BPM for supporting customer relationship and profit decision

Abstract

Purpose – As a response to increasing global market competition, companies in various industries tend to identify and manage customer relationship to increase profit performance. Companies commit more resources to identify their VIP customers and retain them by all means. The purpose of this paper is to develop a customer relationship management (CRM) business process management (BPM) model to identify airline customers with different degree of relationship and profit potential, and select the highly profitable customers for developing retention strategy and processes, and convert the less profitable into profitable corporate accounts. Design/methodology/approach – This study innovatively apply the well-known techniques including CRM and relationship marketing models, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP), and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) in the BPM research. This novel approach analyzes longer term customer profit and value potential, and prioritizes corporate accounts as the basis for setting appropriate customer service levels and improving the CRM process. This hybrid model is able to capitalize on the benefits of these methods and offset their deficiencies. Most importantly, it can be customized to various industries without complex modification. Findings – This study uses data of an airline company to validate feasibility of the proposed CRM BPM model. The results indicate that this model is able to classify the customers based on various criteria and sub-criteria, thus allowing companies to introduce appropriate service levels to deal with different categories of customers, and improve CRM process so as to maximize customer profit and value potential. Practical implications – This CRM BPM model and analysis provide managers extensive customer knowledge, more analytical and fact-based decision-making support, and a stronger focus on return on investment in sales and marketing. Knowing the profit and value potential generated by individual corporate customer makes it easier to establish the link between the CRM and the profit outcome. This model also benefits the organization and its stakeholders by allocating more resources to the targeted customer relationships that are profitable or valuable, and makes marketing more accountable in its marketing programs. Originality/value – This study makes the first move to innovatively apply the well-known techniques including CRM and relationship marketing models, FAHP, and TOPSIS in the BPM research.

Enablers of green business process management in the oil and gas sector

“…Developed and further modified by Daim et al (2013), this prioritization approach is critically important as it Green business process management will help organize the factors enabling GBPM integration. It is appropriate for evaluating and prioritizing business processes (Lau et al, 2016;Gallego et al, 2015;Lankarani and Asadi, 2012;Mehrajunnisa and Jabeen, 2020;Veit et al, 2017). Developed by Saaty (2008), the AHP model is highly recommended for performing complex decisions that incorporate comparing elements, which are otherwise quite challenging to quantify.…”

Take a Ride on Credibility: The Role of Brand Personality in Users’ Loyalty to Virtual Brands in the Sharing Economy

“…By using knowledge as the main element of its strategies (Lau, Nakandala, Samaranayake, & Shum, 2016), CRM enables firms to strategize in a global consumers' database, transcending national boundaries and creating global brands that can compete internationally (Khojastehpour & Johns, 2014). In this sense, a brand can operate in different social and cultural contexts, addressing the relational strategy to the scenario in which consumers are located, but keeping the brand essence (Khojastehpour & Johns 2014).…”

Untitled

“…Based on Porter's value chain (Porter 1985), Kovačič and Bosilj Vukšić (2005, 35) define the following core processes: (1) the procurement process that refers to the physical flows of material required for production; (2) the process of producing products, providing services related to the transformation of input sources into output, and (3) the sales process relating to the activities associated to product distribution, downstream, sales and after-sales activities. The primary purpose of core processes must be to create new value for the customer, which is a process and requires an appropriate approach -core process management (Sinur, Odell, and Fingar 2013;Jeston and Nelis 2014;Margherita 2014;Trkman, Budler, and Groznik 2015;Potočan and Nedelko 2015;Lau et al 2016). The management of core processes involves activities: planning, organizing, leading, and controlling core processes, and for company perfomance requires that we look at them simultaneously from an instrumental and interest perspective.…”

“…According to various authors (Sinur, Odell, and Fingar 2013;Margherita 2014;Espino-Rodriguez and Rodriguez-Diaz 2014;Trkman, Budler, and Groznik 2015;Potočan and Nedelko 2015;Lau et al 2016), we can agree that for the company performance, core processes must be linked to the goals of the company, oriented towards benefit for the customer and that we must have clearly defined criteria for measuring the effects on the business. Also, in accordance with Kaplan and Norton (1996), those companies that include the aspect of core processes in their business, in addition to finance, learning, and customers, will be successful.…”

“…Zelt, Schmiedel, and Vom Brocke (2018, 67) note that for high performance of the organizations these days, it is a prerequisite that they have an excellent management of core processes. Thennakoon et al (2018, 478; Espino-Rodriguez and Rodriguez-Diaz 60 management • volume 14 2014, 2) highlight the importance of the connection of the management of core processes with the objectives of a company, targetting the benefit to the customer and other participants as well as emphasising that we have to have clearly set criteria for measuring the effects of processes on company performance (Margherita 2014;Trkman, Budler, and Groznik 2015;Lau et al 2016;Rowell 2018;Arias et al 2018).…”