Clay.earth vs. Shared Contacts for Gmail

Shared Contacts for Gmail is well suited for organizations that generate and coordinate long term partnerships and that have a big remote working component as a main form or working. It is less appropriate with organizations dedicated to sales and performance based ways of working. I would recommend it for medium size organizations.

Incentivized

• Helps manage contact lists and distribution lists.
• Eliminates the need for the use of an additional platform, like a CRM, to manage contacts.
• Makes it easier to share contacts with a targeted audience with the flexibility to be selective about who the data is being shared with.

• I have been looking for a way to share our contacts within our organization for a while now. This process really improves how we were doing it within Google Sheets.
• My only negative is that it has taken so long for it to be functional within Google.

Incentivized

My company used Zendesk Sell for a while, but the profiles weren't as manageable and easy accessed as Shared Contacts [for Gmail.] It resulted easier to update the contact information within Shared Contacts [for Gmail] and maintain the contact flow, than updating in Zendesk, and then manually go into gmail and continue the conversation. As well we don't use Shared Contacts [for Gmail] alone. We do accompany it with an internal operations system, were we manage the clients profile, but the combination between the two is perfect.

Incentivized

• More contact with clients
• Keeping track of contact information no matter the places
• Clients like the familiarity that is created by the constant check on them

Incentivized