Many companies feel stuck with outdated CRM systems due to complexity, disruption and costs
- Leaders demand simpler CRMs with immediate ROI and support
- Companies feel trapped by the costs and complexity of CRM
- Successful CRM transitions lead to improved business efficiency
Despite the widespread adoption of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems, many organizations face dissatisfaction.
A recent report from Workbooks found that while 80% of sales and marketing professionals use a CRM, only 31% believe their current system adequately meets their needs.
This dissatisfaction, caused by the complexity, cost and disruption associated with CRM systems, has left many companies stuck in a cycle of underperformance, unsure whether a change is worth the risk.
Impact on business performance
For companies, the gap between satisfaction and dissatisfaction with CRM systems is more than just a frustration: it impacts crucial performance data. The report highlights that satisfied CRM users outperform their counterparts in key areas such as lead generation and pipeline management.
Users who are satisfied with their CRM system score 5.9 out of 10 in lead generation effectiveness, compared to 4.9 among dissatisfied users. Similarly, pipeline management is rated significantly higher among satisfied users, with a score of 7.6 versus 5.7 for those unhappy with their system.
These figures reveal the potential benefits of an effective CRM system, but also highlight the widespread inefficiencies that many organizations face.
Even when dissatisfaction is high, many companies feel trapped in their current CRM setup. The Workbooks report found that nearly two-thirds (62%) of sales and marketing leaders feel “stuck” with their existing systems, largely due to perceived challenges in switching.
The fear of workforce disruption (cited by 55% of respondents), the potential costs (45%) and the time investment required (36%) all contribute to the reluctance to change. This hesitation means that many organizations continue to rely on outdated or underperforming systems, despite the negative impact on their business performance.
The complexity of many CRM systems compounds this problem. According to 45% of respondents, CRM technology itself is a barrier, with systems that are overly complex and difficult to adopt, frustrating users and hindering the tool’s overall success.
The report highlights a growing demand among sales and marketing professionals for CRM systems that offer both robust functionality and simplicity. 77% of respondents say ease of use is a top priority when selecting a CRM, while 46% are looking for systems that deliver a return on investment from the start.
To switch to a new CRM system, there are now incentives such as better customer support and more flexible cost structures. However, 31% of respondents still mention the need for better service, while 23% continue to strive for lower costs. The findings suggest that current industry CRM offerings are not meeting these expectations, leading many to consider alternative solutions that better suit their daily needs.
The report outlines the key concerns around disruption, risk, cost and time, with disruption being the highest rated challenge with a score of 7.6 out of 10. Despite these concerns, successful CRM transitions lead to meaningful gains, especially when organizations prioritize good change management and invest in extensive training to ensure long-term adoption.
“Sales and marketing leaders have the unique challenge of fulfilling dual roles. This means it’s even more important that their tools work for them, rather than against them. But our research shows that when they find the right CRM approach, it can dramatically improve performance across their broad control area,” said Dan Roche, Chief Marketing Officer at Workbooks.
“One problem is that many sales and marketing leaders don’t have the empirical data to show that moving CRM isn’t more trouble than it’s worth. With this new research, the benefits of a different approach are now clear both quantitatively and qualitatively.”