How Embracing Customer Success Can Transform Your Business Processes

Atanu Roy
SVP Customer Success
“Can you just document the new CS (Customer Success) processes?” was how it started – sparked by quite reasonable feedback from our Sales team trying to formalize where their part of the process ended and my team’s began since we started maturing our organization.
Inwardly, I groaned. Outwardly, my response was, “of course, let me get right on that!”
Why Customer Success is Everyone’s Responsibility
Building a Customer-Centric Culture
Why the groan? Well, rightly or wrongly, I’ve been spending time with all our teams – Product, Support, Professional Services, Sales, Marketing, Legal, and Operations – gaining buy-in to a philosophy that “Customer Success” doesn’t start and end with my team (even though it’s called the Customer Success team!). Actually, it is a facet of every process in our company – which is fine as a philosophical principle, but try documenting it… you have to get into every process and rework an element of it!
Why Customer Success is More Than Just a Team
So my reasoning was this: let’s work on the culture to include Customer Success at every turn; let’s offer some mentoring (and in turn be mentored myself) to every function, and let’s evolve the behavior from the ground up before documenting the processes. After all, it’s not the documentation that adds the value; it’s the behavior that it documents.
So why am I blogging about my own woes?
I had a lightbulb moment. I realized that my challenges weren’t unique to my industry and that pulling together that combination of culture, tooling, and processes were common factors to pretty much every customer challenge that I come across, despite the wide variety of use cases that these represent (such as legal case management, customer relationship management, procurement and supply chain processes, sports club management, HR policy management to name a few – I’m sure you’ll agree, pretty diverse!)
In all these scenarios, the stimulus that begins the set of related business flows is either directly or indirectly influenced by the result of those same business flows.
It sounds counter-intuitive, right? Surely most organizations work on a set of linear flows that feed from one to the next, mapping across the teams in that organization, to achieve the appropriate business outcomes, don’t they?
The Infinity Loop: A Framework for Connected Processes
So, here’s a challenge for you – think about your teams’ inputs and outputs and consider the ways that your outputs could influence the inputs – even if you’re fed by, and feed into, other teams along the way. What are the metrics? Are they volume or speed-related? Revenue-related? Quality-related? Feedback score-related? Maybe they’re a combination, like efficiency or effectiveness? Think laterally if it’s not obvious – maybe take the time to think about it away from work – I’m betting that you’ll find the link!
“Hardly an original thought,” I hear you cry, and of course, you’re right, this ‘infinity loop’ concept has been written about before, and I’m sure that many of you involved in Customer Success, sales, or marketing have an image of that loop in your minds.
In my case, when thinking about documenting Customer Success processes, I’ve got some parallel threads. One is: let’s document our ‘internal’ processes – at least that helps everyone understand what we do directly. The other is: let’s identify the ways in which my team influences the other parts of the business and find ways to have their documentation updated.
Here’s an example.
In many ‘customer journey’ infinity loops, there’s always the concept of an ‘untouched/unaware’ marketplace – those prospective customers that we could serve with our solutions, but they probably don’t know about us. It’s usually the job of marketing to turn the ‘unaware’ into ‘aware’ so that when those prospects have a problem that we could address, they know that we exist.
Practical Steps to Embed Customer Success Company-Wide
Does my CS team play a part here, given that its primary role is nothing to do with marketing? I would argue that the answer is an emphatic ‘yes.’
We can feed insights on what we have done for customers (rather than what we could do) so that the marketing messages stay pertinent and topical. By ‘pre-conditioning’ the message, we can maximize the generation of qualified leads.
Through the ‘sales’ stages in that customer journey (most loops show these as the steps from evaluation to purchasing decision) my team builds the demonstration assets, informative materials, and brings the domain expertise that materially increases our rapport, reputation, and win rate.
In staying engaged with these customers throughout their adoption experience, my team feeds into the product lifecycle to help prioritize developments in line with market and customer needs.
If we do this right, our customers stay loyal and drive continuous value to the level that they renew and even expand the footprint of our offerings in their environments.
OK, now I write it down, I’ve realized that documenting this might not be such a mountain to climb after all…maybe I was just feeling a bit grumpy.
The Need for Tool Integration in Customer Success
The Challenge of Tool Silos
Anyway, I got to thinking about not just the inter-connectedness of the processes, but also of the tooling supporting them. Most companies I’ve worked in have grown at such a pace that they have selected different tools to handle different parts of the process in isolation. For example, a CRM might have been chosen for centralizing customer data, but it’s likely that the marketing department has different tooling for their campaign management, the support team probably has different tooling for ticket management, and the product teams have different tools for prioritizing their development…and so on.
Aiming for ‘Process Harmony’
But if the challenge is to drive ‘process harmony’ (new phrase…think I’ll keep it!) then we need these tools to talk to each other.
If we were lucky, we managed to integrate them – usually through APIs, customizations, or with external business intelligence tools to give us the insights needed. If we were fortunate enough to have selected ‘open’ tools and have good enterprise architects and data scientists, it’s even worked pretty well!
If you’re one of these lucky few, hats off. In my experience though, this is the exception rather than the rule – and extends well beyond sales and marketing – it’s a challenge that impacts every process in the business (back to that infinity loop concept).
As a result of this, many of the businesses I speak with find themselves ‘stuck’ when trying to gain incremental improvements – often because an efficiency initiative in one department inevitably highlights a dependency on the tooling or process choices in another (sound familiar?).
Conclusion: Procrastination or Process Clarity?
How are you supposed to get unstuck? You’re unlikely to be able to get other teams to change their tooling choices, since the budget and value is primarily justified within that team’s spend. You could try putting manual methods in place (e.g., externalize the data from the system, put it through some business intelligence, and make it available to upstream or downstream teams) – the popular choice for many, but ultimately ‘information’ doesn’t equate to ‘action’ – unless processes are actually triggered, this is just ‘reporting.’
Ideally, we would find a solution that could fit alongside existing tools, model out the data relationships, drive the workflows, or provide the insights needed across teams and track metrics that can show us how systemic improvement is being achieved.
And AI? Can you write a blog without mentioning it? How about using AI to categorize, enrich, or assist those workflows to generate a step-change in how you operate? Imagine what an army of analysts and consultants might achieve if they looked over every business flow – that’s where AI would play its part.
Talk about procrastination…in the time taken to write this blog, I could have documented something… ah well, back to the keyboard!
Find out more About Cyferd
New York
Americas Tower
1177 6th Avenue
5th Floor
New York
NY 10036
London
2nd Floor,
Berkeley Square House,
Berkeley Square,
London W1J 6BD
Request a Demo
Comparisons
BOAT Platform Comparison 2026
Timelines and pricing vary significantly based on scope, governance, and integration complexity.
What Is a BOAT Platform?
Business Orchestration and Automation Technology (BOAT) platforms coordinate end-to-end workflows across teams, systems, and decisions.
Unlike RPA, BPM, or point automation tools, BOAT platforms:
- Orchestrate cross-functional processes
- Integrate operational systems and data
- Embed AI-driven decision-making directly into workflows
BOAT platforms focus on how work flows across the enterprise, not just how individual tasks are automated.
Why Many Automation Initiatives Fail
Most automation programs fail due to architectural fragmentation, not poor tools.
Common challenges include:
- Siloed workflows optimised locally, not end-to-end
- Data spread across disconnected platforms
- AI added after processes are already fixed
- High coordination overhead between tools
BOAT platforms address this by aligning orchestration, automation, data, and AI within a single operational model, improving ROI and adaptability.
Enterprise BOAT Platform Comparison
Appian
Strengths
Well established in regulated industries, strong compliance, governance, and BPMN/DMN modeling. Mature partner ecosystem and support for low-code and professional development.
Considerations
9–18 month implementations, often supported by professional services. Adapting processes post-deployment can be slower in dynamic environments.
Best for
BPM-led organizations with formal governance and regulatory requirements.
Questions to ask Appian:
- How can we accelerate time to production while maintaining governance and compliance?
- What is the balance between professional services and internal capability building?
- How flexible is the platform when processes evolve unexpectedly?
Cyferd
Strengths
Built on a single, unified architecture combining workflow, automation, data, and AI. Reduces coordination overhead and enables true end-to-end orchestration. Embedded AI and automation support incremental modernization without locking decisions early. Transparent pricing and faster deployment cycles.
Considerations
Smaller ecosystem than legacy platforms; integration catalog continues to grow. Benefits from clear business ownership and process clarity.
Best for
Organizations reducing tool sprawl, modernizing incrementally, and maintaining flexibility as systems and processes evolve.
Questions to ask Cyferd:
- How does your integration catalog align with our existing systems and workflows?
- What is the typical timeline from engagement to production for an organization of our size and complexity?
- How do you support scaling adoption across multiple business units or geographies?
IBM Automation Suite
Strengths
Extensive automation and AI capabilities, strong hybrid and mainframe support, enterprise-grade security, deep architectural expertise.
Considerations
Multiple product components increase coordination effort. Planning phases can extend time to value; total cost includes licenses and services.
Best for
Global enterprises with complex hybrid infrastructure and deep IBM investments.
Questions to ask IBM:
- How do the Cloud Pak components work together for end-to-end orchestration?
- What is the recommended approach for phasing implementation to accelerate time to value?
- What internal skills or external support are needed to scale the platform?
Microsoft Power Platform
Strengths
Integrates deeply with Microsoft 365, Teams, Dynamics, and Azure. Supports citizen and professional developers, large connector ecosystem.
Considerations
Capabilities spread across tools, requiring strong governance. Consumption-based pricing can be hard to forecast; visibility consolidation may require additional tools.
Best for
Microsoft-centric organizations seeking self-service automation aligned with Azure.
Questions to ask Microsoft:
- How should Power Platform deployments be governed across multiple business units?
- What is the typical cost trajectory as usage scales enterprise-wide?
- How do you handle integration with legacy or third-party systems?
Pega
Strengths
Advanced decisioning, case management, multi-channel orchestration. Strong adoption in financial services and healthcare; AI frameworks for next-best-action.
Considerations
Requires certified practitioners, long-term investment, premium pricing, and ongoing specialist involvement.
Best for
Organizations where decisioning and complex case orchestration are strategic differentiators.
Questions to ask Pega:
- How do you balance decisioning depth with deployment speed?
- What internal capabilities are needed to maintain and scale the platform?
- How does licensing scale as adoption grows across business units?
ServiceNow
Strengths
Mature ITSM and ITOM foundation, strong audit and compliance capabilities. Expanding into HR, operations, and customer workflows.
Considerations
Configuration-first approach can limit rapid experimentation; licensing scales with usage; upgrades require structured testing. Often seen as IT-centric.
Best for
Enterprises prioritizing standardization, governance, and IT service management integration.
Questions to ask ServiceNow:
- How do you support rapid prototyping for business-led initiatives?
- What is the typical timeline from concept to production for cross-functional workflows?
- How do licensing costs evolve as platform adoption scales globally?
