Salesforce Sales Cloud Reviews

My primary use case of Sales Cloud is for account management. It's usually used by the sales teams, to organize our accounts and actually target certain accounts, to push certain products over to them. We have it linked with our current ERP platform, SAP, to give us visibility on invoices and products, what we call pack sizes, where we can build reports that help the sales teams do their jobs more efficiently. We also use it to create call cases, which is our product complaints process. 

The number one benefit of Sales Cloud is the visibility of accounts. Before, when people were communicating by email, for example, things could get lost in translation. Whereas, now, we can centralize all communication to a specific account. We can then tie it in and create follow-up tasks—based on what we call the chatted posts—on the actual records themselves. Communication has definitely been a lot more centralized, and it gives everyone the visibility needed on their accounts, whether it's on their desktop or even their phone, on the mobile app. 

One of the most valuable features is the automation of Sales Cloud. It gives us the ability to easily—without the use of coding—create automation in order for us to do our work a lot more efficiently, whether it's notification reminders or certain automatic processes. There are a lot of things that Sales Cloud can do that, in my opinion, make everyone's jobs a whole lot easier and give them the visibility they need when they require it, when talking to customers and prospecting. It makes the account management process easier as well. 

Sales Cloud could be improved with more training. In general, the training is very good, but you have to really seek out some good options in order to upskill yourself. Another thing, which could also be a benefit, is that Sales is very customizable. If you move from one organization to another, you can see your Salesforce as before, but their Sales Cloud may look completely different from what you're used to. It's not like Microsoft Excel or Trello, where the layout and all the functions are the same. Because it's so customizable, I feel like there is a bit of a learning curve when you inherit another Sales Cloud instance. To be honest, I think that's the beauty of Salesforce because you can customize it so much to fit your needs as a company. It follows your processes and use cases in order for you to get the most out of the system itself. 

The other thing I believe Salesforce could improve on is the file storage system. Salesforce is very good for its account management processes and automation, but when it comes to file storage, it could use a bit of work to rival that of something like Microsoft OneDrive or SharePoint. With that being said, there is a lot of integration with a tool called Files Connect, which allows you to connect to SharePoint or OneDrive, so it's not an issue moving forward, but it's something that they could improve. 

An additional feature we would like to see is better integration. A lot of software is already very well-integrated with Salesforce, directly as well, but I think that because we use SAP, we would like to see more of a direct link. We have one via a third-party solution, but I think that integration should eventually be a lot easier without the use of a third-party. For now, it's still very manageable, though. 

I have been using Sales Cloud for eight years now. 

The performance is very good. Every now and again, there may be something up with the system, but Salesforce is very transparent when it comes to these issues. 

Sales Cloud requires maintenance three times a year, so you need to be ready for when the product launchers come. 

This solution is definitely very scalable. We work in a multinational company—in Australia, we have approximately 70 people using Sales Cloud, but we use Salesforce in the other countries as well. In total, I'd guess there are around 2,000 people who use it. Our sales team uses it maybe 30% of the time because a lot of our main selling processes are still external. Given that our organization has a mature customer base, this is the way things have been done for a long time. We're translating processes bit by bit—maybe three projects a year—translating big things in order for us to do it within the Salesforce Sales Cloud CRM. We would like to get engagement up to 50-60% in the coming years, and we'll definitely see that engagement with initial projects that we're rolling out for the coming years and beyond. 

Salesforce replicated very well within multiple organizations. We've got one organization for several countries across the world, even though we've only got 70 people in Australia, and I think it will be very easy for us to use as we move forward. There are times when we need a bit more training, but I think that the onus is on them. Salesforce provides their own training and upskilling lessons called Trailhead, so they're very helpful. 

I contacted Salesforce in my previous role and I had a really good experience. Whenever you create a case, they get back to you quite quickly a lot of the time. I previously communicated with the account executive of Salesforce and they were very helpful with their processes. If they can't help us directly, they're more than happy to lead us in the right direction. So far, it's been a great experience. 

I don't have previous experience with similar products—I've only really worked with Salesforce. 

Just last year, I deployed this solution with my current company. It was a bit challenging to translate our current business processes into Salesforce. We have about 80% of the functionality that we used to—for example, copying and pasting from an email into a Word document or Excel is a lot easier than copying and pasting it into Salesforce. There's not that like-for-like translation. 

There were three people involved in the deployment process and it took about 18 months.

We implemented Salesforce through an in-house team. 

They're the best in the business, so I think their business model is definitely based on that. The cost is worthwhile, to me, and I think it's fair because of the customization capabilities. However, small organizations that are just starting out might struggle to pay for something additional like this, so they might have only one or two. You pay per license with this sort of solution, as well as any additional benefits. They have what they call managed packages, some of which are free, but some you have to pay for. My understanding is that Salesforce is a little bit expensive, but in terms of the efficiencies, automation, and visibility, I think it's definitely value for money. 

The advice I would give to someone looking into implementing Salesforce is to know the business inside and out—that would be what they call a functional consultant—because a lot of processes can be translated easily enough without the use of coding. For us, it took about 18 months of scoping in order to get the best process moving forward. The implementation can be as easy or as difficult as you want it to be. If you translate all your processes together, then I think it will be more difficult, but you essentially have to give a bit in order to take.

I recommend engaging with an experienced Salesforce consultant or partner in order to get the most out of the system because if you're doing it yourself, it might get a bit overwhelming, especially if you don't have any CRM experience. Just know that almost anything is possible with Salesforce. A lot of the companies I used to work for were built on Salesforce and all opportunities—revenue-driven processes—were driven through Salesforce. It's easily done, especially within the e-commerce and tech software industries. Sales Cloud is very applicable, but make sure to engage a partner who is experienced in rolling out Salesforce. There are partners who specialize in the education sector, F&B, etc., so you have options. 

I rate Salesforce a nine out of ten. 

Our main use cases for the solution are B2B directions, some presale activities, and some of our service manager activities, which are mainly requests for supplies, certain products.

We do re-house implementation, sales calls for our B2B segment, so it's business to business. We are actually covering all of our sales interactions with our clients within Sales Cloud, just trying to keep the information in one place and all of the activities, according to the sales cycle, within the Sales Cloud, within the certain records inside Salesforce.

The main way the solution has improved the organization is by giving a good understanding of how the salespeople should be tracked, how to restructure their work. Normally salespeople can be disorganized, so we have people who do something which is very difficult to track. However, some people won't do anything until the deadline is tomorrow. So all of the directions, all of the processes should be tracked and sales will give you the understanding. If a salesperson is working to discover a relationship with a client and is trying to sell something, it can be very easy, very intuitive, with very few fields. 

Then you can see if something is moving on or still at the same place for months or even years. You can easily identify it by creating the opportunity and seeing whether you made progress or not. As long as you understand how it should be tracked, the only thing is left to go to sales and say that you expect anything you do to be reflecting this in a certain record, and either I see the progress there, or I can see there's no progress at all. You can say that you're doing something, but if I do not see it within the system, it does not exist.

One of the most valuable features is with management within Salesforce. This is one of the important parts of the process we have right now in place. 

First of all, the point of view that Salesforce gives you on certain object models normally satisfies the biggest parts of the business. In a lot of business scenarios, because the sales process is more or less at a high level the same, in different areas, it's been changing. On the high level, it's all about managing the clients, managing the opportunities around those clients, managing the tasks, calls, activities, all those things are already pretty fine on Salesforce. 

Flexibility is the second point I would like to mention. The flexibility is pretty high and we can set up different scenarios. We can use different pools, both with developer experience and with development experience, making things automated within Salesforce. So it gives you an opportunity for not just a flexible set up, the processes you would like to set, but also to automate the things and make the automation for different scenarios, like providing emails, assigning leads, assigning the right clients to the right people. And also automate that during the sales cycle, if we're talking about providing the resources and providing the information resources.

And I would say the interface isn't perfect, but it's much better than the other CRM systems can provide. So it's not 100% modern if they're talking about making it 21, but compared with the competitors, you can see that Salesforce is way better in terms of user experience. Working the system, it's much more intuitive, it's more user-oriented, user friendly than the other systems I had in my previous experience.

One area where the solution could improve is with handling feature requests. Salesforce has its own community all over the world and people submit ideas saying, okay, that's what's needed. The number of requests is pretty high, and all of these requests are stored for years, but people need these. These features that I requested really sound obvious, but they're still for five, four, six years remaining just the same. When you search for a feature and find that someone created a request years ago, and 6,000 or more are saying, "yes, of course, we need this," it's an obvious feature. It's not that difficult to implement but the waiting line can be up to 10 years long.

One of the features I'd like to see in a future release is a way to see the updates of all the records that I follow. Not an email notification, but a single page to see the information for all the records I'm following. There is a solution that can partially satisfy this need in Salesforce Classic, but it's also classic and old-fashioned, and we would not like to promote the initial sales software within our firm. We are trying to keep Salesforce Lightning as the main tool. Rather than asking the commercial director to switch to Salesforce Classic, just to see a part of the information, but if you need both, we'll be able to give it.

The other area that is definitely a waking point for me is the integration with Slack. Slack is pretty popular and we're trying to launch it as well. The basic integration that is out-of-the-box is pretty small. Having both of these products in the product portfolio in the same company, we actually really expect to have it highly integrated for different scenarios, like task assignments, following notification, so even the same balance can be done within Slack and assigned to a certain account record in Salesforce. There is a huge field for improvement; right now these two products are pretty separated, despite the service.

And the third thing I would say is a Salesforce strategy. A lot of countries, all over the world are trying to protect personal data. And the limitations are increasing here and in new territories, like China, Russia, India, Arabic countries, GDPR regulation, European Union, all of these things that you require the new response from the platforms that are actually dealing with this personal data, personal information. Salesforce itself, its data is a GDPR compliance system, out of the box. The only funny thing is it's two digital compliance until you start entering the personal data there. As long as you are entering personal data there, so they can do some GDPR compliance, in terms of Russian regulation, Chinese regulation, Arabic countries' regulation. It's definitely something that we expect to be improved.

I've been working with Salesforce Sales Cloud for three and a half years.

The stability and performance of Sales Cloud itself, which is provided by Salesforce, is pretty good. We are pretty satisfied with it. We didn't have any huge lags in months with Salesforce downtime; some certain tools that we actually implemented ourselves, were not the level of reliability of Salesforce, though. But that was something we implemented in our own home. The problem was not with Salesforce, but really the tools, the way we actually implemented it.

Ease of scalability depends on where we actually are scaling, and if we had a certain predicted behavior, such as we have a new region to sell, we have a new person in the new region or have a new account, etc. It definitely requires not just some maintenance, but some developments as well. 

We have approximately 100 users in our company. We're using the solution more and more often. Initially, it was a certain form where sales just gave everyone the opportunity. Then we came to the decision, we want this as a system to direct those people on a regular basis. Now we have a regular meeting and the information from Salesforce is checked by the commercial director. We're trying to introduce the solution to see the broader picture, the full pipeline for targeting the client, and finishing the client when you've closed the case.

Technical support has been pretty helpful, in those rare cases I actually use it. During my previous experience, which was also connected with Salesforce, we had some strange cases escalated to Salesforce, and the answer was, okay, we will fix this in one of our upcoming releases. But that was a matter of half a year, and we had a business stopping issue. But after a certain escalation, we actually managed to do this fix earlier. However, we expected it to be faster.

Previously, I've worked with this SAP, and I was working with a custom regionally developed CRM system based on the Microsoft platform. Salesforce has better flexibility and orientation to the user. SAP has perfect functionality and it's really powerful. However, I wasn't fulfilled with the SAP for five years before I actually left SAP. It was like people who developed it just forgot about the end-users. So the interface, how the end-users actually interacted with the system, was horrible. Salesforce is way better. However, SAP also had the best effort in giving data during the later five years.

The initial deployment can take time. We started the project in February, and the deployment was in June, end of June. Five months, and we are not talking about the prerequisites, because we gathered the business scenarios we need to finish the analysis. So if you're talking about the analysis and prerequisites as well, so it will three months more.

Update deployment prevents a lot of issues, as it gives you the opportunity to change the things that can be badly influencing the production system. So you invest some time to get a deployment done. It still takes hours to deploy and there is a certain benefit behind this. The more time spent on deploying, the fewer issues on production. However, there is certainly fuel for improvement there.

The initial deployment was a group of about 20, involving people from different parts, both development, quality assurance people, admins, business analysts, business representatives, salespeople, pre-sales people department. So this group was much broader than future deployments.

There is only one person who actually doing update deployment for us. However, the more we grow, the more people will be involved in the deployment. And we work with the vendor because certain parts of our implementation require the help of Salesforce authorized companies which help us to do this. And there were more people than one to do the deployment because different groups of people were involved in the development. To merge the codes of different groups of development, we required the efforts of recruiting people. Either two or three people were involved in the deployment; they were not only our internal team working with the development.

Right now I'm operating on the Russian market, and in terms of investment value and return of the investment, Salesforce right now is pretty good in the Western markets where the price of the employees is pretty high.

Here in Russia, the country has a cheaper workforce, so the investment into Salesforce Solution is questionable, in terms of the return on the investment. The price model, is oriented on the best markets and there is a certain sense of investment in Salesforce there; but here in Russia, prices for the workforce can do the same thing easily. It's the 21st century, probably manual work should be reduced each day. We think if we look at this problem in terms of the investment, it will be a big question if it's worth the money, as Salesforce is pretty expensive.

The biggest advice that I can give to anyone considering Sales Cloud is to develop a good pre-analysis before the implementation and don't overload the stages of the opportunity. Think what the main purpose of these stages is. The best way to make it work for salespeople and for the commercial department is to structure it that way, that it will now reflect the stages of the penetration to the client. Pursue methodology, when we have targets, interact, propose, close. It's not just throwing the opportunity between the different departments, but it's complete and clear and simple, which is very important. You don't have 20 stages, but you have five certain career stages, which actually reflect the steps when you're closer and closer to the deal. Not in terms of working with the documents, but in terms of structuring the sales process in terms of the penetration to the clients.

Also, very close to the implementation, the final day of the goal, dedicate as much time as possible to the data migration. Dedicate as much time as you have, consider doing data migration; it will be difficult. We will have a lot of migrant issues rolling the data from the previous system to the new one. So two or three weeks is the shortest period that should be dedicated to that purpose.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The reporting and dashboards functionalities are the most valuable features for us.

Also, the CRM's built-in information indexation with standard and custom fields provides complete control in manipulating data. This functionality remains key to driving informed decision making.

It's driven comprehensive decision making by associating marketing spend with the lead source to revenue generation from completed sales efforts over an extended sales cycle.

Also, the information indexation is fantastic and this facilitates a comprehensive understanding when you need to correlate marketing spend with sales efforts to ascertain ROI. This helped to reallocate marketing spend to more effective lead-generating activities that contributed to higher ROI. Information indexation of the tool facilitates associating ROI by lead source which won opportunities for sales.

• Reporting can become slow to pull once you reach a certain limit of contact records due to the complexity and volume of the data available.
• It's a comprehensive tool that is not intuitive to use in order to effectively leverage the benefits of its customization capability.
• The tool can appear complex and there are key understandings needed to leverage this CRM properly. Not creating an opportunity upon lead conversion for example, prevents correlating data between lead source and opportunities won at a later date - so important!

I've used it for over 5 years.

No, it's straightforward to get an account. From there, it's knowing how to customize it properly to optimize process and facilitate quality data input. It's also been straightforward to deploy for my clients.

There are only stability issues if the report pool involves data from 10,000+ records. The pull can be very slow. Other than that, the tool is both robust and stable.

Scalability issues only arise around reporting from my experience as the data pulls can become slow.

Never called customer service.

I've had insufficient engagement with technical support to comment.

We didn't switch, but different CRMs apply to different business sizes and integration requirements. 17 Hats is quite comprehensive for entrepreneurs, for example, but you might consider this more of a simplified ERP solution.

I have not come across the circumstance where I migrated to Salesforce from something else. Either it was chosen from the beginning or not chosen when the complexity of data control was not needed.

Setup is complex, but worth the time to get things the way you want it. Complexity is commensurate with what you want to get out of the tool.

You sign-up online with immediate access to the tool. I feel the setup can appear complex to those not familiar with the tool initially and creation of customizations is not intuitive at the admin level. There is a learning curve with detailed control.

We did it in-house.

N/A

Professional is what I choose unless the enterprise functionality is immediately relevant to the business operations. Standard license is usually sufficient. In my professional opinion, the pricing is small compared to the value Salesforce brings.

We evaluated InfusionSoft, Sugar, Karma 2.0, Netsuite ERP, and Zoho.

CRM deployment is part of a bigger strategy to centralize your data. By mapping out all the area data enters and exits first with requirements for each point, you can assess if Salesforce is the right fit properly.

We use the solution for opportunity identification, pipeline management, and forecasting. Those are primarily the areas.

The solution has provided our company with a common platform, a common process, and has created a common skill set, and institutional awareness of major transactions. It's provided easier audit for opportunities, deal reviews, and automation features for reporting. 

The dashboards and dashboard customization are great.

The solution is stable and reliable.

You can scale the solution easily.

The setup is pretty fast.

Technical support is helpful and knowledgeable. 

The reporting formats could be better. We'd like to be able to graphically, optically, change what the selections are that we can choose to put a report or format in, just in how they appear, the aesthetics. There could be more presentation formats that are incorporated that would make them easier to transfer over to a PowerPoint or something. We should be able to export documentation capabilities that are more presentation-friendly outside of the system.

II want to be specific about what it looks like, what the actual report actually looks like. For example, the optics of the report, the colors that are used, the format that it's in. That's the main comment. The data is fine. It's how the report actually looks that's an issue.

I've been using the solution for more than 12 months at this point.

It's very stable. It's reliable. It's a good solution.

It scales well. A lot of people need to own that the solution will only work as well as its design, and how people apply it. The more information that can be given upfront about what the outcome requirements are, the better.

That's a conditional situation. It really depends on how engaged the client is in providing their requirements and then giving that stuff over so that it can be executed. It's a pretty well-thought-out solution that performs and scales well.

We have more than 5,000 users at this point. That's across departments in the services division. The solution is extensively used. 

I've dealt with technical support. They were good. They were on the better side. Nobody's perfect, however, they were pretty knowledgeable.

I've used multiple CRMs and NetSuite by Oracle in the past. In this organization, we had a homegrown solution that would not have been commercially marketed.

The initial setup was complex, however, it was well planned. There was a good approach. It was very formulaic. It allowed for customer feedback to help customize the solution. I thought it was a very interactive process.

The configuration part was relatively quick. It was the planning that took longer as it required a lot of internal reviews to discern what was important information and what wasn't. It's hard. I would say that the process was six months, however, the actual flipping the switch wasn't that long - maybe a couple of weeks.

That's why it's hard for me to discern where the breakpoint is. It was a lot of reviews, communication, et cetera. However, the enabling of the technology did not take very long. It was more or less deciding on how to enable the technology that took long.

There is a team that handles maintenance for the product. I don't deal with that directly.

I've done it probably two ways. One was an internal engagement. The other one was external. I know that Accenture was involved in that. I myself actually had to go to Chicago to train at one of the Accenture facilities to be a champion for their transition.

I'm an end-user. I'm using the most recent version of the solution.

I'd advise potential new users to make sure you're good by researching what's best for your organization and make sure that once you choose to go down that path, that you've put the right steps in for adoption. This or any other CRM will fail if the organization doesn't agree on the value or use of the tool.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. It is highly available, handles the majority of our business needs, and the consistency of its function is pretty strong. The capacity of capability is good.

A client was running the sales and marketing operations in a spreadsheet, and they wanted to have everything in one place. So, they migrated to Salesforce, and we helped them out with:

• Creating the object structure
• Mapping their objects with native Salesforce objects
• Putting together the page layout for the team
• Adding the data from the sheet into the instance

In terms of deployment, it was on the Salesforce cloud. The users had to log into it through a browser.

It enabled them to centralize the location of all the information. For example, everyone could enter the lead information in the central location, and then the higher management had a high-level overview of all the leads that came in. They could see how long it was taking to process leads and close them from the time leads come in. It keeps track of the close date as well. 

You can set up automation for following up and sending emails to the rep when the leads first get assigned. You can also run automation where if there is no activity on a certain lead for 30 days or so, the lead owner gets the notification. 

The ability to work on it from anywhere is most valuable. All you need is a computer, a browser, and an internet connection to access your instance. It can be accessed from anywhere, which is pretty cool and user-friendly. 

Its licensing can be improved to accommodate small companies. They provide a certain number of licenses in a set or batch, and you have to buy the set. For example, if they have 20 licenses in a set, you have to get the whole set, even if you need just three licenses, which could be a barrier for small companies. There is no option to buy fewer licenses. So, small companies have to go for a smaller CRM, such as HubSpot.

It has been pretty stable. When they have any maintenance, they usually send a notification saying that the system is going to be unavailable from a certain time, which is usually over the weekends. Usually, no one uses the system at that time.

It seems to be pretty good. It provides the ability to use different types of automation. If you want to create complex solutions or automation, you can do that. You can also start with simple ones and then go into the more complicated ones.

Currently, we have around 10 to 15 users who use this solution. They are usually into business development. There is also a leadership team with around five or six people. There are two different divisions of the company. One is marketing, and one is sales, and then there is also a business development section. So, each team has a number of people associated with it.

It is being used extensively. If we onboard new people, it'll probably scale.

They're fairly responsive. They usually respond within half a day. They send the details or instructions about how to resolve an issue. If it's something that belongs to a future release, they redirect us to the post mentioning that.

Its deployment was fairly straightforward. It wasn't too complicated for this use case. The complicated part was figuring out and mapping the existing objects and data structure with the Salesforce data structure.

For deployment, we had a team of three people. This team included a project manager, a developer, and me. We didn't really need the developer. We had him in case we had any complicated deployment. It was a smaller implementation, and it took about two months.

Its maintenance depends on the scale. If it is a big deployment, you would need an admin. For our internal instance, currently, we don't have an admin, but in the next few months, we'll probably be looking for a dedicated internal admin because we want to implement a few data projects. We're trying to create a partner portal, and we are thinking of hiring a dedicated admin for that.

It is alright for now because we ended up getting a discount off the base price. So, for now, it is okay. We may have to renegotiate when we get more users, and I don't know if the price would stay the same or increase.

It has just a standard licensing fee. If you end up hiring a consultant for implementation, you will have to pay for the implementation. Other than that, there are no additional fees.

You should know what your use cases are. Try to figure out if you will be extensively using automation or not. If you're not, you can use the lower licensing versions that are pretty cheap. The basic model was about $25 a month per user, and you can probably have three users for that, but it doesn't give you extensive automation capabilities. You will have to do a cost comparison for your specific use case to see if the basic license fits the needs of your business.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

The primary use case is if you want to update old legacy systems and go into a more mobile way of doing business. One of the main competitive advantages of this solution is that it already offers an 85% solution (out of the box), and you can modify it if you wish.

Salesforce does not offer anything on premise. It's always in the cloud.

No installation of software, or security updates. Easily working together with colleagues.

Salesforce wishes to push for a declarative way of solving IT problems.
As an end user, you can do a lot by yourself, so you do not have to write code. The idea is that they go for low-code and they use flow. It's possible to update records and do things like automation without writing real code. I think this is one of the advantages of the solution.

Also you can easily collaborate with your colleagues. Another main benefit is that you can find a lot of information on websites, and you can learn it yourself through Trailhead. It's a guided way of learning new topics, and it's completely free.

The company has a policy of three releases per year.

One of the advantages of Salesforce is that it's fun. With features like Trailhead, the gamification makes it a joyful environment.

The reporting part is a bit low. You have other possibilities, like Einstein, or Tableau.

The deployment of (meta) data from the sandbox environment to production is also a weaker point because their solution is not powerful (even non-existent).

I have been working with Salesforce Sales Cloud for more than five years. 
I work as a Salesforce functional consultant. My role is to improve the adoption ratio of the client. I help implementing (declarative) and migrating legacy systems towards Salesforce.

The stability of Sales Cloud (and Salesforce in general) is extremely reliable. Ten years ago, we were one of the first Belgium customers that got a massive implementation of Sales Cloud. Servers were in the United States, there were several complaints from customers that it was taking too long. Salesforce acted and invested heavily in data centers in Europe, and now I have never had any issues with reliability or stability.

The solution is extremely easy to scale up because you can go from the Professional Edition to the Unlimited Edition.

You will only have a problem if you wish to downgrade.

If you have a problem, you can open a case with Salesforce. They give it a status, like high, low, or medium. If it takes a bit of time, maybe it's linked to the fact that your case is not crystal clear. If they don't do anything after a while or if you haven't heard back from them, then you can escalate the case.
Of course all is linked to your service contract and SLAs.

Positive

Salesforce doesn't require any specific maintenance. Salesforce works like a hotel. You just rent a room for a particular period, and the rest is done for you.

The main issue is the price. Because it's SaaS, you will have to pay on a monthly basis. It will become very expensive because you'll be thinking, "I have Sales Cloud, and I want to do service and help my customers, so I need another cloud." This is something I have already seen with other customers. They would like to jump into the Salesforce environment, but it can become a hefty price tag, so that's an issue.

There are different licensing models. 
You could have the Essentials, Professional, Enterprise, and Unlimited edition. It is linked to functionality. I only work for multinational clients, so they usually use an Unlimited or Enterprise solution.

If you are a big company, then you have a lot of leverage and more power to decrease the cost of your system per month. A lot of people aren't aware of that. If you go into a full-fledged solution, you can still bargain or discuss the price.

Only one person is required for deployment, and you can automate it if you wish. If you have a good developer who creates that, and you have your deployment street, you can push information into the production environment on a nightly basis.

I would rate this solution a 9 out of 10.

Sales Cloud is suitable for everyone, even a mom and pop shop, if you have the money to invest in it ( I would not recommend it for a very small company that has only one FTE). 
If you have five or 10 SEs, you can definitely use it, all the way up to Fortune 500 companies. Most companies that use Salesforce are Fortune 500 companies.

I would definitely recommend that you try to stick to what Salesforce offers. You should not try to change the native setup of Salesforce, otherwise you will face issues with new releases. You should try to follow the spirit and idea of Salesforce, for example avoid large coding because then you will/can screw up the system.

• Open API
• Big ecosystem of applications, knowledge, and training
• Flexibility

I’ve worked with about 30 nonprofit organizations implementing Salesforce. I’ve seen it answer questions that are key to an organization’s strategy, e.g. Does our program work? Which people does it work best for? Where is the revenue coming from? How many people are we serving today/this week/this month/this year?

In addition, it saves hours a day for staff members who track donations, volunteers, etc.

Reporting is still not as strong as it should be.

I've used the Enterprise Edition for three years/

Salesforce is complicated, and there are plenty of things that can go wrong. With small to medium non-profits, the biggest issue is typically that staff don’t have time to spend using the new system, or that leaders aren’t asking questions of the system. When the system doesn’t get used, it definitely doesn’t work.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

It really depends. The free customer service isn’t so useful, but that is mitigated by the huge number of consultants, YouTube videos, and KB articles. These resources are just a different level of magnitude than for any other similar product. If you pay for tech support and additional customer service, I believe that the experience is better, but I don’t have direct experience with that.

The free tech support is really only useful for pretty basic stuff. They get the job done, but it isn’t any fun. It would be nice if they would consent to fix things via email instead of phone calls.

I’ve switched organizations from various home-grown solutions, eTapestry, Donor Perfect, Gift Works, and piles of spreadsheets. All those options have their advantages, but none are as flexible as Salesforce.

I did set it up for an organization where I worked, and it was complex but now I’m very comfortable doing it, however, your average non profit staffer is not.

I've been the vendor, except when I set it up for the organization where I worked.

The price point for non profits is very low, as the first 10 users are free and subsequent users are about $30 per user per month. There’s also the investment either in significant staff training or in a consultant, but for something as simple as a donor database, you’re probably looking at a one time cost of about $3000-$5000. Ongoing costs depend on the time and tech skills you have on staff. Organizations with one person who is interested and able to spend some time on it can need as little as 10 hours from a consultant per year, but those who need more assistance might need more like 48+ hours per year. Prices for consultants vary widely, as does quality. In terms of the return on that investment, a non profit that uses the system well should be able to raise more money with the data and time savings provided. Some organizations do this by better identifying and following up with donors, and some are able to demonstrate their effectiveness and better compete for grants.

It depends entirely on how complex the use of the system is. A system that does day-to-day program management, volunteer management, donor management, and outcomes tracking can cost upwards of $40K. A basic donor database can be as little as $3000-$5000.

For different organizations, I’ve evaluated Sugar CRM, eTapestry, Gift Works, Donor Perfect, Wild Apricot and Neon. These products all have their advantages, but only Sugar CRM has the open API and flexibility of Salesforce. Unfortunately, Sugar’s ecosystem is tiny compared to Salesforce’s. It is much harder to find qualified consultant, online resources are paltry in comparison, and I’ve been told by web developers that Sugar is horrible to interface with.

Hire someone to help, even if you just hire them to spend a few hours pointing you in the right direction. Make sure you’re ready to use the product, Salesforce provides pretty good resources for evaluating this. However, the big thing you need are leaders who are asking the important questions and who will give staff time to devote to setting up and using the product. Without those two things, it doesn't matter who you hire or how much money you spend, you won’t be successful.

I use Sales Cloud to manage my sales pipeline.

Salesforce is very good and offers a comprehensive sales process.

Salesforce has a vast sales process. It's a very broad tool, and it is difficult to pinpoint any specific feature.

There is no room for improvement in Sales Cloud. I would not want any new features included in the next release.

I have been using Sales Cloud for almost ten years.

I have not had any issues with the stability while using it.

The scalability of the product is good, actually.

Their support team is good.

Positive

I do not know anything about the pricing.

Everyone has room for improvement.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.