CRM Flunks the Usability Test

Origin: NewsFactor Network - E-Commerce Minute
Source: Erika Morphy - www.CRMDaily.com,
Date: June 20, 2002

Harley Manning, a Forrester research director, likens CRM's usability to Ford's Model T car.
"It took two people to start it, and it could easily flip because of the way the steering was designed then," Manning told CRMDaily.com. "Did that stop it from catching on? Heck, no. Everyone wanted one, but it took many product generations for it to be easy to use."

The CRM lifecycle at the same point right now, Manning said.

"It's usability -- or user interface -- is quite bad, frankly. This is true of almost all the applications on the market, including those by the large vendors." But, companies will keep on deploying the applications, because the CRM available today is better than the alternative, which is nothing, he added.

Vendors know their shoddy user interfaces are a major problem, Manning said. "But, only a handful are brave enough to take steps to address it. Everyone knows the early ones that jump on this issue will be plowing the ground with their faces."

Hard Times

Manning told of one company that spent US$4 million on a license from a well-known CRM vendor and then never used it. Once implementation began, it quickly became clear that it was too difficult for employees to operate.

"That is an extreme example, but not an unusual one," he said. He also tells, with obvious relish, of IT help desks receiving computers that have been run over by cars or set on fire.

"There are a lot of unhappy software users out there," he said.

Testing Ground

A recent report that Manning coauthored with Forrester analyst John Dalton lists some of the common problems with CRM interfaces: the use of familiar icons or controls, like check boxes, in unexpected or unexplained ways; the use of pick lists and data fields in unexpected ways; crippled application logic; disorienting content presentation; language not familiar to the user; inconsistent terminology; and font sizes and styles that are not legible.

Manning said the issues described in "Packaged Apps Fail the Usability Test" may sound like little things, but they quickly add up. "There are huge hidden costs associated with a poor user interface," he maintained.

For example, a contact center found its costs quickly escalating when it deployed a poorly designed CRM application. Using the software added about two minutes to each call, because agents had to plow through numerous windows and screens to access the information they needed, Manning said. Plus, the excessive number of screens caused the application to crash at least once a day.

Cleaning House

Manning does not expect to see any significant improvement in the next few years. "Usable apps are still very hard to build, especially during such rapid tech churn, as is the case now."

One problem is that software is often designed by multiple teams, which can lead to application inconsistencies.

Until vendors start delivering better software, Manning said, companies will "have to own this problem themselves. The vendors aren't going to solve it for you for some time."

End the Bleeding

However, companies can take steps to mitigate the problems and higher costs that inevitably accompany poorly designed user interfaces.

He suggests that they start by conducting a formal evaluation of the software already installed. "If it's a problem, can it be fixed by a simple makeover, or do you have to get into the code and reprogram everything? Or, do you have to replace it?"

If the software has to be replaced, it is better do it as quickly as possible, because it will bleed you, he said. Before a company issues an RFP (request for proposal), it should conduct an evaluation of the potential users.

"Figure out what people are actually doing with the software and what they will be doing. What tools do they need to do the job correctly?"

In some cases, a company may be able to request a usability, quality-of-service agreement, he said. "Companies get QOS agreements for all kinds of reasons. Why not usability?"