Scoping Customer Relationship Management Strategy in HEI
Understanding Steps towards Alignment of Customer and Management Needs
B. Khashab, S.R. Gulliver, A. Alsoud and M. Kyritsis
School of Business Informatics, Systems and Accounting, University of Reading (UK), Henley Business School,
RG6 6UR, Reading, Berkshire, U.K.
Keywords: Customer Relationship Management (CRM), Strategy, Scoping; Alignment, Higher Education Institutions.
Abstract: Higher Education Institutions (HEI) are complex organisations, offering a wide range of services, which
involve a multiplicity of customers, stakeholders and service providers; both in terms of type and number.
Satisfying a diverse set of customer groups is complex, and requires development of strategic Customer
Relationship Management (CRM). This paper contributes to the HEI area, by proposing an approach that
scopes CRM strategy, allowing us a better understanding CRM implementation in Higher Education
Institutions; maximising alignment of customer and management desires, expectation and needs.
1 INTRODUCTION
Customer Relationship Management (CRM) means
different things to different people, however, despite
confused and often conflicting understandings,
interest in CRM implementation within Higher
Education Institutions (HEIs) has soared. There is
increasing evidence that CRM should be managed as
a critical business strategy (e.g. Lindgreen et al,
2006; Rigby and Ledingham, 2004), which is of
strategic imperative to business success (Bohling et
al., 2006). There is, however, no consensus or
developed methods demonstrating how customer
desires expectations and needs (DEN), and business
strategy can be systematically aligned.
By identifying customers, the effective scope of
their needs can by defined. By identifying
appropriate steps in HEI CRM strategy development
can support the creation of superior value to
customers. In this paper we aim to better understand
existing CRM implementation in HEI. Presentation
of materials in this study is as follows: In section 2
we present a literature review that highlights existing
discrepancies in CRM implementation. This is
followed, in section 3, by a brief explanation of
related work concerning CRM, with focus on the
HEI setting. We discuss the research methods
adopted in section 4, and as a result of practitioner
interviews, in sections 5 and 6 we propose a six-step
approach, to scope strategy and maximise alignment
of customer and management desire, expectations
and needs.
2 CRM DISCREPANCY
To date there has been some confusion, in both
commerce and academia, concerning “what CRM
is”. CRM can be conceptualised as a strategy,
process, capability, philosophy or technological
solution (Zablah, et al., 2004), which has lead to
some significant differences in the perception of
what CRM includes. Lindgreen et al. (2006), for
example, claims that CRM can be grouped into three
main themes (strategic, infrastructure and process).
Poornima and Charantimath (2011), Buttle (2009)
and Thakur et al. (2006) all consider CRM as a core
business strategy, which maximises revenue,
profitability, and customer satisfaction; and openly
reject the perspective that CRM is nothing other than
a technical solution (Payne and Frow, 2005). CRM
in this study, and in the context of HEI, is defined as
a cross-departmental, customer-centred, technology-
aggregated business-process-management strategy
that should optimise customer relationships; and
yield benefits that span the entire enterprise
(Goldenberg, 2000).
Due to the historically high rate of CRM
implementation failure, and because of the lack of
understanding concerning the scope of CRM, a
267
Khashab B., R. Gulliver S., Alsoud A. and Kyritsis M..
Scoping Customer Relationship Management Strategy in HEI - Understanding Steps towards Alignment of Customer and Management Needs.
DOI: 10.5220/0004891002670274
In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2014), pages 267-274
ISBN: 978-989-758-028-4
Copyright
c
2014 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)
number of CRM implementation frameworks have
been developed to support practitioners. Gartner
(2001) introduced a CRM model called ‘The Eight
Building Blocks of CRM’, which considers eight
steps towards success (Radcliffe, 2001), which
specifically emphasised the need to focus on the
strategic role of CRM. Payne and Frow (2005)
proposed a strategic CRM framework that
underscored the importance of strategy as the
starting point, in order to overcome the shortfall of
considering CRM as simply a narrow technological
solution. Payne and Frow (2005) state that business
strategy and customer strategy alignment affects
CRM strategy success. They stress a need to
consider business strategy at the starting point to
define how the customer strategy should evolve.
Thakur et al. (2006) identified seven steps to
implementing CRM strategy (i.e. make customers
the essential focus of CRM strategy; categorise
customers on the basis of their perceived
importance; deliver value to prioritised customers;
concentrate on strategic capabilities; create strategies
that are customer centric; select CRM technology;
and implement the CRM strategy). Finally Buttle
(2009) defined a five phase implementation
framework, which focused on the development of
CRM strategy as being key to CRM implementation
success. Buttle (2009) defined CRM strategy as “a
high-level plan of action that aligns people,
processes and technology to achieve customer-
related goals.” In his strategy stage, he highlighted
the significance of establishing the goals based on
the prioritised and focused business processes.
Buttle argued that strategic CRM is a main
customer-centric business strategy that concentrates
on spreading customer oriented business culture.
To be effective, as identified by all key CRM
implementation frameworks, a CRM strategy must
be effectively aligned to the business strategy (Payne
and Frow, 2005). However, as
customer/management desires, expectation and
needs differ (Anton, 1996), it is important to
understand and manage the conflict that occurs
(Kotorov, 2002).
3 RELATED WORK IN HEI
Higher Education Institutions (HEI) are complex
organisations, offering a wide range of services (i.e.
teaching, research, knowledge transfer), involving a
multiplicity of stakeholders; both in terms of type
and numbers. Moreover, customer types vary
significantly (e.g. prospective / current students,
parents, alumni, business community, accreditation
organisations, government funding agencies, etc.).
Unlike most companies, however the output product
in HEI is commonly the customer, i.e. a student
(Kotler and Fox, 1985). Satisfying the conflicting
needs of diverse customer groups and stakeholders is
complex.
Daradoumis et al. (2010) highlighted that only
limited studies have considered CRM in the domain
of HEIs; and that existing studies commonly only
consider a limited scope or context within HEI
activity (e.g. prospective student activity); which has
resulted in solutions that do not consider all CRM
solution types (i.e. strategic, analytical, operational
and collaborative) (Buttle, 2009).
Seeman and O’Hara (2006), found that
implementing CRM systems within the university
improves management of customer data process,
raises student oriented focus, and increases student
retention, loyalty and satisfaction with the
university’s educational programs and services.
Seeman and O’Hara suggested that treating students
as customers enables HEIs to gain a competitive
advantage; improving capabilities to attract, keep
and satisfy its customers via superior value.
Moreover, Biczysko (2010) stated that CRM
systems can identify students who might drop out.
Biczysko claimed that by conducting frequent
surveys to measure the student’s satisfaction, and
reacting immediately to their demands, student
retention has been improved; which is of significant
financial value to management.
With increasing international competition within
the HEI sector, there is increasing pressure to satisfy
‘customer’ needs, yet limited support is given within
this complex sector to CRM strategy development.
Our research aims to understand effective CRM
implementation in HEIs, by studying existing HEI
CRM implementation. This is then used to develop
an approach, which can provide insights to
institutions that are planning adoption of a CRM
solution.
4 RESEARCH METHOD
To better understand CRM implementation in HEI,
and thus enable us to define a CRM strategy
development approach, we conducted interviews
with individuals who had in-depth experience of
CRM implementation in a range of UK based
universities. By tapping into the knowledge of
experienced implementers, we sought to gain an in-
depth understanding of CRM HEI implementation
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
268
success and failure. The research aimed to achieve
two primary objectives: i) To investigate the extent
to which HIEs employ CRM strategies, if any, and
how these are formulated; ii) To highlight key areas
that appear critical to the success of CRM
implementation in HEIs.
Universities selected for this study had CRM
implementation experience, and the people
interviewed were selected from Joint Information
Systems Committee (JISC) reports; which feature
more than 27 UK institutions websites. Ten semi-
structured interviews were carried out with key
implementation stakeholders (including one vice
chancellor, four project managers, two IT managers,
and three CRM managers) taken from six different
universities. Data was analysed using the Content
Analysis Method (Babbie, 2010), which facilitates
analysis and interpretation through the use of
structured codes on the basis of the following
questions: 1) Did they have a clear CRM strategy?
2) How did they formulate this strategy? 3) What are
the critical success factors that affected CRM
implementation? 4) How did they define the key
stakeholders involved in the CRM implementation?
5) What method did they use to define the
stakeholders? The process led to the emergence of
six critical steps, justified and elaborated in sections
5 and 6 respectively, which need to be addressed to
achieve successful HEI CRM strategic scoping and
alignment.
5 APPROACH DEFINITION
Interview data revealed a need to include six key
steps, which are: i) Define the CRM output focus; ii)
Define relevant customer groups; iii) Contextualise
output; iv) Map output lifecycle; v) Define customer
group needs/expectation/desires; vi) Quantify and
evaluate needs/expectation/desires in context of the
business strategy.
5.1 Step 1 - Define CRM Focal Output
70 % of interviewees stated that top management
should initiate CRM strategy; and that Customer
Relationship Management strategy should align with
the business strategy. “We look at our strategic
objectives as a university” (Interviewee 4).
Interviewees pointed out that it is essential to have
“a very detailed understanding of what the corporate
business requirements are, and how that might relate
to the wide strategy” (Interviewee 7). Interestingly,
one of the key factors, identified by 70% of
respondents, was the need to have “a different
strategy for different sectors and customer groups”
(i.e. specific teaching, research, knowledge transfer
outputs, degree level, etc.). Accordingly, to achieve
implementation success, each CRM strategy should
have a clear focus. In our approach we propose an
initial step that defines the HEI output scope.
5.2 Step 2 - Define Customer Groups
If separate CRM strategies are defined for specific
HEI output, it is important to define what customer
groups relate to that output. 60% of respondents
indicated that CRM strategy can only be gained by
understanding the bottom line (i.e. stakeholder
needs). It is therefore critical to define the primary
client(s), yet highlight the interaction of additional
secondary beneficiaries, e.g. staff who would not be
employed if the output did not exist. A step was
therefore added to our approach that defined all
customer groups (both primary and secondary),
highlighting their role in context of the focal output.
5.3 Step 3 - Contextualise Output
“Most of the goals for CRM systems will be driven
by the particular function” (Interviewee 5). Thus
CRM strategy should be designed around the
strategic functional needs of a specific output focus.
To deliver target functionality for specific customer
groups, in context of the focal output, it is important
that process occurs change at the appropriate point
within the organisation. “You have got to understand
the overall business processes that you’re trying to
satisfy” (interviewee 4). Accordingly it is important
to add a step to our approach that scoped the impact
of the CRM strategy in context of organisational
outputs, i.e. does change need to occur at University,
Faculty or School level; thus also highlighting the
scope of influence held by different customer groups
on the specific focal output.
5.4 Step 4 – Lifecycle Mapping
“It is important not to disregard the output lifecycle
when implementing CRM” (Interviewee 3). To
understand how customer groups interact with, and
influence, the focal output, it is important to
understand the lifecycle of contact points (i.e.
processes, activities, events and roles) in context of
the focal output. Respondent 6 mentioned that
different product customer groups need different
solutions at different times. “The undergraduate
experience is very different to the PG experience”
ScopingCustomerRelationshipManagementStrategyinHEI-UnderstandingStepstowardsAlignmentofCustomerand
ManagementNeeds
269
(Interviewee 6); and hence it is important, when
defining the CRM strategy, that the ‘as is’ lifecycle
for the focal output is clearly defined. Accordingly,
a step was added to our approach to map ‘as-is’
activities, events and roles involved in the lifecycle
of the focal output.
5.5 Step 5 - Defining DEN
60% of interviewees agreed that it is critically
important to consider students’ needs and
expectations when creating strategic CRM goals.
70% of the respondents highlighted the importance
of considering student experience as a pre-
implementation requirement. “I don’t think you can
really set out objectives without taking into account
what the students want” (Interviewee 10).
Accordingly a step was added to our approach,
which captured customer group desires, expectations
and needs (DEN).
5.6 Step 6 - Quantify and evaluate DEN
Capturing customer DEN in HEI is substantial to the
development of a successful CRM strategy; however
customer DEN (bottom up) needs to be balanced
against company objectives (top-down). Simply
capturing customer DEN does not fully consider
issues of practical alignment with the business
strategy. Accordingly, a step is needed in our
approach where senior management consider
customer DEN (bottom-up), and identify i) which
DEN will be taken forward, and ii) what quantifiable
measurement should be assigned.
6 SCOPING METHOD
6.1 Define CRM Focal Output
The first step of our approach is to identify the
university’s high level CRM strategic output focus,
i.e. the university output where value needs to be
added to the customer interaction. As HEI produce
multiple outputs (Hashimoto and Cohn, 1997),
defining the scope for the CRM strategy is critical to
successful resource use and implementation. Top
HEI management (i.e. at University level) are
therefore required to strategically prioritise what
outputs are critical to the University.
The HEI should focus CRM strategy
development on or around specific outputs, i.e. to
allow top HEI management highlighting what
discernable outcomes will be positively affected by
the specific CRM strategy. The focal output should
therefore be an output that senior management are
interested in strategically improving. If multiple
focal outputs are identified by management, then
distinct CRM strategies should be created to
consider each output. By focusing on outputs we are
able to determine the level and scope of
implementation within the organisation. By
following this first step, senior HEI management
will be able to discuss what business outcomes need
to be develop; via implementation of CRM systems.
By allowing senior HEI staff to define the high-level
focus of the CRM strategy, benefits can be justified,
the same senior management will also be ready,
willing, and able to fund / support resulting CRM
projects and solution implementations. In this paper
the focal output, used in the example will be the full-
time MBA degrees in a business school.
6.2 Define Customer Groups
Numerous studies have described the significant
importance of segmentation on the successful
implementation of a CRM strategy (e.g. Bligh and
Turk, 2004; Rigby et al., 2002). There are numerous
stakeholders within the context of any HEI output.
Spanbauer (1995) grouped HEI customers into two
categories: external (employers, students,
community, government, etc.) and internal
(instructors, service department staff, etc.). Each
stakeholder, in the lifecycle of the focal output, will
influence and/or benefit from the output - either
directly, as the client, or indirectly via allocation of
resource. By simply using a single one-umbrella
classification, it is impossible to identify the
complexity of HE stakeholder influence.
Accordingly, in the second step of our approach
we propose the use of stakeholder capture and
categorisation methods (as defined in Liu et al.,
2007); which applies organisational semiotic
approaches to classify the role and influence of
different stakeholders benefiting from the output.
Six role categories, defined in Liu et al. (2007), are:
1) Actors, i.e. those that take action that directly
influences the outcome; 2) Clients, who receive the
consequences of the outcomes; 3) Providers, who
provide the conditions to facilitate the deliverables
of the outcome; 4) Facilitators, who are the initiators
and enablers of an output, and are the ones who
solve conflicts and ensure continuity and steer the
team towards its goals; 5) Governing Bodies, who
take part in the project planning and management
planning and supply the legal framework; and 6)
Bystanders, who are not part of the project but can
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
270
influence the outcome. Staff involved in the
provision of the focal output (at faculty / school
level), should define how all stakeholders’ influence,
and benefit from, the delivery of the defined focal
output; with each segment classified as a separate
customer group. This allocation of roles allows us to
define direct and indirect customer groups (i.e.
beneficiaries of the given output), and the roles that
they take in the focal output lifecycle. In the context
of an MBA programme output (see Figure 1),
stakeholders might be: Actor - programme director;
Client - MBA students, supporting companies;
Provider - financial departments, teaching staff,
module conveners; Facilitator – Research
supervisors, admissions; Governing body –
University senate; Bystander: business
organisations, community institutions, press
agencies, etc. The list of customer groups should
categorise all stakeholders involved in the lifecycle
of the focal output.
Figure 1: CRM roles influencing HEI output.
The results from this step should be tabulated
separately for each focal output. This table should
also be, as required, augmented with information
concerning stakeholder responsibilities, roles, and
job function.
6.3 Contextualise Output
Renner (2000) stated that maximising customer
relationships requires a full understanding of their
scope. To understand the size of our focal output
within the organisation, and the scope of customer
group relationships, the third step of our approach
maps all customer groups (see section 5.2) in context
of the focus output hierarchy. Figure 2 shows a
simplified HEI hierarchical structure for
postgraduate degrees. If senior management defines
‘MBA’ as the HEI CRM ‘focal output’ (see step 1),
it is important to note that the MBA is just one of
many masters programmes. The MBA is by
definition a master programme, yet if MBA
specifically is deemed by management as deserving
an augmented level of customer service / interaction,
the CRM strategy should not necessarily impact all
master programmes; but at the sub-level of MBA
specifically. By scoping the influence of the focus
output we are able to define the scope of the CRM
strategy. In our example, the MBA programme is
sub-categorised as being full-time, part-time,
executive, or via distance learning. Each of these
delivery modes may have a very different model of
customer relationship. As we are considering just the
full-time MBA it is important to define whether all
delivery modes are considered to be included in the
scope of a single strategy (i.e. one strategy that will
apply to all four cohorts), or whether different
teaching modes equates to four separate focal
outputs (with potentially separate CRM strategies
required for each).
Figure 2: Hierarchical structure for postgraduate degrees
to facilitate contextualisation.
Defining the scope of the focal object, in context of
the organisation, allows implementation staff to
support senior staff to better tailor the strategy
definition. Moreover, identifying smaller and
smaller groups enables the university to better
manage the use of business processes/services with
each segment; treating customers in accordance to
their values and needs.
6.4 Lifecycle Mapping
The fourth step in our approach relates to the
detailed mapping of all customer groups, to current
Processes, Activities, Events and Roles (PAER) in
the lifecycle of the output (AS IS) – i.e. its current
state. O'Rand and Krecker (1990) claimed that
consideration and use of life cycles and life-events
supports alignment of desperate viewpoints
concerning a single entity or person. Unsurprisingly,
the life event concept is being increasingly adopted,
by public information service providers, to manage
customer experience (Kavadias and Tambouris,
ScopingCustomerRelationshipManagementStrategyinHEI-UnderstandingStepstowardsAlignmentofCustomerand
ManagementNeeds
271
2003). The use of focal object, lifecycle and life-
events, allows us to consider the ordering and impact
of customer group interaction. Since, within HEI,
different stakeholders (i.e. customer groups), interact
with, influence and/or benefit from the focal object
at different points in the output lifecycle, it is
important that information about the focal output
lifecycle should be used to structure the relationships
of customer groups in context of time.
As the primary client passes through the
lifecycle of the output (e.g. Full time MBA students
in our example), customer groups will have varying
influence / interaction on specific Processes,
Activities, Events and Roles (PAER) at each life
stage (e.g. recruitment stage). By understanding the
layout of these PAER, in context of the output
lifecycle, the experience of all customer groups can
be understood incrementally; thus building up an
interaction model of the whole focal output.
Such a model will help the university determine
the customer experience at each stage of the
lifecycle; thus highlighting areas that require
improvement / development. For instance, within the
MBA recruitment stage, measuring applicant
experience can help HEI admissions staff to guide
students to the correct programme (full-time/part-
time/executive); and can be used to define any areas
where better resourced is required.
6.5 Defining DEN
Desires, expectations and needs (DEN) are
differentiated by a set of subtle definitions
(Boradkar, 2010). Needs equate to essential
functional requirements, and must be met to ensure
that the focal output is viable. Expectations are
benefits, attributes and / or outcomes that
customer groups expect to exist in the focal output.
If an expectation is not delivered in the final output,
then the customer would, if left unmanaged, suffer a
feeling of disappointment; from which a feeling of
discontentment will result (Kano, 1995). Galbreath
and Rogers (1999) argued that a business cannot
survive if they do not meet their customer needs and
expectations. Desires are attributes and / or
outcomes that customer groups would like to exist in
the focal output, however customers are unlikely to
expect all desires to be met.
In HEIs, different stakeholders, e.g. a student and
the HEI vice chancellor, will have a very different
perspective on essential DENs. For example, in the
context of MBA taught programmes, a student is
both the client (i.e. the primary customer), but
arguably also the output. The student is paying to
experience the output lifecycle, yet course content is
developed by academic staff to often align with the
wider school teaching portfolio. Accordingly senior
management risk prioritising DEN that are of little,
or no significant importance to the paying client.
Explicit classification of desires, expectation and
needs, particularly from client and management
perspectives, is important to consider both bottom-
up (from client) and top-down (management)
desperate views.
We propose that in the fifth step of our approach,
four sub-steps are required. Firstly the focal output
(i.e. Full-Time MBA) DEN of senior management
should be collected and considered against the ‘AS-
IS’ lifecycle, defined in section 6.4. Secondly, senior
management should use a Likert type scale,
prioritise their DEN; in the paper we will call this A.
Thirdly customer groups (i.e. relating to full-time
MBA) should be asked to assess management DENs
from their own perspectives; using a similar Likert
type scale; in the paper we will call this B. The
result can be used to highlight the proposed CRM
improvements that will most positively impact
specific customer groups. Finally, we suggest that
customer groups define a set of additional DEN
concerning the focal object; and a weight (on a
Likert type scale) to identify their perception of
importance.
Figure 3: Customer / Management DEN definition.
6.6 Quantify and evaluate DEN
Porter (2010) stated that HEI institutions should
focus on the realistic objectives. Management should
evaluate which DEN should determine the final set
of focal object DEN (see figure 3). As a result of
customer feedback, a final set of DEN should be
evaluated. It can be argued that the more the HEI
knows about its customer groups, and allocates
available resources effectively to achieve their DEN,
the greater management can enhance business
performance and improve customer satisfaction
(Kirkby, 2002); which in turn leads to customer
loyalty (Anderson and Mittal, 2000). Whilst top
managers are ultimately responsible for formulating
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
272
and defining the final CRM strategy, feedback and
customer DEN (highlighted in section 6.5), however
for the sake of customer acceptance, senior
managers should consider customer DEN /
feedback; particularly in context of the focal output
lifecycle. If senior managers disregard customer
DENs, and do not view them as being critical, then
they risk loosing customer satisfaction. If, however,
management implement customer DEN, without
consideration of business strategy, they risk
inclusion of DEN that may not ultimately be viable.
Accordingly HEIs need to balance management
(top-down) and end-customer (bottom-up) DEN.
If numeric quantification is needed, gap analysis
can be used to allow the analyst to gauge customer
attitudes towards a given strategy (whether positive
or negative). For example, in their SERVQUAL
model, Parasuraman et al. (1988) stresses on the
importance of measuring, understanding customer
expectations, and aligning them to the business
processes. Closing expectation gaps between the
perceived service and expected services allowing to
align customer strategy with the business strategies
and services.
To identify and prioritise customer expectation
gaps, we suggest adopting an adapted version of
Cheng et al.’s (1998) gap analysis method. Value =
(A-B)*A; where A is the management strategic
score, and B is the defined customer relevance score.
If the customer score is less than the management
score, the value will be positive; implying that the
specific DEN is more important to management than
the customer group. If the customer score is more
than the management score, then the value will be
negative; implying that a DEN is more important to
the customer than management. To reflect the
strategic importance of the specific DEN value, we
magnify the sum by the management strategic score.
The greater the level of importance placed on the
DEN by management, the larger the final value.
The goal of this step is to view the entire
spectrum of DENs, and decide which to consider
and which to ignore. Such information facilitates
senior management to focus on the key DEN that
supports the business strategy that will be accepted
positively by customers. A wide gap between
management and customer requirements indicates an
absence of alignment. Where value is deemed to be
negative, the viability of client DENs must be
assessed by senior managers.
In the case of our full-time MBA focal object,
students might expect regular networking with
alumni students. Management might have given this
service a priority of 3 (i.e. A) on a 7 point Likert
style scale. If MBA students, however, give this
service a priority of 7 (i.e. B) on a similar 7 point
Likert style scale, the service value is currently (-
12); Value = (A-B)*A. As this is a negative number
management can instantly see that a low focus on
this service risks resulting in dissatisfaction from
students. It is then up to management to decide
whether resource can be viably invested.
Gap analysis quantifies the importance of DEN,
and allows managers to assess the plausibility of
each set of DENs; i.e. decide which should be
carried forward strategically. Moreover, gap analysis
supports quantification of each DEN, allowing
management to quantify CRM outcome.
The scoping strategy that we propose seeks to
align business model imperatives with customer
DENs, and to check the appropriateness of the
strategy as a tool for prioritising, segmenting, and
quantifying DENs, as a result of ranking and
mutually defined priorities. If customer and senior
management DENs are aligned, then the strategy
adopted will ideally implement strategically
important DEN, whilst providing customers with
what they want.
7 CONCLUSIONS
In a complex organisation, such as the HEIs, in
which multiple stakeholders have very different sets
of needs, expectations, and desires, the challenge of
implementing CRM solutions becomes particularly
great. In this paper, we develop a scoping approach
to help align the CRM strategy of management with
the desire, expectation and needs of customer
groups. Our method builds upon practical evidence
from the results obtained with interviews, which
were systematically synthesised. We investigated
HEI CRM implementation issues, placing focus on
institutions that have implemented CRM, with the
aim of understanding effective steps in the
development of HEI CRM strategy. Focusing on and
understanding customer groups’ desires,
expectations and needs can be used to support
effective strategy creation; which in turn, improves a
HEIs unique position.
It is believed that this paper is of significant
value to both CRM researches and practitioners;
when developing and implementing CRM strategies
within HEIs. Future research will focus on the
iterative implementation of our CRM strategy-
scoping approach; to help us identify the pros and
cons of the proposed approach in maximising the
alignment of customer and management DEN.
ScopingCustomerRelationshipManagementStrategyinHEI-UnderstandingStepstowardsAlignmentofCustomerand
ManagementNeeds
273
REFERENCES
Anderson, E. W. and Mittal, V., 2000. Strengthening the
Satisfaction-Profit Chain. Journal of Service Research,
Volume 3, No. 2, pp.107-120.
Anton, J. 1996. Customer Relationship Management:
Making Hard Decision with Soft Number, Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, and New Jersey.
Babbie, E., 2010. The Practice of Social Research (12th
Ed.). Wadsworth: Cengage Learning. p. 530.
Biczysko, D., 2010. CRM solutions for Education. In: P.
Jałowiecki and A. Orłowski, ed. 2010. Information
systems in management, Distant Learning and Web
Solutions for Education and Business. WULS Press,
Warsaw, 1st edition, pp.18-29.
Bligh, P. and Turk, D., 2004. CRM Unplugged Releasing
CRM’s Strategic Value. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bohling, T., et al., 2006. CRM Implementation
Effectiveness Issues and Insights." Journal of Service
Research 9(2), 184-194.
Boradkar, P. 2010. Designing things: a critical
introduction to the culture of objects, Berg.163-164.
Buttle, F. 2009. Customer Relationship Management
(Paperback). 2nd Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann.
Cheng, B. W. and Lin, S. P. and Liu, J. C., 1998. Applying
quality function deployment to improve the total
service quality in a Hospital’s Out-patient Department,
Proceedings of National Science Council: Humanities
& Social Science, 8(3), 479–493.
Daradoumis, T. et al. 2010. CRM Applied to Higher
Education: Developing an e-Monitoring System to
Improve Relationships in e-Learning Environments.
International Journal of Services Technology and
Management, Volume 14, Issue 1, 103-125.
Galbreath, J. and T. Rogers. 1999. Customer relationship
leadership: a leadership and motivation model for the
twenty-first century business. The TQM magazine
11(3), 161-171.
Goldenberg, B. 2000. What is CRM? What is an e-
customer? Why you need them now, in Proceedings of
DCI Customer Relationship Management Conference,
Boston, MA.
Hashimoto, K. and Cohn, E. 1997. Economies of scale and
scope in Japanese private universities. Education
Economics 5(2), 107-115.
Kano N. 1995. Upsizing the organization by attractive
quality creation G.H. Kanji, Total Quality
Management: Proceedings of the First World
Congress. Chapman.
Kavadias, G., Tambouris, E. 2003. GovML: A Markup
Language for Describing Public Services and Life
Events, in Proceedings of the 4th IFIP international
working conference on Knowledge management in
electronic government, 106-115.
Kotler, P., and Fox, K. 1985. Strategic Marketing for
Educational Institutions. Prentice Hall. New Jersey.
Kotorov, R. P. 2002. Ubiquitous organization:
organizational design for e-CRM. Business Process
Management Journal 8(3), 218-232.
Lindgreen, A., Palmer, R., Vanhamme, J., and Wouters, J.
2006. A relationship management assessment tool:
Questioning, identifying, and prioritizing critical
aspects of customer relationships. Industrial
Marketing Management, 35(1), 57−71.
Liu, K and Sun, L and Tan, S. 2007. Using Problem
Articulation Method to Assist Planning and
Management of Complex projects, in Charrel, P. J and
Galarreta, D. (Eds.) Project Management and Risk
Management in Complex Projects: Studies in
Organisational Semiotics. Springer, Netherlands, 1-14.
O'Rand M and Krecker L. 1990. Concepts of the life
cycle: their history, meanings and is- sues in the social
sciences. Annual review of sociology. Vol. 16, 241-62
Parasuraman, A. Zeithaml, V.A, and Berry, L.L. 1998.
SERVQUAL: a multi-item scale for measuring
consumer perceptions of service quality, Journal of
Retailing Vol. 64.12-40.
Radcliffe, J. 2001. Eight Building Blocks of CRM: A
Framework for Success. Gartner research note.
Renner, D. 2000. Customer relationship management: a
new weapon in your competitive arsenal”, Siebel
Magazine, Vol. 1 No. 2.
Payne, A. and Frow, P. 2005. A strategic framework for
customer relationship management. Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 69, 167-76.
Poornima M. C and Charantimath, M. P. 2011. Total
Quality Management, Pearson Education India, 477-
480.
Porter, B. 2010. KRADLE Project Kingston Relationship
Application Data for Learner Engagement. [Online].
Available at: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/
programmes/bce/kradlefinalreport.pdf. [Accessed:
12th November, 2013]
Kirkby, J. (2002). Developing a CRM Vision and
Strategy. GartnerG2, A1, CRM31.
Rigby. D and Ledingham, D. 2004, CRM done right",
Harvard Business Review, 11.
Rigby, D. K., et al. 2002. Avoid the four perils of CRM."
Harvard Business Review 80(2), 101-109.
Seeman, D.E. and O'Hara, M., 2006. Customer
relationship management in higher education: Using
information systems to improve the student-school
relationship, Campus - Wide Information Systems,
Vol.23.No 1, pp. 24-34.
Spanbauer, S. J. 1995. Reactivating higher education with
total quality management: using quality and
productivity concepts, techniques and tools to improve
higher education, Total Quality Management, Vol. 6,
No. 5/6.
Thakur, R. et al. 2006. CRM as strategy: Avoiding the
pitfall of tactics, Marketing Management Journal, Vol.
16, Issue 2, 147-154.
Zablah, A.R, Bellenger, D.N and Johnston, W. J. 2004. An
evaluation of divergent perspectives on customer
relationship management: Towards a common
understanding of an emerging phenomenon .Industrial
Marketing Management, 475–489.
ICEIS2014-16thInternationalConferenceonEnterpriseInformationSystems
274
