Sales Intelligence Solution and Sales Force Automation
Overview
The concept explores the two processes that utilise technologies, applications and practices for the collection and presentation of sales information and to track and automate sales processes.
Definition
Sales intelligence (SI) refers to technologies, applications and practices for the collection, integration, analysis, and presentation of information to help Sales keep up to date with clients and prospect data. One of the solutions, Sales Force Automation (SFA), involves utilising information technology to automatically track all the stages of the sales process (Pride and Ferrell, 2011) and transform repetitive tasks into automated processes (Agnihotri, 2010).
SFA has made the personal-selling process database driven. Salespeople now rely on marketing information systems to store and help them find knowledge about customers, markets and company products (O'Guinn et al., 2011).
Description
Sales Force Automation (SFA) incorporates communication technology, software applications and customer relationship management (CRM). Its basic functions are: (1) organising; (2) presenting; (3) reporting; (4) informing; (5) supporting; (6) processing transactions; and (7) communicating (Henson, 2008). Efficient SFA should include contact management, sales lead tracking system, sales forecasting system and product knowledge system. Some of the more complex systems may also include configurators (on-line product builders) and other elements that make it possible to access information via web or mobile applications (Rainer and Cegielski, 2010).
SFA is used by Sales and Marketing teams to manage market intelligence and to assist with functions related to taking orders, generating proposals or quotes, managing territories, managing partners, and maintaining contact data. Systems often include various levels of analytic and reporting capabilities with special solutions and other analytical database tools (Agnihotri 2010). SFA can also be used to document field activities, communicate with the home office, and retrieve sales history and other company literature (Wisner et al., 2009).
The improved communication and access to data made available via SFA can facilitate accurate and timely decisions, and increase sales productivity and customer service capabilities. Some find FSA particularly useful for non-selling activities, such as sales report preparation, sales forecasting, or customer information gathering. At the same time it has been found to be less useful for identifying customer needs, overcoming objections, and closing sales (Havaldar, 2010).
SFA is used by Sales and Marketing teams to manage market intelligence and to assist with functions related to taking orders, generating proposals or quotes, managing territories, managing partners, and maintaining contact data. Systems often include various levels of analytic and reporting capabilities with special solutions and other analytical database tools (Agnihotri 2010). SFA can also be used to document field activities, communicate with the home office, and retrieve sales history and other company literature (Wisner et al., 2009).
The improved communication and access to data made available via SFA can facilitate accurate and timely decisions, and increase sales productivity and customer service capabilities. Some find FSA particularly useful for non-selling activities, such as sales report preparation, sales forecasting, or customer information gathering. At the same time it has been found to be less useful for identifying customer needs, overcoming objections, and closing sales (Havaldar, 2010).
Business Evidence
Case Evidence
- In 1997 WearGuard Corp., a textile company, implemented a SFA system to be used by its 87 sales representatives in the business sales group. Although the increase in accounts from 65,000 to 80,000 could not be linked in full to the implementation of the new system, the business development manager reported that it led to increases in customer satisfaction and projected sales quotas by 12% (Girard, 1999).
- Group Health, a non-profit health insurance company which already had a CRM for its 100-member sales department, deployed a US$500,000 SFA system which took three months to implement. The results of the new system were very satisfactory (Patton, 2002).
- Technology consultancy Gartner's report on CRM trends showed that in 2011 Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) delivery of CRM applications represented 34% of worldwide CRM application spending. More than 50% of all SFA spending was on the SaaS platform (Columbus, 2012). Thus, when Telco COLT needed to transform its business in order to stay competitive it made a decision to implement a SaaS SFA software for the 1,400 users it had in 2008 (Chillingworth, 2009).
- Putnam Lovell Securities, a small US bank, decided to use a SaaS SFA instead of another type of system. The company paid US$65 per month for each of its 134 users and, as a result of implementation, saved US$200,000 per quarter (Patton, 2002).
Strengths
- SFA has been found to increase salesperson professionalism and responsiveness, customer interaction frequency, and customer relationship quality (Pride and Ferrell, 2011).
- SFA has the potential to streamline the selling process allowing less people do more, reduce costs, improve communication, reduce cycle times, and improve organisational access to information (Henson, 2008).
- Research shows that SFA adoption and usage has a direct impact on effort. This reduces the number of hours worked (Rapp et al., 2008).
- SFA allows for better time management, fewer lost appointments, and better information sharing with managers, other salesmen and administration personnel (Henson, 2008).
- Some software applications add new layers to the selling process by incorporating data for social networks (Pride and Ferrell, 2011).
Weaknesses
- Salespeople tend to see their customer accounts as proprietary and may not be willing to share information for fear of losing their leverage (Czinkota and Ronkainen, 2007).
- Although the system implementation is always viewed with high expectations, research suggests that six months after introduction there is a high rate of negative job-related perceptions from salespeople and even technology rejection. Some people also consider technology to be a threat to jobs (Czinkota and Ronkainen, 2007).
- Sometime SFA is only useful for the non-selling activities of the sales cycle (Havaldar, 2010).
Professional Tools
Videos
Sales Force Automation
Measuring Your Organizations Sales Intelligence: Getting More with Less
Business Application
Implementation Information
To successfully implement an SFA solution companies need to align its sale personnel with the SFA. The steps below suggest how this can be achieved:
Implementation Steps
- Understand the sales representative perspective.
- Ease the transition.
- Build the technology into the culture (and vice versa).
- Focus on value to the sales force before value to the firm.
- Make the training and usage of SFA mandatory.
Implementation Reference: Cotteleer et al. (2006)
Success Factors
- Success or failure of an SFA implementation has been related to the: (1) Degree of process change (incremental or disruptive); (2) Salespeople buy-in; and (3) Perception of technology enablement (high or low) (Keillor, 2007).
- Wherever possible, it is advisable to prototype prior to FSA solution implementation (Carlopio, 2003).
Measures
Further Reading
Online Resources
Print Resources
References
Agnihotri, R. (2010) Effective Sales Force Automation and Customer Relationship Management: A Focus on Selection and Implementation. Business Expert Press.
Carlopio, J. (2003) Changing Gears: The Strategic Implementation of Technology. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chillingworth, M. (2009) Managing COLT services. CIO UK, Sep 9th. [Onloine] Available at: (www.cio.co.uk/article/3200151/managing-colt-services/?pn=2) [Accessed 17 December 2012].
Columbus, L. (2012) What's Hot in CRM Applications (2012) Forbes.com, Apr 24th. [Online] Available at: (www.forbes.com/sites/louiscolumbus/2012/04/23/whats-hot-in-crm-applications-2012/) [Accessed on 17 December 2012].
Cotteleer, M., Lee, F. and Inderrieden, E. (2006) Selling the Sales Force on Automation. Harvard Business Review, July. [Online] Available at: (hbr.org/2006/07/selling-the-sales-force-on-automation/ar/1) [Accessed 17 December 2012].
Czinkota, M.R. and Ronkainen, I.A. (2007) International Marketing. Cengage Learning.
Girard, K. (1999) WearGuard's Sales-Force Automation System. CIO, 15 January.
Havaldar, K.K. (2010) Business Marketing: Text & Cases, 3E. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
Henson, L.E. (2008) Sales Force Automation Expectations, Practices and Outcomes in the Specialty Chemical Industry: A Survey Analysis. ProQuest.
Keillor, B.D. (2007) Marketing in the 21st Century. Greenwood Publishing Group.
O'Guinn, T.C., Allen, C.T. and Semenik, R.J. (2011) Promo. Cengage Learning.
Patton, S. (2002) Get the CRM you need at the price you want. CIO, 1 May.
Pride, W.M. and Ferrell, O.C. (2011) Marketing. Cengage Learning.
Rainer, R.K. and Cegielski, C.G. (2010) Introduction to Information Systems: Enabling and Transforming Business. John Wiley & Sons.
Rapp, A., Agnihotri, R. and Forbes, L.P. (2008) The Sales Force Technology-Performance Chain: The Role of Adaptative Selling and Effort. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 28(4), p. 335-350.
Wisner, J.D., Tan, K. and Leong, G.K. (2009) Principles of Supply Chain Management: A Balanced Approach. Cengage Learning.
Innovation Zone Content
There is currently no Innovation Zone specific content on Sales Intelligence Solution and Sales Force Automation
Innovation Zone Insights
Discuss how your organisation uses sales intelligence and any automated system to track sales opportunities. Identify 2 points for improvement