Paynee

This article was downloaded by: [Universite De Paris 1]
On: 21 May 2013, At: 12:20

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Marketing Management

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjmm20
Customer Relationship Management: from Strategy to

Implementation
Adrian Payne & Pennie Frow
Published online: 01 Feb 2010.
To cite this article: Adrian Payne & Pennie Frow (2006): Customer Relationship Management: from Strategy to
Implementation, Journal of Marketing Management, 22:1-2, 135-168
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/026725706776022272
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to
anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,
claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Journal of Marketing Management, 2006, 22, 135-168
Adrian Payne1 and Customer Relationship

Pennie Frow2 Management: from Strategy
to Implementation
This article examines Customer
Relationship Management, or CRM,
from the perspective of strategy
formulation and implementation. We
commence by reviewing the origins and
role of CRM and highlighting the
importance of adopting a cross-
functional approach to CRM strategy
Cranfield School of Management, formulation. We examine alternative
Cranfield University approaches to CRM strategy
development and, using an ‘interaction
research’ approach, propose a model that
Downloaded by [Universite De Paris 1] at 12:20 21 May 2013
addresses both CRM strategy and

implementation. We identify four critical
implementation components of a
successful CRM programme and
examine these in the context of five key
cross-functional CRM processes. The
model structure is used to help identify a
research agenda
Keywords: CRM, customer relationship management, CRM implementation.

CRM strategy,relationship. marketing
Introduction
Customer Relationship Management, or CRM, has developed into an area of

major significance in less than a decade, with the worldwide global market
for CRM systems and consultancy estimated to grow to $US 47 billion by
2006 (Gartner 2003). Although the term CRM is relatively new, the principles
behind it are not. Businesses have long practiced some form of customer
1 Correspondence: Professor Adrian Payne, Cranfield School of Management,

Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedford, MK43 0AL, UK. Tel: +44 1234 751122, Fax:
+44 1234 751806, email: a.payne@cranfield.ac.uk
2 Pennie Frow, Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield University, Cranfield,
Bedford, MK43 0AL
ISSN1472-1376/2006/1-2/00135 + 33 £8.00/0 ©Westburn Publishers Ltd.

136 Adrian Payne and Pennie Frow
relationship management. What sets present day CRM apart is that

organisations now have an increased potential to utilise technology and
manage one-to-one relationships with potentially huge numbers of
customers in a context of rapid market transformation.
The purpose of CRM is to efficiently and effectively increase the
acquisition and retention of profitable customers by selectively initiating,
building and maintaining appropriate relationships with them. Advances in
information technology can assist with the development of improved
customer relationships. Companies have at their disposal a range of
database, data mart, and data warehouse technologies, as well as a growing
number of CRM applications. Such developments make it possible to gather
vast amounts of customer data and to analyse, interpret and utilise it
constructively. Furthermore, the advantages presented by increasingly
powerful computer hardware, software and e-services are augmented by the
decreasing costs of running them. By using a wide range of CRM tools
companies can, potentially, target their most promising customer
opportunities more effectively.
However, this does not mean that such benefits will automatically be
achieved by the purchase of CRM software solutions, as illustrated by many
examples of CRM failure (e.g. Ebner et al. 2002). Opportunities for
relationship enhancement through information technology (IT) may not be
realised. Authors such as Carr (2003) and Schrage (1997) have pointed to the
potential transformation of IT from a strategic to a more commodity-like
factor of production and organisations’ unwillingness to change behaviour in
the context of too many technological choices. If the benefits of CRM are to be
realised, a more integrated approach is needed for both the formulation and
implementation of CRM strategy.
The purpose of this article is to examine CRM strategy development and
propose a model for addressing key issues in CRM implementation. More
particularly, its aims are:
1. To examine the role of CRM processes and consider the importance of

adopting a cross-function approach to CRM strategy development.
2. To discuss the origins and role of CRM.
3. To review the development of alternative approaches to CRM
strategy development.
4. To propose a model for CRM strategy and implementation utilising
an ‘interaction research’ (Gummesson 2002a) approach.
5. To use the model structure to help identify future research
opportunities.
Customer Relationship Management from Strategy to Implementation 137
The Origins and Role of CRM
CRM is based on the principles of relationship marketing which is regarded

as one of the key developmental areas of modern marketing and one which
has generated great research interest (Sheth 2000). We see relationship
marketing as a paradigmatic shift in marketing approach, a perspective
supported by several leading scholars (e.g. Grönroos 1997; Gummesson 1997;
Parvatiyar and Sheth 1997).
Relationship marketing emerged from work in the 1980s in industrial
marketing (Bund Jackson 1985; Levitt 1983), studies of interaction,
relationships and networks by IMP and others (Håkansson and Snehota
2000) and services marketing (Berry 1983). However, publications on the
importance of relationships appeared in the 1970s and earlier (Sheth and
Parvitiyar 1995) and its origins can be traced back to ancient times (Grönroos
1994). Berry’s (1983) paper launched the term relationship marketing where
he defined it as attracting, maintaining, and enhancing customer
relationships.
By the 1990s relationship marketing was a topic of great interest to

marketing scholars and practitioners. The increased interest in ‘one to one’
marketing (Peppers and Rogers 1993) highlighted the potential for shifting
from a mass marketing to individualized or ‘one-to-one’ marketing where
the customer and supplier engage in a mutually beneficial co-production
process (Bendapudi and Leone 2003). Relationship-oriented approaches have
been increasingly advocated over the last fifteen years (e.g. Grönroos 1994;
Gummesson 2002b; Webster 2002; Vargo and Lusch 2004). However,
relationship marketing has not developed as a streamlined and integrated
body of research and Coote (1994) has described how alternative approaches
to relationship marketing have evolved.
A number of contributors to the relationship marketing literature
emphasize the key role of multiple stakeholders (e.g. Christopher, Payne and
Ballantyne, 1991; Kotler, 1992; Gummesson, 1999; Morgan and Hunt, 1994).
We adopt the perspective of Ryals and Payne (2001) who suggest that
relationship marketing is concerned with managing relationships with
multiple stakeholders, while the focus of customer relationship management
should be primarily on the customer (cf. Gummesson 2002c, p. 310).
However, CRM does need to be considered in the context of its interface with
other key stakeholders.
The Development of CRM
It is not the purpose of this paper to provide an exhaustive domain review of

the CRM literature. However, some commentary should be made on its
development. With its roots in relationship marketing, CRM is a relatively

new management discipline. In the academic community the two terms
relationship marketing and CRM are often used interchangeably (Parvitiyar
and Sheth 2001).
CRM is the outcome of the continuing evolution and integration of
marketing ideas and newly available data, technologies, and organisational
approaches (Boulding et al. 2005). In 2003, Zablah, Beuenger and Johnston
observed that the practitioner and academic literatures have failed to
produce a consensus definition for CRM and the large number of CRM
definitions have caused confusion. Unfortunately, CRM technology is often
incorrectly equated with CRM (Reinartz, Krafft and Hoyer 2004) and a key
reason for CRM failure is seeing CRM as a technology initiative (Kale 2004).
Adopting an appropriate definition of CRM is important and, as Sheth (1996)
has argued, an emerging management discipline needs an acceptable
definition that encompasses all facets, so as to focus understanding and
growth of knowledge in the discipline.
Recently there has been some increased clarity in definition of CRM.
Payne and Frow (2005) list twelve definitions and descriptions and categorise
them into three broad perspectives: ‘narrowly and tactical as a particular
technology solution’; ‘wide-ranging technology’; and ‘customer-centric’.
They propose that CRM, in any organization, should be positioned in the
strategic context of ‘customer-centric’. In a recent review of CRM, Boulding
et al. (2005) argue that the field of CRM has now begun to converge on a
common definition: “Specifically, CRM relates to strategy, managing the
dual-creation or value, the intelligent use of data and technology, the
acquisition of customer knowledge and the diffusion of this knowledge to
the appropriate stakeholders, the development of appropriate (long-term)
relationships with specific customers and/or customer groups, and the
integration of processes across the many areas of the firm and across the network
of firms that collaborate to generate customer value” (p. 6). We adopt their
definition in this article and highlight its emphasis on integration of
processes across different functions.
Zablah, Beuenger and Johnston (2003) state that “further exploration of
CRM and its related phenomena was not only warranted, but also
desperately needed”. Some useful initial work has been done on the
conceptualization of CRM (e.g. Meta Group, 2001; Srivastava, Shervani and
Fahey, 1999; Sue and Morin, 2001; Winer, 2001; Zablah, Beuenger and
Johnston, 2003; Payne and Frow, 2005) and on issues associated with
implementation (e.g., Ebner et al., 2002; Henneberg, 2003; Pettit, 2002; Rigby,
Reichheld and Schefter, 2002), however much work still remains to be done.
CRM Strategy and Cross-functional Processes
There appears to be increasing interest in cross-functional processes in

organisations today. This is at least partly in response to the problems with
the traditional ‘command and control’ organisational structure adopted by
marketing departments; with their resulting ‘functional’ orientation to the
customer (e.g. Ostroff and Smith 1992; Gummesson 2002b). The command
and control approach works under central control, through large functional
(or ‘vertical’) departments where strategy is developed at the top and
implemented through a centralized command culture. Work is divided at the
functional level into departments, groups and tasks. However, as Kaplan and
Norton (2001) point out this approach is incremental and inadequate for
today’s environment. By contrast, a process approach organizes around a
small number of cross-functional (or ‘horizontal’) processes instead of
traditional functions such as marketing, sales or operations. These processes
link the organisation to its customers.
Cross- Functional Processes in CRM

However, there is only slight recognition of cross-functional management
and processes in CRM. For example, Webster (2002) argues that
organisational processes and capabilities represent a key means of linking
customers with the organisation, while Ryals and Knox (2001) emphasize
how CRM requires a cross-functional approach, involving not only the
marketing department, but the entire enterprise.
Developing a cross-functional approach to CRM requires identifying its
key processes and their major components. Ostroff and Smith (1992) suggest
that determination of relevant processes should be driven by key
performance objectives based on customer needs. Some prior work on
process identification has been undertaken in different contexts. Davenport
(1993), in a manufacturing firm setting, suggests a number of operational and
management processes. Srivastava, Shervani and Fahey (1999), in their work
on marketing and business processes, identify three core “highly macrolevel”
(p.169) processes: customer relationship management, supply chain
management and product development management. These latter authors
also list eleven sub-processes for CRM including: identifying potential new
customers; determining the needs of customers; and managing customer site
visit teams. However, these CRM elements represent a predominantly
operationally-oriented set of activities and do not embrace the major strategic
cross-functional processes that are the focus of this article.
CRM Strategy Frameworks and Processes

CRM is complex and difficult to implement without a systematic
framework, as a study by BT (2001) illustrates. This study examined CRM

adoption in a range of industry sectors and concluded that 75 per cent of
companies did not have a definition of CRM and 61 per cent did not have a
framework for CRM strategy. It appears doubtful that businesses can
implement an effective CRM strategy if they are not clear on what CRM is
and do not have a framework for developing their strategy. Authors, such as
Grabner-Kraeuter and Moedritscher (2002), point to the lack of an adequate
CRM strategic framework, from which to define success, as being one reason
for the disappointing results of many CRM initiatives. Kale (2004) concurs
with this view and argues that a critical aspect of CRM involves identifying
all strategic processes that take place between a company and its customers.
A number of authors have proposed CRM strategy frameworks. However,
most of these do not adopt an explicit cross-functional process-based
approach. Buttle (2001) provides a ‘CRM value chain’ that identifies a series
of ‘primary stages’: customer portfolio analysis; customer intimacy; network
development; value proposition development; and manage the relationship.
It also identifies a series of ‘supporting conditions’ including: culture and
leadership; procurement processes; human resource management processes;

IT/data management processes; and organisation design. This is one of the
more detailed approaches. Sue and Morin (2001) develop a framework for
CRM based on initiatives, expected results and contributions. This
framework is not process-based and, as the authors acknowledge, many
initiatives are not explicitly identified in the framework. Winer (2001)
outlines a model, which contains: a database of customer activity; analyses of
the database; decisions about which customers to target; tools for customer
targeting; how to build relationships with the targeting customers; privacy
issues; and metrics for measuring the success of the CRM program. Whilst all
these frameworks provide insights into CRM, none adopt an explicit cross-
functional process-based conceptualization.
Using an expert panel of managers with extensive experience within the
CRM and IT sectors, Payne and Frow (2005) review potential cross-functional
processes for CRM. They specifically focus on the formulation of CRM
strategy rather than CRM implementation issues. The expert panel agreed six
process selection criteria for use in determining key generic CRM processes.
Five CRM processes were identified that met the selection criteria including:
a strategy development process; a value creation process; a multi-channel
integration process; an information management process; and a performance
assessment process. Because of this framework’s specific cross-functional
focus, we utilise these five generic processes within the CRM strategy and
implementation model developed in this article.
Research Approach
Before reviewing the model, we summarise our research approach. This

article reports on part of a programme of research that utilises learning from
field-based interactions with executives together with synthesis of relevant
literature. This research approach used Gummesson’s (2002a) ‘interaction
research’ methodology which emphasises that interaction and
communication play a crucial role in the stages of research; and that testing
concepts, ideas and results through interaction with different target groups
of managers forms an integral part of the whole research process. It also
draws on approaches used in the work on ‘contemporary marketing
practices’ (Coviello et al. 2002).
We utilised several methods to gain these insights and we found
managers’ observations and suggestions very valuable in interactively
developing and refining our understanding of CRM implementation,
supporting Gioia’s and Pitre’s (1990) proposition that multiple views created
by different approaches may yield a more comprehensive view of
organisational phenomena; and that assumptions may be modified by

further consultation with informants.
This interaction research programme utilised executives who were
primarily from large enterprises in the business to business and business to
consumer sectors, including:
1. A panel of 34 experienced executives independently selected by the

director of a leading European research and development institute
specializing in the CRM and IT sectors.
2. Interviews with 20 executives working in CRM, marketing and IT
roles in financial services; this sector was chosen as it was considered
by CRM observers to be the most advanced in CRM adoption.
3. Interviews with six executives from large CRM vendors and with five
executives from three CRM and strategy consultancies.
4. Workshop-based activities, supplemented by individual interviews,
were held with 18 CRM vendors, analysts and their clients. In total, 35
workshops were held for the following organizations: Accenture,
Baan, BroadVision, Chordiant, EDS, E.piphany, HP, IBM, Gartner,
NCR Teradata, Peoplesoft, Oracle, SAP, SAS, Siebel, Sybase and
Unisys. Five of these vendors account for over 50% of worldwide
CRM new license revenue (Nelson 2004).
5. Piloting the model as a planning tool in two global organisations. Six
workshops were held in each company.
The research approach draws on concepts suggested by Rapoport (1970),

which aim to contribute both to the practical concerns of people in a

challenging situation and to the goals of science through collaboration within
a mutually acceptable situation; and on an iterative approach proposed by
Eisenhardt (1989). The research approach varied across the groups of
executives outlined above and reflected both ‘emic’ and ‘etic’ (Pike 1954)
perspectives.
For example, a more ‘emic’ approach was used with the panel of thirty-
four highly experienced CRM practitioners, all of whom had very extensive
experience within the CRM and IT sectors. Its members were selected on the
basis of: substantial management and industrial experience (average 17.2
years); maturity (average age 40.2 years); international representation and
international experience (managers from nine countries, most of them had
international experience); and academic qualifications (degree or equivalent).
This panel were involved in a day long intervention and were requested to
nominate the key generic CRM processes they considered important and to
consider central issues relating to CRM strategy and implementation..
After a briefing session, each of the panel members independently
completed a written list representing their view of the key generic processes
that met process criteria they had agreed. These lists were collected and
categorized and a frequency count undertaken. This data was fed back to this
group and a detailed discussion followed to help support our understanding
of the relevant process categories. As a result of this interactive method, five
CRM processes were agreed that met the selection criteria; all five were
confirmed as important generic processes by more than two-thirds of the
group. (By contrast, billing, the sixth process on the list was only supported
by 15 per cent of the group, and was subsequently judged by the group to be
a specialized process, rather than a generic one, and of strategic relevance in
only specific industry sectors such as telecoms.)
A more ‘etic’ approach was utilised in the initial representation of the
CRM strategy and implementation model described in the next section. Here
the researchers sought to represent all the component CRM processes and
the critical implementation elements previously into an initial diagrammatic
conceptual model. As described in the following discussion, this was
subsequently modified a number of times by what might be described ‘emic’
feedback with a number of the executive groups listed above.
CRM Strategy and Implementation Model
An examination of the extant literature on CRM highlights the effective

management of customer relationships involves many different and
interlinked aspects. Further, most of the literature on CRM does not
emphasise its cross-functional nature. We posit this is a neglected and critical
component of CRM that should form the basis of any CRM implementation
model.
Our model was developed using an ‘interaction research’ approach and
combined field-based interactions, involving the executives groups outlined
above, with insights from the literature to identify key implementation areas.
These components were then incorporated into a first preliminary model.
This initial model, and the development of further versions of it, was
informed and further refined by interactions with executive groups
discussed above. The model went through several iterations and a number of
further minor revisions. The final version of the model is shown in Figure 1.
CRM
CRM Readiness Assessment
Readiness Assessment
Process 1: Strategy Development

CRM Project Management
CRM Change Management

ENABLING PROCESSES
Process 2:: Process 3: Process 4:
Value Multi-Channel Information
Creation Integration Management
EmployeeEngagement
Employee Engagement
Process 5: Performance Assessment
Figure 1. CRM Strategy and Implementation Model
The model has two main components: key CRM implementation elements
and core cross-functional CRM processes. As a result of this research four
critical elements for successful CRM implementation were identified. A
longer list was initially developed from interviews, extensive discussions and
group work at workshops and from the literature. They were interactively
and progressively refined into the following categories: CRM readiness
assessment; CRM change management; CRM project management; and
employee engagement. We then integrated these four critical elements for
CRM implementation with five core CRM processes (Payne and Frow 2005)
in a conceptual model for CRM strategy and implementation. The

development of the model benefited from discussions and criticisms during
presentations at two academic conferences.
Figure 1 illustrates an organizing model for CRM which is recursive,
rather than linear, in that many of its activities need to be managed
concurrently and some elements may need to be revisited as a consequence
of later activities. We highlight the importance of the four implementation
elements as it is in this area that CRM research especially needs further work;
in particular, little attention has been given to the role of people in
implementing CRM activities (Boulding et al. 2005).
Core Cross-functional Processes
The five cross-functional processes need to be considered concurrently and in

connection with the four implementation elements. Each is closely related
and they unite to form a CRM implementation logic. The discussion that
follows in this and the following section of the article outlines each
component of the model. First, we review each of the five CRM processes.
Next, we discuss how a CRM readiness assessment can be used to examine
progress with each of the five CRM processes and identify future priorities.
Finally, change management, project management and employee
engagement are examined.
The expert panel described above were not only used to help identify
components key CRM implementation elements and core cross-functional
CRM processes. They also provided detailed explanation regarding why a
strategic cross-functional approach would help better realise the benefits of
CRM. Each executive was requested to provide a written view on this topic.
Among the any reasons reported by these respondents were: “Ensures a
holistic view of the business and its customers.” ; “A good client experience
can usually not be delivered without all the functions within a
process/service/product facing the same way.” ; and, “By working in unison
the cost of delivering good CRM is minimised.”
The Strategy Development Process

The strategy development process is appropriately the first process we
consider as it defines the overall objectives and parameters for the
organisation’s CRM activities. This process has a dual focus on the
organisation’s business strategy and its customer strategy.
The area of business strategy is well known, so it requires little
commentary. An examination of industry and competitive characteristics
(e.g. Porter 1980) need to be considered in terms of future possible structural
change including creating challenges to traditional business models (e.g.
Anderson, Day and Kasturi 1997). The purpose of addressing business

strategy, as part of the CRM strategy development process, is to determine
how the organisation’s customer strategy should be developed and how it
will evolve in the future.
Customer strategy involves determining the appropriate level of
segmentation granularity (including whether a macro-segmentation, micro-
segmentation, or one-to-one is appropriate; e.g. Rubin 1997), identifying key
customer segments and building strategies to address these customers. If a
company operates in an intermediated market, it will have a number of
customer groups and each of them needs to be fully considered in terms of
segmentation approach and granularity.
Our research suggested companies have some distance to go in improving
segmentation and resulting marketing efforts directed at them. For example,
one manager we interviewed in a consumer service business pointed out
how her company had analysed their customers into four ‘macro’ groups but
had made no attempt to break these down into meaningful ‘micro’ segments.
This was despite strong evidence of considerable variation on a number of
key customer dimensions in these four macro segments. We examined this

company’s activities in more detail and learned that each of the four
segments was treated equally from a promotional spend and customer
acquisition perspective. This was despite marked differences in the
attractiveness of each segment, where customer acquisition costs varied by a
factor of three across segments and profitability by a factor of five across
segments.
Alignment and integration of business strategy and customer strategy
should be a priority, especially where they are developed within different
functions of the business. The importance of strategy alignment and
integration was highlighted in a number of our interviews.
For example, one interviewee, a country general manager, pointed out the
lack of integration in his organisation: “The content of our company’s
business strategy has absolutely no connection to the real-life customer
strategy issues at the country level”.
The Value Creation Process

The value creation process involves taking the outputs of the strategy
development process and building a programme that both extracts and
delivers value. However, as Grönroos (2000) has observed, value has
traditionally been used more in the marketing literature to address ‘the value
of customers for a firm’; only to some extent has ‘value to the customer’ been
addressed. CRM programmes should identify both the value the customer
receives from the company and the value the company receives from the
customer; value creation is an interactive process between the two. We
consider that recent emphasis on viewing the customer as a co-creator or co-

producer (e.g. Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004; Vargo and Lusch 2004) will
become increasingly important in CRM activities in the future.
To provide relevant benefits, the organisation must be able to target
specific customers and develop a value proposition which explains the
relationship between the performance of the product, the fulfilment of the
customer’s needs and the total cost to the customer over the customer
relationship life cycle (Lanning and Michaels 1988; Lanning and Philips
1991).
We were interested in learning the extent to which companies had
developed formal value propositions in the pursuit of their CRM objectives.
To obtain a view of this aspect of CRM we used participants at four of the
workshops (listed under item 4 in the earlier section on research
methodology) to investigate this. These groups included 120 managers from
different companies. We found that although some 65 per cent of these
companies use the term ‘value proposition’ internally within their
organisations, only some five percent of them have a formal written value
proposition and a structured approach for developing them. This suggests

greater emphasis needs to be put on this important aspect of CRM.
Understanding the underlying customer economics, on a market segment
basis, is vital if the organization wishes to maximize the lifetime value of its
customers. In seeking to increase profitability, companies need to develop
integrated programmes that address customer acquisition, customer
retention and other related activities such as cross-selling and up-selling at
the segment level. Peppers and Rogers (1997) have developed a customer
typology for understanding customer value. One company, a large British
supermarket, stood out amongst our interviews as an outstanding exemplar
of understanding customer value. They had an extremely highly developed
and highly granular customer typology and an ability to execute their
marketing at a one to one level.
The Multi-Channel Integration Process

Increasingly sophisticated approaches to customer segmentation, value
propositions development and lifetime value calculation will help companies
to better understand how value should be created for the customer and the
enterprise. However, this will only be realised by ensuring a superior
customer experience within and across all the channels in which the
company interacts with customers.
The multi-channel integration process involves decisions about the best
combination of channels; how to ensure the customer experiences highly
positive interactions within those channels; and, where customers interact
with multiple channels, how to create and present a ‘single view’ of the
customer. This involves managing every contact point between the customer
and company, be they physical or virtual. Integrated channel management
strategy involves creating better ways for customers to experience the
company and ensuring the communications and services a customer receives
through different channels are co-ordinated, coherent and tailored to their
particular interests.
There are many individual channel options through which companies can
interact with customers. These include: sales force (including field account
management, service and personal representation); outlets (including retail
branches, stores, depots and kiosks); telephony (including traditional
telephone, facsimile, telex and call centre contact); direct marketing
(including direct mail, radio, traditional TV, etc.); e-commerce (including
email, the Internet and interactive digital TV); and m-commerce (including
mobile telephony, SMS and text messaging, WAP and 3G services).
One company we interviewed in the telecoms sector was highly advanced
in its approach to multi-channel integration with its major corporate
customers. It has driven considerable cost out of their traditional channel –
an expensive account management structure - by introducing innovation in

this area. It has focused on utilising new and improved channels such as
desk-based account management, partners, call centres and the Internet to
achieve very specific objectives including: reduce the cost to serve; improve
customer satisfaction; increase account directors face to face selling time; and
improve revenue growth.
This large number of channels creates many opportunities for improving
customer relationships. It also presents considerable challenges in managing
the complexity of channels both profitably and in an integrated manner. The
topic of experience management and how to create an outstanding customer
experience is currently receiving considerable attention (e.g. Pine and
Gilmore 1998; Storbacka 2001; Smith and Wheeler 2002; Schmitt 2003). Work
by Lanning (1998) is relevant to improving the customer experience. He
suggests businesses should systematically ‘become the customer’ by
exploring, observing, analyzing, and creatively redesigning the actual
experiences potential customers do and could have.
The Information Management Process

The information management process can usefully be thought of as an
‘engine’ that drives CRM activities. It consists of several elements that need
to work closely together including: a data repository that provides a
corporate memory of customers; IT systems including the organisation’s
hardware, software and middleware; analytical tools; and front office and
back office applications. This process is concerned with two key activities:
the collection and collation of customer information from all points of
customer contact; and, in combination with other relevant data, developing

customer insight that can be used to enhance the quality of the customer
experience.
Choosing the appropriate IT hardware, software and systems to achieve
this can be a challenging task, given the constraints of legacy systems, the
range of technology options, and the uniqueness of every business situation.
The growing number of CRM tools and services on offer from IT vendors
(Greenberg 2001) further complicates the questions of what constitutes the
best CRM solution and whether to source the IT infrastructure externally or
to construct it using internal expertise.
Where customer information is spread across disparate functions and
departments, interactions with the customer may be based on partial or no
knowledge of the customer. One company we interviewed, one of the largest
in Europe, estimated it had over 200 customer data bases! Organizations
need to organize their data in appropriate data repositories, such as a data
warehouse (Agosta 1999; Inmon, Welch and Glassey 1997; Kelly 1997; Swift
2000). Through the effective use of analytical tools, such as data mining
(Berry and Linoff 1997; Groth 2000) the data warehouse can be used to help
identify the most promising customers, and to assist in developing strategies
to retain them and enhance their value.
The elevation of CRM from the level of a specific application, such as a
call centre, to the level of a pan-company CRM strategy requires the
integration of customer interactions across all communication channels,
front-office and back-office applications and business functions. What is
required to manage this integration on an ongoing basis is a purposefully
designed system – or what is sometimes termed an integrated CRM solution.
In our interviews and workshops, executives frequently drew attention to
the need to use the information management process to capture and use the
past history of customer interactions. As one interviewee stated: “One of the
best ways for us to retain and grow our customer base is for us to have the
same memory, or a better memory, of the past customer interactions as the
customer has – and to use this information in a relevant and pro-active way.”
The Performance Assessment Process

The performance assessment process ensures that the organisation’s
strategic CRM objectives are being delivered to an appropriate standard and
that key metrics to guide future improvement are identified. This process has
a dual focus on shareholder results, which provides a ‘macro-view’ of the key
drivers of CRM performance, and on performance monitoring, which involves
a more detailed ‘micro-view’ of the key descriptors of CRM performance
(Payne and Frow 2005). The key elements that drive shareholder results
include building employee value, customer value and shareholder value; as
well as reducing costs. For performance monitoring, detailed standards,

measures and key performance indicators are needed to ensure CRM
activities are planned and practised effectively and that a feedback loop
exists to maximize performance improvement and organizational learning.
Overall, this process involves focusing on two key issues: how can we create
increased profits and shareholder value; and how should we set standards,
develop metrics, measure our results and improve our performance?
The ultimate purpose of CRM is to deliver improved shareholder results.
Recent studies, such as the ‘service profit chain’ research (e.g. Heskett et al.
1994; Loveman 1998) conducted at Harvard Business School, emphasize the
relationship between employees, customers and shareholders and the need
to adopt a more informed and integrated approach to exploiting the linkages
between them. This work provides a most useful framework for improving
shareholder results. The model has now been empirically tested in a number
of industries (e.g. Heskett, Sasser and Schlesinger 1997; Kamakura et al. 2002;
Rucci, Kirn and Quinn 1998). Recent work has linked customer lifetime
value with shareholder value (Stahl, Matzler and Hinterhuber 2003), and
customer satisfaction with shareholder value (Anderson, Fornell and

Mazvancheryl 2004).
For performance monitoring, firms have tended to organize themselves in
terms of functional responsibility and thus performance measures have
reflected the individual objectives of departments, functions or strategic
business units. For example, Finance has been driven by profit, Sales by
volume and Marketing by customer acquisition. However, because CRM is a
cross-functional activity, CRM performance measurement must use a range
of metrics that span the gamut of processes and channels used to deliver
CRM. One of the more popular attempts to provide cross-functional
measures is the balanced scorecard approach, developed by Kaplan and
Norton (1996), which proposes use of four different perspectives of
performance: a customer perspective; an internal perspective, an innovation
and learning perspective; and a financial perspective. Some issues cannot be
measured in a quantitative sense but can be assessed qualitatively, hence
qualitative assessment is also important and needs to be considered as part of
this process.
One specific company application we examined in the telecoms sector had
developed a sophisticated performance metrics scorecard visualisation that
included the following measures: customer retention; customer loyalty; a
customer advocacy rating; customer experience measure; value of existing
customers; projected customer lifetime value; average revenue per customer;
new customer acquisition rate; monthly installation rate; and total customer
numbers. The application included the ability for these measures to be
examined and compared at the customer segment or micro segment level.
Companies need to consider their CRM priorities, given their specific

circumstances, and which standards and metrics should be used by them.
Organisations can benefit from learning about existing standards and metrics
used by other. The increasing importance of CRM measurement has recently
resulted in the development of CRM standards for both general and more
specific use within organisations (e.g. QCI 2004; COPC 2003). Whilst
standards will never fully reflect the priorities and needs of specific
organizations, a number of our interviewees stated there had been positive
experiences in their companies in using these evolving standards – one in
telecoms, one in logistics and one in financial services.
Key CRM Implementation Elements
Boulding et al. (2005) have pointed out there are substantive unknowns with
regard to CRM implementation and that organisational issues relating to
CRM are a critical area deserving attention: “Data and technology processes
and systems are critical for CRM activities, but without appropriate human
interaction with these processes and systems, the returns to investments in

these areas are at risk.” (p. 23.) We outlined, in the section on the research
approach, how we used an interactive research approach to identify the
following four key implementation areas.
CRM Readiness Assessment

A CRM readiness assessment can help managers assess the overall
position in terms of readiness to progress with CRM implementation and to
identify how well developed their organisation is relative to other
companies. Research by Ryals and Payne (2001) showed that there are
identifiable stages of maturity in CRM development: pre-CRM planning;
building a data repository; moderately developed; well developed; and,
highly advanced. Each of these stages represents a level of CRM maturity
characterised by the extent to which customer information is used to enhance
the customer experience and customer-generated cash flows. In our
interviews we found the more experienced CRM managers tended to know
the stage of CRM development in their company. However, we also found
companies with a surprising lack of knowledge as to how far they had
progressed with their CRM, when compared with their competitors.
If an organisation is in the early stages of CRM development, it is useful to
start with an overview audit of the five key CRM processes to help get senior
management understanding and buy-in at an early stage. The overview form
of readiness audit can be used to rapidly form an initial view on the key
CRM priorities, to define the relative importance of these priorities and to
determine where effort needs to be applied. Figure 2 shows the output of
such an exercise for a major European bank. In the case of this bank, changes
were considered to be necessary in all processes, with the greatest
improvement needed in the value creation and performance assessment
processes, as shown in Figure 2. A number of important new CRM initiatives
were identified and project teams were formed to implement them. We have
also used this overview audit with some of the other organisations referred
to earlier and usually found significant differences in the gap between the
current position and the desired position and on the relative emphasis on
each process.
10 Strategy
StrategyDevelopment
Development
Process
Process
8
Proposed
Performance
Performance 6 Existing
Assessment
Assessment
Process
Process 4 10
8
10 6
8 2 4 Value
ValueCreation
Creation
6 2 Process
4 Process
2
2
2
4
4
6
6
Information 8
InformationManagement
Management 8 Multi-Channel
Multi-Channel
Process
Process Integration
IntegrationProcess
Process
10 10
Figure 2. Overview Audit of Key CRM Processes
Although simple in concept, we found the completion of an overview

audit and a structured discussion with a company’s managers around the
scorings was extremely valuable in highlighting areas on which an
organisation should concentrate in order to improve its CRM performance.
To extend the response rate it is possible to develop a simple web-based
programme to collect and aggregate information from around the company.
We have undertaken overview audits on over 20 companies as part of this
research. The number of executive participants participating in these audits
has varied greatly from a few to over 100. In the case of a logistics company
(one of two global companies listed under item 5 in the earlier section on
research methodology) over 100 senior executives took part in a series of
workshops. Here we used eighteen groups of five or six executives to first
independently, then as a group, complete the audit. We then compared the
rankings from each of the 18 groups and got extremely consistent views in
scoring. As these results on each of the five dimensions were within a very
narrow band, the company’s management had a high degree of unanimity on
the priorities ahead.
Firms that are more advanced or wish to go into greater detail can then
undertake a more comprehensive CRM audit. A number of CRM audit tools
have also been developed, mainly by consulting firms. These audits vary
greatly in detail and quality. Some are little more than a quiz and others
show little evidence of understanding all the strategic issues relevant to
CRM. One of the few audits that is more robust is the CMAT assessment tool
(QCI 2004). QCI have accumulated a substantial amount of data from a large
number of businesses which enables comparisons to be made not only across
all industries, but within specific industry sectors. However, such audits are
not tailored to the specific circumstances of an organization or industry
sector and are not weighted to reflect the relative importance of specific CRM
issues to the organisation. More work is needed in the area of comprehensive
audit development.
CRM Change Management

To implement a large-scale and complex CRM initiative, companies will
typically have to undergo substantial organisational and cultural change. A
critical dimension of any large CRM programme, therefore, is an effective
change management programme. Based on our discussions during
interviews, we make a distinction here between change management which
is concerned with strategic organisational change; and employee engagement
which was seen as a more operationally-oriented set of activities. These
activities are, however, closely entwined.
We also concluded from these interactions with executives involved in our
research that the sheer scale of change management needed is often not
recognised by companies. For example, we made a detailed study of a
proposed £12 million CRM plan and budget for a large UK service company
with several million customers. We found the budget provision in the plan
for change management activities was minimal and insufficient thought had
gone into this critical aspect of CRM. This was especially important as new
systems needed to be introduced across a number of different countries all of
whom had substantially different legacy systems, cultures and change
management issues. When we raised this as an example with both
individuals and groups during our research (and especially with the ones
listed under items 3 and 4 in the research approach section) their responses
led us to conclude this is a critically under-emphasised element which can
potentially cause great damage to a CRM project.
Because CRM is potentially so wide-ranging in terms of the organisational
ramifications, a robust analytical framework is needed help assist CRM
leaders identify the organizational change management issues in relation to a

particular CRM programme. One well-known change management
framework, the ‘Seven S’ framework (Peters 1984), is a useful tool to help the
organisation identify those issues relevant to their business. This framework
provides a means of viewing organizations as packages of key skills, or skill
gaps. Hence, it can be used as a tool for analysing organizational deficiencies,
building on positive skills and identifying new skills needed. Child et al.
(1995) illustrate the use of the ‘Seven S’ framework in a context relevant to
CRM change management.
From our interviews and interaction research, three recurrent change
management issues emerged: the need to establish a senior sponsor for CRM;
creating a CRM vision; and facilitating improved cross-functional working
within the organization.
Senior level understanding, sponsorship and leadership is clearly critical
in a complex CRM implementation. However, Rigby, Reichheld, and Schefter
(2002) conclude that one major reason that CRM fails is that most senior
executives “don’t understand what they are implementing, let alone how
much it costs or how long it will take”. CRM managers we interviewed

pointed out the difficulties of obtaining senior-level ‘buy-in’ to what are often
very expensive projects and how having a board-level sponsor is vital, not
only for initiating CRM projects but also for overcoming delays caused by
resistance to change. Employee commitment to the CRM initiative will be
heavily influenced by the visible behaviour of the CRM sponsor. Effective
and continual communicating of the worthiness of the CRM goals and the
results obtained from CRM initiatives was highlighted in our interviews as
an important element of this role.
A CRM vision is a powerful means of creating shared values and a
customer focus. We identified few companies with a clear CRM mission in
our research. Orange, the UK mobile service provider, was visited as part of
one of the workshops. Orange represent a rare example of a company with a
clear CRM vision: “Our mission is to build strong enduring relationships
with our customers, thereby increasing customer lifetime value and company
profitability and building sustainable competitive advantage. We will
achieve this through the application of CRM strategies. CRM is about
building relationships to turn customers into advocates, so that their decision
to stay with you becomes more “automatic”; they buy more and spend more,
and they tell their friends and colleagues about your products and services
too.” A CRM vision such as this can create a clear sense of purpose and
direction for the organisation.
We have already emphasized the importance of CRM and cross-functional
processes. Successful CRM demands that members of different functions
such as marketing, information technology and human resource
management work together. In many organisations there are inter-functional

tensions that inhibit a positive customer-oriented organisational culture and
climate and that prevent effective cross-functional collaboration. A good
starting point in achieving better cross-functional integration is to surface the
different views of functional departments within the organization using a
tool such as the cultural web (Johnson 1992) and then to identify what needs
to be done to reconcile any negative aspects so that the functions can work
together in a more joined-up manner. Establishing cross-functional teams
which are drawn from across departments was found to be essential for most
CRM initiatives. The organization should work to develop the skill bases of
team members to ensure they have the requisite capabilities for collaboration,
including IT, marketing, finance, data mining and project management skills.
CRM Project Management

CRM project management has increasing importance as the size and
complexity of CRM initiatives increase. We identified two main types of
CRM projects: first, where a team of specialists is brought together on a
temporary basis to address a particular project with a finite completion date;

second, where a cross-functional team is assembled with a remit of ongoing
management of part of the enterprise’s CRM initiative. Successful CRM
projects deliver against the CRM objectives derived from the corporate
objectives and support the overall business strategy. Our interviewees
emphasised that CRM projects which overrun budgets and timescales create
considerable damage to CRM credibility, hence effective CRM project
management is essential. We identified several companies using the Benefits
Dependency Network (BDN) framework (e.g. Wilson et al. 2000) in an effort
to make their project management more effective. The BDN framework
works backwards from the project’s objectives to ensure that all necessary
business changes are made, as well as CRM technology solutions
implemented.
Some organisations we interviewed were adopting a large-scale and very
comprehensive approach to CRM implementation. However, others had
found that an incremental and modular approach to CRM development or
enhancement was more appropriate. These latter companies typically
engaged in a series of smaller individual CRM projects, undertaken in an
appropriate sequence, each with clearly defined objectives and ROI
outcomes. These projects varied in the emphasis placed on analytical CRM,
operational CRM and collaborative CRM (Meta Group 2001).
Henneberg (2003) has identified two CRM implementation approaches
adopted by organisations: a dominant ‘hard’ implementation of CRM
(focusing on IT, analytics, centralization and campaign management); and a
‘soft’ implementation of CRM (focusing on decentralised customer
experience management and customer relationships). Of the twenty-three

companies he examined, sixteen of them adopted the ‘hard’ approach, four
adopted the ‘soft’ approach and three of them utilized a combination of
approaches. IT-based CRM project management will be of greatest
importance in ‘hard’ CRM implementation. He found the ‘hard’ or analytical
dimension typically emphasised integrated customer database with
marketing data marts, a shared data model, marketing analysis and data-
mining tools (such as propensity modelling or targeting and triggering
activities), centralised CRM management functions, the integration of all
touch-points/channels with feedback-loops to the centralized database, and
a standardisation of customer interaction and service processes. The main
implementation activities here are software adaptation and integration,
process redefinition, organisational integration, sales force automation and
campaign management.
Henneberg found that the ‘soft’ or customer experience dimension
encompasses aspects of direct customer interaction management. It is more
decentralized and focuses on customer interaction skills and strategies, a
deep understanding of customer or customer segment relationship needs, the

development of new customer-centric touchpoints and the ability to build
relationships. Companies can benefit from these findings by considering if a
‘hard’, soft’, or ‘hybrid’ approach to CRM implementation is appropriate for
their organisation.
As the CRM project plan is implemented, two further issues should be
considered: creep in project scope and understanding the implications of
scale. Ebner et al. (2002) point out that as a project grows in scope, the
system’s development can take on a life of its own, incorporating new
features that do not support business objectives but add considerable
complexity and cost. IT professionals have learnt that the bigger a project, the
harder it is to integrate and the more likely it is to miss deadlines or be
scrapped altogether. The business objectives that the CRM system was
intended to achieve must be kept under constant scrutiny and any efforts to
increase the scope of the project must be evaluated very carefully. Further, as
a project is planned, it is critical that the implications of scale increase are
understood. Point estimates of future demand should be replaced with
estimates based on three levels of potential future demand: optimistic, most
likely and pessimistic. As the numbers of users and customers grow, the
system must be robust enough to accept higher possible increases in volume.
Employee Engagement
The final of the four implementation elements is the engagement of
employees to support the various initiatives that comprise the overall CRM
programme. Employees have a crucial role to play within the CRM processes
and implementation activities outlined in this article. An organisation cannot

develop and operate appropriately customer-focused systems and processes
without motivated and trained employees.
Change management and project management are particularly dependent
on engagement of employees for their success. Ensuring the delivery of a
superior customer experience during times of unexpectedly high demand
requires the active engagement and commitment of all customer-facing staff
and is a hallmark of a well-planned CRM implementation. Interviewees
stated that employee engagement is now receiving greater attention as their
companies focus on creating outstanding customer experiences.
Increasingly, organisations are recognizing the significant value their
employees contribute to the business, which extends well beyond the basic
fulfilment of core duties. Employees are instrumental in implementing
processes including customer service, improving efficiencies and nurturing
consumer confidence and repeat purchase. As Srivastava et al. (1999) point
out: “processes are meaningless when viewed in isolation of those people
charged with implementing them” (p.170). Gummesson (2002c) considers
how human knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour combine with IT, and how
CRM systems need to work effectively for both the companies that use them
and the customers who are exposed to them.
In the written feedback on cross-functional processes from our expert
panel (item 1 in our research methodology section) a number of comments
were made by different respondents regarding the impact of employee
engagement on CRM strategy and processes, including:
• “Happy employee will affect customer’s experience.”

• “Training of people is necessary to better understand customers’
businesses.”
• “A good client experience can usually not be delivered without all the
functions within a process/service/product facing the same way.”
• “By [employees] working in unison the cost of delivering a good
CRM is minimised.”
• “…a cross-functional approach is critical for success when
implementing CRM With this approach you will get the ownership
and commitment needed to have a successful implementation.”
• “You can not separate Marketing from other functions – they are
interdependent.”
• Every employee is somehow in touch with the customer to serve.”
• “Everyone in the company becomes engaged in fulfilling the
strategy.”
• “Customer knowledge is spread throughout different functions.”
• “Involve all key people in organisation and get their buy in .”
• “… a CRM strategy requires buy-in from back-office as well as front-

office.”
• “Key thing: BUY IN = SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION.”
• “Firms have to make a training effort increase the employee
capability to manage the client relationship.”
• “Buy-in from all employees thus giving a consistent message to
clients.”
These comments from our expert panel highlight the obvious importance of
employee engagement which requires a strong commitment from the
company’s personnel. However, a major global study, involving more than
9,700 full and part-time employees, shows that employees are, in general, not
committed to their employers (Sweetman 2003). The research found 34 per
cent of employees are ‘trapped’ and 27 per cent are ‘high risk’. Only slightly
more than half the sample felt a strong personal attachment to their employer
and only six in ten employees believe their organization deserves their
loyalty. Truly loyal employees are the most desirable employees as they feel
a deep attachment to their organisations, want to be there and workers are

prepared to go the extra mile to get the job done and often serve as role
models for their peers. Among the significant findings of this study is
verification that an employee’s job performance is directly tied to their level
of commitment to the organisation.
The role of senior executives in facilitating employee engagement is vital.
At board level, issues such as governance, finance, acquisitions and cost
reduction may predominate over issues of customer management, marketing
and employees. McGovern et al. (2004) provide a ‘business driver’ approach
for partly addressing this problem. This involves assessing how effectively
marketing is supporting corporate strategy, and determining when
marketing and strategy are misaligned. This can take the form of an
interactive exercise in which business strategy, customer strategy and
organization evolve in an iterative manner and employee engagement
activities are focused on achieving the customer strategy.
One firm in our research, one of the top three professional service firms in
its sector, has concluded the starting point for its CRM activities is employee
engagement. This firm’s board has taken the view that ‘strategy is local’ and
it has commenced with an employee engagement exercise based on its ten
top global accounts to align marketing and strategy. This iterative initiative
has started to integrate multiple practice areas, integrate different country
offices and engage employees from around the world in a manner that has
not been achieved before in this firm. It will be further extended to other top
accounts in the near future.
Therefore, how all the company’s human resources are engaged, but
especially those who have any form of customer contact, is a key factor in
determining CRM success. A wide body of research support the claim that
the surest way to enhance competitive performance is through recruiting and
selecting the best employees, training and motivating them and providing
effective leadership. This will maximize the likelihood of employees
effectively engaging with both customers and their colleagues.
As part of this overall research programme we attended workshops with a
large global automobile manufacturer that is focused on improving
competitive performance through its people. This company had concluded
that the success of their CRM initiative would depend on a massive change
in the mindset of people at every level within their company and within their
distributors. A CRM employee engagement programme was devised which
included ‘CRM Best Practice Workshops’ aimed at engaging employees and
building awareness of the benefits of CRM through case studies of best
practice in CRM. The workshops entailed a mix of presentations and visits to
companies where successful CRM was evident. Interestingly, managers and
other staff considered the greatest lessons were derived from presentations
from executives from Southwest Airlines - a company renowned for its

exemplary people culture and its selection, development and employee
engagement activities.
McKean (2002) identifies eight overall areas the enterprise needs to focus
on in order to achieve strong customer relationships, including: leading the
‘human’ firm; acknowledging customers; treating customers with respect;
building trust; communicating humanly; implementing the human touch
consistently; understanding and applying the human touch as a process; and
implementing technology to ‘humanise’. McKean’s research highlights the
need to select, develop and empower employees to bring about their full
engagement and commitment to delivering an outstanding customer
experience. From our research we conclude that employee engagement is,
generally, the most important factor in successful CRM implementation.
Limitations, Future Research and Managerial Applications
This article is a response to the call that further exploration of CRM is

desperately needed (Zablah, Beuenger and Johnston, 2003); and our
experience of the confusion and problems that many companies are
experiencing in their efforts to implement CRM. In this section we consider
limitations of the research, review areas for future research, and discuss
managerial applications of our work.
Research Limitations
There are a number of limitations to this article. First, our research was
based on large companies as it is in such businesses, because of their
complexity, that CRM is likely to have the greatest positive impact. We did
not examine issues relating to CRM strategy in other businesses such as small
or medium-sized companies.
Second, we did not explore the application of CRM strategy in non-
business areas such as the government and not-for-profit sectors. A tentative
conclusion, following one intervention we undertook with senior managers
from a large government agency, is that the model may have applicability in
this sector, with modification to elements of the strategy and value creation
processes.
Third, we have not attempted to identify highly specific components that
may assume strategic importance in particular industry settings. For
example, the billing process, discussed by some of our respondents, is a key
process in the fixed and mobile telecoms sector – but not in most other
sectors.
Fourth, our attention was on enterprises seeking to develop strong

relationships with their customers. There may be instances of some
companies that wish to adopt a more transactionally-oriented approach.
Insights from the work on contemporary marketing practices (Coviello et al.
2002) regarding the relative emphasis different companies place on
transactional and relational aspects of marketing may be useful in exploring
CRM in more transactionally-oriented settings.
Future Research Opportunities

With CRM at an early stage of maturity, there is considerable scope for
further research. We highlight nine areas of research opportunity in this
emerging domain relating to each of the key elements in the CRM strategy
and implementation model.
First, particular aspects of the strategy development process in the model
would benefit from research. McKinsey & Co.’s work shows that a failure to
establish clear business goals before launching a CRM activity is a common
and important source of problems with CRM (Ebner et al., 2002). We also
found the failure to set strategic business objectives to be a key issue. Our
interviews highlighted several other issues and problems with regard to
CRM strategy development including: a failure to consider the potential
return from CRM initiatives; viewing CRM as a technology initiative rather
than a strategic one aimed at improving customer relationships; and
pursuing CRM as a means of cost reduction rather than a means of value
creation. A more exhaustive study of factors hindering and facilitating CRM
strategy development is warranted.
Second, the value creation process represents opportunities for further

work. A number of perspectives of value have been outlined in this article
including: the value the company creates for the customer; the value the
customer creates for the company; and the opportunity for co-creation of
value. For the first of these, the concept of the value proposition needs
stronger conceptual underpinnings. In terms of the value delivered to the
company, this area is better represented in existing research. One gap is the
lack of a framework for gaining improved customer value in the context of
increasing share-of-wallet from existing customers, and more systematic
managerial approaches and models for improving customer acquisition,
customer retention, up-selling and cross-selling and the development of
advocacy across the customer base. Context-driven research opportunities
also exist in the area of co-creation.
Third, within the area of multi-channel integration, many opportunities
exist for further work despite its forerunner, hybrid marketing systems,
being emphasized in the literature some fifteen years ago (Moriarty and
Moran 1990). In particular, work is needed to identify the relative costs and
economics of different channels in a CRM environment, including migration

patterns between channels. Additionally, the area of understanding and
managing the customer experience needs further exploration. The question
of how to create a ‘perfect customer experience’ at an affordable cost had
special resonance with executives we interviewed. Combining insights from
a body of existing work (e.g. Jones and Sasser 1995; Pine and Gilmore 1998;
Storbacka 2001) with field-based empirical research is proposed as a starting
point.
Fourth, within the information management process, more systematic
studies of IT implementations of CRM solutions are proposed. There are now
a considerable number of studies relating to the failure of CRM technology
projects to deliver business benefits. However, such studies use different
samples, methodologies and approaches and focus on different issues.
Further, the sponsors of the study, often consultants, CRM vendors or
analysts, may have particular motives which could lead to some bias in the
findings. Extensive cross-sector and within-sector research is proposed.
Fifth, with respect to the performance assessment process, more detailed
study of CRM assessment is needed. We identified a number of approaches
to CRM performance assessment. More work is needed on the application of
tools such as the service profit chain and in extension of the balanced
scorecard concept so it could be used at a more detailed level in the context
of a CRM performance assessment dashboard
Sixth, in the area of CRM readiness assessment more work is needed in
the development of a comprehensive audit tool. The more advanced audit
tools that exist are proprietary, as they have been developed by consultants
and are not in the public domain (e.g. QCI 2004). Our interviews highlighted
the need for a comprehensive, independent and research-based instrument to
assess and measure CRM readiness assessment.
Seventh, empirical investigation of CRM change management is
warranted within and across sectors. In the limitations to this study listed we
suggest a number of areas for within sector work; especially in relatively
unexplored sectors such as small and medium sized businesses, the not-for
profit sector and in the area of citizen relationship management.
Eighth, the area of CRM project management is almost completely
neglected in the literature with the exception of a small amount of
managerially oriented literature by Gentle (2002). Gentle’s work raises many
issues worthy of examination and in particular the value of studying CRM
project successes and failures.
Finally, employee engagement and people related issues in CRM
implementation have already been highlighted earlier in the article as an area
where future research is needed. Initial work by Ebner et al. (2002);
Gummesson (2002b; 2002c); Henneberg (2003); Pettit (2002); and Rigby,
Reichheld and Schefter (2002) will provide a useful platform from which to
develop this important area of research. Further avenues for research in this
area are summarised by Boulding et al. (2005).
Managerial Applications
While these opportunities lie ahead for future CRM research, it is
appropriate to briefly comment on some managerial implications of this
research with reference to executives’ initial experiences in using the CRM
strategy and implementation model within their organisations. The model
has been used by managers to address a number of issues, including:
To help in surfacing problematic issues. For example, in planning a CRM
program in a large auto company, use of the framework surfaced integration
problems between business and customer strategy. This made them highly
visible within the company, resulting in actions being taken to address them.
To plan the key components of a CRM strategy and to identify which
process components of CRM should be receive priority. Different companies,
according to their specific circumstances, will have different issues they need
to address; the framework has been used to highlight which processes need
greatest attention. Use of the framework in this way can result in focusing on
one specific area that will give the best return at that point in time. For
example, in one company’s case this was call centre management; in another
company it was a sales force automation project.
To undertake a range of benchmarking activities. A large global financial
services company retained a leading US strategy consulting firm to use the
model to benchmark six US companies considered to be world-class CRM
leaders within the financial services sector.

To create a platform for change in a company. In the large logistics
company, referred to earlier in this article, the framework was used with its
senior staff in a series of workshops. Working in small groups, managers
provided a team score in terms of their perception of the company’s existing
and desired capabilities. The findings from these groups were very
consistent regarding problems. Key areas for action were identified and a
critical mass of executives, sharing a common perspective, undertook
responsibility for implementing a major change management program.
Summary
The literature on CRM is, to use the evolutionary metaphor applied to the
services marketing literature, still ‘crawling out’, as opposed to ‘scurrying
about’ or ‘walking erect’ (Fisk, Brown and Bitner 1993). This article makes
some progress towards understanding the strategy and implementation
dimensions of CRM from a cross-functional process-based perspective. CRM
is a complex and challenging domain, but as the academic community starts
to develop and implement a comprehensive and integrated CRM research

agenda, customers, organisations, shareholders and other relevant
stakeholders should be able to better realize the considerable potential
benefits of effective CRM practice.
References
Agosta, Lou (1999), The Essential Guide to Data Warehousing, Upper Saddle
River, NJ, Prentice Hall.
Anderson, Erin, Day, George S. and Kasturi V. (1997), “Strategic Channel
Design”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38, Summer, pp. 59-69.
Anderson, Eugene W., Fornell, Claes and Mazvancheryl, Sanal K. (2004),
“Customer Satisfaction and Shareholder Value”, Journal of Marketing, Vol.
68, October, pp. 172 -185.
Bendapudi, Neeli and Leone, Robert P. (2003), “Psychological Implications of
Customer Participation in Co-Production”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 67,
January, pp. 14-28.
Berry, Leonard L. (1983), “Relationship Marketing”. In: Emerging Perspectives
on Services Marketing. (Eds.), Berry, Leonard L., Shostack, G. Lynn and
Upah, Gregory (Chicago). American Marketing Association, pp. 25-28.
Berry, M.J.A. and Linoff, G. (1997), Data Mining Techniques, for Marketing,
Sales, and Customer Support, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Boulding, William, Staelin, Richard, Ehret, Michael and Johnston, Wesley J.
(2005), “A CRM Roadmap: What We Know, Potential Pitfalls, and Where
to Go”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69, No. 4, October,pp. 155-167.
BT (2001), A Survey of CRM Practice, unpublished Internal CRM study.

Bund Jackson, Barbara (1985), Winning and Keeping Industrial Customers: The
Dynamics of Customer Relationships, Lexington, D. C., Heath.
Buttle, Francis A. (2001), “The CRM Value Chain”, Marketing Business,
February, pp. 52-55.
COPC 2003, “Benchmark Review”. (accessed 14 November 2003) [available at
www.copc.com].
Carr, Nicholas G. (2003), “IT Doesn’t Matter”, Harvard Business Review, Vol.
81 May-June, pp. 41 – 49.
Child, P., Dennis, R.S., Gokey, T.C., McGuire, T., Shennan, M. and Singer, M.
(1995), “Can Marketing Regain the Personal Touch?”, McKinsey Quarterly,
No. 3, pp. 112-125.
Christopher, M. G., Payne, A. F.T and Ballantyne, D. (1991), Relationship
Marketing: Bringing Quality, Customer Service and Marketing Together,
Oxford, Butterworth Heinemann.
Coote, Leonard (1994), “Implementation of Relationship Marketing in an
Accounting Practice”. In: Relationship Marketing: Theory, Methods and
Applications. (Eds.) Sheth, Jagdish N. and Parvatiyar, Atul (Atlanta, GA),

Emory University, Center for Relationship Marketing.
Coviello, Nicole E., Brodie, Roderick J., Danaher, Peter J. and Johnston,
Wesley J. (2002), “How Firms Relate to Their Markets: An Empirical
Examination of Contemporary Marketing Practice”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 66 July, pp. 33 – 46.
Davenport, Thomas H. (1993), Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through
Information Technology, Boston, MA, Harvard Business School Press.
Ebner, Manuel, Hu, Arthur, Levitt, Daniel and McCory, Jim (2002), “How to
Rescue CRM”, McKinsey Quarterly, Special Edition: Technology, pp. 49-57.
Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989), “Building Theories from Case Study
Research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, March, pp. 532-550.
Fisk, Raymond P., Brown, Stephen W. and Bitner, Mary Jo (1993), “Tracking
the Evolution of The Services Marketing Literature”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 69, Spring, pp. 61-103.
Gartner Group (2003), Correspondence from Gartner analyst to the authors.
Gentle, M. (2002), The CRM Project Management Handbook, London, Kogan
Page.
Gioia, Dennis A. and Pitre, Evelyn (1990), “Multiple Perspectives on Theory
Building”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 15, October, pp. 584-602.
Grabner-Kraeuter, Sonja and Moedritscher, Gernot (2002), “Alternative
Approaches Toward Measuring CRM Performance,” 6th Research
Conference on Relationship Marketing and Customer Relationship
Management, Atlanta, June 9-12, pp. 1 – 16.
Greenberg, Paul (2001), CRM at the Speed of Light, Berkeley, CA,
Osborne/McGraw Hill.
Grönroos, Christian (1994), “Quo Vadis, Marketing? - Toward a Relationship
Marketing Paradigm”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 10, June, pp.
347-360.
Grönroos, Christian (1997), “Value-driven Relational Marketing: from
Products to Resources and Competencies”, Journal of Marketing
Management, Vol. 13, July, pp. 407-419.
Grönroos, Christian (2000). Service Marketing and Management: A Customer
Relationship Management Approach, West Sussex, UK, John Wiley & Sons.
Groth, R. (2000), Data Mining: Building Competitive Advantage, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
Gummesson, Evert (1997), “Relationship Marketing as a Paradigm Shift:
Some Conclusions from the 30R Approach”, Management Decision, Vol. 5,
No. 4, pp. 267-272.
Gummesson, Evert (1999), Total Relationship Marketing, Oxford, UK,
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Gummesson, Evert (2002a), “Practical Value of Adequate Marketing
Management Theory “, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36, March, pp.

325-49.
Gummesson, Evert (2002b), “Relationship Marketing in the New Economy”,
Journal of Relationship Marketing, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 37-57.
Gummesson, Evert (2002c), Total Relationship Marketing, second edition,
Oxford, UK, Butterworth-Heinemann.
Håkansson, Håkan H and Snehota, I. (2000), “The IMP Perspective: Assets
and Liabilities of Business Relationships”. In: Sheth, Jagdish, N. and
Parvatiyar, Atul (Eds.), Handbook of Relationship Marketing. (Thousand
Oaks, Ca), Sage, pp. 9-94.
Henneberg, Stephan C. M. (2003), “An Exploratory Analysis of CRM
Implementation Models”, 11th International Colloquium in Relationship
Marketing, University of Gloucestershire, September, pp. 1-20.
Heskett, James L., Jones, Thomas O., Loveman, Gary W., Sasser, Earl W. Jr.,
and Schlesinger, Leonard A. (1994), “Putting the Service-Profit Chain to
Work”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 82, March-April, pp. 164-174.
Heskett, James L., Sasser, Earl Jr. and Schlesinger, Leonard A. (1997), The
Service Profit Chain, New York, The Free Press,
Inmon, W.H., Welch, J.D. and Glassey, K.L. (1997), Managing the Data
Warehouse, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
International Data Corporation (2001), Demand-Side Survey: A Reality Check on
CRM Software, International Data Corporation.
Johnson, Gerry (1992), “Managing Strategic Change – Strategy, Culture and
Action”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 25, Vol.1, pp. 28-36.
Jones, Thomas and Sasser, W. Earl (1995), “Why Satisfied Customers Defect”,
Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73, November-December, pp. 88-99.

Kale, Sudhir H. (2004), “CRM Failure and the Seven Deadly Sins”, Marketing
Management, Vol. 13, September/October, pp. 42-46.
Kamakura, Wagner A., Mittal, Vikas, de Rosa, Fernando and Mazzon, Jose
Afonso (2002), “Assessing the Service-Profit Chain”, Marketing Science,
Vol. 21, Summer, pp. 294-317.
Kaplan, Robert S. and Norton, David P. (1996), The Balanced Scorecard:
Translating Strategy Into Action, Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
Kaplan, Robert S. and Norton, David P. (2001), The Strategy-Focused
Organization, Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
Kelly, S. (1997), Data Warehousing the Route to Mass Customization.
Chichester, John Wiley & Sons.
Kotler, Philip (1992), “Its Time or Total Marketing”, Business Week Advance,
Executive Brief, 2.
Lanning, Michael J. (1998), Delivering Profitable Value, Cambridge, Ma,
Perseus Publishing.
Lanning, Michael and Michaels, Edward G. (1988), “A Business is a Value
Delivery System”, McKinsey Staff Paper, McKinsey & Co., Inc.

Lanning, Michael and Phillips, Lynn (1991), “Building Market-Focused
Organizations”, Gemini Consulting White Paper.
Levitt, Theodore (1983), “After the Sale is Over ....”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 61, September-October, pp. 87-93.
Loveman, Gary W. (1998), “Employee Satisfaction, Customer Loyalty and
Financial Performance”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 1, August, pp. 18-
31.
McGovern, Gail J., Court, David, Quelch, John A. and Crawford, Blair (2004),
“Bringing Customers into the Boardroom”, Harvard Business Review, Vol.
82, November, pp. 70-80.
McKean, John (2002), Customers Are People: the Human Touch, New York, John
Wiley.
Meta Group (2001), Integration: Critical Issues for Implementation of CRM
Solutions, Report by Meta Group Inc., February 15.
Moriarty, Rowland T. and Moran, Ursula (1990), “Managing Hybrid
Marketing Systems”, Harvard Business Review, 68 (November/December),
pp. 146-157.
Morgan, Robert M. and Hunt, Shelby D. (1994), “The Commitment-Trust
Theory of Relationship Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, July, pp.
20-38.
Nelson, Scott (2004), “The CRM Scenario: The Current and Future”,
presentation at Gartner CRM Summit 2004, London, 28-29 April.
Ostroff, Frank and Smith, Douglas (1992), “The Horizontal Organization”,
The McKinsey Quarterly, No. 1, pp. 148-168.
Parvatiyar, Atul and Sheth, Jagdish N. (1997), “Paradigm Shift in Interfirm

Marketing Relationships”. In: Research in Marketing. (Eds.) Sheth, Jagdish
N. and Parvatiyar, Atul, Vol. 13, (Greenwich, CT), JAI, Press, pp. 233-255.
Parvatiyar, Atul and Sheth, Jagdish N. (2001), “Conceptual Framework of
Customer Relationship Management”. In Customer Relationship
Management – Emerging Concepts, Tools and Applications, Sheth, Jagdish N.,
Parvatiyar, Atul and Shainesh, G. (New Delhi), Tata McGraw-Hill, pp. 3-
25.
Payne, Adrian and Frow, Pennie (2005), “A Strategic Framework for
Customer Relationship Management”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69, No. 4.
October,pp. 167-176.
Peppers, Don and Rogers, Martha (1993), The One to One Future, London,
Piatkus.
Peppers, Don and Rogers, Martha (1997), Enterprise One to One, London,
Piatkus.
Peters, Tom (1984), “Strategy Follows Structure: Developing Distinctive
Skills”, California Management Review, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 111-125.
Pettit, Raymond (2002), “The State of CRM: Addressing Efficiencies and the
Achilles’ Heel of CRM’”, Business Intelligence Advisory Service, Executive
Report, Vol. 2.
Pine, B. Joseph and Gilmore, James H. (1998), “Welcome to the Experience
Economy”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76, July-August, pp. 97-105.
Pike, Kenneth L. (1954), “Emic and Etic Standpoints for the Description of
Behaviour,”. In: I.K. Pike, Language in Relation to a Unified Theory of
Structure of Human Behaviour, part I, Glendale, Il.
Porter, Michael, E. (1980), Competitive Strategy, New York, Free Press.
Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, Venkatram (2004), “Co-creating Unique
Value with Customers”, Strategy and Leadership, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 4-9.
QCI 2004, “CMAT” (accessed 22 January 2004). [available at www.qci.co.uk].
Rapoport, Robert N. (1970), “Three Dilemmas of Action Research”, Human
Relations, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 499 -513.
Reinartz, Wemer, Krafft, Manfred and Hoyer, Wayne D. (2004), “The
Customer Relationship Management Process: Its Measurement and
Impact on Performance”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 41, August, pp.
293-305.
Rigby, Darrell K., Reichheld, Frederick F. and Schefter, Phil (2002), “Avoid
the Four Perils of CRM”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 80, February, pp.
101-109.
Rubin, Marc (1997), “Creating Customer-Oriented Companies”, Prism,
Arthur D. Little, Vol., No. 4, pp. 5-27.
Rucci, Anthony J., Kirn, Steven P. and Quinn, Richard T. (1998), “The
Employee-Customer-Profit Chain at Sears”, Harvard Business Review, Vol.
76, January-February, pp. 83-97.

Ryals, Lynette and Knox, Simon (2001), “Cross-Functional Issues in
Relationship Marketing through Customer Relationship Management”,
European Management Journal, Vol. 19, October, pp. 534-542.
Ryals, Lynette and Payne, Adrian F.T. (2001), “Customer Relationship
Management in Financial Services: Towards Information-Enabled
Relationship Marketing”, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 9, March, pp.
1-25.
Schmitt, Bernd H. (2003), Customer Experience Management, Hoboken, New
Jersey, John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Schrage, Michael (1997), “The Real Problem with Computers”, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 5, September-October, pp. 178, 183 - 184.
Sheth, Jagdish N. (1996), “Relationship Marketing: Paradigm Shift or Shaft?”,
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Miami.
Sheth, Jagdish N. (2000), “Relationship Marketing: Paradigm Shift or Shaft?",
In: Handbook of Relationship Marketing. (Eds.) Sheth, Jagdish N. and
Parvatiyar, Atul (Thousand Oaks, Ca). Sage, pp. 609-620.

Sheth, Jagdish N. and Atul Parvatiyar, (1995), “Relationship Marketing in
Consumer Markets: Antecedents and Consequences”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 23, Fall, pp. 255-271.
Smith, Shaun and Wheeler, Joe (2002), Managing the Customer Experience,
London, Prentice Hall/Financial Times.
Srivastava, Rajendra K., Shervani, Tasadduq A. and Fahey, Liam (1999),
“Marketing, Business Processes and Shareholder Value: An
Organizationally Embedded View of Marketing Activities and the
Discipline of Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, Special Issue, pp.
168-179.
Stahl, Heinz K., Matzler, Kurt and Hinterhuber, Hans H. (2003), “Linking
Customer Lifetime Value with Shareholder Value”, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 32, May, pp. 267-279.
Storbacka, Kaj (2001), RED - Relationship Experience Design, Helsinki, CRM
Group Ltd.
Sue, Patrick and Morin, Paul (2001), “A Strategic Framework for CRM”,
(accessed April 13, 2002) [available at crm-forum.com]
Sweetman, K.J. (2001), “Employee Loyalty Around The Globe”, MIT Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 42, Winter, p. 16. [This is based on: Walker
Information Global Network Commitment in the Workplace: The 2000
Global Employee Relationship Benchmark Report, 2000.]
Swift, Ronald S. (2000), Accelerating Customer Relationships - Using CRM and
Relationship Technologies, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
Vargo Stephen L. and Lusch, Robert R. (2004), “Evolving to a New Dominant
Logic for Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68, January, pp. 1-17.
Webster, Frederick E. (2002), “Marketing Management in Changing Times”,
Marketing Management , Vol. 11, January/February, pp. 1-17.
Wilson, H, Daniel, E., McDonald, M., Ward, J. and Sutherland, F. (2000).
Profiting from eCRM, London, Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
Winer, Russell S. (2001), “A Framework for Customer Relationship
Management”, California Management Review, Vol. 43, Summer, pp. 89 –
105.
Zablah, Alex R., Beuenger, Danny N. and Johnston, Wesley J. (2003),
“Customer Relationship Management: An Explication of Its Domain and
Avenues for Further Inquiry”, 2003 International Conference on
Relationship Marketing, Relationship Marketing, Customer Relationship
Management and Marketing Management: Co-Operation – Competition Co-
Evolution, 2003 Freie Universitat Berlin, pp. 115-124
About the Authors

Adrian Payne is Professor of Services & Relationship Marketing, Director,

Centre for Customer Relationship Marketing and Academic Leader of the
Marketing Group at Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield University
Pennie Frow is a Visiting Fellow at Cranfield School of Management,

Cranfield University

Paynee

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Paynee

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Paynee

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Universite De Paris 1]

On: 21 May 2013, At: 12:20

Journal of Marketing Management

Customer Relationship Management: from Strategy to

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/026725706776022272

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Adrian Payne1 and Customer Relationship

addresses both CRM strategy and

Keywords: CRM, customer relationship management, CRM implementation.

Customer Relationship Management, or CRM, has developed into an area of

1 Correspondence: Professor Adrian Payne, Cranfield School of Management,

Bedford, MK43 0AL

ISSN1472-1376/2006/1-2/00135 + 33 £8.00/0 ©Westburn Publishers Ltd.

relationship management. What sets present day CRM apart is that

1. To examine the role of CRM processes and consider the importance of

The Origins and Role of CRM

CRM is based on the principles of relationship marketing which is regarded

By the 1990s relationship marketing was a topic of great interest to

The Development of CRM

It is not the purpose of this paper to provide an exhaustive domain review of

development. With its roots in relationship marketing, CRM is a relatively

CRM Strategy and Cross-functional Processes

There appears to be increasing interest in cross-functional processes in

Cross- Functional Processes in CRM

CRM Strategy Frameworks and Processes

framework, as a study by BT (2001) illustrates. This study examined CRM

leadership; procurement processes; human resource management processes;

Before reviewing the model, we summarise our research approach. This

organisational phenomena; and that assumptions may be modified by

1. A panel of 34 experienced executives independently selected by the

The research approach draws on concepts suggested by Rapoport (1970),

which aim to contribute both to the practical concerns of people in a

CRM Strategy and Implementation Model

An examination of the extant literature on CRM highlights the effective

Process 1: Strategy Development

CRM Project Management

CRM Change Management

Process 5: Performance Assessment

Figure 1. CRM Strategy and Implementation Model

in a conceptual model for CRM strategy and implementation. The

Core Cross-functional Processes

The five cross-functional processes need to be considered concurrently and in

The Strategy Development Process

Anderson, Day and Kasturi 1997). The purpose of addressing business

key customer dimensions in these four macro segments. We examined this

The Value Creation Process

consider that recent emphasis on viewing the customer as a co-creator or co-

proposition and a structured approach for developing them. This suggests

The Multi-Channel Integration Process

an expensive account management structure - by introducing innovation in

The Information Management Process

customer contact; and, in combination with other relevant data, developing

The Performance Assessment Process

well as reducing costs. For performance monitoring, detailed standards,

customer satisfaction with shareholder value (Anderson, Fornell and

Companies need to consider their CRM priorities, given their specific

Key CRM Implementation Elements

interaction with these processes and systems, the returns to investments in