgers PaperToy Template 
This is the fifth post in my series on The Impact of Generic CRM Systems on the Fundraising Database Market.

To finish off this short series on the new, generic CRM systems, below is a list of possible suppliers and companies who you could approach for more information.

It only lists suppliers who have got systems and ‘templates’ specifically set-up for UK charities and the NFP sector. But I list on my website plenty more companies who can help you build a system from the vanilla versions and who have experience of working in the NFP sector. This list is at CRM Software For Charities.

Microsoft CRM Dynamics


Salesforce

If you know of any others then do let me know.


Convio and Blackbaud:  Having written this series of articles, I was then as surprised as most people to read the news that Blackbaud had bought Convio. It is too early to tell what this will mean to the UK market (and the US market too, of course) for fundraising and CRM database solutions and at the time of writing we don't know whether Convio UK will therefore be developing their Salesforce-based solutions any further for the UK market.

For now, my only advice is: watch this space!!

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Specific Things to consider when procuring a generic CRM System


This is the fourth post in my series on The Impact of Generic CRM Systems on the Fundraising Database Market.

There are of course many things to consider when purchasing any type of database, whether it is a dedicated fundraising package or one of the generic CRM systems. The list below provides points which are specifically relevant to the generic CRM systems. (That said, some of these points could certainly apply to any database but they are accentuated because of the type of solution which the generic CRM systems provide).

  • Cloud Technology: Because it is quite likely that you will be hosting a generic CRM system in the cloud, there are various pros and cons associated with that. Read my previous blog about the points you need to consider.
  • Functionality: by definition, because it is a more generic system (not fundraising-specific), you won’t necessarily have all the functionality you need/want and might/would expect from a dedicated fundraising package. Of course, because you would be buying into a platform and the potential scope, you therefore need to see past the vanilla version of the system. It is not WYSIWYG! I have detailed the pros and cons of some of this already but the two most important points are:
    • There will be some specific functionality which you will need to consider and which the vanilla versions won’t have. This is probably, mostly going to be income related, especially Gift Aid and Direct Debit processing and possibly other income issues such as Payroll Giving. But you might also want to consider the record structure for organisations and how that can or cannot be applied to corporate/trust fundraising. Membership might also be an issue? And maybe assure yourself that they can support you with all your Direct Marketing and segmentation needs if that is a significant aspect of your fundraising.
    • Don’t go for style over substance!
  • Demos: Following on from the above, you therefore need to manage the software suppliers’ presentations in a slightly different way to those from dedicated fundraising package suppliers. With generic CRM systems, it is as much about seeing how the company and software works, as it is seeing exactly what it will do, because it is quite viable that some functionality you require won’t be in the version you see at the demo. (Of course, with any system you need to always consider the supplier, but it is likely there will be more of a reliance with these CRM systems). Therefore, challenge the suppliers, make sure they do understand your needs, ask them what they have done before which is the same/similar, how they would approach your specific requirements.
    • If you are making a large investment, you may even want to ask the suppliers to prototype one or two aspects of the system. This will be possibly be more difficult if you are comparing a fundraising package with a CRM system, so you need to consider that and make sure you are being fair to everyone.
  • Evaluating The Suppliers' Fundraising Knowledge: As I’ve already said, it is even more important to be working with a company who understands fundraising, and who you are comfortable with and you can work with, as they may well have more need to be bespoking and configuring etc, whereas at least with a fundraising package you can see what you will/won’t get.
  • Intellectual Property: if you are buying a company’s template, or even if you are buying the vanilla version and getting a reseller to configure/bespoke it for you, then can you make your own bespoke changes to that? And if in later years you decide not to use their services, can you still continue to use their work/template?
  • On-going changes: For suppliers selling templated versions, how will any bespoke changes they make now fit in with future changes to their template version?
  • Development: what happens if you make changes to anything internally? How does that impact IP/support etc?
  • Cost: The project may well involve more Discovery/Feasibility Costs; remember, the heart of the Total Cost of Ownership won’t be in the software licenses but will be in the implementation. Refer to my previous post in this series on costs for more thoughts on this.
  • Risk Management: because of all the points I have detailed throughout this series of posts, you will need a different sort of risk management to a dedicated fundraising package.
One thing which will be interesting to see is how some of this will change over the forthcoming years as the systems, and templated versions in particular, mature over the years to come.

Of course, do not forget all the standard things you should do throughout any database procurement, from reviewing processes, gathering requirements and doing data audits through to proper cost comparisons, taking references and so on. (For lots more information on this, see my blog on the Top 50 Database Procurement Tips for Charities and Not-for-Profit Organisations  and the accompanying and more thorough eBook).


 

Friday, January 27, 2012

CRM systems vs Fundraising databases: How do costs compare?


There's nowt like standing on the Fence..:O)
This is the third post in my series on The Impact of Generic CRM Systems on the Fundraising Database Market.

In part one of this series, I discussed the potential benefits and issues of these systems. But I deliberately left out two of the most key questions: how long will it take to implement the systems? And how does cost compare to dedicated fundraising databases?

The reason I decided to address these points in a separate post is partly because they require more dedicated consideration but also because they are, understandably, two of the more contentious factors for suppliers from both sides of this fence. Suppliers of dedicated (“traditional”) fundraising databases will of course say one thing and the new generic CRM suppliers will say something else.

So this is my attempt at a fair appraisal of the two approaches. I have no doubt that people will want to agree or disagree – that’s fine, please do so constructively in the Comments below! – and I have no doubt that there will be genuine reasons as to why some of my arguments may be quite rightly challenged in some instances, but hopefully they will give charities and NFPs a better understanding of the sorts of things they need to consider.

And the bottom line, as with any database for any industry, is that there are so many variables in any CRM implementation that there is no one answer – in fact, if you were to ask me point blank, how much will it cost, then “it will depend” will be my most common answer. And it will depend - on everything from functionality required and breadth of data you want to store, to the size of your organisation and your in-house skills.

Bear in mind also that most my points below are mostly true for the “mid-size” NFP, which many charities will indeed fall into. For large charities, the implementation costs and time are going to be high regardless of whatever sort of solution you go for, and for small NFPs, there are amazingly low-cost fundraising packages or you may be able to implement a new CRM system quickly with very low implementation costs.

However, here goes nothing for giving you my views…

Cost
The reason it can be difficult to compare the cost of dedicated fundraising packages and the new CRM systems is because we have to remember the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for any procurement – i.e. it is not just the initial cost of the software which you must pay, but everything else: implementation, configuration, consultancy, training, data migration, third-party software, hardware/hosting, database/web integration, on-going support, even internal support needs. And much, much more. (I have published a document on Slideshare which looks at How to consider all costs in CRM procurement).

But the main difference in cost structures between the two types of system is that the dedicated fundraising package will (generally) have higher software license costs (i.e. cost per user) but because the fundraising functionality is already built-in, many implementations will not require much additional development or implementation work.

Whereas, with the new CRM systems, the basic software licenses of the CRM software itself can be extremely cheap (even free for open source systems such as SugarCRM or for 10 licenses from the Salesforce Foundation), although you also need to be aware of the on-going annual costs of not just the CRM system itself (i.e. Salesforce, MS CRM etc) but also of any third-party apps or 'templates' you use. Such costs can start to add up. However, the good thing about those is that you (usually) only need to buy a license for each app for just the number of user(s) who will be using them. e.g. Even if you have, say, 10 users overall on the database, if you have an email marketing app and only 2 people need to use it, then you may well only need to pay for a 2 user license for that app. (It's interesting to compare such annual costs with the annual support/maintenance costs of the 'dedicated' fundraising databases - depending on your requirements, they might not always be so wildy different...)

However, the main cost for these generic CRM systems will come in the implementation: and all the discovery work, spec documents, configuration/development and associated costs with all that. Even for the “templated” versions, they will either have a cost for the template and/or will still require additional work on top of them.

Unfortunately, it may be especially hard during a procurement to know the implementation costs of the generic CRM systems, because, whereas with dedicated fundraising packages, almost all suppliers will be able to give the “average size” charity a fixed cost or pretty-near estimate at an early(ish) stage, because CRM system by their definition will need more configuration, it may be more difficult for suppliers to give such accurate (or even ball-park) figures. They are more likely to need to do more work with your charity before they can provide such costs, and sometimes that discovery or feasibility work will be chargeable.

And for these reasons too, the 'explicit' cost of implementing a CRM system in particular, could be far lower if you don’t use a third-party supplier – all you have to do is buy the licenses and off you go. Of course, it isn’t quite as simple as that – there will be all sorts of other 'implicit' costs and different risks doing it in-house and someone in your organisation will still have to implement the system: design it, configure it, support it and so on. And there will of course therefore be an implicit cost in doing that.

Speed of Implementation
In theory, a fundraising package with all its pre-defined fundraising functionality, could be implemented quite quickly for the “average charity”. Of course, you will still need to consider business processes, have consultancy, do data migration, be trained and so on. But if you don’t need much changing from the standard system, then the time constraints can more often be your own internal resources as much as the supplier’s.

For generic CRM systems, it is extremely likely that you will need some configuration and bespoke work done on them, and as I’ve said already, even if you start with a templated version. And if you start with the vanilla version, then you will definitely need such time. Of course, again, some of this will be the same as per fundraising packages: the need for consultancy, reviewing business processes and so on. But the difference is likely to be that, after any initial consultancy on your requirements, even if you need standard fundraising functionality such as Gift Aid, then on a vanilla CRM system this will need to be configured or programmed by your supplier.

And thus we can see immediately that this will of course impact on costs…

All that said, for generic CRM systems, for simple fundraising requirements, where a supplier can provide a templated solution or integrate with appropriate third-party apps for that CRM system, it may well be that implementation timescales can be brought down. (In the same way that dedicated fundraising packages will have such functionality built-in…!)

Sitting on the Fence
I know that, to a degree, I am sitting on the fence in terms of giving you an answer to such a critical question. But as I said above, this is because there is no simple answer! And every procurement and implementation will be anything from slightly - to very - different. The point is, if you are going to buy a new system, then you need to understand and consider the different approaches and why it isn’t as simple as any supplier telling you that they can do it best because dot dot dot.

Do remember Total Cost of Ownership and do remember to compare like-with-like as much as you possibly can.