Fast Strategy of Knowledge (KM) in Customer Relationship Management (CRM) of Knowledge Intensive Services (KIBS)

Pugdee Manaves

ABSTRACT The research attempts to develop a Fast Strategy by proposing a Taxonomy of the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) in the Thai Industry. Customers are the best assets of the . As an increasing number of realize the importance of becoming more customer-centric in today’s competitive economy, they must have deep knowledge about their customers, products, and services internally and externally. The enterprise executives must know the CSFs that will drive their CRM to help foster a customer-centric business strategy in order for them to grow their business. The CSFs will be derived from interviewing of 9 executives from 9 Small and Medium Enterprises SMEs, focusing on the Knowledge Intensive Services (KIBS) in Thailand, which have implemented CRM. The initial results will develop the proposed baseline CSFs Taxonomy. For this study, the initial results will be validated and seek for the contributions of the CSFs Taxonomy to the related management concepts, which includes (KM), Strategic , and , and then the final CSFs Taxonomy is developed from the initial base CSFs Taxonomy with the results from the validation. Experts’ comments have been used as a major input for this particular validation process. The finding from the experiment shows that the taxonomy is demonstrated to be useful for the executives to improve their performance measurement systems, helps them build the companies’ Fast Strategy, and transfer knowledge and experience to newly promoted or second generation executives smoothly and most likely to speed up to the mature stage. In addition, the taxonomy contributes to the Knowledge Management (KM), Strategic Leadership, and Strategic Management. This proposed taxonomy has both potential benefits and limitations that will be addressed throughout the paper.

Keywords: Customer Relationship Management (CRM), Fast Strategy, Critical Success Factors (CSFs), Performance Management, and Business Performance.

บทคดยั ่อ การวิจยครั ้ังน้ีมีวตถั ุประสงคเพ์ ื่อพฒนากลยั ทธุ ์แบบรวดเร็ว โดยการเสนอตวแบบการจั ดหมวดหมั ู่ ของปัจจยสั าคํ ญของความสั าเรํ ็จ (Critical Success Factors, CSFs) ของการบริหารความสัมพนธั ์ลูกคา้ (Customer Relationship Management, CRM) ของอุตสาหกรรมในประเทศไทย ท้งนั ้ี ลูกคา้ คือ สินทรัพย์ ที่สําคญทั ี่สุดขององค์การ ทาใหํ ้หลายองคการม์ ีความตระหนักถึงความสําคญของลั ูกคาเพ้ ่ิมมากข้ึนใน สภาพการแข่งขนทางเศรษฐกั ิจปัจจุบนั ซ่ึงจะตองม้ ีความรู้เชิงลึกเกี่ยวกบลั ูกคา้ สินคาและบร้ ิการท้งั ภายในและภายนอกองค์การ ผูบร้ ิหารขององค์การจะตองม้ ีความรู้เรื่องปัจจัยสําคญของความสั ําเร็จ สําหรับการพฒนาความสั ัมพนธั ์ลูกคา้ เพื่อสนับสนุนกลยุทธ์ธุรกิจแบบลูกคาเป้ ็นศูนยกลางเพ์ ื่อการ เจริญเติบโตทางธุรกิจ ปัจจัยสําคญของความสั ําเร็จได้ถูกพฒนาจากการสั ัมภาษณ์ผูบร้ ิหารองค์การ จานวนํ 9 ท่าน จากองคการธ์ ุรกิจขนาดกลางและขนาดเลก็ (Small and Medium Enterprises, SMES) จานวนํ 9 องคการ์ ซ่ึงดาเนํ ินธุรกิจหลกดั านบร้ ิการแบบการใชองค้ ความร์ ู้เป็นหลกในประเทศไทยั ซ่ึงไดม้ ี

การดาเนํ ินแผนงานดานการบร้ ิหารความสัมพนธั ์ลูกคา้ ผลลพธั ์เบ้ืองตนท้ ี่ไดมาจะถ้ ูกพฒนาเปั ็นตวแบบั การจดหมวดหมั ู่พ้ืนฐานของปัจจยสั าคํ ญของความสั าเรํ ็จ (The Proposed Baseline CSFs Taxonomy) สาหรํ ับการศึกษาคร้ังน้ี ผลลพธั ์ที่ไดเบ้ ้ืองตนจะถ้ ูกยืนยนและหาประโยชนั ์ที่ไดร้ ับกบองคั ความร์ ู้ดาน้ การจดการอั ื่นที่เกี่ยวของ้ ไดแก้ ่ การจดการองคั ความร์ ู้ (Knowledge Management, KM) ผนู้ าเชํ ิงกลยทธุ ์ (Strategic Leadership) และการจดการเชั ิงกลยทธุ ์ (Strategic Management) และนาผลการยํ นยื นมาปรั ับ ปรุงพฒนาตั วแบบการจั ดหมวดหมั ู่ปัจจยสั ําคญของความสั ําเร็จต่อไป ความคิดเห็นและขอเสนอแนะ้ ของผเชู้ ี่ยวชาญจะถกนู ามาใชํ เป้ ็นหลกในกระบวนการยั นยื นผลการศั ึกษา จากผลการวิจยพบวั า่ งานวิจยั มีประโยชน์อยางมากส่ าหรํ ับผบรู้ ิหาร ในการปรับปรุงระบบการวดผลงานและชั ่วยให้องคการสามารถ์ สร้างกลยุทธ์แบบรวดเร็วและถ่ายทอดความรู้และประสบการณ์ให้กบผั ไดู้ ร้ ับการเลื่อนตาแหนํ ่งใหม่ หรือผบรู้ ิหารรุ่นที่สองให้สามารถดาเนํ ินธุรกิจไดอย้ างราบร่ ื่น ซ่ึงธุรกิจมกจะมั ีแนวโนมเข้ าส้ ู่ช่วงคงที่ (Mature Stage) นอกจากน้ี ยงเปั ็นแนวทางในการจดการองคั ความร์ ู้ การพฒนาผั นู้ าเชํ ิงกลยทธุ ์และการ จดการเชั ิงกลยทธุ ์ อยางไรก่ ็ตาม ตวแบบการจั ดหมวดหมั ู่ปัจจยสั าคํ ญของความสั าเรํ ็จมีศกยภาพทั ี่จะก่อ ใหเก้ ิดประโยชน์ และในขณะเดียวกนกั ย็ งมั ีขอจ้ ากํ ดหลายประการั ซ่ึงมีรายละเอียดอยในผลงานวู่ จิ ยนั ้ี

Introduction possible within a small organization. However, large In today’s uncertain, competitive and volatile organizations that have ventured geographically and business world, where is affected by technology and provided numerous customers touch points (such as globalization, in order to survive in the competitive remote locations, call centers, Web access, sales and global economy, the organizations have to well marketing representatives), have acknowledged that manage knowledge to create competitive advantage. information systems can provide knowledge, fast Over the last decade, organizations of all types and response, fast answers, a unified face to the customer sizes have increasingly realized the importance of and a holistic view of the customer (Jutla et al., customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction can lead 2001). Most of today’s large organizations are to customer loyalty, customer retention and business organized along functional units spanning sales, profits. It is widely understood that keeping existing customer support and service, marketing, , customers is far less costly than winning new ones. and . As these large organizations undergo Consequently, customer satisfaction has become one various organizational growth stages, coupled with of the key operational of many organizations. the unprecedented advancements in technology, Such organizations have invested heavily in improving functional units have deployed best of breed systems performance in customer satisfaction. that help address their current needs. These best of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) is a breed systems quickly became disparate systems that concept that enables an organization to provide specific lacked common integration and created dispersed services to each individual customer and, as a result, customer’s operational and historical data across the create customer intimacy. CRM may be used to create organizations. personalized one-to-one experience that will give the Organization are also considering different individual customer a sense of being cared for; thus customer acquisition and retention mechanism opening up new marketing opportunities based on the ranging from convenience of self-service, ubiquitous preferences and history of the customer (Peppers, availability through multiple access methods, Rogers and Dorf, 1999). creating a sense of community about the product or CRM is not a new concept and has existed in service, and configurable products or services inno- some form in most organizations. The underlying vation based on customer knowledge. Based on premise of CRM, caring and responding to customers’ customer knowledge, cross-selling and up-selling of needs on a continual basis, has been around for goods and services, at all customer touch-points, several years. Organizations, of all sizes, have used a have also become major business drivers. Companies form of customer-oriented strategy to compete and need more information and it must be learned fast. survive in their respective customer segments. Fast learning is competitive weapon No1 (English & Before the establishment of large organizations and Bogan, 1994). Fast strategy is the key of the strategy the deployment of various customers touch points agility (Doz & Kosonen, 2008). Three key dimen- such as multiple branches, call centers, and the Web, sions of strategic agility are as follows: organizations were practicing customer relationship ◦ Strategic sensitivity management based on the traditional one-on-one ◦ Collective commitment customer relationship. Managing traditional one-to- ◦ Resource fluidity one customer relationship, on an individual basis, is

Problem Statement In all Western countries, knowledge-intensive Small play an important role in the business services (KIBS) are among the fastest economy of any country because of their flexibility growing sectors of economy. KIBS firms are expert and ability to innovate. In nearly every country, they companies that provide services to other companies play a significant role in providing and organizations. Typical KIBS industries are opportunities and supporting large-scale manu- IT services, R&D services, technical consultancy, facturing firms (Gunaasekaran et al., 2000). Small and legal, financial and management consultancy and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are critical to almost marketing communications. Besides their growth, every national and local economy because of their KIBS have aroused interest as an essential part of the potential to grow larger (Duan and Kinman, 2000). knowledge and innovation infrastructure of national Small businesses are increasingly recognized as the and regional economies. By nature the knowledge- life blood of modern (Ghobadian and intensive business services (KIBS) are consultative Gallear, 1996). The Office of Small and Medium and usually highly customized. In these services it is Enterprises Promotion of Thailand (2004) reported common to end up in unique situations where the that most of the SMEs are family firms. In 2004, solutions must be highly based on customer needs. Thailand had a total of 2,166,621 enterprises, of which (Toivonen, 2004). 2,161,577 or 99.8 percent were SMEs. The Family SMEs and KIBS generally have limited resources Firm Institute of Boston (2004) estimated that around in terms of working, people, management skills, 90 percent of all U.S. companies are family owned. lack of efficient Customer Relationship Management That means that there are approximately 14 million of (CRM), Knowledge Management (KM), and Strategic such firms. Its predominantly small and medium com- Planning, which causes them to have the difficulty to panies, the majority have fewer than 20 employees. survive to the second generation of family members. Also, the institute estimates that only about 30 percent Figure 1 provides the research scope. of these small companies survive to the second generation of family members. Only 12 percent Research Objective survive to the third generation, and 3 percent to the The overall objective of this research is to fourth generation and beyond. Most of the executives identify the knowledge of the Organizations’ Critical of the small and medium companies are entrepreneurs, Success Factors (CSFs) of the Customer Relationship who tend to be specialists in an activity such as Management (CRM). This research seeks into the marketing, production, or finance, so they usually do CSFs that support Customer Relationship Manage- not make good general managers. While managerial ment (CRM) initiatives in organizations in Thailand. skills can be developed through training and/or The Critical Success Factor (CSF) methodology was experience, the skill of sometimes saying “no” to developed by Rockart at the Massachusetts Institute family members wanting to enter the business may of Technology to help senior executives determine still be missing. U.S. Small Business Admission their managerial information needs (Rockart, 1979). (1991) reported that there are four basic reasons According to Chu (1995), “Critical Success Factors why family firms fail to transfer the business from are the limited number of areas in which satisfactory generation to generation successfully; including 1) results will ensure successful performance and poor Lack of viability of the business, 2) Lack of planning, results will spell trouble for the organization”. 3) Little desire on the owner’s part to transfer the firm, and 4) Reluctance of offspring to join the firm. These factors, alone or in combination, make transferring a family business difficult, if not impossible. The primary cause for failure, however, is the lack of planning. With the right plans in place, the business, in most cases, will remain healthy. There are four plans that make up the transition process, which includes 1) Strategic plan, 2) Family strategic plan, 3) Succession plan, and 4) Estate plan.

“Baseline” Critical Success Factors Knowledge within the context (CSFs) of the experience of top (Set of CSFs should be used to help management monitor and evaluate the Customer Relationship Management (CRM) performance level)

Specific customer A specific set of relationship CSFs Final CSFs Taxonomy development by using management (CRM) the results of executives’ opinions on the facing top Customer Relationship Management (CRM) management’s relevance, and the importance of the CSFs decision-making

Transition during changes at the top- or high-level management

Final CSFs Taxonomy analysis on: (1) Comparisons of the relevance of the Customer Relationship Management (CRM), (2) Analysis on CSFs, and (3) To ensure the CSFs of the selected organizations are the appropriate for them to monitor their CRM performance

Validation work on: (1) Participating executives’ opinions on the relevance and suitability, (2) Executives’ opinions on the predictability, and (3) Experts’ opinions on the usefulness.

Figure 1: Research Scope

Research Methodology The study has been conducted in three phases. In this research, there were several tasks under- These are 1) Exploratory and case screening 2) taken. Before the discussion of the details in each Experiment and a proposed baseline Critical Success step takes place, it is important that the background Factors (CSFs) of the Customer Relationship Manage- of the nine companies under study be introduced. ment (CRM) and 3) Validation and contribution. The companies provide knowledge intensive services Phase 1, Exploratory and case screening are in engineering design, repair and maintenance, to interview the 9 executives from 9 SMEs/KIBS accounting, human resource development and manage- companies to explore the nature of their businesses, ment services with approximately 100-150 employees. personal information, working experience, educational The ages of 9 executive were in 40-55 years old. Their background, and current Customer Relationship educational background was in engineering, accounting, Management (CRM) systems. operations, human resource development, and sales Phase 2, Experiment: there are two steps in vand . Their expertise and this phase including 1) taking the information in experience were in the areas of sales, marketing, Phase 1 and identify the CSFs of the CRM, and 2) finance, engineering design, repair and maintenance, Developing the proposed baseline CSFs Taxonomy. operations and accounting management.

Phase 3, Validation takes the baseline CSFs (KM), Strategic leadership, and Strategic Manage- Taxonomy developed in Phase 2 and validates its ment, and then the final CSFs is developed from the benefits. In other words, it is the validation of the initial baseline CSFs Taxonomy with the results from CSFs Taxonomy and the potential contributions of the validation. Experts’ comments have been used as the CSFs Taxonomy to the related management a major input for this particular validation process. concepts. These include Knowledge Management Figure 2 illustrates the research methodology.

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Exploratory and Experiment Validation case selection

Explore the nature of Validation of the the businesses, Identify the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) relevance, the usefulness, personal information, of the Customer Relationship Management and success working experience, (CRM), and then develop the proposed predictability of the educational baseline CSFs Taxonomy CSFs Taxonomy with 9 background, and executives, and then Customer develop the final CSFs Relationship Taxonomy Management (CRM)

Conduct the Conduct interview with 9 executives from Validation of benefits interview to the 9 9 SMEs/KIBS companies by the experts’ executives from 9 comments, via SMEs/KIBS interview and open companies ended questionnaire

Figure 2: Research Methodology

Research Results and Discussion objectives of this research and agreed to provide The summary from the interviews, and validation inputs of CSFs based on their previous experience and the followings can be demonstrated. The initial work current customer relationship management (CRM) involved the identification of CSFs. To develop a programs have been implementing at their organiza- group format CSFs, the Input/ output (I/O) Analysis, tions. Subsequently, common or general CSFs would or the breakdown of an organization into 5 com- be derived. A total of 60 CSFs were initially identified ponents—upstream, inputs, processes, outputs, and and later categorized into four focused are as — 9 downstream, was to be made. The next step was to CSFs for each strategy CSFs, people CSFs, process categorize the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of CSFs, and technology CSFs respectively. Customer Relationship Management (CRM) into the The initial Taxonomy of the Critical Success 4 focused areas. The top management, 9 executives, Factors (CSFs) of CRM of baseline development is from these 9 companies were informed about the shown in table 1.

Table 1: The Baseline or Initial Taxonomy of the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) from interview with 9 Executives Focused Areas Subjects 1. Strategy CSF 01. Strategic Vision and Mission CSF 02. Business Strategy CSF 03. Operational Strategy CSF 04. Strategic Goals and Objectives CSF 05. Strategic Management Process CSF 06. Degree of Customer Segmentation CSF 07. Customer Buying Trend Analysis CSF 08. Resource Allocation CSF 09. Performance

Focused Areas Subjects 2. People CSF 10. Corporate Culture CSF 11. Leadership Involvement and Support CSF 12. Human Resource Development CSF 13. and Reward Systems CSF 14. CRM Training Program CSF 15. Employee Retention CSF 16. Employee Motivation CSF 17. Staff Alignment CSF 18. Teamwork 3. Process CSF 19. Operational Management Process CSF 20. Customer Management Process CSF 21. Process CSF 22. Regulatory and Social Management Process CSF 23. Marketing Management Process CSF 24. Process CSF 25. Call Center Process CSF 26. Finance and Accounting Management Process CSF 27. Problem Solving Process 4. Technology CSF 28. Data Warehouse Technology CSF 29. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Systems CSF 30. Electronic CRM or eCRM CSF 31. Customer Support and Service (CSS) CSF 32. Sales Force Automation (SFA) CSF 33. Enterprise Marketing Automation (EMA) CSF 34. CRM Software CSF 35. E-Commerce CSF 36. Internet/Intranet

Validation of the proposed final baseline for planning). Within the context of its taxonomy integration ability into knowledge and strategic In this phase, the proposed baseline taxonomy is leadership management activities, the proposed validated by the interview of 9 executives from 9 baseline taxonomy received overall scores in the companies on their acceptability of the proposed range of 4.11 to 4.78 for a scale of 1-5, with the baseline taxonomy to their Customer Relationship corresponding standard deviation values of 0.33 to Management (CRM) system. The initial results were 0.53— implying high consistency among their perceived to be relevant and suitable by the same opinions and evaluation. group of 9 executives. Finally, the third task is to validate the monitored With respect to an attempt to verify and accept CSFs to ensure the CSFs of CRM of the 9 companies the proposed taxonomy, the initial results were are appropriated CSFs for them to monitor their CRM perceived to be relevant and suitable by the same performance. For this verification task, there are group of nine executives when the follow-up discus- two key external implications selected: (1) customer sion was conducted. The proposed baseline taxonomy satisfaction index (2) years of top ten customers’ was thought to be useful as a guideline to improve retention. The main reason to select these two key information requirements, and as objective evidence external impacts is because if the nine companies for transferring experience to new managers. From a have the proper monitored CSFs proportions, they scale of 1- 5, the score averages were in the range of should manage their CRM performance competitively, 4.11 to 4.56. The corresponding standard deviation and achieve the results better than the average values were between 0.33 and 0.53. This reflected industry’s performance, and should be able to satisfy high consistency. For the second verification task, the their customers, and retain these loyal sustainable group of nine invited experts generally considered the customers. The more successful the companies satisfied proposed taxonomy to be useful in enhancing the their customers, the longer years of customer retention knowledge management effort as well as benefiting periods the issues relating to strategic management (e.g., a

Table 2: Top ten customers’ retention periods

Companies Average years of being customers (#) Company#1 13 Company#2 15 Company#3 13 Company#4 14 Company#5 17 Company#6 15 Company#7 14 Company#8 16 Company#9 14

Table 3: Results of the customer satisfaction index versus industry average Companies Customer satisfaction Industry Average Customer satisfaction index index (%) customer satisfaction above industry average (%) index (%) Company#1 88% 80% 8% Company#2 85% 80% 5% Company#3 90% 85% 5% Company#4 91% 83% 8% Company#5 90% 80% 10% Company#6 89% 80% 9% Company#7 94% 80% 14% Company#8 87% 80% 7% Company#9 92% 80% 12%

Table 2 indicates that the average top ten shareholders. Their educational background and customers’ retention periods are 13 years, 15 years, 13 experience in the areas of professionals of sales, years , 13 years , 13 years , 13 years , 13 years , 13 years marketing, finance, engineering accounting, and and 13 years for company#1, company#2, company#3, operation management may also influences the results. company#4, company#5, company#6 company#7, The firms that operate in different environments company#8, and company#9, respectively. Table 3 may not be able to adapt the research results entirely, shows that all nine companies’ customer satisfaction in both the circumstances and their corresponding index is higher than the industries’ customer satisfac- sets of CFSs. The manufacturing firms may rely on tion index. These results demonstrate that the three other CSFs such as the product quality factors. The companies achieve CRM performance better than their firms with considerable high over the market competitors, and the industries, which reflects that (i.e., the supply side) may not need to pay a lot their monitored CSFs proportion of each focused area of attention on CSFs of CRM. The large firms with is proven to be acceptable and applicable. In conclu- a clearer separation between shareholders and sion, these CSFs proportions may be suitable for managing directors may prefer a different set of these particular types of business, size, or industries, CSFs. Definitely, the administrators for public the companies operate in different size or different agencies cannot simply adopt the taxonomy in its industries may have to adapt the CSFs proportion entire form. Finally, this study has not verified the which is most suitable for them. important priority ranking of CSFs embedded in each focused areas. Research Limitations There are several limitations on the proposed Conclusion baseline taxonomy. First of all, this taxonomy is based The taxonomy is proved to be very useful for on the experiments with only 9 companies. Their size the executives as a baseline or a guideline to help is considered to be medium with high competition. monitor the CRM performance levels of the firm. They can also be considered as knowledge intensive The initial reaction and feedback from the executives services (KIBS) firms. The background of top who had participated in this study were generally managers or executives who volunteered for this positive. The reason is that this taxonomy is based study may influence the research findings. They on their actual requests; therefore, it represents assume the roles of both top managers and major the transfer of their experience into firm’s records.

Newly- promoted or hired executives can use this Nonaka, I. (1995). The Knowledge-creating Company. guideline as a basis for the information needed to help Harvard Business Review, 69(6): 96-104. make quality decisions. This proposed taxonomy Nonaka, I. and H., Takeuchi. (1995). The Knowledge- should not be as an absolute rule but integrated into a creating Company. Oxford University Press, NY. management process as a complimentary component Peppers, D., Rogers, M., and Dorf, B. (1999). Is to help newly- hired or –promoted executives adjust Your Company Ready for One-On-One Marketing. themselves into their new responsibility (under Harvard Business Review. 77(1):151-160. extremely complex environment), and create a manage- Rockart, J. F. (1979). Chief Executives Define Their ment tool for quality decisions. In addition, this Own Data Needs. Harvard Business Review. taxonomy may be used to demonstrate the capability 57(2): 81 and maturity of an organization. Finally, there will be Sink, D. S. (1985). Management: additional research work in the areas of limitations Planning, Measurement and Evaluation, Control discussed previously. This is necessary to help verify and Improvement. John Wiley & Sons, NY. the usefulness of the proposed baseline taxonomy. Sink, D. S. and T., Tuttle. (1989). Organization of the Future. IIE Press. References Small and Medium Enterprises Promotion of Thailand Abbot, J., Stone, M., and Buttle, F. (2003). Customer 2004. The Small and Medium Business Outlook Relationship Management in Practice: a qualitative and Trend. SMEs Promotion of Thailand. study. Journal of Database Marketing, 9(1): 24-34. http://sme.go.th, March 15, 2005. Awad, E. M. and H.M., Ghaziri. (2004). Knowledge Takala, J and O., Huhtala. (2003). Developing a Model Management. Pearson Prentice Hall, NJ. for Competitive Outsourced Payroll Administration Battista, P. and Verhum, D. (2000). Customer Rela- by Comparative Benchmarking Experiences from tionship Management: The promise and the other Industries. n.p. reality. CMA Management, 74(4): 34-77 The Family Firm Institute of Boston (2004). The Beasty, C. (2006). How Sales Teams Should Use family firm . The Family Firm Business CRM: destination CRM Features, available at: Review. http://ffi.org/fbr, March 15, 2005. www.destinationcrm.com. Thompson, A. A., A. J., Strickland III, and J. E., CarriÓn, G., J., González, and A., Leal. 2004 Iden- Gamble. (2007). Crafting and Executing Strategy, tifying key knowledge area in the professional the Quest for Competitive Advantage, Concept services industry: a case study. Journal of Know- and Cases. 15th ed. McGraw-Hill Irwin, NY. ledge Management, 8(6): 131-150. Toivonen, M. (2004). Expertise as Business. Long- Chu, P. C. (1995). Conceiving strategic systems. Jour- term Development and Future Prospects of nal of , 46(4): 36-43. Knowledge-Intensive Business Services (KIBS), Bogan, C. E. and English, M. J. (1994). Bench- Espoo: Helsinki University of Technology. marking for Best Practice. McGraw Hill, NY. U.S. Small Business Admission (1991). U.S. Small Ghobadian, A. and D., Gallear. (1996). Total quality Business Statistics. Small Business Review. management in SMEs. OMEGA, 24(1): 83-100. http://sba.gov, March 15, 2005. Gunasekaran, A., L., Forker, and B., Kobu. (2000). Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research Design and Improving operations performance in small com- Methods. 3rd ed. Sage Publications, London. pany. International Journal of Operations &Production Management, 20(3): 316-335. Hahnke, J. (2001). The Critical Phase of the CRM Lifecycle: Without CRM analytics, your customer won’t even know you’re there. www.hyperion. com. Harper, J. (1984). Measuring Business Performance. Grower Publishing Company, Brookfield. Jutla, D., Craig, J., and J., and Bodorik, P. (2001). Enabling and Measuring Electronic Customer Relationship Management Readiness. Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International Conferences on System Sciences. Kaplan, R. S. and D. P., Norton. (1996). The Balance Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Press. Lussier, R. N. and C. F., Achua. (2004). Leadership Theory Application Skill Development. 2nd ed. South-Western, Thomson, OH. Madura, J. (2004). Introduction to Business. 3rd ed. South-Western, Thomson, OH.

Dr. Pugdee Manaves is an international management consultant, business leader, and global educator who helps managers to think strategically, develop winning plans, and successfully turn ideas into results. He earned his B.Eng in Engineering from Chulalongkorn University, MSc. in Management from University of London, UK., Ph.D. in International Relations from American University, U.S.A., D.Eng. in Engineering from Kasetsart University in the collaborative program with Case Western Reserve University, U.S.A., and his Postdoctoral degree from University of Vaasa, Finland. His working experiences as a CEO of Castrol Chemicals, Thailand, recorded to achieve corporate strategic goals with excellent results. He is currently a deputy managing director of Bangkok Aviation Fuel Services Plc, providing the aviation fuel services for Bangkok and Provincial airports in Thailand. He also serves academic works as a faculty of Stamford International University, Thailand, and a visiting professor of University of Vaasa, Finland.