Best practice for pipeline stages
Hi everyone. Can I get your input please…
What is your view on having pipeline stages called Won and Lost? I have been unsuccessful so far trying to logically explain to my employer (who insists on keeping these stages in our pipeline in Pipedrive) that we don't need them as Won and Lost are statuses not stages, and we can look that info up easily re which deals were won and lost.
Can you share with me what you consider to be the most commercially compelling reasons for removing Won and Lost as stages in a pipeline, as my employer has dismissed my arguments are "theoretical concerns" that to him don't matter.
Here's what I have communicated to him so far, as to why we should remove the Won and Lost stages:
- They can mess up our forecasting data because they risk causing us to think we have marked a deal as Won when all we have done is move it to the stage called Won, which are totally different things.
- Seeing Won and Lost deals is a matter of a click away anyway, on these filters:
- All Won Deals (these were links for him to those filters in our Pipedrive)
- All Lost Deals
- They (the two additional columns these unnecessary stages create) makes all the other columns narrower giving a cramped pipeline view with stage titles cut-off
- They also make the pipeline view 30+ screens deep/tall!
If you were my employer, what would persuade you to agree to remove these stages?
If you're wondering why he likes these stages, it's a combination of:
- "I just like being able to see those won and lost deals there"
- "We've always done it that way" (not explicitly said, but is my interpretation of this)
- "What's the harm? Makes no difference." (hence his "it's only your theoretical concern" point)
Thanks in advance for your input and suggestions!
MC
Comments
-
Your question is reasonable. Primarily, Won/Lost stages are needed to eliminate unnecessary noise from the pipeline, which is not semantically required there.
Another question is why it's not possible to rename these stages, link them to existing ones, add foolproof mechanisms, adjust analytics to avoid accidental changes, and provide options for subsequent actions. For example, at the Lost stage, you can specify the reason, while at Won, nothing. To prevent deals from disappearing into a void, Pipedrive suggests adding a custom field and automation. This seems like a workaround because Pipedrive does not have a custom field type for boolean, but even if it did, users might forget to select it, which could ruin the entire statistics.
Ideally, the "Won" stage should be configurable and offer options like deal repetition.
Regarding the fine line between the last stage and Won, the logic comes from task-tracking systems. Instead of Won, they usually use Close, which serves two functions:
1. Immediately close the task.
2. Allow the manager to decide if the task can be closed and if everything has been done correctly.
I think the latter point is very close to Won in CRM.
0 -
The best argument I can make is that Pipedrive is designed to treat won and lost as statuses, not as stages. One can lose a deal in any stage and win a deal from any stage. To work counter to Pipedrive's design is to kick against the goads if I may use a Biblical reference.
Does your boss possibly have a history of using HubSpot? My understanding is that HubSpot is built around the idea of having "won" or "closed" as a stage. However, Pipedrive is not built that way.
1
