Open Source CRMs: How Do They Stack Up?
Michelle Murrain, NOSI
Constituent Relationship Management (CRM) tools are one of the bread and butter tools of nonprofit organizations: tracking donations, constituents, activities and the like are critical to accomplishing mission. It makes sense then, that CRM and fundraising software are the most plentiful and mature software product vertical in the nonprofit sector.
There is also an increasing amount of change and innovation in this realm, from open APIs on such stalwarts as Convio and Kintera, to newer open source alternatives like CiviCRM and MPower Open, and the entry of Salesforce.com as a force to be reckoned with.
This is, for sure, a space to watch.
The question is, how do the newer open source alternatives stack up to the long standing proprietary packages and Software as a Service (SaaS) options that people have gotten used to? The answer is, for the most part, they stack up quite well. There is likely to be an open source package that will work for your organization.
On the small-scale side, Organizer's Database is an open source desktop database (although it depends on Windows and Visual Basic), and is a great choice for small organizations that want a simple but powerful CRM, without having to pay to acquire it. It compares well to the myriad smaller desktop proprietary fundraising and CRM packages that have been out there for a while, such as Giftworks.
In the web-based realm, SugarCRM and CiviCRM are two server-based web applications. They are free and open source, and install fairly easily on a Linux server, or even generic virtual hosting service.
SugarCRM is designed for business, so like Salesforce.com, you have to re-arrange your thinking about how to use them, and translate vocabulary (like “accounts” should be “organizations”.) There are, however, quite a number of nonprofits that use it.
CiviCRM, on the other hand, is designed for nonprofit organizations, and has very nonprofit specific functions, like tracking contributions, membership and event registration. The new version has some case management functionality. It also scored quite high on the NTEN CRM satisfaction survey conducted late last year -- in fact, it was first in satisfaction. There is an increasingly active community, it is under heavy development, and some large and well known nonprofits are using it.
SugarCRM and CiviCRM can be compared most clearly to web-based CRMs like eTapestry, CitySoft, Kintera, or Convio, although there are not exact feature overlaps, so it's not easy to make a direct comparison.
The new player in the field is MPower Open, which was called “MPX” but is newly open source. MPower Open is an enterprise-class client/server CRM that compares very well feature-wise with Blackbaud's Raiser's Edge. It is a good thing that there is now an open source client/server package that can compare well with what is sometimes considered the standard.
What is important to remember, of course, is that although all of these CRM examples are “free”, they are not without cost to implement. Some, such as Organizer's Database, and even SugarCRM, can be up and running in a matter of minutes, but of course it will take days and weeks of time and effort before any CRM, whether open source or proprietary, bears fruit. CiviCRM and MPower Open are alternatives that take a bit of expertise to implement, and it will be important to find people who can provide training and support for those packages in order to take the best advantage of them.
Open Source CRMs are getting better, more plentiful, and providing options to nonprofit organizations that can be more cost-effective, and more flexible than the proprietary alternatives. This, as well as the fast growing open source field in general, is providing competition and incentives to change (like MPower becoming open source) that can only benefit everyone in the long term.
Mary,
I agree wholeheartedly with you when you say that there are CRM products that are mature, and have been around track for a long time.
You say "Opensource is a very dangerous minefield for non-profits." Wow, is that a problematic blanket statement. It is true that nonprofit-focused, open source CRMs are further behind in development than their proprietary alternatives. And I never suggested avoiding proprietary software like the plague, either. Some of them are good, and will fit the needs of many nonprofits.
But the promise of open source software is evident. Bet you've tried Firefox. Bet you run your webserver on a LAMP (open source platform). Bet you search on Google, which is written on top of open source software. Open source software makes the net work. It makes web 2.0 possible.
Implementing *any* software package to track donations and contacts in a nonprofit is a minefield, whether it be Excel (or OpenOffice.org) spreadsheets, or Raiser's Edge, and everything in between. But open source options provide, in many cases, lower TCO, as well as some strategic value than the proprietary alternatives. Strategic values include easier integration, increased possibilities of changes and customization, a community of developers who are basically directed in development by the needs of users rather than being primarily influenced by the bottom line, and software that will never be bought (and therefore discontinued out of your control.)
EBase is still kicking, although it is decreasing in use. Not because it was "open source" (in spirit) but because the technology it was based on (FileMaker Pro) is being left behind for newer, more powerful technologies. This is also true for many desktop-based CRMs. Having been around the block for a long time also means behind the 8 ball technologically - organizations need new functionality as technology changes. But that's a whole new article.
What defines a CRM, and who defines a CRM is a tricky business. There are overlapping feature sets that are part of the CRM space, and not all nonprofits need all of them, and some nonprofits use multiple CRMs for multiple functions.
In terms of MPower - I haven't personally run MPower (and I'm not a development specialist, anyway) but in looking closely at the feature set, and talking with development folks, it seems like it's pretty close. And, since it's open source, people can make it closer. (An aside, gazillions of ministries and churches use standard nonprofit CRMs. So it seems to me that a CRM initially designed to be used by faith communities probably isn't that far off the mark.)
I didn't include EBase in this article not because I thought it was dead (I don't - I know it is alive and kicking, although falling out of favor.) It's because EBase is not, technically open source. It is open source in spirit - and you can modify the underlying "code" - but "code" is in quotations because it depends on a proprietary platform (FileMaker Pro). Thus it cannot technically be called open source.
And EBase is a great example - you can keep EBase going, even if there is no "company" behind it. (That is, as long as FileMaker Pro keeps going. There's the rub.)
Mary O'Donnell: My experience has been the exact opposite of yours. Since the code is open source, it's by definition available to you at no charge. So even if the originating company goes out of business (unlikely if the software's good), then the nonprofit can continue to use and maintain the software indefinitely. If a proprietary-software company were to go belly up, then you'd have the exact situation you fear; attached at the hip to a dead piece of software you can't maintain of modify. And for the record, Ebase is still very much alive.
Opensource is a very dangerous minefield for non-profits. You talk about proprietory packages being avoided like the plague, when in fact many of them offer supported API's, and have the financial strength to stick around.
One only has to look in the recent past, specifically Ebase. Ebase was touted as open-source nirvana, and was 'backed' by FileMaker Pro. Thousands of non-profits signed on.
Where is it now? Dead. And with it hundreds of thousands spent on implementation, consulting fees, customization fees, training, etc. In fact, the only people that did well are the very consultants that recommended (and received fees).
In addition, you mentioned CRM software packages, that in reality aren't CRM at all (such as Convio, which is much more a marketing and Content Management System, and would never claim to be THE CRM database- because they don't track off-line interactions, at all.)
Furthermore, comparing MPower Open with Raiser's Edged is comparing apples to oranges. Raiser's Edge has such sophisticated tracking, it makes MPower look like a stone and chisel (unless you are a ministry, which Mpower has been specifically designed for).
It surprises me that you also did not mention other CRM products, such as Exceed, Donorperfect, Sage, Donorquest, Donorpro, etc... that have all been in business for 10+ years and have tens of thousands of customers. All of these products track much more than donors, and in fact track many different kinds of constituents, from inidividuals to Volunteers, Companies to other non profit organizations.
Opensource really only makes sense if a non profit has the long-term and dedicated technical resources to make it happen. It's not for the light of heart. Implementations start at $2k, with some quickly reaching $100k when all of the customizations are done.
When there are proven packages used by thousands available for $2k or less, why take a chance with Opensource???
Mary
Great post, love your blog as well.
I am wondering if you can point me to some good basic CRM material.
I work for a small, though quickly growing, company that provides professional services in the DC area. I am exploring some CRM options for us, but need better material to provide to our President and other key personnel to sell them on the concept, and so they and I can make some intelligent decisions about whether or not a system would work, and especially how we would use it.
I'm not clear what are good deciding factors on which system to use and why, especially.
The good news / bad news is we do not have a well defined process for CRM presently. So we are adaptable to a new system, but it will be more complex to configure it I believe.
Any assistance would be appreciated.
Thanks for the informative article on Open Source CRMs. Regarding SugarCRM, it is packaged in multiple ways so that those with existing systems and those without can install it. Complete packages including Web server and database (LAMP stack) can be installed for Windows, Linux, Mac OS X, and Solaris UNIX.
The new Studio module makes it very easy to change the names of tabs, modules, and fields to suit your organization. New modules can be created with ModuleBuilder.