|
|
I'm a solo lawyer, trying to use BCM to keep track of clients. BCM seems to
default to "accounts" as organizations; however, many of the clients that I
do business with are individuals, and I'm not sure how feasible it is, or
even if I should, set up individual clients as "accounts."
Looks like, if I do, there will be an "account" and a "contact" that are the
same person; or, I could just set the client up as a "contact," but then the
client doesn't appear in MS Office Accounting, which I'm also trying (mainly
because its free).
Any advice from the collective?
TIA---David Rowll
|
|
Hi David
From your description, it would seem that you can benefit the most out of
BCM and OA by setting your clients up for both as Accounts and Business
Contacts. By setting them up as Accounts, you can view them in OA and take
advantage of their accounting features, and by setting them up as Business
Contacts, you can take advantage of the detailed contact information provided
by BCM. A feature that BCM has is that it allows you to link a Business
Contact to an account, thus, by pulling up the Account you can view the
Business Contact and vice versa. This way, you can take advantage of all the
features provided to you!
Hope this helps.
Monica Tsang [MSFT]
"David Rowell" wrote:
[Quoted Text] > I'm a solo lawyer, trying to use BCM to keep track of clients. BCM seems to
> default to "accounts" as organizations; however, many of the clients that I
> do business with are individuals, and I'm not sure how feasible it is, or
> even if I should, set up individual clients as "accounts."
> Looks like, if I do, there will be an "account" and a "contact" that are the
> same person; or, I could just set the client up as a "contact," but then the
> client doesn't appear in MS Office Accounting, which I'm also trying (mainly
> because its free).
> Any advice from the collective?
> TIA---David Rowll
|
|
David,
I too have wrestled with the crazy-maker "one size must fit all" BCM design
reality. When creating so called "integration" with Office Accounting it
apparently never ocurred to any of the BCM tech gurus that there are numerous
real-world users such as you and I who do business with "customers" that are
individual people vs. only organizations!
Here is how I keep it all straight in my mind now for work around purposes:
The BCM Account Record can serve 2 distinct data tracking functions. 1)
Contact Management grouping-Marketing & Vendors Management. 2) Financial
Transaction grouping-Sales Management.
I'll give you an example from my own consulting business model that hopefully
will clarify. I sell my services directly to individuals (Business to Person)
and I target my Marketing Lead generation campaign efforts toward
organizations that are in a position to refer individual prospective clients
to me. I use the Account Record to relate to these referral organization
sources and I assign a category called "Referral" to each of these Accounts.
I do not directly sell to or do any financial transactions with these
referral accounts. I do focus heavily upon developing positive
"RELATIONSHIPS" with the individual Business Contacts linked to these
referral Account organizations because they are the life blood source of my
service business. These "Marketing-Referral" type Account Records serve to
more easily manage and massage the flow of prospective individual people that
they refer my way to eventually sell to.
Once I receive a referred individual sales prospect I create a Business
Contact record (quick capture) and I designate it as a LEAD until such time
that I complete an initial qualification of this Lead. Once this
introductory qualification occurs the Lead either is disqualified or it
evolves into the first stage of my business sales cycle as a newly created
Opportunity record and I then link this Lead Business Contact record to this
Opportunity record. I also include the individual's name in the Opportunity
name field for handy reference. If the Opportunity does not close into a
sales transaction it ends there with the final sales stage indicating this
status. If the Opportunity evolves and closes into a sale I then create an
Account Record for that individual and I link the Opportunity record to this
new Account Record so that all Opportunity Communication History "rolls up"
into the new Account record. To these types of Account Records I assign a
category called "Client" which is different from my separate Account Record
"Referral" category mentioned above. These "Client" type of Account records
are what I will then financially relate to the "Customer" records in Office
Accounting.
Instead of using categories in the above examples you could also just create
custom fields if you prefer so that these designations are more easily sorted
and shared by others in your office if your BCM db is networked. You can
also of course be more fancy and designate various modified types of
"Referral" and "Client" Accounts if needed.
By distinguishing between the Sales Function of an Account Record vs. the
Marketing Function of an Account Record I have found a better way to adapt
BCM to what I am doing. It is said that CRM is all about building
"RELATIONSHIPS" and although this is certainly true in the actual Sales Cycle
process with each Lead Prospect, it is even more vital within the upfront
Marketing function activities of one's business or else you never generate
any one to ever sell to in the first place.
I hope this brief description of my own workflow adaptation of BCM is helpful.
I would love to see MS publish a book with such specific varied examples to
model for individuals in different industries how to effectively tailor BCM
to work best for their particular needs. It can be rather confusing and non-
intuitive to sort through this on your own when you are a new user to this
application.
I also must give due credit and thanks to Lon Orenstein, President of
Pinpoint Tools, LLC for his helpful and clarifying input around these
marketing and sales relationship ideas. Lon regularly contributes to this
newsgroup and is a co-author of the recently released Outlook 2007 BCM for
Dummies. www.pinpointtools.com
Best wishes,
-THP
David Rowell wrote:
[Quoted Text] >I'm a solo lawyer, trying to use BCM to keep track of clients. BCM seems to
>default to "accounts" as organizations; however, many of the clients that I
>do business with are individuals, and I'm not sure how feasible it is, or
>even if I should, set up individual clients as "accounts."
>Looks like, if I do, there will be an "account" and a "contact" that are the
>same person; or, I could just set the client up as a "contact," but then the
>client doesn't appear in MS Office Accounting, which I'm also trying (mainly
>because its free).
>Any advice from the collective?
>TIA---David Rowll
--
Message posted via OfficeKB.com
http://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/outlook-bcm/200704/1
|
|
David,
Eureka! I just thought of an even more efficient way to more briefly
summarize my above post.
The Account Record does NOT have to be thought of and named strictly as a
Business Organization entity. It often CAN be but it does not HAVE to be.
An Account Record can either have an organization name as a convenient way to
group Business Contacts together for the purpose of easier contact management
OR as Monica outlines above, the Account record can be co-named and co-exist
complimentary to a linked Business Contact for the purpose of financial
Accounting.
Three cheers for greater brevity!
-THP
mrtimpeterson wrote:
[Quoted Text] >David,
>
>I too have wrestled with the crazy-maker "one size must fit all" BCM design
>reality. When creating so called "integration" with Office Accounting it
>apparently never ocurred to any of the BCM tech gurus that there are numerous
>real-world users such as you and I who do business with "customers" that are
>individual people vs. only organizations!
>
>Here is how I keep it all straight in my mind now for work around purposes:
>The BCM Account Record can serve 2 distinct data tracking functions. 1)
>Contact Management grouping-Marketing & Vendors Management. 2) Financial
>Transaction grouping-Sales Management.
>
>I'll give you an example from my own consulting business model that hopefully
>will clarify. I sell my services directly to individuals (Business to Person)
>and I target my Marketing Lead generation campaign efforts toward
>organizations that are in a position to refer individual prospective clients
>to me. I use the Account Record to relate to these referral organization
>sources and I assign a category called "Referral" to each of these Accounts.
>I do not directly sell to or do any financial transactions with these
>referral accounts. I do focus heavily upon developing positive
>"RELATIONSHIPS" with the individual Business Contacts linked to these
>referral Account organizations because they are the life blood source of my
>service business. These "Marketing-Referral" type Account Records serve to
>more easily manage and massage the flow of prospective individual people that
>they refer my way to eventually sell to.
>
>Once I receive a referred individual sales prospect I create a Business
>Contact record (quick capture) and I designate it as a LEAD until such time
>that I complete an initial qualification of this Lead. Once this
>introductory qualification occurs the Lead either is disqualified or it
>evolves into the first stage of my business sales cycle as a newly created
>Opportunity record and I then link this Lead Business Contact record to this
>Opportunity record. I also include the individual's name in the Opportunity
>name field for handy reference. If the Opportunity does not close into a
>sales transaction it ends there with the final sales stage indicating this
>status. If the Opportunity evolves and closes into a sale I then create an
>Account Record for that individual and I link the Opportunity record to this
>new Account Record so that all Opportunity Communication History "rolls up"
>into the new Account record. To these types of Account Records I assign a
>category called "Client" which is different from my separate Account Record
>"Referral" category mentioned above. These "Client" type of Account records
>are what I will then financially relate to the "Customer" records in Office
>Accounting.
>
>Instead of using categories in the above examples you could also just create
>custom fields if you prefer so that these designations are more easily sorted
>and shared by others in your office if your BCM db is networked. You can
>also of course be more fancy and designate various modified types of
>"Referral" and "Client" Accounts if needed.
>
>By distinguishing between the Sales Function of an Account Record vs. the
>Marketing Function of an Account Record I have found a better way to adapt
>BCM to what I am doing. It is said that CRM is all about building
>"RELATIONSHIPS" and although this is certainly true in the actual Sales Cycle
>process with each Lead Prospect, it is even more vital within the upfront
>Marketing function activities of one's business or else you never generate
>any one to ever sell to in the first place.
>
>I hope this brief description of my own workflow adaptation of BCM is helpful.
>I would love to see MS publish a book with such specific varied examples to
>model for individuals in different industries how to effectively tailor BCM
>to work best for their particular needs. It can be rather confusing and non-
>intuitive to sort through this on your own when you are a new user to this
>application.
>
>I also must give due credit and thanks to Lon Orenstein, President of
>Pinpoint Tools, LLC for his helpful and clarifying input around these
>marketing and sales relationship ideas. Lon regularly contributes to this
>newsgroup and is a co-author of the recently released Outlook 2007 BCM for
>Dummies. www.pinpointtools.com
>
>Best wishes,
>
>-THP
>
>
>
>>I'm a solo lawyer, trying to use BCM to keep track of clients. BCM seems to
>>default to "accounts" as organizations; however, many of the clients that I
>[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>>Any advice from the collective?
>>TIA---David Rowll
--
Message posted via OfficeKB.com
http://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/outlook-bcm/200704/1
|
|
Even more briefly:
Clarity with BCM entirely depends upon how you interpret in your mind and
relate to the meaning of the word "ACCOUNT."
-THP
mrtimpeterson wrote:
[Quoted Text] >David,
>
>Eureka! I just thought of an even more efficient way to more briefly
>summarize my above post.
>
>The Account Record does NOT have to be thought of and named strictly as a
>Business Organization entity. It often CAN be but it does not HAVE to be.
>An Account Record can either have an organization name as a convenient way to
>group Business Contacts together for the purpose of easier contact management
>OR as Monica outlines above, the Account record can be co-named and co-exist
>complimentary to a linked Business Contact for the purpose of financial
>Accounting.
>
>Three cheers for greater brevity!
>
>-THP
>
>>David,
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 79 lines]
>>>Any advice from the collective?
>>>TIA---David Rowll
--
Message posted via OfficeKB.com
http://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/outlook-bcm/200704/1
|
|
I guess I am not through with this thread yet!
I have found that reading other CRM related material has helped me to adapt
to BCM's strengths and weaknesses. I have read a lot about the more fully
feaured MS CRM Dynamics 3.0 application and more distinction is placed upon
the 3 main functions of CRM.
1) Marketing
2) Sales Automation
3) Customer Service / Accounting
Keeping clear in my mind over what it is that I am needing to do with my BCM
db records in relation to each of these main functions has been useful.
Best wishes,
-THP
mrtimpeterson wrote:
[Quoted Text] >Even more briefly:
>
>Clarity with BCM entirely depends upon how you interpret in your mind and
>relate to the meaning of the word "ACCOUNT."
>
>-THP
>
>>David,
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>>>>Any advice from the collective?
>>>>TIA---David Rowll
--
Message posted via OfficeKB.com
http://www.officekb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/outlook-bcm/200704/1
|
|
Wow, and thanks to all for the insight!
|
|
|