The conceptual framework is based on the proposition that the long-run growth of firms employing CRM strategies – measured by their ability to consistently grow recurring revenue – is determined largely by their ability to manage natural tensions between specialists and convert them into opportunities for collaboration, learning and more effective action. We offer DE as the specific behaviors of
interdisciplinary teams to manage tensions from combining diverse skills, knowledge, and strengths to generate greater value for clients and for the firm.
2.4.1. Conceptual framework for disciplined execution
Our conceptual framework for the study of disciplined execution of CRM strategies is based on the premise that firms adopt CRM strategies to accelerate their growth in recurring revenues from ongoing customer relationships. This emphasis on growth implies that for a CRM strategy to meet expectations, the teams implementing the strategy must simultaneously improve their ability to retain and grow current client relationships while maintaining their ability to acquire and cultivate new ones, or improve their acquisition abilities while maintaining their retention – or both. Thus, CRM implementation represents multi-faceted challenges for teams that require thoughtful adjustments to retain the most effective current practices while integrating new practices associated with new strategies while continuously monitoring the impact of work-flow changes on clients. We undertook three studies to understand and measure how CRM teams take on these challenges and the results of the studies are presented in the following diagram of the DE framework.
Figure 5: Conceptual framework for Disciplined Execution (DE) in CRM teams
The insights from the two stages of qualitative interviewing in Study #1 are cumulative and are used to support the quantitative research in Studies #2 and #3. The 58 interviews with industry experts, top executives, and CRM team members defined the five dimensions of DE used in the third-party measure for the quasi-experiment and the more detailed direct measures of each DE dimension used in the survey. Together, the three studies paint a detailed picture of how the level of discipline in the execution of a marketing strategy influences the performance of the strategy. This framework for understanding the role of disciplined executions (DE) also permits us to quantify the impact DE on CRM performance and to confirm its mediating role between investments in resources to support CRM and performance. The qualitative research was consistent across 58 depth interviews and identified the five dimensions and the 19 associated behaviors and attitudes of interdisciplinary CRM teams that drive success in implementing CRM strategies. The quasi-experiment in Study #2 compares the growth in recurring revenue as a measure of CRM performance attributable to selecting a CRM strategy to the growth attributable to DE. For the average case in the Bayesian quasi-experiments, firms that adopted the CRM strategy had an average annual growth in recurring revenue for the three years after adoption of 46% more than the average case for a matched control group. Firms that implemented the strategy and had a high level of DE
(6 on a 7-point scale) produced growth in recurring revenue that was 41% more than similar firms with an average DE level (4 on a 7-point scale). The survey and model in Study #3 explore the role of DE as a mediator between the investment in CRM resources by senior leaders to support CRM strategy as an antecedent and CRM team performance as an outcome. The results confirmed positive and significant effects for CRM resources on CRM performance with positive and significant mediating effects for DE, as hypothesized. The dimensions and measurement items for DE used in the survey are summarized here:
2.4.2. Five interdisciplinary team dimensions of DE and associated items
Through qualitative interviewing, we identified 31 specific behaviors and attitudes associated five dimensions of DE in CRM teams. The 19 items we retained after exploratory and factor analysis are described briefly here.
1. Engagement in defining implementation (five items) a. Defined an implementation plan
b. Made suggestions about how to implement c. Shared insights about implementation d. Passionate about generating benefits e. Team took ownership of implementation
2. Acceptance of the new strategy or adjustment (four items) a. My team was among the first to use it
b. My team helped me to adopt it
c. My team discussed the merits of the change d. My team is committed to get the most out of it
3. Orchestration of implementation with team members (four items) a. My team paid attention to my feedback
c. I am satisfied with my team’s responsiveness
d. I have followed the feedback from my team members 4. Focus of time and resources on implementation (three items)
a. Implementing the change was a high priority for my team b. My team committed ample time to implementation c. My team applied appropriate resources to implementation 5. Tenacity in addressing challenges of implementation (three items)
a. My team stayed with the change through difficult challenges b. My team was unwilling to give up
c. My team identified and worked through problems
We believe our research contributes to practice by specifying and testing these behaviors and attitudes marketing leaders can use in their efforts to train, measure, and manage disciplined execution as a source of strategic advantage. The results of this research have been presented to the ten focal firms that
participated in the qualitative stage and the insights concerning disciplined execution have been
incorporated in several training and measurement regimens at these firms. The early anecdotal feedback from practitioners has been favorable as managers have found the results to be consistent with their experiences and the training based on results has resulted in positive team outcomes.