The Users-Reps’ Technology Frames

The role of User-Reps included the sales team leaders, sales reps, and customer care reps. Each of these users were members of the sales force.

7.1.5.1 Nature of Technology

Technology capabilities and functions. Sales reps believed technologies, including laptop computers and BlackBerrys or smartphones, had necessary functionality to provide up-to-date information and increase sales rep mobility

“Having some type of device where you can look at this information and locate it through a hand held device would definitely be beneficial.” [10:2]

“I think more information as far as the emails, Do Not Calls, territory list in a more accessible manner, handheld, laptop. … To have that information available to you to make the job a little bit easier.” [15:54]

“The information they would need to retrieve through a hand held device is information that they would need during an appointment.” [10:4]

Sales reps spent all day in the field visiting as many prospects as possible. Thus, these reps believed the technology should have mapping capabilities

“If there’s some kind of like grid or like just a map of each zip code and they could like highlight it with their mouse and then boom, it would create a list of what you highlighted of which prospects are in that chunk and if it’s at least 50, boom, you’re golden.” [5:41]

A sales rep suggested the technology should also have built-in capabilities for real-time sales reporting “Normally I have about two appointments a day. Let’s say I’m hitting 30-35

doors every day and if I can see how many doors it takes for me, cold calls to appointment ratio and then maybe appointment to sales ratio so I know every 100 doors that I hit, there’s going to be a deal.” [26:43]

In summary, the User-Reps focused on technology capabilities and functions they could use in the field. Specifically, the User-Reps understood technology would benefit them. They spoke of the features and capabilities of the technology, e.g. “mobility” and “mapping capabilities,” see Table 7.5.

7.1.5.2 Technology Strategy

Projected value of technology. User-Reps believed the technology’s mobile solution made smarter sales force

“A laptop would be huge. You know, the big thing about having a laptop, you can [view] your POINT territory book [which] has the decision makers name.

Chapter 7 Analysis of TFRs: A Static View

106

But if you had a laptop or a mobile device out in the field that had internet service, you could conceivably look up every president, CEO or owner before you walked through that door and you could learn a little bit more.” [11:6]

The customer service reps believed the technology would enhance customer service management “Siebel’s CRM tool is phenomenal and if you can actually get into there and massage everything and pull it out, it would be very useful.” [20:3]

In summary, while User-Reps spoke only sparingly regarding technology strategy, they perceived the new SFA would make them more effective. The User-Reps expressed a belief that a “mobile solution makes the sales force smarter” and would “enhance customer service management,” in relation to the projected value of technology, see Table 7.5.

7.1.5.3 Technology in Use

Use of Technology. The sales reps were required to manage their sales activity using VoiceTech’s sales operations technologies. For example, some sales reps used technologies like MapQuest for territory mapping, Dunn and Bradstreet for prospect information, and online databases for reporting purposes. Each of these technologies helped sales reps complete their daily activities

“In the morning I’ll print out paperwork for my appointments.” [15:37]

“Headcount, we do have to enter that information in the appointment directory every Friday, then we have to get the number of headcount, the number of total heads we have and then effective heads.” [23:6]

“Oh, the on-line report should take 30 seconds. You put in how many cold calls you made, how many appointments you set, how many telemarketing calls you made and how many deals you sold. Just four numbers.” [23:24]

“[Managers] need a tool to track what’s going on and I think it’s a pretty good tool for tracking, you know, our activity.” [26:3]

Sales reps were also expected each day to enter all sales appointments into the SFA. This information became data used to generate various sales management reports. Thus, User-Reps primarily used the SFA for appointment management

“[In] POINT you have a list of … your appointments. I had a first appointment with ABC Company today … and the first appointment has a day and time on the calendar. I’ll come back and I’ll status that appointment on a drop down box as appointment completed, call back, or second appointment. If I do second appointment, it will have me enter in a pop-up calendar and enter in when the second appointment is and that appointment is considered statused because there is an outcome that you recorded and the second appointment was set.” [15:25] “At the end of every week and every month, I print out my appointment tracker and I can do it per rep and I can say, you know, so and so went on eight appointments for the entire month, that’s why, you know, they finished where they did finish and just-or didn’t do well.” [5:4]

Chapter 7 Analysis of TFRs: A Static View

107

“The online [system] goes into detail as far as how many cold calls they made, presentations, sit downs, how many referrals they got and how many phone calls they made and how many appointments they set. So that helps track everything and it helps the reps figure out their ratio.” [10:76]

Sales managers used technology to track and verify each sales rep’s orders were correctly entered and properly assigned. Thus, users understood technologies were available for order tracking

“I have to check orders in our order tracker and then in our Siebel database to make sure the rep’s name [is there and] make sure they are under me.” [5:21]

Unbeknownst to many sales reps, the SFA allowed VPN access from User-Reps’ home computers. Thus, only a handful of User-Reps used remote SFA access

“I have my VPN set up at home so I can get onto the network here.” [2:7]

Customer care reps dealt with customers after the sale was made. They used technology for maintaining customer contacts

“[Customers] will say can you send me some more information in writing and I’ll just shoot them an email attachment on it.” [24:21]

Customer care reps also referenced information in the SFA but principally used Siebel CRM and a VoiceTech knowledge base to facilitate customer relationship management

“We have the knowledge base and each week we have an out space tracker, so if we get a question … not in the knowledge base or we don’t actually have it in front of us, we just jot it down and they’ll get the information in the knowledge base. They’re always adding different things to that.” [24:34]

VoiceTech maintained sales rep handbooks, product manuals, competitor data, and sales forms within its intranet. This information was available to all reps and some affirmed the intranet supplements training

“We don’t go over the handbook together. We will sit and go over the intranet together. That’s one of the things that I kind of guide them through when they’re first hired and they come out of training.” [10:23]

“Information can be found on our sales intranet, so I would follow up with the reps if I feel like they aren’t using the information that’s provided to them. … That’s something that’s provided on the sales intranet that the reps have access.” [10:67]

“We get on the sales intranet on a daily basis … there’s a lot of things that are provided in the sales intranet that the reps don’t know … and don’t want to take the time to look at it.” [10:69]

Consequences from use of Technology. Only sales reps on the job for three or more months used POINT. Non-use by newer reps exacerbated problems with duplicate and conflicting data. These sales reps had to write sales contacts on sheets of paper as a result of junior sales reps not using the technology

Chapter 7 Analysis of TFRs: A Static View

108

Because junior reps did not use the SFA, User-Reps believed paper reports were used to manage reps “The paper [reports] go into more detail as far as where they’ve been. It’s easy

for someone just to put a number up there on the online [report].” [10:78]

“It helps us figure out how they’re managing their territory, helps us figure out … a lot of information that we look through that to make sure they’re getting the right information when they’re out cold calling.” [10:81]

The POINT SFA was consistently viewed as a frustration to sales reps. They were frustrated with not being able to get the information they needed, not being able to login to the SFA, and not having filtering capabilities on many reports. User-Reps believed these characteristics made the SFA not easily used or useful

“I would prefer [being able to go] into POINT to print it out and it would be nice and neat and typed.” [5:1]

“They’re going to write it on their calendar and then they have to turn around and go sit at a computer if there’s one available and if the database actually works and then they have to enter it in there.” [5:7]

“You’re dealing with like 2000 pages, so it’s real tedious and highly annoying.” [5:16]

“There needs to be less frustrating things like POINT.” [5:17]

“You’ll start a task and it will lock up and you don’t have time to log out and restart your computer, so you just don’t do it and then you forget to do it, so you’ve wasted 10 minutes.” [5:24]

Because User-Reps were in the field most every day without mobile access to the SFA, they only updated POINT when they had time and were in the office. The consequence was that information was not real time

“If I need to be out the door for an 11:00 o’clock [appointment], I’ll leave [sales data] on my desk and when I get back … I’ll put it in.” [2:1]

Another consequence of using the POINT SFA was it relied on a software and hardware platform that was outdated and not scalable to VoiceTech’s current growth trajectory. As a result, many of the interviewed User-Reps reported that the SFA was slow

“The system is very slow, it’s very antiquated. It looks like it runs on an old Dos system.” [2:2]

“It’s just a slow-running program. … There’s just a lot of times where you can’t log in.” [2:3]

“It’s very slow … and it’s just extremely annoying.” [5:89]

Sales reps were required to use one of a handful of computers in each office. These User-Reps acknowledged PC sharing caused frustration

Chapter 7 Analysis of TFRs: A Static View

109

“It is frustrating because there are not that many computers and then there’s a line to check your e-mail.” [9:20]

User-Reps admitted calls and visits to businesses on the do-not-call list were made because the SFA was not used to identify prospects or DNC’s

“We just kind of had to walk around and see what was going on and I mean I didn’t really use the territory book that much. -” [9:62]

“When somebody sends a branch email that says ‘Do Not Call this person,’ that sticks in my head more than me flipping through and saying I just spent five minutes scanning this list and I’m not supposed to call this person.” [15:35]

Because sales reps were in the field each day with no mobile access to the SFA, they created duplicate information in multiple systems

“I can’t just update something in the system or do emails as much because I’m in my car. … So I’ve made my own sheets and things like that to keep myself organized just for my sanity.” [5:9]

“The paper [report] is the biggest hang up for everybody because it’s so time consuming and so redundant.” [15:20]

Each office occasionally printed out territory books and made them available to sales reps so they could use them to verify information for future sales calls. In other cases, sales reps resorted to making sales calls from business cards other reps had collected. Thus, the system contained duplicate and conflicting data

“I know we have our territory books but they are so outdated, they’re not updated, half the businesses on there don’t exist anymore and they don’t have the new businesses. So I don’t know how old they are but they’re very uninformative.” [2:13]

“There’s just so many cards lying around the office, if you just pick a handful up, you might call [a business on the do-not-call list] and just not know it. … I’m certainly not going to remember when I get back [to the office], so I just throw it into my personal ‘do not call this person again’ [stack].” [2:16]

The User-Reps believed their territory books were inaccurate. The books, which provided information about all the businesses in a given territory, contained so many errors about those businesses that reps tended to not rely on them. They were a product of data entered into POINT. Thus, because of the problems with POINT and the errors in the territory books, users believed prospect data was unreliable

“We have a territory book that’s a product of POINT that has a list of … businesses in your territory and the decision maker’s name. But, the information is inaccurate a lot of the time and stuff changes. The database isn’t updated too often … so I don’t really rely on that information very much at all.” [11:4]

Because the SFA technology was limited, the User-Reps were required to use printed marketing materials and forms. There was no online form capability

Chapter 7 Analysis of TFRs: A Static View

110

“Our presentation kits along with the other collateral is in a book that’s about two inches thick and … when the reps are cold calling fifty doors a day, they don’t know if they should be carrying that information or not.” [10:166]

Sales reps believed pushing too much information to a PDA had negative consequences. They believed a PDA interface had to be simple. The PDA had limited screen space and mobile access to information was limited

“I think it would be faster just to text message … our project engineer, and say ‘Hey, does this work with this?’ And he could reply yes or no. Whereas … [providing] an index of everything we do … would just be way too difficult.” [2:18]

The POINT SFA was not designed with mobility features. Instead, it required reps to return from the field to the office each evening to enter sales activities into POINT. Reps believed they had better tools to use in the office than in the field because of this limited mobile functionality

“ They want us to be at the office [telemarketing] … but it’s not very efficient to sit there with your cell phone and try and make 200 calls. … So you come here, you have a computer with internet access. … You have better tools here to utilize than I would if I was in my car making calls.” [11:25]

Successful sales reps tended to be self-motivated and socially engaging. They wanted to be out in the field meeting and engaging potential customers face-to-face or on the phone instead of via email or text messages. In light of this desire to not use email and text messaging to engage customers, some User- Reps believed less socially engaging, and therefore less successful, reps, might rely on the technology to interact with customers. The successful reps believed a mobile SFA solution made the sales force less interactive with customers

“I know a lot of reps that use e-mail way more frequently than I do. I’m a phone person. I would rather be on the phone talking to someone than contacting via e- mail. It takes longer and … it’s less interaction.” [2:11]

The sales reps understood the SFA was used as arbiter for opportunity conflicts

“[With] POINT, one of the first intentions of it was to solve rep conflict.” [11:15] “It’s hard to go out there and find a deal to close and you come back into the office and then you have to battle it out with another rep inside the office.” [11:122]

The legacy SFA provided limited information about territory assignments for sales reps in the field. This lack of clarity in the system prompted some User-Reps to claim that territories were not well understood

“Territories have been the biggest problem for me and I’ve had this idea since POINT came out” [5:14]

“There needs to be an automated way to retrieve that data … right there.” [5:28] “There needs to be a map for that that I can highlight like region your mouse just kind of highlight an area and then, boom, all the prospects pop up.” [5:121]

Chapter 7 Analysis of TFRs: A Static View

111

In summary, the User-Reps use of technology was directly related to the information they were required to submit. Thus, the User-Reps perceived the SFA was used for tracking their activities, e.g. and “appointment management” and “order tracking.” However, the User-Reps perceive the SFA as being limited in providing benefits to them, e.g. “duplicate and conflicting information” and “SFA was slow,” see Table 7.5.

7.1.5.4 Technology Implementation

Organizational implementation process. User-Reps believed interfacing with the IT department for needed reports was a protracted process. A customer care rep understood anytime a new report or query was needed, he had to submit requests to an IT queue

“It’s not the quickest process. It’s not as if there is an interface where I can go in and say I need to see this, this and this. You actually need to go to the person that can write the query. Regardless of whether or not I can write a Siebel query, they have to do it. … They want to help, but there’s a queue and you sort of have to