SIEBEL SYSTEMS: ANATOMY OF A SALE What are the positives and negatives of Gregg Carman’s performance in gaining an entry into Quick & Reilly? In view of this, would you rate his performance favorably? Going forward what is most potent threat that could jeopardize Carman’s plan? Justify your answers using case facts. Siebel Systems was formed with the dual objective of being a high technology enabler focused entirely on customer satisfaction with enduring values. The company was part of the tipping point of IT being a back end function to a growth driver. It captured the most crucial aspect of this evolution, that of enabling a firm to reach out to its customers when and where the customers required service. By 2001 it had over 50% of the CRM market share, was touted to be the best in the industry in CRM solution and had global presence. It was going from strength to strength and the biggest factor contributing to this growth was its “ecosystem of partners” strategy coupled with its single minded focus on customer satisfaction. The research results were proof of how effective Siebel was in achieving its aims, garnering its customers return on the CRM investments in 9.6 months only along with a 20% increase in customer satisfaction levels, 19% increase in productivity levels & 16% increase in customer retention levels for its customer firms. In the case of Carman we need to first understand the relationship from the customers’ need. Quick & Reilly was clearly a firm in distress but with tremendous potential, given its enduring business proposition. It had reached a growth plateau due to its inability to scale up and was clearly in need for a CRM solution, the kind which Siebel was touted to be the best in the market. Carman’s style was very much in line with Siebel’s TAS framework. The first meeting between the two parties happened at a trade show. This clearly shows