Customer relationship management in automobile sales performance

CRM and Car Buying

The world of business has come a long way since the only maxim was "The customer is always right." One of the most important new versions of that age-old wisdom is the model of "customer relationship management" or CRM. This paper examines that strategy, which is a model of doing business in which various techniques are used to learn more about the needs and behaviors of the company's clients for the purpose of developer stronger relationships with those customers. The motto of this strategy might still be "The customer is always right" - but a more appropriate version might be something more like "Good customer relationships are the core of all long-term business success." While CRM has so far been primarily used in companies involved in high-tech fields, it has extremely wide potential application in both product-oriented and service-oriented firms. This research examines the use of CRM in the former realm, using qualitative research techniques to examine how CRM is linked to sales performance within the arena of automobile sales.

There are a number of different components of customer relationship management, including a number that involve state-of-the-art communications technology. Because these are new and "sexy" technologies, a great deal of emphasis has been placed on them in much of the writing and thinking about customer relationship management. However, while the technical element of customer relationship management cannot be overlooked, it is also a mistake to focus only on the technology (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,5042-535520,00.html).Far more than the use of complex new software, CRM is a mindset in which a firm makes a commitment to orient itself towards the needs of its clients or customers through the process of becoming well informed about them. This process includes both the gathering of information about those clients as well as creating ways in which to make that information useful and usable: Information without order (as all too many companies that gather data on their clients outside of a CRM framework could testify) is antithetical to efficiency and progress.

Customer relationship management is an overall process that can be used to help assemble information about customers as well as information about sales, the effectiveness of every aspect of a business plan, and market trends. Thus the overall goal of customer relationship management is to blend the most appropriate technologies and human resources to as of way of understanding the complex and changing behavior of customers. However, while it is certainly true that in general as well as in the automobile firms surveyed for this research customer relationship management was found to improve efficiency and profits significantly, it is also important to emphasize that it is not a quick fix that can simply be plugged into an existing system. An effective use of customer relationship management requires a company to make an overall commitment to a way of looking at its clients as being partners in its own success. Those firms that were most successful in adopting and integrating CRM into their firms were in fact those that made a commitment to the process of integration: The adoption of CRM was not simply a change for their companies but a transformation of the ways in which they worked with their clients as well as quite often a transformation in the ways that they worked with each other.

The next sections of this paper review the existing literature on customer relationship management, describe the qualitative methodologies used and the research design then discuss and analyse the data derived from the interviews with both senior managers and lower-ranking employees at five automobile firms in Ireland.

Review of the Related Literature

As W.B. Ellington has quoted in his 25th chapter titled "Sales and Customer Relations," "a distinction should be drawn between sales and customer relations, even though the two tend to overlap and mutually support each other." According to the experts in this field, activities concerning sales pertain to promoting the products and services "through personal contact and advertising" (Ellington, Sales and Customer Relations). On the other hand, "customer relations activities relate to the ongoing dialogue between the supplying organisation and customers about the quality of the product," in this case which will be the quality as well as the functioning and the performance of the car once a sale has been made. Therefore, "the regularity and the success of customer relations will significantly affect subsequent sales" (Ellington, Sales and Customer Relations).

Nonetheless, to date the concept of as well as the relationship between customer relationship programs and sales performance does not yield general agreement. According to Keefe (2001, p. 4), "some CRM experts argue that there is little consensus about what CRM actually is, or how to best execute or measure it." Proving her assertion, Keefe, in one of her research articles "reports on an interview with Heidi Wisbach, manager of CRM analytics in the New York office of Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, who specialise in CRM initiatives in the manufacturing, hospitality, financial services and telecommunications industries" (Keefe, 2001, p.4). Wisbach is one of the designers of the Customer Relations Management Index, the function of which is to assist companies in gauging the degree "to which they use actual CRM techniques and to compare their standing against competitors" (Keefe, 2001, p.4). Wisbach defines "a company's CRM readiness as a function of having:

way to track customer information;

Metrics. A means of evaluating customer performance;

The ability to impact change.

The industries that tend to be more CRM ready are those that are aware of distinct contact with the customer and those, which are really competitive, thus requiring individual companies to differentiate themselves significantly.

What experts mean by improving customer relations thereby increasing sales is to promptly respond to the needs, problems and demands of the customers thereby gaining their satisfaction. Lord (2000,p. 40-43) identifies the following needs of the customers and stresses on the word "relationship" in customer relationship management or customer relationship programs:

Quality products,

Twenty-four hour accessibility,

Easy ordering,

Removal of geographic boundaries,

On-time delivery and Responsive service" (Lord, 2000,p. 40-43).

Thus, with the help of the research conducted by some of the best experts in the related field as well as reviewing the line of reasoning of the experts in the literature review section, it is evident that there exists a clear link between customer relationship management programs and the sales performance.

Customer Relationship Management (CRM) is increasingly gaining prominence among both academics and business practitioners. As technologies and customer expectations rapidly change businesses realize the value of having long-term relationship with their customers and are focused on enhancing shareholder value by shifting from a "market share" mindset to obtaining higher "share of individual customer's business" (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,5042-535529,00.html).

The practice of CRM has been greatly enriched by contribution of researchers and academics who have developed theories, concepts and frameworks to help us understand and explain various aspects of CRM, this literature review is a compendium of the research papers. Coverage includes emerging concepts in CRM, conceptual model of CRM, knowledge management for CRM and Research agenda for CRM. Managers want to make certain that when implementing they capitalise on CRM's full potential. Therefore there is a brief section on "Implementing CRM" which highlights the optimal allocation rules for CRM.

As Seth and Parvatiyar (1995b) note the task of developing customer relationships has historical antecedents going back into pre-industrial era. Much of it was due to direct interaction between producers of agricultural products and their consumers. It was only after industrial era's mass production society and the advent of middlemen that there were less frequent interactions between producers and consumers leading to transactions oriented marketing.

In recent years, however, several factors have contributed to the rapid development and evolution of CRM. These include the growing de-intermediation process in many industries due to the advent of sophisticated computer and telecommunication technologies that allow producers to directly interact with end-customers. The de-intermediation process and consequent prevalence of CRM is also due to the growth of the service economy. Since services are typically produced and delivered at the same institution, it minimizes the role of middlemen. A greater emotional bond between the service provider and the service user also develops the need for maintaining and enhancing the relationship. It is therefore not difficult to see that CRM is important for scholars and practitioners of services marketing (Berry and Parsuraman 1995; Bitner 1995; Crosby and Stephens 1987; Crosby et al. 1990; Gronroos 1995).

The key account management program designates account managers and account teams that assess the customer needs and then husband the selling company resources for the customer benefit. Such programs have led to the foundation of strategic partnering within the overall domain of customer relationship management (Anderson and Narus 1991). Similarly, in the current era of hyper-competition, marketers are forced to be more concerned with customer retention and loyalty (Dick and Basu 1994; Reicheld 1996).

One can understand more clearly that CRM is "not only about technology, databases or the market of one" (Graham Hoskins 2001). It is about providing choices for customers, enabling them to manage their relationships with us. It is about changing the way we do business and valuing those people who manage our customer interactions. "It accepts the role of technology and customer information but only as enablers" (Graham Hoskins 2001).

Interestingly Eastman Software conducted a survey recently of the UK's top 1000 companies asking what they see as the most important elements in successful CRM. The results were:

Proactive customer management

Product Quality single telephone number

Web address for all enquiries.

In many respects these results are not surprising. There is no mention of end-to end process or organisational change. It is still viewed by many to be just about access and the web.

What is Customer Relationship Management?

Before we begin to examine the conceptual foundations of CRM, it will be useful to define what is CRM. In the marketing literature terms customer relationship management and relationship marketing, are not distinguished from each other (Parvatiyar and Seth 2000) therefore we use them interchangeably.

The customer relationship management terms have been used to reflect a variety of themes and perspectives. Some of these themes offer a narrow functional marketing perspective while others offer a perspective that is broad and somewhat paradigmatic in approach and orientation. A narrow perspective of customer relationship management is database marketing emphasising the promotional aspects of marketing linked to database efforts. Another narrow, yet relevant, viewpoint is to consider CRM only as customer retention in which a variety of after marketing tactics is used for customer bonding or staying in touch after the sale is made.

A more popular approach with recent application of information technology is to focus on individual or one-to-one relationship with customers that integrate database knowledge with a long-term customer retention and growth strategy. Shani and Chalasani (1992) define relationship marketing in the following way, as:

integrated effort to identify, maintain, and build up a network with individual customers and to continuously strengthen the network for the mutual benefit of both sides, through interactive, individualized and value-added contacts over a long period of time (p.44)

Berry (1995) professes a more strategic view, by stressing that attracting new customers should be viewed only as an intermediate step in the marketing process. Developing closer relationship with these customers and turning them into loyal ones are equally important aspects of marketing. Thus, he proposed relationship marketing as "attracting, maintaining, and - in multi-service organisations- enhancing relationships" (p.25).

Berry's notion of customer relationship management resembles that of other scholars studying services marketing, such as Gronroos (1990). Gronroos takes a broader perspective and advocates that customer relationship ought to be the focus and dominant paradigm of marketing. "Marketing is to establish, maintain, and enhance relationships with customers and other partners, at a profit, so that the objectives of the parties involved are met. This is achieved by mutual exchange and fulfilment of promises" (p.138). The implication of Gronroos' definition is that customer relationships is the 'raison de etre' of the firm and marketing should be devoted to building and enhancing such relationships.

Another important facet of CRM is "customer selectivity." As several research studies have shown not all customers are equally profitable for an individual company (Storbacka 2000). The company must tailor their marketing efforts and segment and select customers for individual marketing programs. It could even lead to "outsourcing of some customers" so that a company better utilize its resources on those customers it can serve better and create mutual value. However, the objective of a company is not really to prune its customer base but to identify appropriate programs and methods that would be profitable and create value for the firm and the customer. We shall look at this in more detail further on in this literature review.

To tie up this section we have identified a definition within this vast amount of literature, which we believe integrates the various different perspectives of what CRM stands for. The definition is the following:

Customer Relationship Management is a comprehensive strategy and process of acquiring, retaining and partnering with selective customers to create superior value for the company and the customer (Parvatiyar and Seth 2001).

As is implicit in the above definition, the purpose of CRM is to improve marketing productivity. Marketing productivity is achieved by increasing marketing efficiency and marketing effectiveness (Seth and Sisodia 1995). In CRM, marketing efficiency is achieved because cooperative and collaborative processes help in reducing transactions costs and overall development costs for the company. Two important processes of CRM include proactive customer business development and building partnership relationship with most important customers. These lead to superior mutual value creation.

CRM: Research Agenda

Relationships are as old as humanity. Sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists, philosophers, theologians and many other people have studied it. For that matter even the traders and businessmen of yesteryears relied on relationships for their success. However the modern marketers started taking fancy to the same only recently. Which is why CRM is replete with opportunities for research studies.

In the early 1990's the concept of relationship marketing was formally introduced into the field of services marketing. Financial service institutions, airlines and other service providers found it profitable to retain and reward existing customers than running after new customers. It was established that building closer relationships with customers resulted in better returns to companies through the following means:

Increased use of company services by loyal customers;

Charging of price premiums for customized services;

Referrals by satisfied customers that brought new customers (Reichheld, 1993).

The concepts developed for services marketing also found application in the case of industrial as well as consumer products too. This has led to the debate as to whether the whole marketing should be re-written with the new relationship paradigm or should it rest on the traditional 4P's [Product, Price, Place and Promotion] approach (Gronroos 1994). However a whole lot of questions need to be answered before the relationship paradigm is accepted as a foundation on which the entire marketing theory can be built. A paper by Shanthakumar, 2001 attempts to throw a number of research ideas that need to be explored in depth.

Some of the ideas discussed in this article include the development of scale to measure the depth of relationship, the stages of relationship development and also the underlying dimensions of business relationships. Further research should identify ideal timing (in terms of the stage of the relationship and the depth of relationship) for cross selling and up selling of products and services.

Taking the customer lifestyle into account, the article explores the research opportunities at different stages; 1) Customer need assessment and acquisition; 2) Customer development through personalization and customisation; 3) Customer equity through cross -selling and up-selling and; 4) Customer retention referrals for new customers.

The research areas we are interested in for this project are the stages of the relationship in order to analyse how they are formed and developed. Anderson and Narus (1991) and Dwyer, Schurr and Oh (1987) along with numerous other scholars have contributed towards our understanding of the relationship process model. By looking at the stages of the relationship development process, one could identify which constructs would actively impact the outcome considerations at that stage and which of them would have latent influences (Wilson, 1995). The process model of relationship formation, relationship governance, relationship performance and relationship evolution is an attempt to add to this stream of knowledge development on relationship marketing. Our objective by using this model is to have a conceptual foundation for applying to and understanding the domain of customer relationship management in Irish automobile. This model is described comprehensively in the following section, "A CRM Process Framework."

CRM Process Framework

Several scholars studying buyer-seller relationships have proposed relationship development process models (Dwyer, Schurr and Oh 1987; Evans and Laskin 1994; Wilson 1995). Building on that work Parvatiyar and Seth (2001) developed a four-stage CRM process framework. The broad framework suggests that CRM process comprise of the following four sub-processes: customer relationship formation process; relationship management and governance process; relational performance evaluation process; and CRM evolution and enhancement process. Appendix 1 depicts the important components of the process model.

CRM Governance Process

Once CRM program is developed and rolled out, the program as well as the individual relationships must be managed and governed. For programs directed at business-to-business customers the management of the relationship would require the involvement of both parties.

The degree to which these governance responsibilities are shared or managed independently will depend upon the perception of norms of governance process among relational partners given the nature of their CRM program and the purpose of engaging in the relationship (Parvatiyar and Seth 2001).

Whether management and governance responsibilities are independently or jointly undertaken by relational partners, several issues must be addressed. These include decisions regarding role specifications, communication, common bonds, planning process, process alignment, and employee motivation and monitoring procedures (Heide, 1994).

Overall, the governance process helps in maintenance, development and execution aspects of CRM. It also helps in strengthening the relationship among relational partners and if the process is satisfactorily implemented it ensures the continuation and enhancement of relationship with customers. Relationship satisfaction for involved parties would include governance process satisfaction in addition to satisfaction from the results achieved in the relationship (Parvatiyar, Biong and Wathne, 1998).

CRM Performance Evaluation Process

Periodic assessment of CRM is needed to evaluate if programs are meeting expectations and if they are sustainable in the long run. Performance evaluation also helps in making corrective action in terms of relationship governance or in modifying relationship marketing objectives and program features. Without a proper performance metrics to evaluate CRM efforts, it would be hard to make objective decisions regarding continuation, modification or termination of CRM programs. Developing a performance metrics is always a challenging activity as most firms are inclined to use existing marketing measures, such as market share and total volume of sales may not be appropriate in the context of CRM.

For measuring CRM performance, a balanced scorecard that combines a variety of measures based on the defined purpose of each program (or each cooperative/collaborative relationship) is recommended (Kaplan and Norton 1992). In other words, the performance evaluation metrics for each relationship or CRM program should mirror the set of defined objectives for the program. However, certain global measures of the impact of CRM effort of the company are also possible. Sirvastava, ET. Al. (1998) developed a model to suggest the asset value of cooperative relationships of the firm. If cooperative and collaborative relationship with customers is treated as an intangible asset of the firm, its economic value-add can be assessed using discounted cash flow estimates. In some ways, the value of relationships is similar to the concept of brand equity of the firm and hence many scholars have alluded to the term relationship equity (Peterson, 1995). Although as well-accepted model for measuring relationship equity is not available in the literature, as yet, companies are trying to estimate its value particularly for, measuring the intangible assets of the firm.

Another global measure used by firms to monitor CRM performance is the measurement of relationship satisfaction. Similar to the measurement of customer satisfaction, which is now widely applied in many companies, relationship satisfaction measurement would help in knowing to what extent relational partners are satisfied with their current cooperative and collaborative relationships. Unlike customer satisfaction measures that are applied to measure satisfaction on one side of the dyad, relationship satisfaction measures could be applied on both sides of the dyad. Both the customer and the marketing firm have to perform in order to produce the results in cooperative relationship and hence each party's relationship satisfaction could be measured (Biong, Parvatiyar and Wathne 1996). Such propensity could also be indirectly measured by measuring customer loyalty (Reicheld and Sasser 1990).

CRM Evolution Process

Individual customer relationships and CRM programs are likely to undergo evolution as they mature. There are several decisions, which have to be made by the partners involved about the evolution of CRM programs. These include decisions regarding the continuation, termination, enhancement, and modifications of the relationship engagement. Relationship performance and relationship satisfaction are likely to have the greatest impact on the evolution of the CRM programs. When performance is satisfactory, partners would be motivated to continue or enhance their CRM program (Shah 1997). When performance does not meet expectations, partners may consider terminating or modifying the relationship.

CRM Implementation

We would add a fifth stage to this model, which is CRM implementation. One of the most interesting aspects of CRM development is the multitude of customer interfaces that a company has to manage in today's context. The business environment companies interface with their customers through a variety of channels including sales people, service personnel, Internet websites, market and business development agents etc. While each of these units could operate independently, they still need to share information about individual customers and their interactions with the company on real time basis. Therefore, effective CRM implementation requires front-line information systems that share relevant customer information across all interface units.

To effectively implement a Customer Relationship Management solution it is very important to identify real knowledge about different types of customers (viz. most valued customer, most grow-able customers, below zero customers). CRM applies this knowledge to develop and design marketing strategies to develop and cultivate, long lasting beneficial interaction and relationship with the customer. "Customer knowledge and customer interaction on the basis of this knowledge are the two pillars on which any CRM design and its successful implementation rests" (Devenport 2000).

As Sharma et al. identify that the foundation of customer knowledge rests on a variety of data sources, data could be numerical, textual, organised in tables and so on. Key to leverage this data is to organize it so that it becomes knowledge on the basis of which informed business decisions could be taken. Industry analyst estimate that the data has no external (internally there are sentences, paragraphs and words) structure represents 80% of the enterprise compared to 20% of structured data. It is a proven fact 80% of an organization revenues come from 20% of its customers, it becomes imperative to design CRM solutions keeping in mind these most valuable customers and to leverage 80% non-structured data of about 20% of these most valuable customers (Sharma et al. 2001).

Well-managed customer information that is properly catalogued and structured, available and accessible to the right people at the right time becomes customer knowledge. The key to successful customer knowledge management is personalization, i.e. how to extract the knowledge that is pertinent to the use and translate it into a format that is easily understood. A customer knowledge catalogue should be created, in which a categorized collection of company's intellectual asset will exist. It should be built on a database platform that enables enterprise wide-scaling, protects and maintains the knowledge content, and allows for consistent fast access to enterprise wide customer knowledge resources (Nonaka & Takeuchi 1997).

Conclusion

The domain of Customer Relationship Management extends into many areas of marketing and strategic decisions. Their recent prominences are facilitated by the convergence of several other paradigms of marketing and by cooperate initiatives that are developed around the theme of cooperation and collaboration. If the phenomenon of collaboration with the customers becomes the dominant paradigm of marketing practice and research, CRM has the potential to emerge as the predominant perspective of marketing.

From a corporate implementation point-of-view, CRM should not be misunderstood to simply mean software solutions implementation project. Building Customer Relationship Management is a fundamental business of every enterprise and it requires a holistic strategy and process to make it successful. It is about enabling customer access, providing choice and allowing the customer to manage the relationship. It is also about centralising and creating easy access to customer information so that the relationship can be better understood, managed and maximised.

Methodology and Research Design

To count or not to count. That is the question. And a question of as great importance to many social scientists and humanists as was Hamlet's question to himself on the nature of suicide and the value of life. One of the most important choices that a researcher makes in designing a research project is to make a choice between qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Although the two can certainly be used together, most research projects rely far more heavily on one than on the other either because of the nature of the data themselves or because of personal preferences by the researcher.

Quantitative research is most valuable when it is used to investigate any behavior (or value or belief) that can be quantified without doing harm to the core concept that is being investigated. Some concepts and behaviors are in fact very difficult to quantify, as Patton (1990) argues. How, for example, can one quantity the idea of religious belief without coming up with a unit that is so far divorced from the idea of faith that the research design has destroyed its own subject?

Quantitative methods like sociometry can be used to collect and then to tabulate information about a wide range of kinds of interactions among all of the members of small to relatively small groups (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998). Such methods - which create a universal accounting of all interactions within a carefully defined universe - create ironclad safeguards against many of the biases that can and probably do enter into the results of qualitative research. On the other hand, they are often insufficiently sensitive to investigate complex human behaviors and beliefs.

As noted, the choice of whether to use qualitative or quantitative methods (or primarily one or the other) is often based more in the personal epistemological preferences of the researcher rather than in the structure of the data or because of any other intrinsic aspect of the research.

My belief is that the heart of the quantitative-qualitative debate is philosophical, not methodological. Many qualitative researchers operate under different epistemological assumptions from quantitative researchers. For instance, many qualitative researchers believe that the best way to understand any phenomenon is to view it in its context. They see all quantification as limited in nature, looking only at one small portion of a reality that cannot be split or unitized without losing the importance of the whole phenomenon.... Many qualitative researchers also operate under different ontological assumptions about the world. They don't assume that there is a single unitary reality apart from our perceptions. Since each of us experiences from our own point-of-view, each of us experiences a different reality. Conducting research without taking this into account violates their fundamental view of the individual. Consequently, they may be opposed to methods that attempt to aggregate across individuals on the grounds that each individual is unique (http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/kb/qualdeb.htm).

It should be noted that no researcher is bound to a single methodology, and indeed the strongest research projects are often those that utilize a number of different methodologies, whether all qualitative or all quantitative or some of both, as Jaeger argues. For example, one might well combine participant-observation - that quintessentially anthropological method of study - with unstructured interviews, which are more focused than simple observation but far less focused than a method like a questionnaire. Participant-observation is the method that provides the richest - "thickest" to borrow Clifford Geertz's term - description, but it has a number of drawbacks, primarily because it is extremely time intensive. It also requires that a researcher be able to pass, at least at some level, as a native (Wiersma, 1999, pp. 15-6).

Participant observation often requires months or years of intensive work because the researcher needs to become accepted as a natural part of the culture in order to assure that the observations are of the natural phenomenon (http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/kb/qualmeth.htm).

An emphasis on qualitative research should never be considered to be a dismissal of the importance of quantitative research or the reverse. Quantitative research can be highly valuable as a tool to examine any human behavior (or for that matter any human belief) that can be quantified without doing substantive epistemological damage to the core concept of that research.

The Data Gathering Method

There is no "right" way to do research. Rather, each specific research project can be best pursued by a specific research methodology that is supported by a theoretical perspective that is consonant with the methodological approach that is being taken. This section describes the methodological approach taken for this project and the reasons this method was selected.

Gephart (1999) defines interpretive research as fundamentally concerned with meaning: Interpretative research seeks to understand the meaning of a situation both for the participants and for any observers. One of the key theories in interpretative research is ethnomethodology, and one of the types of analyses is ethnographic interviews and conversational analysis. Graue (1999) notes that ethnography has become a more generalized social science tool from its origins as a tool only of anthropologists doing field work, from a more precise descriptive tool of the life styles of people distant from their homelands, to a collection of related approaches that incorporate a wide range of theoretical frameworks.

The phenomenological investigation used here most often uses the long interview as the method to gather data (Moustakas, 1994). The interview process is an informal interactive process and utilizes open-ended questions and comments from a free-association perspective. However, to obtain sufficient meaning and depth a general interview guide can be used. Such a guide is also useful when interviews are done by email as well in verbally, as was the case in this research. These guidelines allow for nuanced, open-ended responses on the part of the subject, allowing the subject to determine the key categories for analysis.

The choice between quantitative and qualitative research methodologies has profound implications for the overall tone - and even possibly the results - of that research. There are fundamental differences in the two approaches that tend to result in one approach or the other in being more productive in any given research situation.

The format of interviewing used in this research was that of a guided but unstructured interview. Unstructured interviews are not based on the answers to a predetermined set of questions that is given to everyone in a research project. This form of interview allowed for the researcher to derive some common data from each subject while also allowing the interview subject himself or herself to introduce topics of importance to that individual.

Unstructured interviews such as those conducted for this project are an excellent way of determining how "natives" think about a subject because they allow those "natives" to establish and respond to their own categories. This would not be possible within either a structured interview or traditional questionnaire format.

The passage below summarizes both the advantages and limitations of the kind of guided but unstructured interviews used to obtain the data for this project:

Unstructured interviewing involves direct interaction between the researcher and a respondent or group. It differs from traditional structured interviewing in several important ways. First, although the researcher may have some initial guiding questions or core concepts to ask about, there is no formal structured instrument or protocol. Second, the interviewer is free to move the conversation in any direction of interest that may come up. Consequently, unstructured interviewing is particularly useful for exploring a topic broadly.

However, there is a price for this lack of structure. Because each interview tends to be unique with no predetermined set of questions asked of all respondents, it is usually more difficult to analyze unstructured interview data, especially when synthesizing across respondents (http://trochim.human.cornell.edu/kb/qualmeth.htm).

Subject Pool

The subject pool were ten employees, two from each of five different automobile firms with a range of experience with both CRM and sales and marketing in general.

Comment on Validity of Data

Any research design must consider the question of how reliable the data are. Although we all use the term "reliability" frequently in everyday speech, it has a more precise meaning within the world of research that is worth noting here:

Data reliability, therefore, is concerned with ideas such as:

The consistency of the data collected.

For example, will the same question asked of the same person in similar circumstances, produce the same answer?

The precision with which it is collected.

For example, this may relate to things like the representativeness of a sample, the level of response you receive from respondents and so forth.

The ability to replicate a piece of research (http://www.sociology.org.uk/p1mc5n1a.htm).

The data gathered through these interviews must also be evaluated as to their validity, which has a specific meaning when considered in the context of scientific methodology.

Validation refers to gathering evidence supporting some inference made from test scores. There are three main forms of validity or ways of validating score inferences. They are called content, criterion, and construct validity.

1) The first is called content validity. Content validity refers to the degree to which the items, tasks, or questions on the test adequately sample the particular domain of interest. It involves examining the content of a test to determine if the items represent the thing you are trying to measure. Expert judgment is used to provide evidence of content validity.

2) The second major type of validity is called criterion-validity. Criterion-related validity refers to a judgment of the extent to which the scores from a test can be used to infer, or predict, performance on some activity (http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:OqxHQJS0e0gC:www.southalabama.edu/coe/bset/johnson/lectures/ch4.PDF+definition+experimental+reliability&hl=en&ie=UTF-).

It is imperative to remember that simply because it is more difficult to assess the validity and reliability of qualitative data does not mean that it is impossible to do so, nor that the virtues of qualitative data are not sufficient to compensate for any limitations in reliability.

In the end, the choice of research methodology or methodologies depends on the personal preferences of the researcher. However, when approaching any new research problem the researcher should always be open to new methods rather than simply relying on old favorites. The methodological choices made for this research were derived from the needs of the research itself rather than from an a priori assumption of what the best methods would be.

Originality and Limitation of Data

This data, being gathered from primary rather than secondary or tertiary sources, is entirely original and as such adds to the body of knowledge on this topic.

Because a large amount of data will be gathered from individuals with a range of experiences, the data have applicability beyond this particular project However, because the data will not be gathered using a randomized schema they are not generalizable per se. Rather than taking a traditional business research approach that considers only overall efficiency, this research thus provides a "native" perspective on changing workplace procedures.