Index
Buyers submit two forms with distinct requirements. CRM matches the same email and treats everything as duplication. Separate contact identity from request identity to avoid losing legitimate opportunities.
Choose the operating model before requesting a quote
Compare preventing repeated contact records with linking several inquiries to one contact. The first solves identity; the second preserves commercial processes. Define when resubmission corrects an inquiry versus describing another project rather than deciding from email alone.
Contacts may be duplicated while requests describe genuinely new needs. Link identities and preserve separate commercial inquiries when scope differs. Record merges must not erase origins, responses or ownership, nor automatically combine proposals buyers intended to evaluate independently, particularly where several departments use the same purchasing contact for unrelated initiatives.
Requirements to include in the proposal
- Separate contact identities from each individual commercial request identifier
- Distinguish resubmissions and corrections from genuinely new projects
- Preserve inquiry history after linking repeated contact records
An acceptance test for this specific purchase
Send hypothetical inquiries from one contact for two business units. Maintain one personal record and two needs with independent context. Repeating the first must not create a third opportunity or overwrite the second's requirements.
Reference for assessing scope
Official documentation for evaluating this scope
Prepare your project with Quantum9
Bring Quantum9 the current process and an anonymized example of this issue. Discovery compares available configuration with necessary development and defines a scope your operations team can actually verify.