Group 8 (Section A)

B18011 Ankur Jaiswal || B18023 Harshit Malhotra || B18035 Pathikreet Banerjee

B18041 Ria Mittal || B18047 Shaunakraj Deshpande ||B18059 Vedika Murdia

Siebel Systems: Anatomy of a Sale [Pt 1 & 2]

Case Facts
Siebel systems is a software firm that specialises in automation of sales force and building
customisable exhaustive software for customer relationship management. Its focus on the core
values, focussing on the customer and treating them as more than business resulted in them
becoming the world leaders in the CRM software space with 50% market share.
The first part of the case revolves around the dilemma that Gregg Carman faces, as he has to
choose between accepting a deal with Quick and Reilly worth $2.1 million and agreeing to a
customer- FleetBoston’s wishes to stop the deal.
The second part of the case deals with the point of view of Quick and Reilly who are in urgent
need of a more sophisticated CRM management software to replace a heavily outdated system
which is costing them due to loss of customer acquisition opportunities. While the firm is
heavily impressed by the product quality of Siebel and the subtle selling approach of Carman,
they are cautious due to the presence of Schwab, a direct competitor, on the board of Siebel.
Analysis
Siebel was a company that was built on traditional values that it strictly adhered to, resulting in
high metrics of customer satisfaction (customer satisfaction levels as high as 98%). The firm
went beyond the norms of treating a customer and took special efforts to help the customer
deal with the problems that came under its gambit.
While the deal with Quick and Reilly would hugely benefit the firm due to the size of the
project, it was in direct conflict with the wishes of one of its customers, FleetBoston. To
evaluate if this is a deal that would benefit the firms in the long run, we find the pros and cons
of the deal.
For Siebel, the magnitude of the deal makes it immediately profitable, also strengthening its
partnership with its integration partners such as Accenture etc. However, Quick was not yet a
customer of Siebel, and it hence was not covered under the strict values system that governed
the firm. On the other hand, by directly going against a customer that was as important as
FleetBoston, such a business would directly contradict the firm’s values.
From Quick’s POV, the deal, while it would help them improve their CRM system immensely,
would also leave them a little unsure of the information they shared with a firm that had a rival
on its board of directors, thus restricting its ability to closely partner with the firm
Recommendation
 Considering the contradiction of values for Siebel, this sale should either be dropped, or
FleetBoston should be brought on board. For Quick, the deal is only beneficial if they
can be assured that the presence of Schwab on the board will not directly affect them.