Putting All Of Your Eggs In One Basket
Scene:
A company is looking to upgrade its systems, and one of the executives suggests not consolidating all of the technical functionality into fewer, or even one, system. The room is filled with other executives from different departments.
It is amazing when you hear the ways that people come up with to resist change. When you hear of something for the first time, you wonder if it is an oddity, twice a peculiarity, but many times - you know you have a “situation.”
This is the story of such a situation. As mentioned, modern CRMs are not cheap; most people think they are expensive. This belief scares people away frequently and, unfortunately before they open their eyes to see the entire picture. This fear does not always manifest itself immediately, nor does not even represent the absolute truth, and is used as an easier-to-understand explanation of their true feelings.
Incident:
One of the executives raises concerns about putting all their eggs in one basket and suggests having more technologies, each with less functionality. Other executives nod in agreement and state similar concerns.
The argument is simple to understand, and an easily persuadable person can brush it off as an acceptable answer. “It is not intelligent for a company to place all its technical functionality within one system. As a wise mentor who's been through it all, I understand the appeal of having more technologies, each with less functionality. It may seem like a logical approach to spread out your technical dependencies and minimize the risk. However, upon closer inspection, it's essential to question the validity of this argument and consider the merits of having less technology, each with more capabilities.
Let's explore some counter-arguments you may encounter when advocating for consolidating your technical functionality within one system:
What if the technology (system) company goes belly up and we have no support?; This concern is reasonable and worth considering. However, it's essential to realize that no matter what vendor you choose, there is always a risk that they may go out of business. By consolidating your technical functionality within one system, you're not increasing the chances of this happening. Rather, you're simplifying your technical footprint and streamlining your operations. To mitigate this risk, you can conduct thorough due diligence on any vendor you're considering. Look at their track record, financial stability, and customer testimonials. Doing so can increase your chances of selecting a reliable and sustainable partner. Additionally, you can have contingency plans to ensure you have access to the necessary documentation, code, and data to transition to an alternative solution.
What if, after overhauling and upgrading all your vital systems, they jack-up the prices and hold you hostage?; While it's always possible that a vendor may manipulate the situation in their favor, it's essential to approach this concern with a proactive mindset. One advantage of consolidating all your technical needs under one roof is having more leverage in the vendor relationship. If there are issues or concerns with the service, you can renegotiate the terms or switch to a different vendor. More technologies with less functionality may make negotiations and the search for alternatives harder. Additionally, having a detailed and clear contract with the vendor can help protect your interests. The service-level agreements (SLAs) and expectations should be clearly stated so everyone understands their responsibilities.
What if you want to migrate to their competition in the future and they make it difficult to do so?; This is a legitimate concern that requires proper planning. However, by having less technology, each with more capabilities, you're simplifying the process of migrating to a different system. When selecting a vendor, it's crucial to assess their data migration capabilities and policies thoroughly. Ensure that they support industry-standard data formats and can facilitate smooth transitions between systems. Doing so can minimize the likelihood of being locked in or facing obstacles when you decide to move on.
Result:
The conversation becomes a debate, and no clear decision is reached. The company's IT team sees the potential benefits of consolidating all technical functionality into one system, but other executives are hesitant due to their concerns.
The result? Reporting processes that sucked your life out like a high-powered vacuum cleaner and decision-making slower than a confused sloth on a leisurely stroll. Do you see my point? This patchwork of “research” in the search for "protection"is fruitless and downright counterproductive.
Lessons Learned:
The fear of putting all your eggs in one basket is a common concern when consolidating technical functionality within one system. However, spreading out technical dependencies and minimizing risks by having more technologies, each with less functionality, can complicate and slow down operations. It can also make negotiations and search for alternatives more difficult.
A detailed and precise contract with the vendor can help protect your interests and ensure that service-level agreements (SLAs) and expectations are clearly stated so everyone understands their responsibilities. Diversifying technical investments and building interfaces and integrations that allow systems to communicate with each other and external solutions reduces dependency on a single vendor and provides a more flexible technological ecosystem.
I will make this somewhat philosophical but stay with me. People who don't want to put their eggs in one basket don't realize the obvious and sometimes painful introspective truth. The basket isn't the technology; the basket is the company itself. We all have one basket. The idea of multiple different technologies webbed together to provide a layer of protection is ludicrous. Here's the ugly truth: The more disparate technologies you try to cobble together, the deeper you're digging yourself into a bureaucratic swamp. You'll need more people, each with highly specialized training, to get the same job done. It's like trying to assemble a team of bearded dragons to change a lightbulb - they may fiercely protect their respective spots on the ceiling, but the bulb's still burnt out.
Oh, and troubleshooting? You'd better have a comfy chair and a strong drink because you're in for a long wait. With each additional system you tack on, the time spent wrestling with these digital gremlins multiplies exponentially. It's a losing battle; you'll be drowning in meaningless error codes before you know it. But here's the kicker - this chaotic mess of a tech stack doesn't even make your data safer. You'll be tearing through more points of potential failure than a bargain-bin document shredder - hardly the impenetrable fortress of data protection folks were so hyped about.
And let's talk about the nightmare that is data weaving. Somehow, you're supposed to stitch all these disparate threads of raw data together to make a quilt of actionable, straightforward information. But instead, it's like trying to tame a hydra with a single hand; the more you wrestle it, the more heads seem to sprout, each more terrible and devious than the last.
What Should Have Been Done Differently:
The executives should have looked at the benefits of consolidating technical functionality within one system and considered the potential risks. Instead of immediately rejecting the idea, they could have done thorough due diligence and looked at the vendor's track record, financial stability, and customer testimonials. This would have increased their chances of selecting a reliable and sustainable partner and mitigated risks associated with such a decision. Moreover, they could have ensured that the vendor supports industry-standard data formats and can facilitate smooth transitions between systems in case of migration in the future. The company could streamline its operations and optimize its strategy by simplifying its technological footprint. Focusing on practicality and common sense instead of trying to cobble together many subsystems can lead to more efficient and effective decision-making.
Consider This - These companies, these mighty fortresses of CRM technocracy - they’re not the big, bad wolves that some paint them out to be. Quite the contrary! They are your allies, your confidantes, your knights in shining armor. So, let’s debunk this shockingly short-sighted myth.
Are they forcing long and established customers to pay a higher fee? In what universe does that make any business sense? This isn’t a battle; it’s a symbiotic relationship. CRM companies ensure their survival by keeping you around and helping you succeed.
The logic behind this tall tale is so simplistic that it’s almost comical. It’s like someone looked at a problem, lost all their critical thinking skills, and thought, “Hey, let’s make CRM companies the scapegoat!” Neat package, easy to digest, but devoid of any semblance of intellectual rigor.
Sure, it’s got that delicious splash of conspiracy theories. It appeals to the not-so-deep-thinkers desperate for anything to gripe about. It’s the perfect cocktail to guzzle down without overthinking about it. But, we are not here for weak sauce whining. We are here for truth, reason, and practicality.
So, here’s some advice: don’t waste your breath arguing over this. If someone pulls this argument on you, bet your bottom dollar a Trojan horse is hiding amidst their words. There is another issue they’re trying to deflect, another pyre they’re trying to fan into flame.
Find that issue. Identify it, pull it out, and interrogate it like a spy caught red-handed. Was their grandmother scared by a CRM executive when they were a toddler? Are they scared silly of new technology? Have they gotten too cozy with the older, soon-to-be redundant systems? Or, heaven forbid, are they technophobes in disguise, barking at the moon and mumbling about ‘the good old days’?
Time and again, I say this: find the real problem. It might be hiding, skulking under layers of excuses – but trust me, it’s there. A phobia of being held hostage by CRM providers is nothing more than a smokescreen. Please don’t fall for it! Peel away the layers, delve deeper, and demand answers. Only then will you liberate yourself from the perpetual fear of CRM bigwigs and embrace technology in all its liberating, empowering glory.
I urge you to cast off the chains of fear and embrace the wisdom that experience has bestowed upon me. Learn from those who have walked this path before you, keep a keen eye on the road ahead, and you’ll soon grasp the true crux of the CRM debate.
An educated choice rooted in facts and understanding, not whims or frightening campfire stories, paves the way for strategic growth. So, buckle up, gird your loins, and stride into the brave new world of CRM with enlightened courage. Past the myths and misconceptions, your success story awaits writing. Let’s not keep it waiting.
