Does a "User" have to be a "licenced" user of CRM? RRS feed

  • Question

  • In the CRM application we wish to develop there will be a mixture of service-providing staff, some of whom are employees, others volunteers -- and we want to track of information on all of them -- e.g. as Resources who can have appointments scheduled with clients.

    It appears that the User entity would be the best way to represent these people (after all, they would all have email accounts).

    So, is the User entity distinct from the concept of licenced CRM users?  Because things could get expensive if every worker out in the field had to be part of the licence agreement.



    Thursday, September 24, 2015 8:39 PM

All replies

  • There is also the concept of resources. They can be interacted with for scheduling, but do not require a login and thus a license. We've done that in the past to handle volunteers.
    Thursday, September 24, 2015 10:05 PM
  • There are different licensing types that you can select for a user.  All have different restrictions.

    If you have a large number of users out in the field, you could use a 3rd party portal application like ADX Studios Portal.    Your field users then get added as Contacts in CRM.  You can then expose select entities through the portal to those individuals.  By relating the entity records to the specific Contacts who are outside users, you can limit what records that they see.  Since they are technically contacts and not real CRM users, you can reduce the number of CRM user licenses required.

    You would need to get a quote and determine if it is cost effective for your organization.

    Jason Peterson

    Thursday, September 24, 2015 11:04 PM