Towards a Model for Measuring Customer Intimacy in B2B Services

  • François Habryn
  • Benjamin Blau
  • Gerhard Satzger
  • Bernhard Kölmel
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 53)

Abstract

This paper proposes an approach for evaluating the relationship with a customer, leading to the creation of a Customer Intimacy Grade (CIG), across multiple levels of granularity: employee, team, business unit and whole organization. Our approach focuses on B2B service organizations which provide their customers with complex solutions and whose relationship with the customer is distributed among multiple employees and across different business units. The suggested approach should improve the systematic analysis of customer intimacy in organizations, leverage the customer knowledge scattered throughout the organization and enable benchmarking and focused investments in customer relationships.

Keywords

Customer Intimacy Social Network Organization B2B Services Service Relationships Customer Relationship Management 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tuominen, M., Rajala, A., Mo, K.: Market-driving versus market-driven: Divergent roles of market orientation in business relationships. Industrial Marketing Management 33, 207–217 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F.: Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. Journal of Marketing 68, 1–17 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F.: Why “service”? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36, 25–38 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Treacy, M., Wiersema, F.: Customer intimacy and other value discipline. Harvard Business Review (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gubman, E.L.: Aligning People Strategies with Customer Value. Compensation & Benefits Review 27, 15–22 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kellen, V.: CRM Measurement Frameworks, pp. 1–37 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaplan, R.: A Balanced Scorecard Approach To Measure Customer Profitability (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Potgieter, A., Roodt, G.: Measuring a customer intimacy culture in a value discipline context. SA Journal of Human Resource Management 2, 25–31 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Industry Directions and IBM, Increasing Customer Intimacy, Value-Add and Profits Through Expanded Services, pp. 1–7 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yim, C.K., Tse, D.K., Chan, K.W.: Strengthening Customer Loyalty Through Intimacy and Passion: Roles of Customer–Firm Affection and Customer–Staff Relationships in Services. Journal of Marketing Research 45, 741–756 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cuganesan, S.: Calculating customer intimacy: Accounting numbers in a sales and marketing department. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 21, 78–103 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Niven, P.R.: Balanced Scorecard Step-by-Step: Maximizing Performance and Maintaining Results. Wiley, Chichester (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaplan, R., Anderson, S.R.: Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing: A Simpler and More Powerful Path to Higher Profits. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abraham, G.A.: Profit Power of Customer Intimacy: Deliver Top Line Revenue and Earnings Growth (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Richard, J.E.: The Impact of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Technology on Business-to-Business Customer Relationships. Victoria University of Wellington (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liljander, V., Strandvik, T.: The Nature of relationships in services. Advances in Service Marketing and Management 4, 143 (1995)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bove, L.: Customer relationships with service personnel: do we measure closeness, quality or strength? Journal of Business Research 54, 189–197 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barnes, J.G.: Closeness, strength, and satisfaction: Examining the nature of relationships between providers of financial services and their retail customers. Psychology and Marketing 14, 765–790 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mohr, J., Sohi, R.: Communication flows in distribution channels: Impact on assessments of communication quality and satisfaction. Journal of Retailing 71, 393–416 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Morgan, R.M., Hunt, S.D.: The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing. The Journal of Marketing 58, 20–38 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sako, M.: Prices, quality, and trust: inter-firm relations in Britain and Japan (1992)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wilson, J.M., Boyer O’Leary, M., Metiu, a., Jett, Q.R.: Perceived Proximity in Virtual Work: Explaining the Paradox of Far-but-Close. Organization Studies 29, 979–1002 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hogg, M.A.: Social Identity and the Group Context of Trust: Managing Risk and Building Trust through Belonging. In: Siegrist, M., Earle, T.C., Gutsche, H. (eds.) Trust in cooperative risk management: uncertainty and scepticism in the public mind, pp. 51–72 (2007)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Anderson, E., Weitz, B.: The Use of Pledges to Build and Sustain Commitment in Distribution Channels. Journal of Marketing Research 24, 18–34 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Denison, D.: Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness: Is Asia Different From the Rest of the World? Organizational Dynamics 33, 98–109 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Freeman, L.: Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks 1, 215–239 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Buechel, B., Buskens, V.: The Dynamics of Closeness and Betweenness (2008)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shafer, G.: Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton (1976)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • François Habryn
    • 1
  • Benjamin Blau
    • 1
  • Gerhard Satzger
    • 1
  • Bernhard Kölmel
    • 2
  1. 1.Karlsruhe Service Research Institute 
  2. 2.CAS AG 

Personalised recommendations