Siebel Systems: Anatomy of a Sale

Deepak Kumar Sood 34BM17

Evaluate Carman’s interactions with the customer up to this point. Is he doing a good job?
How effective is Siebel Systems’ approach?

Caravan tried to gather information from Cathy to get their requirement and also gave
demo of Siebel systems as to give broad ideas of what they are capable of doing.

Siebel Systems approach is effective to a large extend as it considers customers to be on the top
And focuses on delievring complete solution to them with customisation as required.

They not only concentrate on the sale of the software, however they work with the customer
In implementation and the use of the software and ensure that customer derives benefit out
of the system.

But Carman approach could have been better by leaning the pain points and issues that the
client is having and he might have tailored the demonstration to highlight the aspects that
addressed the specific pain points.
How should Carman establish the roles of Burt and Capodilupo in the transaction? How should
He decide who plays the more important role?

Though Carman must have got some idea on the roles by getting to know their designations, it is
Important for him to listen the points being raised by both. This will help him to get him know
about their agendas more clearly. For ex: if Ron has been asking more questions on the price
of the system, and if it has been deployed with some other client and how did that client got their
Approval it can lead Carman to establish that Ron could be the approver or important
person in the approver chain.

Also, he can go about doing some digging and getting the info from existng IT vendors of Q&R,
as to know the approval heirarchy and the roles being played in it by the Burt and Capodilupo
 At this point the account is Oracle’s to lose. It particularly does not want to lose to Siebel
Systems. How should Oracle act?

here are 3 factors which Oracle can use to leverage and bring the case in its favor:

Stressing on the fact that Quick and Reily is already using Oracle database and they are
familiar with the system and know its effectiveness. Rolling out a new system with a new
company can bring in lot of unwanted factors along.

Emphasizing on the fact that they can build a new product from the scratch just for
Quick and Reily with all necessary customisations as required and in fact Quick and Reily
need not to pay for its development cost.

It has been mentioned in the case that many executives in Quick and Reily have actually joined
from Oracle, it can actually use it to its advantage to lobby its case.
Where did Carman go wrong? How did he come to miss his numbers?

Carman went wrong in not knowing the fact that the client has not decided on the
system integration vendor yet. Just because the client has given his go ahead with the
product doesn’t mean that sales has happened, with his experience he should be aware
of the fact that till the time the system integrator is finalised, the clinet will actually stall
the final purchase.
Also, when getting to know about the aforementioned problem he never approached
any senior executive from his company, who could have taken up this issue with the top
management of Q&R.
How can Carman save the Quick & Reilly transaction without injuring the
FleetBoston relationship?

It’s difficult for Carman to actually solve the extra Scopus licenses issues at Fleetboston while
also be to sell the Siebel system to Q&R.

There are only 2 way around as I see it:

1. He can propose the discount for Siebel systems at the cost of extra licenses of Scopus.
2. He can integrate the 2 systems somehow and sell the extra scopus licenses for free to Q&R
as a complementary product.
What is your advice to Carman? Could he have anticipated the call from the FleetBoston
manager? At this stage, how important is the FleetBoston relationship to him? What do you
think of Siebel Systems’ approach to customer satisfaction? Is it a realistic one? Is it possible
that customers can take advantage of Siebel Systems because of its commitment to their
satisfaction?
Carman did right by first telling this issue to Ron, who made it clear that he wants only Scopus
System and then escalating the same issue to his own company. Yes, it is quite possible that
sooner or later this issue would have come up and Fleetboston could have inquired Carman.
This could have jeopardise his relation with Fleetboston.

Following points summarise Siebel system’s approach:

• It has a market-driven approach and delivers high customer value with complete solutions.
• They also giving customers a holistic implementation and productive solution.
• A good competitor analysis is used to tackle the competitor.
• Gathers information and better understands customer requirements to deliver a customized
product.

Yes, sometimes you get clients who can take advantage of your customer centric approach and
can play unfair but I think this approach is the main competitor advantage of Siebel and they
should continue with the same.
Thank You