NAME- PIYUSH SANDUJA
PGID – 61510241
COURSE – BBMK
Section - I
REPORT – Siebel System: Anatomy of a Sale, Part 1& 2
After looking into the positives and the negatives of Gregg Carman’s performance, I would rate Carman’s performance favorably. He tried to gain as much information as possible and also tried to play on Siebel System’ strengths rather than dwelling on Oracle’s negatives. Hence Carman maintained the Siebel values intact.
POSITIVES OF GREGG CARMON’S PERFORMANCE 1) Compliance with Siebel core values: Carman, during his 15mins conversation with the VPs of client services & marketing of Quick & Reilly, completely complied with the Siebel core values as described in the Table below.. Sr. No. | Siebel Core Values | 1 | Serving our customers is not simply a market opportunity. Carman approached the situation with great humility. He didn’t boast of Siebel systems despite having market leadership. | 2 | Our respect for our customers is highly visible in everything we do. | 3 | As a company, we will never place financial gains above ethics. Carman preferred not to comment on its competitor even when straightforwardly asked by Cathy Ridley. | 4 | We choose to be leaders, but we do so with great humility. | 5 | We do not look for problems, we propose solutions. Carman showed them the demo of their offerings and how Siebel will be able to help propose a solution. |

2) Assessing a project opportunity: By conversing with the two officials from Quick & Reilly, Carman was able to gauge - * The contextual contention of the company under the backdrop of a possibility of their merger with FleetBoston. * The lead management issues arising due to improper system application provided by the current company Bradley Partners.
And hence Carman could understand the company’s urging to install a new system. 3) Convincing the two for a Demo: Carman could convince the two as - * Carman was able to draw the two from Quick & Reilly to the demo that Siebel had put up in the exhibition hence he was able to prove the product superiority on a technical level. * Also he could prove to them the benefits of Siebel’ global ecosystem of partners and the process of detailing while developing and implementing the customized product.

4) Relationship Building: Carman was trying his best to build some rapport with the two employees from Quick & Reilly so as to convert a prospect into a sale and he was able to impress the two too as has been explained in Siebel System – Part 2 last paragraph.
Having said that, he could have pushed a little by showing the Gartner research but he did what he could in the given scenario.
NEGATIVES OF GREGG CARMAN’S PERFORMANCE 1) Why Carman did NOT show the Gartner Research – Carman could have actually showed the Gartner Research to the two from Quick & Reilly as the report was self explanatory and without even talking about the competitor directly, he would have been in a more comfortable situation as far as the prospect’s conversion is concerned.

2) No clear idea of project’s scope and budget – Carman couldn’t exactly gauge Quick & Reilly’s financial strength or the project’s requirement hence couldn’t exactly judge how COMPELLING the project was.
But, I can assume the necessity of showing the product/ service demo more than that of boasting on the research findings given the limited time that he had. Also, he had to maintain a rapport with the prospective clients in order they could rate him favorably as the two employees from Quick & Reilly would judge Siebel and its products and services by its employee’s behavior. Hence, he did the right thing.
Carman’s plan is to convert the prospective project opportunity at Quick & Reilly in to a sale as it will result in a revenue offering of ~$2.1 million. Hence, the project was of great importance. Knowing FleetBoston would acquire Quick & Reilly, two situations might arise in future: 1) FleetBoston favors the project. Hence, Carman will have no issues securing the project in that case. 2) FleetBoston would vote against the purchase of the system hence making Carman’s situation complex as FleetBoston is the largest financial service firm in the region and going against it might result in overall relation damage, thereby a potent threat.
Carman needs to prepare himself to come out of such potent threat by doing a parametric analysis of the situation keeping the value system and the sales process intact. Coming out with a mutually acceptable solution would be better idea. Hence, by researching a solution that is cost effective as well as solves the overall issue of lead management at both firms FleetBoston as well as Quick & Reilly, Siebel can offer a better & pragmatic system by looking into what both firms want and then coming to a decision.