| Status | |
| Owner | |
| Stakeholders |
Issue
Syensqo requires a CRM system as part of its sales lifecycle and uses salesforce.com to meet its current CRM needs.
The current Syensqo CRM architecture comprises of two productive instances of the salesforce.com platform (Core CRM and ICare), including equivalent multi-instance integrations with relevant backend systems (PRS, PF1, WP1) and point solutions (E.g., Dynasys, Gensuite, Qualtrics, Mappy etc.). Furthermore, the current CRM architecture is built on a heavily customized salesforce.com environment, featuring numerous bespoke and tightly coupled interfaces, primary reliant on WebMethods technology on both instances.
This architecture presents several challenges, including the following:
- Adapted processes exist in both ICare and Core CRM instances, with varying levels of maturity and user adoption.
- Customized solutions require ongoing management particularly in the areas of Quotation, Contract, and Pricing management.
- Intricate integrations with two backend systems, custom interfaces and WebMethods technology constraints are adding complexity.
- Collaboration among GBUs is hindered when dealing with transversal customers and processes, due to multiple instances.
- Strategic Key Customers/Dealers due to multiple channels of interaction.
- Extensive customizations requiring significant resources, including specialized tools and skilled expertise, to manage regressions with every release.
- Current bespoke developments hinder efforts towards aligning with a Simple and Standard approach.
Recommendation
A greenfield implementation of a unified CRM solution is recommended to address existing challenges by consolidating multiple instances, simplifying key processes, unifying pricing and quotation management, integrating complaint and quality inspection processes, and standardizing sample management through out-of-the-box functionality.
One single instance will enable day-to-day collaboration across GBUs on key accounts (transversal). SpP and Composite Materials share customers with GBUs currently on Core CRM. This aligns with the future state integration with One ERP implementation.
Additionally, a new integration layer, iPaaS, is necessary because integrations are crucial and inevitable. This new iPaaS layer could serve as a key enabler to simplify the architecture, reduce costs, and accelerate time-to-market for new requirements.
The new implementation should improve customer relationships by enabling real-time synchronization, eliminating custom logic and support imperative processes as well as reducing the total cost of ownership due to the re-implementation of the new CRM platform.
Background & Context
Syensqo's current customer relationship management (CRM) processes are supported by a complex architecture that involves multiple applications, including two Salesforce instances, integration to both On-Premise and Cloud applications, and various manual and automated system interfaces.
See below two links for existing landscape:
Core CRM interface provider.pdf
Core CRM interfaces consumer.pdf
Some of these non-functional issues are explained below:
Customization: The two CRM instances have undergone extensive customization to meet the demands of various Global Business Units (GBUs). However, this customization has led to complexity in managing existing functions and delayed the go-to-market of new functions, thereby defying the benefits of cloud applications.
Collaboration: GBU's have to devoted considerable time and resources to managing master and transactional processes, particularly for key customers who require cross-functional (transversal) support
Integration: With over 100 interfaces on both instances, the WebMethods architecture is becoming a bottleneck, impacting performance and scalability.
Maintenance Cost: Extensive customizations have driven up maintenance costs and the need for specialized resources and tools.
Assumptions
- The choice of technology for the new CRM platform will be addressed in a later phase.
- SAP S/4HANA will serve as the ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) application for managing and executing customer records, sales contracts, sales orders, logistics, warehousing, transportation, billing, and rebates. To ensure seamless business process execution and master data integrity, the recommended solution must integrate with S/4HANA.
- Orders generated globally from ecommerce solutions (Salesforce + SAP) represent only 4% of total orders for 2023.
- The technical benefits of One Platform stem from its greenfield approach. However, in case merge of the existing instances into one platform, minimal cost benefits are likely to be gained.
- A separate KDD will be created, focusing on pricing strategy, optimization, approval processes, and execution.
Constraints
- Gaining buy-in from stakeholders who may be attached to existing customizations and interfaces.
- Securing proper sponsorship and executive support to drive transformational change, ensure resource allocation, and champion the initiative across the organization.
Impacts
- Process streamlining will impact certain GBUs, requiring change management efforts to ensure a smooth transition.
- Reassess existing interfaces and only reinstate or reactivate necessary ones.
- Ongoing projects
- OneQuote rollout for Composites: scheduled for 2025
- Pricing module updates: expected by October 2024, to display List Price/Recommended Price instead of two separate prices.
Business Rules
No business rules identified in this phase to implement the recommended solution. Further assessments will be done in detailed design phase.
Options considered
Option A: Greenfield CRM implementation with single instance for all GBU's
A unified, cloud-based CRM platform to be implemented to streamline customer-facing processes across all Global Business Units (GBUs), replacing disparate systems. This approach offers several key advantages, including leveraging out-of-the-box features of the cloud solution, optimise existing custom enhancements, and use standard integration across applications with proven technologies.
Other advantages of this solution are: enhance the cross-GBU lead management process by providing real-time synchronization and automated lead assignment, implement a standardized pricing, quotation, and contract management process across GBUs, integrate the complaint management process by linking quality inspections, returns handling, and credit memos in ERP. It will also simplify the sample request management process and automate sample order processing in ERP.
Moreover, this option enables seamless M&A integration with minimal disruption, allowing for easy carve-outs or mergers without compromising the existing configuration. This provides a flexible and scalable solution for future business needs.
While this option poses some challenges, they can be effectively addressed through strategic change management and executive sponsorship, as detailed in the evaluation table.
Option B: Refine and streamline existing processes and integrations, retaining current two CRM instances.
Under this option, the two CRM instances will be retained. However, the existing non-standard processes and bespoke functions will be re-evaluated in collaboration with business stakeholders and replaced with standard, out-of-the-box approaches and functions.
The advantages of this approach are: reuse the existing architecture, standard processes implemented, and interfaces deployed. Training will have to be executed for the optimized and redesigned processes only.
The key challenge would be getting buy-in from stakeholders who may be attached to existing customizations and the existing integration architecture and interfaces will need to be redesigned and optimized to align with the future One ERP backend architecture and processes. The other challenges have been detailed in the evaluation table.
Option C: Merge the two existing instances of CRM into one.
Under this option, one of the two CRM instances will be merged into the other. The GBU's of the retained instance will have all the existing processes and interfaces, however the merged instance will have to adopt to the retained instance business processes. If Core CRM is retained, then Speciality Polymers and Composites will have to be reengineered to adapt to the processes of Core CRM and vice versa.
The advantages of this approach are: Only the GBU's in one of the instances will be impacted and the training will be executed only for the merged instance GBU's.
The key challenges would be on the daily activities and long freeze periods, due to the use of the same platform instead of a new instance in parallel, also if ICare is merged with Core, the impacted GBU's are SpP and Composites with no significant cost benefit.
Option D: Maintain existing CRM solution in the current state, retaining current two CRM instances.
Under this option, existing separate CRM instances will continue to exist, including custom implementations, bespoke functions, and integrations with all other applications.
The key advantages are, this option allows for the preservation of existing investments in CRM technology and customizations, avoiding the need for significant changes or rework. It enables the continued use of current systems and processes while also allowing for future enhancements and optimizations within each instance.
The key challenge is that GBUs operating independently poses a significant challenge, as it hinders the realization of benefits in cost reduction, faster time-to-market, and increased innovation. This approach clashes with the primary goals of a cloud solution implementation, which are simplification and standardization and also the existing instances need to be integrated with to be One ERP backend instance.
Evaluation
Option A - Greenfield CRM implementation with single instance for all GBU's | Option B - Refine and streamline existing processes and integrations, retaining current CRM instances | Option C - Merge the two existing instances into one. | Option D - Maintain Salesforce in its current state, retaining current CRM instances | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alignment with "Simplification principle" |
|
|
| |
| Alignment with "Standardisation principle" |
|  Maintaining two separate CRM instances restricts Syensqo from achieving true standardization, resulting in a lack of unified platform for CRM and customer service, inconsistency across the organization, and no single source of truth for customer data, ultimately hindering efficiency and effectiveness. | Retaining customizations and multiple instances means that standardization is not achieved, leading to inconsistent processes and data. | |
| Maintenance Cost |  A single CRM instance simplifies maintenance, reducing costs and minimizing the risk of integration and interface issues. | Maintenance costs will be higher than they would be with a single, unified CRM instance, due to the added complexity and duplicated efforts required to maintain multiple instances | Maintaining multiple CRM instances and customizations creates a complex environment that leads to duplicated efforts, resulting in costs increasing by 20-30% | |
| Upgrade & Release management | Release and upgrade management is significantly simplified with a single CRM instance, offering a single upgrade path, faster testing and deployment, reduced risk of version conflicts, and simpler rollback procedures, resulting in lower costs and resource requirements. | Multiple instances still presents challenges for release and upgrade management, including longer testing cycles and a higher risk of version conflicts, which may require more resources and budget to navigate. | Multiple instances present complex release and upgrade management, with multiple upgrade paths to manage, slower testing and deployment, higher risk of version conflicts, and more complicated rollback procedures, ultimately leading to higher costs and resource requirements. | |
| User Adoption and Experience | Significant change management effort as part of moving to a new simple and standardized CRM implementation. | While maintaining multiple instances requires careful management, it offers a tailored experience for each business unit. | Multiple CRM instances provide tailored experiences for each business unit, boosting user satisfaction and require little to no significant change management. | |
| Integration and Data Management | A single CRM instance simplifies integration and data management, providing a unified database, consistent data formatting, and reduced data duplication, resulting in improved data quality and integrity. | Although processes are being streamlined, it's essential to reassess existing interfaces to determine if they can be eliminated or optimized. If not, the benefits of integration and data management with multiple instances will be limited. | Multiple instances introduce complexity, with disparate databases, inconsistent data formatting, and increased risk of data duplication and inconsistencies, compromising data quality and integrity, and making integration with other systems and applications more challenging. | |
| Reporting and Analytics | A single CRM instance enables unified reporting and analytics, providing a comprehensive view of the organization with consistent metrics and KPIs, simplified data analysis, and improved insights across Lead to Cash processes. | Refining and streamlining existing processes and integrations will lead to improved reporting and analytics capabilities, without requiring significant changes to the existing CRM infrastructure. | Multiple instances lead to fragmented reporting in CRM and Qliksense, inconsistent metrics, complex data analysis, and limited insights, ultimately increasing reporting complexity and hindering informed decision-making. | |
| Collaboration | One single instance will enable day-to-day collaboration across GBUs on key accounts (transversal). SpP and Composite Materials share customers with GBUs currently on Core CRM. | Having two instances would lead to data fragmentation, hindering day-to-day collaboration across GBUs on key transversal accounts, and causing inefficiencies in managing shared customers between SpP, Composite Materials, and GBUs currently using Core CRM. | Having two instances would lead to data fragmentation, hindering day-to-day collaboration across GBUs on key transversal accounts, and causing inefficiencies in managing shared customers between SpP, Composite Materials, and GBUs currently using Core CRM. | |
| Data Migration | Complex, MDS, business involvement & effort | limited | No impact |