Better Way To Add History To Large Group Of Contacts

[jnpurdy]

I use Microsoft Word's mail merge instead of ACT to take advantage of Word's features.

The contact list is created in ACT and then exported to Excel.

I then use the list created in act to create a short history about what was sent (instead of attaching the whole eMail).

In this case the number of records is 1,200. 

In creating the history, it is taking a very long time - so far over 20 minutes for the system to write the history to the contact records. 

What I did was:

• Create a lookup of those receiving the eMail
• Under the history tab right click to record history
• To the right of the Contact field, clicked on the contact button and selected Current Lookup from the "Select from" dropdown
• In Regarding entered a short description of the eMail that was sent

Is there a better way to do this?

[Gary W · Accepted solution]

Hi John,

For these types of outbound email volumes, I would strongly recommend using an emarketing platform like Act emarketing to create or import templates, send out the messages from external mail servers, manage deliverability, avoid spam classification and handle reporting and history recording back into Act.

Mail Merge by nature is not particularly well suited for sending emails to more than a few tens of recipients. I know there are a couple issues with the functionality of Act Mail Merges that are also limiting right now (these are high on the to-fix list), but I would advise you consider changing your approach to sending out these numbers of emails to gain some pretty worthwhile benefits.

[jonmklub]

I"m not sure it it's faster, but I think simpler.

Do your lookup first

go to contact list.

Tag All 

CTRL+H or Click on REcord History

[jnpurdy]

Thanks for the tip to enter a history record without being on the history tab.

[Gary W]

Hi John,

Adding 1,200 history records will be a slow process. Jon's suggestion would however be a more efficient method.

Could you help us understand why you have chosen to use Microsoft Word's mail merge feature for your emails instead of Act? What Word specific features are you taking advantage of? This kind of feedback is useful for our ongoing product development.

[jnpurdy]

Handling graphics especially when being sent to other than Outlook recipients.

Besides, Word can work on sending out a long list while I continue to work with ACT.  After sorting by eMail address for more random eMail deliveries, I typically send only 40 - 50 at a time to avoid SPAM identification.

I don't see how Jon's suggestion would be more efficient, if efficient translates to faster.  I do see how it is easier to bring up the dialogue box. 

Or am I missing something?

[Gary W]

By efficient, I just meant it's faster to hit Ctrl+A, then Ctrl+H from a lookup list view to open a new history window with all the contacts pre-filled.

[Gary W · Accepted solution]

Hi John,

For these types of outbound email volumes, I would strongly recommend using an emarketing platform like Act emarketing to create or import templates, send out the messages from external mail servers, manage deliverability, avoid spam classification and handle reporting and history recording back into Act.

Mail Merge by nature is not particularly well suited for sending emails to more than a few tens of recipients. I know there are a couple issues with the functionality of Act Mail Merges that are also limiting right now (these are high on the to-fix list), but I would advise you consider changing your approach to sending out these numbers of emails to gain some pretty worthwhile benefits.

[ch1p]

If your note regarding the sent email is less than 254 Chars long I would suggest creating a new field called sent emails (254 chars) and make sure it is also ticked create history. Now you can use Edit Replace to update the lookup in the new field and it will also add to the history along with any single emails or closed activity so you can see all communication in one place and also view the last email sent from the new field. I think you will find updating the records much quicker using this option so worth a try.

[jnpurdy]

An excellent recommendation and I see no reason why Last Results couldn't be used for the same thing.

[ch1p]

Agreed if last results field is not already in use would work just as well.