- Jun 29, 2011
- 60
- 19
- First Name
- Dave
I was hoping to get everyones feedback on an issue we're having on deal credit between internet and the floor. I think we'll basically go with whatever everyone says here and I'll do my best to be neutral on the matter (though it probably won't happen).
Background: We've been using 2 different CRM's (I know this is screwed up, but this is temporary and the way it currently is). Currently ADP is used by the floor and Lead Manager by the internet department. The systems don't talk, but I have a request into support as this feature is available. Also, the two departments are in entirely different buildings with internet being (due to a lack of room) in a building that is across the street from the showroom. The internet building doesn't look like it belongs to the main dealership. Most all appointments, no matter how much you explain to them where you are located always park at the main showroom. We're a downtown dealership surrounded by one way streets, train lines, etc. so it's easy to see how people simply pull into where they know it's safe.
The problem: We've been having issues with deal credit between the floor and internet. The situation I've walked into is that unless the floor desk manager feels there is "sufficient back and forth" between the internet lead and the internet manager that no credit will be given to the internet manager for a sale made by the floor. Due to some recent deals a debate as opened up.
Other Points to Consider:
Points of Internet: When the internet department responds to leads is that there is a lot of team effort involved to make sure responses don't go un responded to. For example, if a lead responds to a message and the rep is off, on a test drive, at lunch etc. someone in the internet department always jumps in and says something like, " Hi, Phil is off today. We didn't want you to think we're ignoring your request. If you need the answer today we can get it for you, otherwise Phil will be back at 9AM and will very much get you all the answers." Lots of CRM's would let us respond as Phil or having a working mobile app, but this one doesn't so we are forced to respond this way to help each other out or risk losing the deal to another dealer all together. It's a collaborative coverage in situations like this and the internet never has issues on who this lead belongs to.
Points of Floor: The floor has no way to know they are working with an internet customer until either the customer says, "hey I've got something different from so and so" or when deal is all done, the internet rep comes in the next morning, notices the sale and says, "hey that's my lead!" This will change when the CRM's talk, but for now and historically if someone on the floor puts in 3 hours worth of work it doesn't seem fair that someone who just sent an email asking the lead to come in for a test drive should get credit if a sale as made and they didn't ask for them. Also, the floor doesn't believe that a phone pop falls under the same guideline as getting a name and number IS currently considered sufficient back and forth communication. P.S. the floor gets every single phone pop.
My view: Personally I'm in favor of engagement as a qualifier, but I think this engagement should go all around. If sending an email is not sufficient engagement because the customer didn't ask for the internet rep then a phone pop where a name and number is logged also isn't sufficient engagement because the lead went online to get answers they didn't feel satisfied with on the phone call. Another simple solution I'm also in favor of is that if some action is logged within a specific period of time then you are protected no matter what (respond to a lead, log a call, etc.). Either one seems fine to me, but to have a hybrid where the floor can simply get a name and number and the internet (with or without a phone number) leaves a message and/or sends and email but doesn't get an email or call back is not considered engagement doesn't seem right. Honestly, I'm good with either one. But what I'm not good with is that there is a set of rules that are simple for one department and another more subjective qualifier for another. Even though we are 2 different roofs, we should operate as one roof and team as much as possible.
What's everyone think?
Should the floor and internet reps be given credit based on engagement?
Should this engagement qualifier be different based on the department or lead type?
Background: We've been using 2 different CRM's (I know this is screwed up, but this is temporary and the way it currently is). Currently ADP is used by the floor and Lead Manager by the internet department. The systems don't talk, but I have a request into support as this feature is available. Also, the two departments are in entirely different buildings with internet being (due to a lack of room) in a building that is across the street from the showroom. The internet building doesn't look like it belongs to the main dealership. Most all appointments, no matter how much you explain to them where you are located always park at the main showroom. We're a downtown dealership surrounded by one way streets, train lines, etc. so it's easy to see how people simply pull into where they know it's safe.
The problem: We've been having issues with deal credit between the floor and internet. The situation I've walked into is that unless the floor desk manager feels there is "sufficient back and forth" between the internet lead and the internet manager that no credit will be given to the internet manager for a sale made by the floor. Due to some recent deals a debate as opened up.
Other Points to Consider:
Points of Internet: When the internet department responds to leads is that there is a lot of team effort involved to make sure responses don't go un responded to. For example, if a lead responds to a message and the rep is off, on a test drive, at lunch etc. someone in the internet department always jumps in and says something like, " Hi, Phil is off today. We didn't want you to think we're ignoring your request. If you need the answer today we can get it for you, otherwise Phil will be back at 9AM and will very much get you all the answers." Lots of CRM's would let us respond as Phil or having a working mobile app, but this one doesn't so we are forced to respond this way to help each other out or risk losing the deal to another dealer all together. It's a collaborative coverage in situations like this and the internet never has issues on who this lead belongs to.
Points of Floor: The floor has no way to know they are working with an internet customer until either the customer says, "hey I've got something different from so and so" or when deal is all done, the internet rep comes in the next morning, notices the sale and says, "hey that's my lead!" This will change when the CRM's talk, but for now and historically if someone on the floor puts in 3 hours worth of work it doesn't seem fair that someone who just sent an email asking the lead to come in for a test drive should get credit if a sale as made and they didn't ask for them. Also, the floor doesn't believe that a phone pop falls under the same guideline as getting a name and number IS currently considered sufficient back and forth communication. P.S. the floor gets every single phone pop.
My view: Personally I'm in favor of engagement as a qualifier, but I think this engagement should go all around. If sending an email is not sufficient engagement because the customer didn't ask for the internet rep then a phone pop where a name and number is logged also isn't sufficient engagement because the lead went online to get answers they didn't feel satisfied with on the phone call. Another simple solution I'm also in favor of is that if some action is logged within a specific period of time then you are protected no matter what (respond to a lead, log a call, etc.). Either one seems fine to me, but to have a hybrid where the floor can simply get a name and number and the internet (with or without a phone number) leaves a message and/or sends and email but doesn't get an email or call back is not considered engagement doesn't seem right. Honestly, I'm good with either one. But what I'm not good with is that there is a set of rules that are simple for one department and another more subjective qualifier for another. Even though we are 2 different roofs, we should operate as one roof and team as much as possible.
What's everyone think?
Should the floor and internet reps be given credit based on engagement?
Should this engagement qualifier be different based on the department or lead type?
