We have these 2 fields in SFDC: Lead status (lead only) and Funnel Stage (both lead and contact).
Lead Status field has the following values: Open, Working, Unqualified, Recycled, Converted; whereas the funnel stage field has all our RCM stage names and there is a set of trigger campaigns in Marketo that updates the Funnel stage field whenever a lead/contact moves to a new stage in RCM, this field is also view only to all our SFDC users (except the Marketo user naturally), so it's more just a window into the RCM rather than a lead lifecycle field.
This system was set up long before my time in the org, but it always seemed disjointed to me - both fields serve a very similar purpose, but lead status is just an incomplete version of the funnel stage field + plus it exists only on the lead object so it is very difficult to get any adequate reporting out of it (my theory is that lead status, sfdc system field, was used before the company got Marketo and was just left there unchanged atfter the funnel stage field was added).
Since the people who set all of this up are no longer with the company, I can't get any background on why lifecycle was set up this way, and keep wondering if I am missing some potential benefits of having these 2 parallel fields, so I thought I would seek out the Nation's collective wisdom and see if anyone else does it this way
I am debating between 2 ways to rebuild the system:
1. Ditch the lead status field altogether and switch to the funnel stage field, make this field editable by sales and use it for all the lifecycle campaigns etc
2. Add contact status field and update the values in lead/contact status fields to refelct our lead lifecycle and leave the funnel stage field unchanged
I am more inclined to go with the 1st solution, seems simpler and cleaner to keep everything in one field; the 2nd solution might be safer and require less reworking of the exisitng infrustructure in Marketo though
So to sum it up: does anyone use lead/contact status field parallel to funnel stage or any other similar field? If so, what are the benefits of maintianing 2 parallel fields? Which solution, 1 or 2, do you think makes more sense to implement?
All thoughts and suggestions are very much appreciated