Search results

This study aims to address how and why do formal key account management (KAM) programmes hinder effective KAM management, and how can the problems of formalization in KAM be overcome. Recent empirical studies have reported an unexpected negative relationship between KAM formalization and performance.

An 18-month (340 days) ethnographic investigation was undertaken in the UK-based subsidiary of a major US sports goods manufacturer. This ethnographic evidence was triangulated with 113 in-depth interviews.

This study identifies how and why managerial reflexivity allows a more effectively combining of formal and post-bureaucratic KAM practices. While formal KAM programmes provide a means to initiate, implement and control KAM, they have an unintended consequence of increasing organizational bureaucracy, which may in the long-run hinder the KAM effectiveness. Heightened reflexivity, including “wayfinding”, is identified as a means to overcome many of these challenges, allowing for reflexively combining formal with post-bureaucratic KAM practices.

The thesis of this paper starts a new line of reflexive KAM research, which draws theoretical influences from the post-bureaucratic turn in management studies.

This study seeks to increase KAM implementation success rates and long-term effectiveness of KAM by conceptualizing the new possibilities offered by reflexive KAM. This study demonstrates how reflexive skills (conceptualized as “KAM wayfinding”) can be deployed during KAM implementation and for its continual improvement. Further, the study identifies how KAM programmes can be used to train organizational learning regarding KAM. Furthermore, this study identifies how and why post-bureaucratic KAM can offer additional benefits after an organization has learned key KAM capabilities.

A new line of enquiry is identified: the reflexive-turn in KAM. This theoretical position allows us to identify existing weakness in the extant KAM literature, and to show a practical means to improve the effectiveness of KAM. This concerns, in particular, the importance of managerial reflexivity and KAM wayfinding as a means to balance the strengths and weaknesses of formal and post-bureaucratic KAM.

Over the past ten to 15 years, key account management (KAM) has established itself as an important and growing field of academic study and as a major issue for practitioners. Despite the use of strategic intent in conceptualizing KAM relationship types, the role of strategic intent has not previously been empirically tested. This paper aims to address this issue

This paper reports on inductive research that used a dyadic methodology and difference modelling to examine nine key account relationship dyads involving 18 companies. This is supplemented with 13 semi-structured interviews with key account managers from a further 13 companies, which provides additional depth of understanding of the drivers of KAM relationship type.

The research found a misalignment of strategic intent between supplier and customer, which suggested that strategic intent is unrelated to relationship type. In contrast, key buyer/supplier relationships were differentiated not by the level of strategic fit or intent, but by contact structure and differentiated service.

This research showed that there can be stable key account relationships even where there is an asymmetry of strategic interests. The findings also have practical implications relating to the selection and management of key accounts.

These results raise questions relating to conceptualizations of such relationships, both in the classroom and within businesses.

A deliberate and planned crisis communication strategy is an important part of key account management. The purpose of this paper is to draw links between key account managers (KAM) and crisis communication and explore the elements critical to crisis communication in key account relationships.

The approach is qualitative. Data were gathered from people experienced in crisis communication and responsible for strategic accounts. The paper analysed managers’ stories of crisis processes and related communication in relationships.

Successful crisis communication requires an open and active crisis communicator, one willing to solve problems, and also the company being a partner worth trusting and the retention of the relationship being worthwhile for the customer.

The present study focuses on the managerial view, and therefore a dyadic approach is suggested for future studies.

The role of the KAM as a crisis communicator and primary identifier of the crisis is emphasized.

Existing crisis communication discussions have been very media focused. This study focuses on the key account relationship and the related crisis communication. In addition, although earlier studies examine the influences of crises on business relationships (e.g. Salo et al., 2009; Thiessen and Ingenhoff, 2010; Tähtinen and Vaaland, 2006), research on crisis communication in business-to-business key account relationships is still scarce. The results will help to understand the characteristics of crisis communication in key account relationships and enhance communication with strategic accounts.

The purpose of the paper is to identify the elements of professional key account management programs, to understand the success factors and to create an integrated framework.

The article is based on an analysis of the existing literature as well as on several qualitative research projects. Existing content from around 30 years of KAM research and practice was reviewed. A total of 18 companies were analyzed using case study methods and action research approaches. A total of 27 interviews with practitioners and 18 workshops were conducted to conceptualize the integrated KAM framework.

Key account management is more complex than the existing literature suggests and companies believe. A professional KAM framework addresses two different target groups: key account managers (and teams) and the company's management (or someone the responsibility of the entire program is delegated to). Both groups have to pay attention to five dimensions of KAM (named strategy, solution, people, management, screening) and several aspects that are different for each group.

A full overview about all the necessary elements of a professional KAM program can be used to assess a company's ways of working with strategic customers and to conceptualize or optimize an entire KAM program.

The presented framework is the first that integrates the different views of the two most important target groups of KAM. It offers a unique overview of all important elements.

Argues that key account management (KAM) in industrial and business‐to‐business markets has its roots in sales management where it has long been recognized that customers of strategic importance require special treatment. Explains that, more recently, growing interest among academics and practitioners in relationship marketing has forced KAM centre stage as one of the few seemingly tried and tested approaches to customer retention and development, but that this trend has exposed three interrelated problems for the adoption of KAM systems. Maintains that: first, many companies have merely extended their traditional approaches to major account selling, rather than transforming their internal processes to accommodate the wider relational aspects of KAM; second, there has been a rush to define managerial competences and best practice, with little theoretical or empirical underpinning; and third, despite parallel developments in purchasing and supply‐chain management, there has been a tendency for the sellers’ perspective to dominate implementation issues. Addresses these problems by operationalizing the relational development model outlined in an earlier article entitled “From key account selling to key account management” (JMP, Vol. 1 No. 1). Draws on the findings from ongoing empirical research which takes the buyer/seller dyadic relationship as the unit of analysis to provide a critique of the relative neglect of KAM processes in preference to outputs in the form of managerial competences.

Key account management (KAM) programmes are a way for companies to develop existing relationships and increase sales, thus being proactive and searching for opportunities (which is often expected of KAM). It is also a way to meet changing customer demands arising from changes in purchasing strategy, buyers' mergers and acquisitions and the search for synergies in order to reduce costs. The purpose of this article is to analyse different key account management programmes on how they manage the sales process complexity and customer expectations.

The paper draws on qualitative data collected during a field study of ABB and six of their major customers, based on annual or biannual interviews with 50 individuals within ABB from 1996 to 2006 and three to ten individuals from each of the customers. Interviewees included corporate managers, key account managers and sales personnel/project managers. The customers involved in the study belonged to mining, automotive, process equipment manufacture, building technology, energy production and telecommunication sectors.

In this study three different programmes are identified and analysed: the proactive programme – which is driven by sales opportunity; the reactive programme – which is driven by customer demands; and the organisation‐based programme – which is driven by the belief in customer‐centric organisational units.

The paper identifies sales aspects (complexities) of KAM programmes that are handled in different ways by different types of programmes.

With an empirical base the paper provides a basis for understanding the reasons behind the establishment of several KAM programmes in the same corporation.

Seeks to better understand whether a retailer's trust in a manufacturer is a key concept in their motivation to allocate resources to those manufacturers with whom they have a long‐term relationship compared with economical motivations.

A survey research method is used to study all customers from three large manufacturers in The Netherlands. These retailers had to answer questions about their trust in a manufacturer, the manufacturer's investments in the relationship, and their marketing efforts. Questions were also asked about the allocation of their own scarce resources for the manufacturer, specifically their adoption of in‐store marketing campaigns initiated by the manufacturer. Structural equation models and regression analyses were employed.

Trust is not that important, but the manufacturer's investments in the brand are the most important predictors. However, interaction effects were also found: trust interacts with investments in the brand to influence resource allocations. It was also found that personal contact of salespeople of the manufacturer with managers at store as well as their contact with headquarters had an effect on resource allocation. This is conceived to be an indication that people at headquarters take into consideration how people at the floor level evaluate the brands and their effects on customers when making resource allocation decisions. In other words, retailer chains have complex buying centers.

A large set of customers was analyzed from three different manufacturers, but customers could have been investigated from many manufacturers.

Retailers respond to manufacturers mainly with economic motivations (e.g. what is the value of this brand for my own firm?). However, trust at times interacts with these economic motivations. This means that manufacturers should invest both in the relationship with the retailer and in their brands, if they want to motivate the retailer to allocate scarce resources (e.g. time).

This paper identifies important factors that influence retailer behavior that have not been studied within a fast‐moving retail context.

The purpose of this paper is to identify what managerial implications research related to inter-organizational interfaces has been produced in marketing. For this aim, the authors focus on a specific concept implemented in many firms that operate on business-to-business markets, which is key account management (KAM).

The authors used the Ebsco Database entering “account management” as a key word in the title row. The search provided 51 papers to which the authors added four MSI reports written by Moriarty and Shapiro between 1980 and 1984. The authors then identified such keywords as “managers”, “practitioners”, “marketers”, “managerial”, “business”, and their variations as well as normative words such as “should”, “must”, etc. in order to identify managerial implications.

Four main findings are provided: a clear managerial purpose is affirmed by KAM academic works whether as a central “purpose” of the works or as “implications”; these managerial implications may display different forms (dimensions to be considered, consequences to anticipate, advices); though the managerial scope of KAM works is clearly visible, the sophistication of managerial recommendations remains … limited; the identification of who is exactly “the manager” targeted by the implications remains vague.

The authors discuss the notion of managerial relevance of academic research.

The authors explore sources for practices (whether they are the ones of scholars or managers) that could help “spelling out more effectively the managerial implications.

To the knowledge this is the first work that reviews so precisely how academic articles address to the managerial audience on a precise issue. Furthermore, the authors believe that KAM is an interesting and appropriate field for such a review because it is widely implemented on business markets.

The purpose of this paper is to explore a contributing factor – communication – within a team as well as with a client. Organizations that rely on key account teams for strategy implementation may find their “best laid plans” thwarted by communication problems associated with such teams.

This paper is based on depth interviews and content analysis. The authors analyze what team members and team leaders say and count positive/negative terms about communication within teams and with clients. These counts of such terms as a proportion of interview length are compared to the actual team success.

Negative comments about communication within the team focus on difficulty and positive comments focus on support. Interestingly, however, the best indicator of whether a team has succeeded in selling its key account is the extent of negative expressions about communication from key account managers. Presumably, the structure of key account teams gives them an extra leadership burden, and the authors’ see a relationship between their perception of communication shortcomings and success or failure.

The authors recommend investigating communication issues when strategy implementation depends on key account teams, but because this study is conducted using a qualitative method with one company, its results cannot be projected. The authors simply demonstrate what a company could learn from conducting its own study and comparing results to its sales success.

Little research has examined communication in key account teams or linked it to sales success.

Addresses the question of how to make key account management processes in industrial and business‐to‐business markets more customer focused. Considers the processual issues emerging from recent empirical research and looks at a range of factors: cultural; organisational; and attitudinal; which have been found to affect the benefits gained from attempting to implement KAM processes. Points are drawn from a number of different sources, such as: formal research projects, studying particular buyer/seller dyads, broader industry surveys, and from observations made during KAM workshops and consultancy projects. They are presented as a guide to those issues that will be the major focus of future research.