Siebel Systems: Case Study Analysis

Group 4
 5C Analysis
COMPANY CUSTOMER COMPETITOR COLLABORATORS CONTEXT

 Founded in 1993 by  Oracle  Key integration

 Cisco  Companies were shifting
Tom Siebel  alliance partners
 Sun Aurum their focus from cost
 Two guiding goals of included Accenture,
 Clorox  Saratoga reduction to what
the company was Capgemini, Ernst & software could do for
building a high  Unisys  Bradley Systems Young, Delloitte revenue, customer loyalty,
technology company  Charles Schwab  Peoplesoft Consulting, IBM, customer retention, and
focused on customer  FleetBoston Pricewaterhouse even employee
satisfaction and build Coopers satisfaction
a company with  Key hardware and  The Internet was elevating
enduring value software partners- e-business applications to
 4 core values – Alcatel, AT&T the attention of a new
Customer satisfaction, Wireless. Avaya, level of decision maker,
professionalism, CISCO, Compaq, the chief executive
Professional Courtesy, Microsoft, Palm, Sun  CRM software that had
Bias for Action and Unisys exploded in recent years,
 Revenue of $2Bn and having grown nearly 400%
approximately 8000 from 1997 to 2000 and
employees by 2000 having been projected by
one research firm to grow
at nearly 32%
compounded annually
through 2005.
 Decision Problem
How can Carman save the Quick and Reilly transaction without injuring the FleetBoston
relationship?

Alternatives
Offer Ron a token discount and try to win the deal

Apply the legal limitation on FleetBoston on transferring seats to Quick and Reilly

Take the legal aspect as well as Internal push in Quick and Reilly and try to maintain good
relations with both
 Evaluation of Alternatives
Offer Ron a token discount and try to
win the deal
1. It will showcase that Siebel
System cared for them
2. Help to build a long lasting
relationship
Apply the legal limitation on Take the legal aspect as well as
FleetBoston on transferring seats to Internal push in Quick and Reilly and
Quick and Reilly try to maintain good relations with
both
1. Would ensure that
1. Loose $1mn worth of seats
FleetBoston doesn’t
2. Have a robust legal system
transfer its extra seats
3. Stay true to its core values
2. This will lead to
dissatisfaction to FleetBoston
 Recommendations
 Have a robust legal system, due diligence center and a defined SOP (Standard
operating procedure) to keep the lines of legitimacy clear.
 Carman Should stand to Seibel System’s ethics and let go of the seats worth 1mn$
 Maintain good relations with both to maintain the core value of customer
satisfaction

According to Woodburn framework to decide KAM strategy for customer

we see that Siebel had a high customer satisfaction rate, whereas Quick
and Reilly were lagging in terms of technological capability and was
acquired by FleetBoston.
Looking at these facts we can conclude that the partnership is categorized
under the first quadrant of Woodburn and McDonalds framework (Sellers
strength – high/ buyer – low growth potential)
The relationship strategy for an account under this quadrant compromises
of:
·       Maintaining good relations
·       Working out sensible objectives and strategies for the account
·       Employ retention strategies