CRM’s $1B Lesson: The Cost of Letting IT Run Sales
CRM didn't fail because the technology was flawed; it failed because the people in charge of implementing it were not the ones who relied on it to sell. In the late 1990s, Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems promised companies a “360-degree view” of the customer. IT and Marketing sponsored these projects with the goal of unifying data and improving reporting, but Sales, the group that actually had to use the systems, gained little. What sales teams experienced was more work and more oversight: endless data entry and tighter management controls with no clear value in return.
Cigna’s billion-dollar Siebel rollout made that disconnect impossible to ignore. The project was led by IT, while customer-facing teams absorbed the operational damage. The new system disrupted core processes, customer service collapsed, and the fallout erased hundreds of millions of dollars while driving away 800,000 members.
The turning point arrived when both technology and governance changed. Software-as-a-Service platforms such as Salesforce allowed business leaders to purchase and configure their own systems without waiting for IT approval. This shift in control—away from central IT and into the hands of Sales Operations—transformed CRM from a management reporting tool into an engine for sales productivity.
From Hype to Control: How It Unfolded
1999 to 2002: The “360-Degree Customer” Promise: After ERP modernized the back office, CRM became the next target for transformation. IT and Marketing sponsored large, on-premise deployments like Siebel, promoting a unified customer record that promised complete visibility for executives. The focus was data integration rather than sales performance.
2002 to 2005: The Cigna Breakdown: Cigna’s $1B CRM overhaul was managed by IT and focused on technical integration rather than business enablement. Within months of launch, customers could not access coverage information, call centers were overwhelmed, and losses exceeded $400 million. Gartner later reported that over half of CRM programs from this era failed to meet expectations. The lesson: integration without ownership produces expensive centralization and little value.
2004 to 2008: The Salesforce Bypass: SaaS changed who held the power. For the first time, a VP of Sales could purchase a fully functional CRM without waiting for IT approval or a budget cycle. Salesforce’s breakthrough was about control rather than the cloud itself. Sales Operations, embedded within the sales function, configured CRM systems to reflect how selling actually worked. Returns appeared once ownership moved closer to the P&L.
2008 to Today: CRM as Core Infrastructure: Sales Operations reframed CRM around usability and productivity. Manual data entry was reduced, forecasting became automated, and metrics were tied directly to pipeline velocity and close rates. What began as a database evolved into the central operating platform for revenue management. Adoption became natural once ownership and usage aligned.
Who Owned It and Who Should Have
Ownership is more than a title on a chart. In the Siebel era, IT and Marketing made decisions, controlled budgets, and determined success metrics. Sales teams were passive users, expected to follow workflows that slowed work rather than accelerated it. Requests for changes passed through IT queues that could take weeks. Feedback from reps rarely influenced design, leaving the system misaligned with real sales processes.
With Salesforce, ownership became active and aligned. Sales Operations managed configuration, prioritized feature requests, and tied system design to revenue metrics. The system became an enabler instead of a bottleneck. Decision rights, funding, and KPIs all shifted closer to the teams using the system daily. Continuous feedback improved processes and drove adoption naturally.
Why It Failed
Failures in early CRM deployments were structural. Ownership misalignment created a system where the sponsors and the users had completely different priorities. IT measured success by uptime and data completeness, but sales measured it by the ability to close deals efficiently. Incentives were misaligned. CRM was built to monitor sales behavior, not to accelerate sales results, which caused frustration and passive resistance from reps.
Process design amplified the problem. Manual data entry was treated as a discipline rather than a symptom of poor workflow design. Salespeople saw hours eaten by administrative tasks that didn't improve their performance or pipeline. Metrics celebrated deployment milestones instead of business outcomes. At Cigna, this combination led to system adoption below 30%, long resolution times for customer inquiries, and ultimately, a $400 million hit to both revenue and membership. Every technical success masked an operational failure.
What Fixed It
The transformation from failure to functional CRM was not about software features but about governance and process design. Sales Operations assumed ownership, aligning system control with revenue responsibility. The team redesigned workflows to reduce manual entry and deliver actionable insights directly to reps, such as pipeline alerts, automated follow-ups, and real-time forecasting.
Clear metrics replaced system milestones. Adoption rates, forecast accuracy, and conversion rates became the guiding KPIs. IT retained responsibility for integration and stability, but Sales Ops controlled configuration, process flow, and user experience. This dual structure prevented repetition of past mistakes and ensured that every change supported the ultimate goal: moving deals through the pipeline faster and more predictably.
What Changed in the Numbers
The results of moving ownership to Sales Operations were tangible. Adoption rates surged from less than 30% to between 70-90%. Sales cycles shortened by 15-25%. ROI, which had been negative under IT-led programs, turned positive within the first two years of Sales Ops management.
Sales teams were no longer passive recipients of technology. They used the CRM as a tool to accelerate deals, gain insights, and coordinate across departments. Each workflow improvement translated into measurable outcomes: fewer lost deals, faster response times, and more accurate forecasting. The system became a revenue engine instead of a reporting tool.
Proof on the Ground
Cigna’s IT-driven Siebel rollout shows the cost of misaligned ownership. The system was live, but sales and service teams were left behind. Customers experienced delays, call centers were overwhelmed, and hundreds of millions in revenue were lost before leadership recognized the problem. Adoption remained low, morale suffered, and business leaders could not extract value from the technology. The failure was about disconnecting the system from the people who relied on it, not the software itself.
Salesforce illustrates the alternative. By putting Sales Operations in charge, configuration, workflow design, and reporting aligned with how reps actually sold. Adoption increased quickly, sales cycles shortened, and forecast accuracy improved. Reps gained tangible benefits, and CRM became a revenue driver instead of a compliance burden. Governance and alignment proved to be as critical as the technology.
The Playbook for Ops Leaders
The lessons from CRM are direct and actionable for any operations leader overseeing transformative technology initiatives:
Put ownership where the P&L sits. Any system that affects revenue should be managed by the business operators closest to the results. IT provides infrastructure; operations provide outcomes.
Align incentives before launch. Users need to see how the system improves their productivity, not just the company’s reporting. Clear alignment between daily work and KPIs drives adoption.
Define success as business movement, not deployment. Go-live is only a milestone. True success is measured in throughput, cycle time, and conversion metrics that move the bottom line.
Recognize the pattern. Today’s AI, automation, and analytics programs often repeat the mistakes of early CRM: central labs, disconnected operators, and rising failure rates. Anticipate ownership conflicts and intervene before they cost millions.
Conclusion
CRM demonstrates that technology alone does not create value. When IT controlled sales systems, billions were wasted, workflows broke down, and adoption stalled. Success came when companies shifted ownership to Sales Operations, aligned incentives, and focused relentlessly on business outcomes. CRM became more than software; it became an engine for growth.
For operations leaders, the lesson is clear: any transformative initiative must be owned by those accountable for results. Governance and alignment determine whether technology amplifies performance or becomes a costly experiment. Applying these lessons to AI, automation, and analytics programs is essential for turning investment into real business impact.