4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 19, 2016
The experience was an overall good one. For the most part we have been able to deliver on much of the expectations. We did experience some issues at the start where we overestimated our 3rd party vendor's ability to integrate well between CRM and other applications. Also, they had experience with older versions which we thought, incorrectly, would translate seamlessly to this version. Hence the project moved much more slowly than we had anticipated, and we are finding that there are portions that need to be re-done. Having said that, we are finding that by using Dynamics CRM as a base platform driving customer engagement experiences, we have been able to work with multiple 3rd party vendors in building out solutions for various use cases. Key to the endeavour though is a sound, comprehensive initial design. We've also found that vendors who are focused on CRM as a development platform work best, as opposed to general purpose developers for whom this is one of many platforms with which they integrate and who are therefore not always able to fully leverage existing functionalities. We were also able to take advantage of other applications already written to address some of our use cases on this platform. This is one of the reasons that we went on-premises as we found that we had difficulty implementing some add-ons in the cloud (though our vendords had said it should be possible) without unacceptable limitations. The other driver for on premises was cost. All in all, a good implementation on which we seek to build.
Use the trial versions of the product beforehand. Become somewhat acquainted with its capabilities so that you are able to play a greater role in determing the solution architecture. The solution is very flexible, so unless there is some really driving need do not allow vendors to 'persuade' you to purchase a bunch of 3rd party products, which you will still have to customize to get them to work together! Ensure that the add-ons add REAL value, and not just commission for the develoepr, or covers up a weakness that they have.
It's flexibility. It really can be seen as a development platform. There is a lot of functionality that comes out of the box and can make the tool very useful immediately, but the ability to extend through its API is pretty amazing.
It's flexibility can also be a disadvantage - you have numerous ways to mess up. The licensing approach, as with many Microsoft products is too complex, and the cost remains too high.
Focus on my needs and solution rather than selling licenses.
1. More in-depth review of our implementation partners. 2. Greater participation in the actual technical design of the solution. 3. Reduce the spread of involved users, but for those you involve bring them on early. We brought on too many people during an initial testing phase - without adequately (benefit of hindsight) sharing the vision. 4. Consolidated design phase and then handle the individual development projects or use cases as possible separate implementations.
We have not had a great need to go back to Microsoft for service and support, as we have doen this primarily through our 3rd party vendors.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 6, 2016
Integration with the overall Microsoft suite makes user adoption easier.
As with all CRM implementations, business sponsorship is key. IT cannot roll this out, the business units must with IT assistance for it to be successful. This is the same irrespective of the vendor that you choose.
Ease of integration, feature rich future roadmap
Longer release cycle
Ensure we had fully mapped out the challenges of connecting to the Cloud platform in an environment where Office 365 has not been implemented. Our firewall architecture meant that it was not a trivial exercise to allow end users access the Dynamics cloud
There has not been a signifigant requirement to utilise support, where it has been used it has been satisifctory