مدیریت پروژه های مدیریت ارتباط با مشتری(CRM) : در مورد یک شرکت بزرگ ارتباطات از راه دور فرانسه
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|1018||2010||13 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 9340 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : International Journal of Project Management, Volume 28, Issue 4, May 2010, Pages 339–351
Customer relationship management (CRM) implementation projects reflect a growing conceptual shift from the traditional engineering view of projects. Such projects are complex and risky because they call for both organisational and technological changes. This requires effective project management across various phases of the implementation process. However, few empirical researches have dealt with these project management issues. The aim of this research is to investigate how a “project team” manages CRM implementation projects successfully, across the different phases of the implementation process. We conducted an in-depth case study of the “Firm-Clients Branch” of a large telecommunications company in France. The findings show that, to manage CRM implementation projects successfully, an integrated and balanced approach is required. This involves appropriate system selection, effective process re-engineering and further development of organizational structures. We highlight the need for a “technochange approach” to achieve successful organisational transition and effective CRM implementation. The study reveals that the project team plays a central role throughout the implementation phases. Furthermore the effectiveness of technochange depends on project team performance, technology efficiency and close coordination with stakeholders.
The implementation of customer relationship management (CRM) is increasingly taking centre stage in organisations’ corporate strategies (Greenberg, 2002 and Bohling et al., 2006). It aims to create, develop and enhance personal and valuable relationships with customers, by providing personalised and customised products and services (Goodhue et al., 2002 and McKim, 2002). CRM is an integration of technologies, people and business processes that is used to satisfy the customers’ needs, and to improve interactions with clients (Bose, 2002, Foss et al., 2008 and Becker et al., 2009). Often built around complex software packages, such CRM systems promise to enable companies to respond efficiently, and sometimes instantly, to shifting customer desires, thereby bolstering revenue and retention, and reducing marketing costs (Rigby et al., 2002). Despite the availability of successful and more reliable technologies, and companies’ use of external skills that are recognised on a technical level, managing CRM implementation projects remains a risky undertaking (Corner and Hinton, 2002, Bull, 2003 and CSO Insights, 2006). In fact, the introduction of large-scale integrated IS leads to more significant changes in processes, tasks and people than traditional computing projects (Winter et al., 2006). The organisational change associated with the implementation of integrated information systems (IS) takes place through an adaption of the business processes, and a reconfiguration of the company’s organisational structure (King and Burgess, 2008). Because of this, the implementation of new CRMs transcends the technical dimension that characterises computing as encompassing human, organisational and strategic factors (Chen and Popovich, 2003 and Mendoza et al., 2007). Nevertheless, organisations have a tendency to concentrate on the technological aspects, and to see CRM systems mainly as computing projects when implementing them (Gartner Group, 2003 and CSO Insights, 2006). King and Burgess (2008) specify that a CRM implementation has similarities with an ERP, in terms of their respective critical success factors (CSF). However the authors point out the under-consideration of the competence and management of the project team in the CRM work compared to that of ERP. For example, in ERP literature, Somers and Nelson (2001) argue that project team’s competences are a primary CSF for ERP implementation projects. Somers and Nelson (2004) specify the need to related project team’s activities to the project life-cycle. This is in line with Gareis and Huemann (2000) who shed light on the need for, and the particularity of, project management competences in project-oriented companies. The preeminent role of project management is confirmed by studies dealing with CRMs (Bose, 2002 and Mendoza et al., 2007). Payne and Frow (2005) argue that successful implementation of a CRM programme depends on four critical factors: (1) CRM readiness assessment, (2) CRM change management, (3) CRM project management, and (4) employee engagement. Foss et al. (2008) remark that poor planning, lack of clear objectives and failure to recognise the need for business change are the key reasons for CRM failures. As an enterprise system, the responsibility for managing CRM implementation project is often assigned to a dedicated project team. The business and managerial activities of this team are increasingly considered a critical factor in enterprise systems’ implementation success (Ward et al., 2005 and King and Burgess, 2008). CRM implementation projects are difficult endeavours because they call for both organisational and technological changes (Bull, 2003). Markus (2004) calls this a technochange (i.e., technology-driven organisational change). Winter et al. (2006) refer to these as “business projects”, which are considered a new class of projects that reflects a growing conceptual shift from the traditional engineering view of projects. However, few empirical researches examine the management of CRM-related changes (Chen and Popovich, 2003 and Bose, 2002) or of CRM implementation projects (Bygstad, 2003), within a holistic perspective (Becker et al., 2009) that integrates technological, organisational and technochange issues. Even such a required change relates, according to Gareis (2010), to several change dimensions the identity of an organisation is not changed by a CRM implementation. Therefore, in our research, the CRM implementation is considered as a first-order change (Levy and Merry, 1986). This study aims to address the gap above by dealing with the context of the increasing importance of CRM implementation projects, the inherent change issues related to its different phases and the central role of project management, as a key to success. Our objective is to investigate the following question: How does a “project team” manage a CRM implementation project and the adaption of the organizational structures throughout the different phases of the implementation process? The paper analyses the dynamics of a CRM implementation project by deploying a process-based approach. We undertook a case study of the project of implementing a new CRM system in the “Firm-Clients Branch” of a leading French telecoms company. This large Branch sells products and services to firms. The remainder of the paper is organised as follows. Section 2 provides a literature review of (Section 2.1) the change dimensions associated with the CRM implementation, and (Section 2.2) the role of the project team in the management of these dimensions over the implementation process. Section 3 describes the case study method adopted for this research. Section 4 highlights the findings of the study. Section 5 discusses the main findings and draws the conclusion of this study.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
This paper demonstrates the management of a CRM implementation project throughout the different phases of the implementation process. The CRM implementation in the case study organisation followed a model of “further developing” (Gareis, 2010). The outcomes (system usage by the sales force and organisational changes) did not fulfil top management’s expectations. This was mainly because of the inadequacy of the approach to managing technochange (Markus, 2004), which requires a lateral approach to implementing technology and managing organisational changes. Hence, technochange is far more complex, larger and more strategic in its nature (Lehtonen and Martinsuo, 2008). This paper contributes to rethinking the dominant classical models in IT project management, by extending the first-order change approach (Fox-Wolfgramm et al., 1998) towards other models that integrate change program/project complexity, and by evolution from a narrow conceptualisation of projects towards a broader perspective. In this perspective, academics and practitioners need to integrate: (1) the multidimensionality of project/program management (Winter et al., 2006) and (2) the dynamics of key players’ roles and activities in the course of the implementation process phases (Ward et al., 2005). Our research has had a dual aim: first to identify the issues in CRM implementation, and to understand the complexity of IT project management; and, second, to show the organisational changes across the various phases of implementation. These findings will help management to plan the roles and responsibilities of the entire project team. This research enables us to construct a matrix (Table 3) that proposes a pluralist and multi-faceted vision of change dimensions, depending on their form: technological, organisational or technochange. Our work has provided concrete elements to answer the questions connected with the introduction of a new way of functioning within the company, the introduction of CRMs in organisations and the management of change process. Although our study, of a single in-depth case, presents a robust methodology that respects the principles of scientific rigour, we are conscious of the habitual limitations of its results in terms of generalisation to other contexts. Nevertheless, our choice, to undertake an in-depth investigation of a large project for introducing a CRM, according to a process-based and longitudinal approach, has enabled us to reveal the co-existence of several change forms that necessitate distinct management methods over the project phases.