Call Tracking Technology Selection Model

Part of the Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management book series (ITKM)


In this chapter we evaluate the selection of a call tracking feature for an existing marketing automation solution. This type of selection process has become much more complex over time based on the sheer volume of offerings available, different technical approaches to implementation, and service plans (features plus costs). In order to manage this complexity for decision making, we gathered a set of core requirements from the client, assembled a panel of experts to rank the importance of requirements, and then evaluated the potential solutions based on those criteria. The actual decision making methodology used in this study is the hierarchical decision model (HDM) testing two alternative methods for evaluating the expert criteria ranking. In this case, by focusing on client requirements, rather than specific technologies or implementation approaches, allows us to greatly simplify this complex decision making process in the absence of a more detailed technical analysis of every possible solution.


Implementation Time Marketing Material Loan Officer Core Requirement Internal Inconsistency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Kalpana Ettenson (2010) Enterprise Phone Systems Buyer’s Guide. Technology Evaluation Centers [Online].
  2. 2.
    Kocaoglu DF (2011) Hierarchical decision modeling. PSU ETM EMGT 530 Class Notes SpringGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    CrumDD (2011) Introduction to VoIP Business Communications, Accessed 21 May 2011
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    PROGNOSIS (2007) Multi-vendor IP telephony management: challenges & solutionGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    The Standish Group (2009) CHAOS summary 2009.
  7. 7.
    Dan Galorath (2008) (updated Sep. 2009) Software project failures cost billions. Better estimating can help.
  8. 8.
    Daim T et al (2009) Technology assessment for clean energy technologies: the case of the Pacific Northwest. Technol Soc 31:232–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    Ajgaonkar A, Jefferis S (2003) Use of HDM for site selection of MLB stadium in Portland, PICMET PaperGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kocaoglu DF (1983) A participative approach to program evaluation. IEEE Trans Eng Manage EM-30(3)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ajgaonkar, Priya. et. al. “ Use of Hierarchical Decision Modeling for Site Selection of a Major League Baseball Stadium in Portland”. PICMET 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  2. 2.Portland State UniversityPortlandUSA
  3. 3.AramCoPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations