CRMs and Tips for Avoiding Duplicate Data Hell

Duplicate data. It’s an inherent part of working with databases. Or at least the potential for duplicate data is inherent in databases. But it’s important that you do all you can to avoid creating duplicate records (often shortened to “dupes”), identify them quickly if they exist, and eliminate them as soon as possible—especially in your CRM.

If one team member is adding important information to Record A and another team member is adding data to that record’s duplicate, Record B, you can see how each record ends up having only some of the information it should have. Then, if someone makes a decision based on one record or the other, that decision is likely to be flawed—or at the very least, not well-informed.

You don’t want stakeholders being confused about what they’re looking at. That doesn’t reflect well on your firm or give stakeholders confidence in your ability to deliver accurate information and insights. 

Increasingly, a firm’s success is based largely on the quality of its data. And continually “deduping” your data is essential to maintaining high-quality information.

CRM Solutions: Advice for Dealing With Duplicate Data

While there’s no way to completely prevent duplicate database records, there are steps you can take to ensure dupes don’t have a negative impact on your operations. In particular, the recommendations below from our Altvia Care Team can be very helpful: 

  • Search your database before creating new records. This is an easy step to take, but getting firm-wide buy-in and compliance can be challenging. When people are in a hurry, they tend to trust/hope that the record they’re adding isn’t a duplicate of one already in the database. But, of course, often it is a dupe. So, anything you can do to get team members to spend just 60-90 seconds on a quick search is helpful. This includes searching for any reasonable variations of a name, like “Elizabeth Smith,” “Liz Smith,” and “Beth Smith.”
  • Use deduping tools. Tools like Dupe Hunter [A1] can be used to produce a report listing any duplicates found. We recommend running this report weekly. And you should have a “data champion” who is in charge of checking the report and merging or deleting the duplicate records. Reports that get run but then are ignored because everyone assumes someone else will review them aren’t helpful.  
  • Use dupe prevention tools. Dupe Catcher recognizes duplicate data and displays an error message when someone attempts to enter a duplicate record.
  • Normalize data before large imports. Normalizing data is the process of ensuring that records have the same fields in the same order. If you’re adding a large number of records to a database, it’s easier to catch dupes if the data is normalized.
  • Use Salesforce’s deduping functionality. Salesforce, the foundation of Altvia’s CRM, has built-in deduplication functionality that can be especially helpful when importing large data sets. Find the data import tool by clicking your name and then “My Settings” and “Import.”


Cleaner Data Gives You a Competitive Edge

In today’s competitive business environment, having to stop what you’re doing and figure out which one of two (or more!) duplicate records are accurate and up-to-date can be costly. ven one pair of duplicates that doesn’t get handled promptly and properly can lead to confusion and poor decisions.

Continually ensuring that the data in your CRM is clean takes some effort—no doubt about it. But if you put best practices into place and provide reminders about those practices until system users have developed good deduping habits, you’ll find that the benefits far outweigh your time-and-effort costs!

A traditional crm was built for general ‘customer’ scenarios

Software platforms have made the world a better place by making work a better place. Indeed the world is better off when people enjoy their jobs even marginally more, and workplace applications on big CRM platforms like have done that and much more.

But the potential that platforms like these offer presents diminishing returns: once the platform provider has engineered too many industry specific components into its platform, its usefulness for other industries begins to be threatened, and with that so do the usefulness of the component tools built into the platform.

So it is with the CRM category that has defined: it is generic enough to work for many industries, and yet still offers the potential for others to round off the edges and nail more vertically-oriented and extremely tailored software solutions.

Private capital markets are actually a great demonstration of this dynamic. Where generic CRM platforms simplify — appropriately so — to assume there’s a business, a customer, a sale, and service of that customer, there are a few industry-specific pieces that are missing.

Take for example, that investors become customers by investing through legal entities the GP raises. It’s a subtle but important nuance that just doesn’t make sense at a platform-as-a-service level (because it’s overly complicated for a simple one-time sale that many industries require), but which can easily be added without 10 years or software engineering. Once provided, the rest of the platform’s components become tremendously powerful again and you’re set to take over the world.

As a traditional CRM in our pillars methodology, these nuances must be present to properly account for investors in these legal entities, potential target companies and which are owned by these entities, the context of all interactions with these parties (as well as the appropriate overlap, ie co-investments), and how you’re arriving at finding these opportunities on both sides of the equation, such that you’re able to piece together what’s effective and what’s not. Not just because we say so, but because these are the very relationships and data that are key to the motivation behind a CRM in any industry.

It’s critical, too, that the valuable publicly-available information that helps to enrich CRM systems and save users painful steps of entering it themselves is fully-integrated at the platform level.

Again, look no further than the 3,000+ pre-built integrations that — the creator of the CRM platform concept — has at a platform level to do so, and which only exists by way of holding just short of overly-specifying certain industry workflows that would present challenges to properly integrate.

Stakeholder reporting and communication (investor relations) draws on a range of datasets

The traditional “customer service” model of CRM systems once again makes overly-simplified assumptions about the customer relationship when applied to private capital markets.

In fifteen years I personally have yet to hear the terms “warranty” or “service call” in this market because it’s just not the same. But make no mistake, as uncomfortable as it may be to say aloud, customer service is more important now than ever and it’s constantly happening; the industry is, after all, considered to be a financial “service”.

As it turns out, that service is primarily information-based — it’s driven by data and takes the form of reports and analysis that drive decisions, and then end up again in investor-facing reports and analysis.

The foundational elements of a private capital markets CRM must be built such that they accommodate this data (like we discussed above), but so too that it can accommodate additional supporting data that investors (customers!) need in the context of service.

Oftentimes this supporting data — financial metrics and time-based values, for example — is believed not to meet the traditional definition of CRM and the natural thought is “well, better do this in Excel!”.

While I happen to believe Excel is still the greatest software application ever built, its introduction to this value chain we’ve discussed herein actually creates the problem many firms suffer from: key data needed to provide customer service (again: effectively the entirety of a firm’s reports and analysis) is now in disparate systems and detached.

Both of those dynamics are important and distinct: not only is this supplemental data disparate, but when brought together there is no logical association that can be made between the two data sets.

Allow me, then, to make the point very simply: not only can this financial and time-based value data (you may be thinking about is as “portfolio monitoring” or “accounting”) be a part of a CRM, it is arguably the most important part of a CRM because it’s at the core of what providing service to the customer entails — information that comes out of data!

Firms need a digital method to engage stakeholders (ie investor portals)

Investor portals are not new; in fact, for many of us — including myself — they conjure up horrifying nightmares in which we’re aimlessly guessing at folders to find the newest document we need.

So in lies the opportunity: not only have the portals we’ve come to hate not simplified the process of acquiring information, they’ve failed to create an entirely new experience that is “customer service” driven.

To be fair, this is not a B2C market where you’d be long out of business for not having focused on customer service and thus the customer’s technology-driven experience. But don’t expect to be around too much longer if you aren’t thinking about this shift.

Today’s institutional investors increasingly expect this same consumer-like experience, and a massive opportunity is being missed by not providing it. It’s not about providing them the experience they desire; it’s more about the ability to measure engagement that is had in return.

Put simply: what’s keeping the market from providing this experience is the availability of the information that’s required to create the service that provides the experience.

If you’ve hung in this long, you know that by focusing on your CRM, you have the data that’s required to manage the customer relationship and the technology-driven experience through which that information is shared to create a differentiated and opportunistic customer experience.