CRM Case Study: Mitigating Risks with an Accelerated Project Timeline

May 3, 2024

Last Minute Training Save


Background 

A long-standing client of Kona Kai was gearing up to migrate to a solution built in Salesforce.  This change would allow numerous efficiencies across various processes tied to creating, sending, and tracking vital contracts, along with other critical functions. Preparing to deploy any new technology involves orchestrating multiple moving pieces, meticulous planning, and adherence to tight timelines. Collaboration among various stakeholders, including IT teams, department heads, end-users, and consultants is essential to ensure alignment of objectives and smooth execution. Throughout this process, project plans are closely monitored to minimize disruption to ongoing operations and maximize the ROI of the technology investment. 


Challenge 

With a focus on scope and meeting unmovable dates it became clear that training would need to be accelerated. The plan was to conduct comprehensive training with employees, managers and contractors but a shift in scope to align with the required timeline wouldn’t allow for this. This would leave a gap in training and present a large risk to the success of the overall project. 


Training on a new CRM system is vital prior to any launch. Doing this ensures employees are equipped with the knowledge and skills needed to effectively utilize the platform, maximize its capabilities, and seamlessly integrate it into their daily workflows. As can be typical in these programs, the business had valid reasons for their accelerated timeline for launch. 


Solution 

Kona Kai jumped into action upon this discovery, providing a set of Salesforce training best practices and proactively presenting four different ways to approach training. After reviewing the options, timelines, and pros and cons of each approach, the client chose to move forward with Kona Kai to conduct discovery, create, and execute training for all end users. 


A training team comprised of external and internal stakeholders was established to outline roles, responsibilities, and anticipated involvement of each party. Super users were also identified to serve as mentors, troubleshooters, and advocates for successful implementation within the organization. 


To address the challenge effectively, Kona Kai devised a two-pronged approach. 


First, educational videos were created covering fundamental topics like navigation and search functionalities, ensuring accessibility for all users.  Secondly, detailed slide decks featuring step-by-step guides and screenshots were developed, serving as primary training materials and backup resources prior to a dedicated training environment being established. 


Detailed training timelines were tracked and updated to provide transparency and ensure project initiatives were on track. 


Results 

Despite the time constraints, Kona Kai expedited the training process, conducting the first live sessions within two months. Being a certified Salesforce partner proved to be vital as extensive knowledge of the software and capabilities expedited the ramp-up time often needed for research and development of such materials. These sessions, targeted at key users, marked the beginning of an extensive training campaign encompassing various topics and audiences. By the project's conclusion, Kona Kai had successfully trained more than 400 individuals over a six-week period, enabling the client to navigate the Salesforce transition seamlessly. The client met their accelerated deadline and effectively leveraged their new contracting process, a pivotal objective achieved through the implementation of Salesforce. 


Working with a Trusted Partner 

Through agility, expertise, and unwavering dedication, Kona Kai emerged as a trusted and flexible partner, guiding their client through a challenging software deployment phase. This case study underscores the invaluable role of proactive consultancy in mitigating risks, seizing opportunities, and driving organizational success. Kona Kai extends gratitude to their client for the opportunity to highlight their adaptability and commitment to excellence in CRM consulting. 


Contact us to begin your evolution.

INSIGHTS

By Paul Benvenuto July 31, 2026
PwC's April 2026 AI Performance Study surveyed 1,217 senior executives across 25 sectors and found something that should reframe how every regulated organization talks about AI investment: nearly three quarters of AI's economic value is being captured by just one fifth of organizations. Not because that top fifth has better models. PwC is specific about the differentiator: those organizations are 1.7 times more likely to have a Responsible AI framework and 1.5 times more likely to have a cross functional AI governance board. Their employees trust AI outputs at twice the rate of everyone else's. The value gap is structural, not a matter of who bought the better tool. That finding lands differently once you connect it to where trust actually comes from. It doesn't come from a more sophisticated model. It comes from knowing where your data originated, who touched it along the way, and what controls sat around it the entire time.  McKinsey's June 2026 research on AI data readiness makes the case that most organizations manage data like a storage problem when they should be managing it like a supply chain. A single PDF can expand into extracted text, tables, images, metadata, sensitivity tags, and quality scores, each one an intermediate artifact that AI systems reuse and recombine downstream. A small error introduced upstream doesn't stay small. It propagates. This matters more in regulated industries than almost anywhere else, because the data causing the most exposure is usually the data getting the least attention. Structured fields get governed. Clinical notes, claim narratives, loan officer comments, and audit trails, the unstructured stuff, usually don't, even though AI systems depend on it heavily. Gartner and IDC both put the share of enterprise data that is unstructured at somewhere around 80 to 90 percent. McKinsey's own research doesn't cite that specific figure, but makes the same underlying point: unstructured content is where AI systems draw the most context, and where governance attention is thinnest. None of this is an argument for waiting until your data is perfect before you deploy anything. PwC's 2026 Digital Trends in Operations Survey argues directly against that instinct: AI can help bridge data gaps, particularly through agents that reason using whatever data is actually available. The real mandate isn't clean data as a prerequisite. It's disciplined governance and iterative improvement running in parallel with deployment, calibrated to how much risk a given use case actually carries. So what does that look like in practice for a CIO or CDO sitting inside a regulated organization right now? A few diagnostic questions worth asking before your next AI initiative launches: Where does data quality actually break down in your pipeline, and does anyone own fixing it? Is lineage visible for the data feeding your highest risk AI use cases, or is it assumed? Where do unstructured assets, like clinical notes, policy documents, and loan files, enter your systems without any governance attached? Have you defined what "good enough" data quality means for each use case, calibrated to its actual risk profile, rather than applying one standard everywhere? Answering those honestly is uncomfortable in most organizations, because the answer is usually "we don't fully know." That's the point. You cannot govern what you cannot see, and you cannot trust an AI output built on a data foundation nobody has actually traced. The organizations in PwC's top 20 percent didn't get there by waiting for perfect data or by buying a better model. They got there by treating governance as a financial performance variable, not a compliance checkbox, and by building the lineage and controls that make trust possible at scale. Kona Kai's data supply chain assessment is built to answer exactly these questions before tool selection, not after. If you're not certain where your organization would land on that list, that uncertainty is worth resolving now. Get in touch to talk through what the assessment covers. Sources: PwC 2026 AI Performance Study, April 13, 2026 (74%/20% figure and 1.7x/1.5x/2x multipliers confirmed directly at pwc.com); McKinsey, AI Data Readiness: The Key to Scaling Impact, June 2026; Gartner and IDC estimates for the 80-90% unstructured data share; PwC 2026 Digital Trends in Operations Survey.
By Paul Benvenuto July 29, 2026
Every governance and workflow framework most organizations are running today was built for AI that waits for a human to ask it something. Agentic AI doesn't wait. It initiates, executes, and chains actions across systems on its own, and the workflows built around human initiated, human reviewed steps simply don't have
By Paul Benvenuto July 27, 2026
Education was the number one way companies say they adjusted their talent strategy in response to AI. And yet most organizations still treat training as an event. A workshop. A certificate. A box that gets checked once and never revisited.
By Paul Benvenuto July 20, 2026
Most organizations think they have AI governance because someone in legal drafted a policy and got it signed off. They don't. A policy sitting in a shared drive doesn't know where your AI is actually running. It doesn't flag it when a model drifts. It doesn't do a single thing when an employee routes a client file thro
By Paul Benvenuto July 20, 2026
Governance, people, data, and process are not sequential steps. They are four load-bearing walls, and in regulated industries, a crack in any one of them shows up as risk somewhere else. Here is where each pillar actually breaks down today, and what the data says about the gap between where most organizations sit and w
By Carly Whitte July 1, 2026
AI success depends on more than technology. Governance, regulation, and operational oversight are helping organizations turn AI pilots into scalable business capabilities.
By Carly Whitte June 27, 2026
Healthcare AI adoption depends on more than technology. Governance, accountability, and AI readiness determine whether AI delivers measurable business value.
By Carly Whitte May 24, 2026
AI-powered “vibe coding” is accelerating enterprise software creation, but governance and security controls are struggling to keep pace. Learn the hidden risks of AI-generated applications and why responsible AI governance is critical for scalable enterprise adoption.
By Carly Whitte May 6, 2026
Why does AI adoption stall in healthcare? Discover how accountability, governance, and risk management influence success beyond change management.
By Carly Whitte April 28, 2026
AI adoption in healthcare often stalls due to unclear accountability, not resistance. Learn how governance design, risk management, and liability structures impact successful implementation.