Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Bachelor Thesis
Seven Aspects of Internal
Alignment Within Key
Account Management - A Qualitative Study Analyzing Internal Alignment within
the B2B Context
Authors: Charlotte Ramstedt 920411
Elias Johansson 940915
Julia Weltman 930206
Supervision: Ph.D. Tomas Nilsson
Examiner: Ph.D. Richard Afriyie Owusu
Date: 31-05-2019
Subject: Degree Project
Term: VT19
Course Code: 2FE22E
i
[Page Intentionally Left Blank]
ii
Abstract One of the main tasks of key account management (KAM) practice is the creation of
customized value propositions for business-to-business organization's most important
customers, which often requires the support of multiple internal departments. Thus,
making internal alignment central in KAM in order to exchange value and serve the key
accounts (KA) long-term. This study will therefore explore internal alignment in KAM
and aims to identify what contributes to internal alignment and how misalignment could
emerge in KAM teams, in order to understand the significance of internal alignment and
identify possible reasons for misalignment in KAM. The theory was framed by 7
elements of internal alignment including shared values, style, skills, staff, strategy,
structure and systems. The empirical data was collected through qualitative semi-
structured interviews with KA managers. The findings suggest that internal alignment is
of importance in KAM and that the elements of internal alignment studied in the thesis
are dependent on each other. Furthermore, it was found that misalignment is most
commonly caused by personal disputes, however, all elements studied were found as
contributing factors to misalignment. The findings led to the conclusion that internal
alignment is not a target state, it is rather a measure of progress and that all aspects that
do contribute to internal alignment also entail causes for misalignment.
Key Words Key Account Management, Key Account Management Teams, Key Account Manager,
Internal Alignment, Internal Misalignment
Acknowledgements Firstly, we would like to show our gratitude to the participants of this study for sharing
their knowledge, experience and valuable time as a contribution to the thesis. We also
would like to thank our tutor Ph.D Tomas Nilsson for the tremendous guidance
throughout the course of the work. Then, we would like to thank the different opponents
we have had along the process, who have pointed out unclarities that have improved the
outcome of the thesis. Lastly, we would like to thank our examiner Ph.D Richard
Afriyie Owusu for contributing with helpful advice and support.
iii
Table of Contents
1 Introduction _________________________________________________________ 5 1.1 Background ______________________________________________________ 5 1.2 Problem Discussion _______________________________________________ 6 1.3 Research Questions________________________________________________ 7 1.4 Purpose _________________________________________________________ 7 1.5 Delimitations ____________________________________________________ 7 1.6 Outline of Thesis _________________________________________________ 8
2 Theoretical Framework _______________________________________________ 9 2.1 Key Account Managers and Key Account Teams ________________________ 9
2.1.1 Shared Values in Key Account Management ________________________ 10
2.1.2 Style in Key Account Management _______________________________ 11
2.1.3 Skills in Key Account Management _______________________________ 11
2.1.4 Staff in Key Account Management________________________________ 12
2.1.5 Strategy in Key Account Management_____________________________ 13
2.1.6 Structure in Key Account Management ____________________________ 13
2.1.7 Systems in Key Account Management _____________________________ 14
2.2 Alignment and Misalignment within Key Account Management ___________ 15 2.3 Operationalization of Thesis ________________________________________ 16 2.4 Conceptual Framework____________________________________________ 17
3 Methodology ________________________________________________________ 18 3.1 Research Approach _______________________________________________ 18
3.1.1 Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research Approach ____________________ 18
3.2 Research Design _________________________________________________ 19 3.2.1 Research Purpose ____________________________________________ 19
3.3 Data Sources ____________________________________________________ 20 3.3.1 Data Collection Method _______________________________________ 20
3.4 Sampling _______________________________________________________ 21 3.4.1 Respondent Validation _________________________________________ 22
3.5 Ethical Principles ________________________________________________ 23 3.5.1 Invasion of Privacy ___________________________________________ 23
3.5.2 Deception ___________________________________________________ 23
3.5.3 Harm to Participants __________________________________________ 23
3.5.4 Lack Informed Consent ________________________________________ 23
3.6 Data Analysis ___________________________________________________ 24 3.6.1 Summarizing of Data __________________________________________ 24
3.6.2 Categorization of Data and Data Coding __________________________ 24
3.7 Quality Criteria __________________________________________________ 27 3.7.1 Credibility __________________________________________________ 27
3.7.2 Transferability _______________________________________________ 28
3.7.3 Confirmability _______________________________________________ 28
iv
3.7.4 Dependability________________________________________________ 28
3.8 The Work Process ________________________________________________ 28
4 Empirical Data ______________________________________________________ 30 4.1 Shared Values ___________________________________________________ 30 4.2 Style __________________________________________________________ 31 4.3 Skills __________________________________________________________ 32 4.4 Staff __________________________________________________________ 33 4.5 Strategy ________________________________________________________ 33 4.6 Structure _______________________________________________________ 34 4.7 Systems ________________________________________________________ 35 4.8 Internal Alignment _______________________________________________ 35 4.9 Dimensions for Internal Alignment in KAM ___________________________ 36
5 Analysis ____________________________________________________________ 38 5.1 Shared Values to Reach Internal Alignment ___________________________ 38 5.2 The Impact of Style for Internal Alignment ____________________________ 38 5.3 How Different Skills Could Affect Internal Alignment ___________________ 39 5.4 Staff Members Impact on Internal Alignment __________________________ 40 5.5 Obtaining a Clear Strategy for Internal Alignment ______________________ 41 5.6 How Structure Affects Internal Alignment ____________________________ 41 5.7 Internal Alignment Through Systems_________________________________ 42 5.8 Managing Internal Alignment in KAM Teams _________________________ 43 5.9 Elements that Foster Internal Alignment or Misalignment ________________ 44
6 Conclusions and Implications __________________________________________ 46 6.1 Conclusion _____________________________________________________ 46
6.1.1 Answering the Research Questions _______________________________ 46
6.2 Theoretical Implications ___________________________________________ 49 6.3 Managerial Implications ___________________________________________ 50 6.4 Societal and Policy Implications ____________________________________ 51 6.5 Limitations _____________________________________________________ 52 6.6 Suggestions for Further Research ____________________________________ 52
References ___________________________________________________________ 53
Appendices ___________________________________________________________ I Appendix A – Interview Guide __________________________________________ I
List of Tables Table 1: Different applications of McKinsey's 7S Framework (Source: own table)...... 16 Table 2: Interview Settings. ............................................................................................ 23 Table 3: Which questions that were askes and which authors that contributed to the
development of the questions. ................................................................................ 26
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework (Source: own model) ................................................ 17 Figure 2: Revised Conceptual Framework (Source: own model). ................................. 50
5
1 Introduction The first chapter starts by introducing the background of the chosen research area,
this in order to provide the reader with insights of the research area. This is followed
by a problem discussion that discusses prior research, gaps, and shifts in logic
related to the research area. The chapter then presents the research questions,
purpose, delimitations and an outline of the thesis.
1.1 Background
Businesses today are constantly seeking for new ways to stay competitive, especially
within the business-to-business (B2B) market (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010). This
has forced a change in the market since single products or services are no longer the
primary source of exchange between industrial companies, it is rather the extension
of the product or service that provides value to customers in industrial relationships.
Today, it is more important for suppliers to provide additional services to their
products than previously, in order to satisfy the customers' need (Davies, Brady and
Hobday, 2007). Hence, the suppliers' organizations have moved from a product-
centric to a customer-centric logic (Davies, Brady and Hobday, 2007; Ivens et al.,
2009). In order to successfully move towards a customer-centric logic, providing
customized solutions to customers, a company ought to create a team approach
within the organization (Zupancic, 2008), as to manage the complex buyer-seller
relationship (Tzempelikos and Gounaris, 2015). This could be done by integrating
key account management (KAM), where the team has to build strategies in order to
find solutions for each key account (KA) (Zupancic, 2008). This is also the main
difference between KAM and regular sales management, namely managing strategic
relationships rather than general ones (Ivens et al., 2009). Homburg, Workman and
Jensen (2000) defined KAM as “[…] the designation of special personnel and/or
performance of special activities directed at an organization's most important
customers” (p.463). Hence, when adopting KAM, an organization gains the
opportunity of building strong relationships with their most valuable customers
(Ivens et al., 2009; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003; Zupancic, 2008). This has
contributed to a shift from a short-term to a long-term relational focus towards
customers, and have further enhanced the change from individual selling to team-
selling in order to manage the complex selling process (Lai and Yang, 2017). In
order to create a team-selling environment, organizations can integrate cross-
functional teams, which further could enhance internal alignment within the
organization (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010) by managing the internal practices that
are needed in KAM (Tzempelikos and Gounaris, 2015).
Nevertheless, it was not until the late 1980’s that the concept of KAM appeared in
literature. Hence, since then scholars have brought more attention to the topic of
KAM, as it appears to be a strategic way of staying competitive within the market
(Colletti and Tubridy, 1987; McDonald and Wilson, 1989). After this, KAM has
been researched to a broad extent, especially within the B2B context due to the
positive impact it has been shown to have on business performance (Homburg,
Workman and Jensen, 2002; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003; McDonald,
Millman and Rogers, 1997). Research conducted within KAM has investigated
several topics such as selection criteria of KA, reasons to adopt KAM, as well as
6
success factors of KAM (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010). More specific, existing
literature on KAM has focused on the implementation of KAM, both on
organizational and team level within companies (Guenzi and Storbacka, 2015; Pardo,
Ivens, and Wilson, 2014; Tzempelikos and Gounaris, 2015). Further, literature has
researched topics such as KAM teams (Jones et al., 2005; Lai and Yang, 2017;
Salojärvi and Saarenketo, 2013), coordination of the buyer-seller relationship (Ivens
et al., 2016), the behavior and skills of KAM (Guenzi, Prado and Georges 2007;
Wilson and Millman, 2003), drivers for implementing KAM programs (Brehmer and
Rehme, 2009), barriers of KAM (Leischnig et al., 2018), resources and capabilities
for strategic KAM (Guesalaga et al., 2018) and motivation factor within KAM
(Mahlamäki, Rintamäki and Rajah, 2018). Accordingly, scholars seem to have paid
little attention to internal alignment in KAM (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010; Lai and
Yang, 2017; Leischnig et al., 2018; Pardo, Ivens and Wilson, 2014), and therefore,
this is going to be further researched in the thesis.
1.2 Problem Discussion
The organizational customer-centric logic has provided internal departments with a
common goal of retaining customers long term. In order to retain KA’s,
organizations have to sacrifice short-term objectives to gain the benefits of the long-
term goals. Therefore, organizations have to justify the sacrifices of short-term
objectives, by selecting carefully evaluated KA’s (Guenzi, Prado and Georges, 2007;
Philippe Gosselin and André Bauwen, 2006). Traditionally, have coordination and
integration between departments been described as problematic, principally due to
different perceptions of value (Kotler, Rackham and Krishnaswamy 2006; Biemans,
Makovec Brenčič and Malshe, 2010; Dewsnap and Jobber, 2009). Accordingly,
KAM is often characterized by teamwork and cross-functional coordination, in
which disrupts the abiding practice of sales departments operating in isolation from
other functions within an organization (Geiger and Guenzi 2009). It is therefore
important for KAM to coordinate the internal departments, such as marketing and
sales etc., thus, making internal alignment a central matter in successful KAM (Ivens
and Prado, 2016).
Within a KAM program, the KA managers should act as the bridge between the
internal organization and the KA (Guesalaga et al., 2018). Therefore, a vast extent of
knowledge is required by a KA manager to satisfy the needs of both organizations.
KA managers rarely have enough knowledge and/or authority over the internal
departments to solely and sufficiently handle the relationship with the KA’s
(Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). Hence, the need for internal teamwork in
KAM which further calls for developing KA teams. Once various representatives of
internal departments are established in a KAM team, the different functions of the
team collectively nurture the relationship with the KA (Birkinshaw, Toulan, and
Arnold, 2001). Accordingly, there is a need for cross-functionality within KAM
teams in order to manage the diverse requirements that may develop in long-term KA
relationships. Furthermore, KAM teams have to be internally aligned in order to
deliver a coherent customer experience by all internal departments (Salojärvi and
Saarenketo, 2013). Thereof, the need for internal alignment within KAM teams.
7
Achieving alignment in a KAM team is a challenging task since the creation and
delivery of value is an increasingly complex process, due to the involvement of
multiple internal and external actors in KAM relationships (Ivens et al., 2009). The
coordination of the team is often complex since it involves, in addition to multiple
parties, multiple subsystems which may be developed and consumed at different
locations, at different times, and with varying technologies (Ulaga and Reinhartz,
2011; Storbacka, Polsa and Sääkjärvi, 2011). The complexity of alignment in KAM
has problematized the traditional linear sales process since sales in KAM are hard to
forecast (Moncrief and Marshall, 2005). This consequently problematizes the
justification of implementation of KAM. Additionally, misalignment between
internal units may slow down adaptation processes or may lead to poor outcomes.
Hence, making internal alignment of importance for successful KAM programs
(Pardo, Ivens, and Wilson, 2013). One way of evaluating the alignment of a KAM
team is to analyze the microenvironment as well as performing internal analyses
(Guenzi and Storbacka, 2015). However, little literature seems to have researched the
topic of internal alignment within KAM. Guesalaga and Johnston (2010) once argued
that a vaguely addressed subject in KAM journals was internal alignment, and
recommended further research within the area. Pardo, Ivens and Wilson (2014) also
addressed a need to further research internal alignment within KAM, and what
cultural issues that might affect it. Further, Lai and Yang (2017) also called for a
need to research internal alignment in different types of KA teams. It has also been
suggested that it would be of interest for further research in the KAM literature to
qualitatively examine how internal alignment configurations can reduce potential
causes of misalignment such as conflicts, integration gaps, etc. (Leischnig et al.,
2018). Thus, making this research area of academic interest, and therefore is the
topic of internal alignment within KAM going to be further researched in this thesis.
1.3 Research Questions
The following questions were developed based on the problem discussion:
RQ 1: What contributes to internal alignment within KAM teams?
RQ 2: How does misalignment within KAM teams emerge?
1.4 Purpose
The purpose of this thesis is to extend the KAM literature by exploring how cross-
functional teamwork is aligned within KAM teams in B2B organizations. This, in
order to understand the significance of internal alignment, and to identify reasons for
misalignment in KAM teams.
1.5 Delimitations
This thesis includes several objectives that could be characterized as delimitations.
The first delimitation made was when choosing to only research internal alignment.
Further, this contributed to delimiting the study to internal alignment within KAM,
and then KAM teams, instead of researching the alignment of a whole organization.
Hence, this delimitation was motivated by previous research, since it appeared to be
a gap in the literature which needed to be fulfilled and further researched (Guesalaga
and Johnston, 2010; Lai and Yang, 2017; Leischnig et al., 2018; Pardo, Ivens and
Wilson, 2014).
8
The second delimitation regards the literature on KAM selected for this thesis since it
was operationalized by applying a theoretical lens. The theory and concepts were
chosen in order to describe and understand different elements of KAM and KAM
teams, which contributed to some aspects of KAM literature being excluded, such as
the implementation of KAM and KAM effectiveness. Hence, this delimitation was
made in order for the thesis to stay within the topic and provide research relevant to
fulfill the purpose.
The third delimitation was made when choosing to only interview KA managers
within the companies. This delimitation was made in accordance with the purpose,
nonetheless, it only provides one person’s perspective of the teamwork.
Nevertheless, in order to include different companies, this delimitation was necessary
due to the timeframe given to collect the empirical data. The timeframe also
contributed to the delimitation of not having proper time to approach more than five
KA managers. Furthermore, the time constraint made it hard to eliminate certain
industries, as it was difficult to find KA managers which had time to participate,
therefore, companies operating in different industries were selected, which decreases
the consistency of the study. However, the authors did not believe that this was a
major issue, since the purpose of the thesis was to obtain the KA managers
perspective of internal alignment, and not to investigate a certain industry.
1.6 Outline of Thesis
This research is divided into six main chapters in order to provide a clear structure. It
starts with providing an introduction of the area studied, both with a background and
a problem discussion which guides the reader to the research questions and the
purpose as well as the delimitations of the study. In the second chapter, the literature
is presented in order to provide insights of the concepts chosen, it also provides a
description of how the thesis has been operationalized and it ends with a conceptual
framework. This is followed by the third chapter, which is the methodology that
provides a detailed description of how the thesis has been conducted, and why
certain decisions were made. The fourth chapter presents the empirical data
collection, which is followed by the fifth chapter, that combines the empirical
findings with the literature, in order to analyze and compare the results with the
chosen concepts and theories. The sixth, and last chapter, presents the conclusions of
the study, this is followed by a section answering the research questions and lastly,
are theoretical, managerial and societal implications presented as well as discussion
of limitations and suggestions for further research.
9
2 Theoretical Framework The second chapter presents and discusses the existing literature and concepts of
KAM. The chapter starts with presenting literature on KA managers and KA teams,
which is followed by KAM literature that is presented in seven different elements.
Then literature on internal alignment and misalignment within KAM is presented.
This is followed by a section that provides an explanation of how the thesis has been
operationalized. The chapter ends with providing a conceptual framework, whereof
the concepts are connected.
2.1 Key Account Managers and Key Account Teams
The KA manager is the one responsible for the KA, where they are the ones who
build the bridge between its own company and its customers. In order to successfully
manage the KA’s, the organization has to include specific knowledge and skills
within the KAM program (Guesalaga et al., 2018). Hence, KA managers should be
characterized as being business professionals that are specialized in managing the
KA’s (Ojasalo, 2001). The KA managers’ main role within the organization could,
therefore, be seen as more relationship oriented, in addition to only focusing on
revenue-generating activities (Guenzi, Pardo and Georges, 2007). This is mainly, and
due to the customers increased expectations (Nätti and Palo, 2012). Therefore, are
the KA managers highly important for the organization, as they provide unique value
for the organization's most valuable customers (Ivens et al., 2009; Workman,
Homburg and Jensen, 2003; Zupancic, 2008). Hence, in order to create exceptional
value to the KA, the KA managers need support from several departments within the
organization, which has contributed to the development of more formalized KAM
teams (Guesalaga et al., 2018; Salojärvi and Saarenketo, 2013; Workman, Homburg
and Jensen, 2003).
Nonetheless, KAM teams are complex, which contributes to difficulties when
managing and designing them (Storbacka, 2012). However, even though, prior
literature often regards cross-functional teams and KAM teams as interchangeable,
the formulation of teams differs widely from one organization to another (Guesalaga
et al., 2018). Team structure can be both formal, which are dedicated teams with
structured functionalities, or informal, where the organization assembles teams for
specific occasions, or, that the formalization of the team is unstructured (Guesalaga
et al., 2018; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). The type of team structure an
organization has does not regulate their performance, the reason for a type of
structure, depends on the organization and the solution that is provided, the
formulation can also differ between KA’s (Salojärvi and Saarenketo, 2013).
Nevertheless, the KAM team include members that are in charge of developing and
improving the sales strategy for a certain account (Salojärvi and Saarenketo, 2013).
Hence, it has been argued that the teams could be seen as independent organizations
within the organization (Brehmer and Rehme, 2009), especially within the B2B
context since the cross-functional KAM teams could include dozens of members
(Guesalaga et al., 2018). Therefore, is KAM highly dependent on its internal
practices (Tzempelikos and Gounaris, 2015), and in order to manage those, scholars
have suggested that organizations should include employee participation by setting
10
clear objectives, targets and measures, the organization should further develop an
increased transparency (Pressey, Gilchrist and Lenney, 2014). Further, KAM teams
have to constantly maintain knowledge about its customers, the customers market
and the customers' industry, along with coordinating the daily sales activities (Lai
and Yang, 2017; Salojärvi and Saarenketo, 2013). When successfully applying cross-
functionality in KAM teams, internal flexibility is achieved, which provides value to
the KA’s (Guesalaga et al., 2018).
2.1.1 Shared Values in Key Account Management
According to Anisimova and Mavondo (2014) are “[…] strategic vision and internal
culture strongly interrelated and there is a need for managers to monitor the
relations between vision and culture”. This suggests that internal culture should be
embedded in the strategic vision. Anisimova and Mavondo (2014) also suggested
that there is a need for managers to ensure that corporate culture and values are
internally accepted. When implementing KAM programs, literature stresses the
importance of shared values and aligned corporate culture as an indicator for
successful KAM adoption (Nätti and Palo, 2012; Guenzi and Storbacka, 2015). The
organizational culture should be developed from the company's values, vision and
goals in order to form the KAM’s course of action, as well as serve the teams well-
being (Ojasalo, 2001). Hence, it has shown being important to identify differences of
organizational values and culture between the internal and external parties, since if
they are too significant, it could have a negative effect on the buyer-seller
relationship (Guesalaga et al., 2018). In order to achieve shared values and alignment
within KAM teams, a common perception of value is needed, where all actors, both
internally and externally are active in the relationship (Håkansson, Henjesand and
Waluszewski, 2004). To further understand the relationship in industrial marketing,
Håkansson, Henjesand and Waluszewski (2004) approached the issue of a more
complex understanding of value in a KAM context by applying an interaction
approach. They found that in order to create value in a relational dyad, such as KAM,
both sides should be active in the value creation process (Håkansson, Henjesand and
Waluszewski, 2004).
However, with the increasingly complex task of coordinating input from internal and
external parties, the KAM role includes interacting with several departments, which
again highlights the importance of shared values and ‘esprit de corps’ (Pardo et al.,
2006). The organizational culture is closely related to esprit de corps, which also
could be described as the ‘team spirit’ within KAM teams, which concerns the extent
of how well the team members commit to the shared goals (Homburg, Workman and
Jensen, 2002). Therefore, could esprit de corps be seen as a crucial factor for KAM
teams, since it is highly dependent on the internal alignment (Guesalaga et al., 2018).
Esprit de corps also concerns the importance of developing close relationships with
its customers, as well as developing an organizational culture that is customer
oriented (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003),
since this could ease the process of exchanging information internally and increase
the collaboration (Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). Workman, Homburg, and
Jensen (2003) argued that corporate culture and esprit de corps is the most important
element for improving KAM effectiveness.
11
2.1.2 Style in Key Account Management
Internal alignment within KAM can be a difficult task since the KA managers often
lack hierarchical power over the different departments within the organization, which
in turn contributes to difficulties with aligning different departments (Homburg,
Workman and Jensen 2000; Homburg, Workman and Jensen, 2002). In order to
manage this, Homburg, Workman and Jensen (2002) argued that the KA manager
should have confidence in their interpersonal skills and informal powers, which in
turn could push the organization towards coordination between departments, and
further contribute to cross-functional integration. The KA managers should further
have status and authority within the organization, which, as aforementioned, not
usually is the case (Storbacka, 2012). Therefore, Zupancic (2008) argued for the
importance of having top-management involvement to successfully manage the
KAM program. Top-management involvement could be beneficial since it signals the
importance of KAM to the whole organization, which in turn could encourage the
departments to commit to it (Pardo, Ivens, and Wilson, 2014). Hence, the top-
management should take advantage of their authority and work as a ‘personal
coordinator’, encouraging cross-functional cooperation since KAM requires
knowledge from multiple departments within the organization (Workman, Homburg
and Jensen, 2003).
However, it has been suggested to be important for the employees to commit to the
organization and work towards the same goals in order for KAM to succeed
(Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). To manage
the coordination within the team, scholars suggested that the organization should
provide cross-departmental activities, providing standardized procedures and policies
(i.e. rewards, recognition, compensation and training) (Jones et al., 2005), which
could be done by setting clear objectives, targets and measures (Pressey, Gilchrist
and Lenney, 2014). Scholars have also argued for the advantage of providing team-
based rewards instead of individual ones, as it contributes to higher level of
collaboration efforts, which further could contribute to increased project performance
(Jones et al., 2005). However, this is an investment for the organizations since it
requires both time and resources, hence, scholars have suggested that the resources
are key for empowerment which makes it necessary to invest in (Ibid).
2.1.3 Skills in Key Account Management
In order to succeed with a KAM program, KA manages have to focus on developing
accounts on a long-term basis, and constantly improve the performance of each
account (Storbacka, 2012). In order to successfully manage KA’s, are different
resources and competencies required, which calls for a wide range of skills that
emphasize a need for teamwork in KAM (Jones et al., 2005). Hence, teams should
include multiple internal departments such as marketing, sales, logistics and finance
etc. This further makes it necessary for KAM to work in cross-functional teams, as it
is the only way to assess the skills needed for creating value to the customers. If this
is managed properly, it could contribute to gaining a competitive advantage (Ibid).
However, the skills within KAM also refers to the organization's ability to propose
additional activities to its KA, in comparison to the company's other accounts. The
12
activities provided to the KA could involve pricing, product adaptations and
integrated systems (Homburg, Workman and Jensen, 2002).
Furthermore, the employees within KAM teams need to be engaged and open to the
organizational goals and contribute with new ideas and activities, since these kinds of
employees tend to be more original, curious and creative which all are desirable
attributes when managing KA’s (Mahlamäki, Rintamäki and Rajah, 2018). Further,
KA managers should have good problem-solving skills, which could be referred to as
‘thinking outside the box’. Furthermore, has it shown being important for the KA
managers to be motivated in order to perform at their best. Also, it has been
suggested that the KA manager should be open to learn new things in order to
successfully manage the KA’s (Ibid). Nonetheless, the KA manager must also have
skills in managing other employees internally in order to achieve alignment within
the team, as KAM should not be a detached activity, it has to be integrated within the
organization, and therefore, motivated to the other departments (Zupancic, 2008).
Hence, the KA manager must undertake several skills to manage the team, as Ryals
and Rogers (2007) once argued that “[…] key account managers often have to
assume new and complex roles such as phase management and/or people
management, or to manage across borders” (p.218), which underlines this.
2.1.4 Staff in Key Account Management
As aforementioned, it is important to coordinate the activities from the salespeople in
different departments of the organization within KAM, as it requires access to
different departments to be successful (Jones et al., 2005; Workman, Homburg and
Jensen, 2003). The human capabilities within KAM are therefore of significance, and
it is important to select the right individuals as KA managers and for the KAM
teams. Hence, managing KA’s is a complex matter, accordingly, does the role of KA
manager require certain skills and competencies in order to manage each KA
efficiently, which emphasizes that individual holding the role is suitable (Ojasalo,
2001). The KAM team should support the KA by applying their collective
knowledge by contributing to the specific expertise that each team member holds in
order to create value (Cova and Salle, 2008). Further, in order to deliver value to the
KA’s, a sufficient amount of expertise is required to provide solutions to the
problems (Hakanen, 2014), as all KA’s have different problems depending on
various factors, such as industry (Davies, Brady and Hobday, 2007), hence, a need
for a diverse range of knowledge by the KAM team (Guesalaga et al., 2018). In order
to acquire such a range of knowledge within a team that can facilitate the case-
specific problem, KAM teams can have either a team of representatives from various
internal departments, or a team that situationally acquire the targeted knowledge of
different staff members (Ibid). A KAM team can support their customers in various
ways that utilize individual targeted knowledge by the team members (Hakanen,
2014). Such ways include providing customers with improved results, an outside
view that challenges their current operations, bring enthusiasm to their business
performance and most importantly, provide opportunities for co-creation of value by
the collectively applied knowledge from the individual team members (Ibid).
13
2.1.5 Strategy in Key Account Management
In order to provide solutions for KA’s, B2B organizations have to strategically
consider what they want to achieve in a long-term perspective in oppose to short-
term return on investments (Davies, Brady and Hobday, 2007; Geiger and Guenzi
2009; Ivens et al., 2009). One of the main strategic challenges in KAM is related to
the creation of customized value propositions that each KA requires, and the
management of the potential long-term risks that the process entails (Philippe
Gosselin and André Bauwen, 2006). It is particularly challenging in the evaluation
process to decide what customers that are considered to be KA’s. Hence, in order to
strategically consider a customer as a KA, they have to be able to return the
investments of the relationship (McDonald, Millman and Rogers, 1997).
Organizations, therefore, have to carefully evaluate what accounts in their customer
portfolio that is most valuable (Ivens et al., 2009).
Another strategic challenge in KAM is the fostering of both strategic objectives and
the general KAM practice, therefore, has research stressed the importance to develop
different sets of strategic goals in order to simultaneously foster long-term and short-
term objectives (Philippe Gosselin and André Bauwen, 2006). Additionally, having
different sets of goals is important since all objectives are generally not reached in all
accounts (Storbacka, 2012). Therefore, it is important for the organizations to
carefully develop strategies regarding what account selection criteria they should
enhance (i.e. profitability, lifetime value and customer size) (Guesalaga et al., 2018).
Hence, the decision should also include fewer tangible criteria such as how suitable
the potential account is, both to the organization and its strategy (Workman,
Homburg and Jensen, 2003). Nonetheless, all organizations have different selection
criteria, depending on size, strategy and sector, hence, it is still important for the
organizations to evaluate their KA’s in order to succeed with the selection, and/or to
reselect the KA’s if they are not considered to be valuable for the organization
anymore (Storbacka, 2012).
2.1.6 Structure in Key Account Management
The structure of a KAM program concerns the organization's ability to deliver
systematic ways of handling activities (Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003;
Zupancic, 2008), more specifically, how well-developed a company’s procedures
and policies are (Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). The structure should be
built on the company's goals, and therefore represent what is important for the
organization (Ojasalo, 2001). Hence, as the perception of what is important for the
individuals and the organization could differ, this has to be well defined (Ibid).
Therefore, is the systematic program crucial for KAM in order to develop the
structure, processes and the people within the organization (Zupancic, 2008). Not
having a systematic approach, could contribute to KAM failure in important
elements, such as failure in corporate learning and create additional costs for the
company (Ibid).
KA planning is also important for a successful KAM program since it provides a
structure for the organization. The KA managers should first identify the customers
need, in order to coordinate those needs with the organization's capabilities (Ryals
and Rogers, 2007). If this would be managed correctly, it could have a positive effect
14
on the customers' trust in the supplier (Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003).
Guesalaga et al. (2018) argued that KAM teams could be cross-functional,
multinational and/or cross-cultural, depending on what is needed for that specific
KA. Furthermore, some KAM teams are long-term oriented, whilst others could be
formed and reformed when the KA’s business change, and/or when their needs
change (Guesalaga et al., 2018). Therefore, should the KAM team have some
flexibility whilst interpreting the formal goals set by the company, in order to find
solutions for its KA that will benefit the company in the long term (Ojasalo, 2001).
Hence, KA planning could still benefit from short-term goals, but those should be
realized within a strategic framework, and not be damaging to the long-term goals
(Ryals and Rogers, 2007). Birkinshaw, Toulan, and Arnold (2001) once argued for
organizations that are coordinated to deliver value to its customers are more likely to
become successful. Which, again, stresses the need for having well-developed
procedures and policies in order to manage the cross-functionality of the organization
(Guesalaga et al., 2018).
2.1.7 Systems in Key Account Management
It has been recognized that formal channels handling the information sharing within
KAM are of importance, since they impact the internal alignment within the
organization and its effectiveness (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010; Pardo, Ivens, and
Wilson, 2014). The importance of information sharing within KAM is due to the
high expertise that is required to serve the KA’s (Marcos-Cuevas et al., 2014). This
could be managed by internal platforms, which provide the organization with well-
defined processes including achievements, responsibilities and progress (Malshe,
2011). The internal processes provide greater understanding between departments
which also reduces the risk of conflicts (Ibid). Having aligned activities within the
organization also provides information about how much resources that should be
spent where, since it reveals which customers that have the highest potential
(Reinartz, Krafft and Hoyer, 2004). Sharing information within the company
increases the source credibility, openness and accuracy of the information and it
could also provide a sense of ‘togetherness’ between the employees, which is
suggested being positive for the commitment of the employees (Lai and Yang, 2017).
Further, sharing information within the organization has shown having a positive
relationship between KAM practices and its outcomes which further can have a
positive effect on profits and increased sales (Tzempelikos and Gounaris, 2015).
Scholars have suggested that having shared processes contributes positively to the
organizations' alignment and structures, since it enables the organization to work
towards its goals more effectively, by adjusting to the customers need faster
(Reinartz, Krafft and Hoyer, 2004). Accordingly, KAM systems should work as a
coordination device which should ease the process of other departments to commit to
the alignment, hence, the KA manager must be able to explain what benefits the
KAM program could bring to the support systems (Pardo, Ivens, and Wilson, 2014).
It has also been suggested that performance measurement systems should exist
within KAM programs, as it enables the organization to measure how well the
company has met their initial goals, which further indicates what needs to be
improved within the organization (Guenzi and Storbacka, 2015). Also, studies have
15
shown that employees became more motivated when meeting measures of
performance which also could increase the general business performance (Ibid).
2.2 Alignment and Misalignment within Key Account Management
A traditional perspective of value in B2B sales have predominantly pointed out the
supplier as the sole creator of value and describes value as a construct of benefits and
sacrifices (Blois, 2003). Hence, important issues could arise when applying such a
conceptualization of value in KAM, since it aims for a long-term relationship instead
of transactional exchanges (Davies, Brady and Hobday, 2007; Geiger and Guenzi
2009; Ivens et al., 2009). The most notable issue is the monetary investment of KAM
implementation and practice by the supplier, such as work compensation, changes in
organizational structures, training etc. which cannot be justified as valuable with the
traditional conceptualization (Homburg, Workman and Jensen, 2002). However,
there is no doubt that KAM programs provide additional value for the customer such
as streamlined and customized solutions (Biggart and Delbridge, 2004). Pardo et al.
(2006) once claimed that “[…] in order to meet the challenges of the KAM context
conceptually, there is a need to move toward a more complex, multi‐faceted
understanding of value” (p.8).
However, to provide solutions for KA’s, the KA manager has to utilize the cross-
functional teams, in order to create customized solutions for the customers, which
contributes to extensive investments and costs (Guenzi and Storbacka, 2015). A
consequence of such an investment is that it increases risk, since more resources are
invested into fewer customers (Ibid). To provide solutions to customers, KAM teams
have to develop new value propositions based on the skills and resources of the
group. Additionally, to achieve mutually beneficial goals within KAM teams, it has
been suggested that organizations should primarily focus on strategically ensuring
internal alignment (Ibid). Storbacka (2012) once described internal alignment as:
“[…] a process of increasing the organization's understanding of the
selected customer's business concerns and opportunities, and jointly
developing a value proposition and an encounter process for the
delivery of the value proposition” (p.261).
By ensuring internal alignment within KAM teams, risks decrease from each
department which provides KAM teams with a common perception of value which is
of importance for smoother integration (Biemans, Makovec Brenčič and Malshe,
2010). However, to achieve internal alignment, organizations may have to adapt their
business model by focusing on common goals, principles and practices across
departments (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010). Hence, one of the most problematic
determinants of successful KAM is internal alignment, predominantly due to the
nature of different perspectives of the members in cross-functional teams (Ibid). In
order to manage the internal alignment within the KAM teams, all members have to
work towards the same goal, hence, misalignment could be a consequence (Leischnig
et al., 2018). Leischnig et al. (2018) described misalignment as “[…] a low quality
of the relationships among KAM units and their internal network partners (e.g., low
levels of trust, high levels of skepticism, and conflict)” (p.61), which further could
16
create internal inefficiency, for instance, disrupted internal information flows.
Furthermore, this could cause inconvenience for the KA’s such as failed
communication and delayed deliveries (Leischnig et al., 2018).
2.3 Operationalization of Thesis
The authors chose to apply a theoretical lens, using McKinsey’s 7S framework in
order to collect research on KAM, whereof the theory was divided into; shared
values, style, skills, staff, strategy, structure and systems. However, the 7S
framework was developed by Waterman, Peters and Philips (1980), when they were
consultants at a multinational consultancy company (McKinsey & Company). The
purpose of the framework was to find important elements to consider when striving
to achieve effectiveness in organizational change, and when defining those they
divided the elements into two categories, hard and soft. The hard elements refer to
structure, systems and strategies, and the soft refer to staff, style, skills and shared
values (Waterman, Peters and Philips, 1980). Since the development of the 7S,
scholars have used the framework in different manners (see table 1). Even though the
McKinsey 7S framework is a known model in both practice and in literature, it has
been vaguely addressed both academically and empirically, which could be
criticized. However, the framework has been applied academically, where peer-
reviewed papers have been published in journals that are approved in the Journal
Quality List provided by Harzing (2018) (see table 1).
Authors Application of Framework Publication of
Journals
Guenzi and
Storbacka
(2015)
They used the framework in order to
provide a model which described reasons
for salesforce change management and its
success.
Industrial Marketing
Management
Hitt (1995) He used the framework in order to identify
different components of a learning
organization.
Leadership &
Organization
Development
Journal
Jones, Roberts
and Chonko
(2000)
They used the framework in order to
analyze different levels when
implementation of KAM.
Journal of
Marketing Theory
and Practice
Table 1: Different applications of McKinsey's 7S Framework (Source: own table).
However, the 7S framework has not been studied in the context of established KAM
programs, previously to this study. Nonetheless, the model was only applied as a
theoretical lens and a tool, in order to collect and capture the existing literature.
Hence, as Guenzi and Storbacka (2015) argued in benefit for the 7S, as the elements
studied in the framework are sets of academically relevant activities in business
management. Therefore, does the 7S framework give the opportunity of building and
studying the existing KAM theory, from seven different aspects, which further makes
17
it possible to analyze the state of KAM, as it suggests how an organization should
work, which makes it possible to investigate if and/ or how KAM teams work with
the elements in practice.
2.4 Conceptual Framework
The theoretical framework provided knowledge about KAM and KAM teams and
describes what could be seen as important elements for a successful KAM team.
Furthermore, it suggests seven different elements (7S) which could contribute to
internal alignment and/or misalignment within KAM teams. Hence, this contributed
to the development of a conceptual framework (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework (Source: own model)
Figure 1 illustrates KAM and KAM teams, and what elements that are of importance
internally in order to successfully create a KAM program, which leads to internal
alignment, or misalignment if not managed properly. Previous literature suggested
that it has become more common for organizations to implement KAM programs to
manage the company's most valuable customers, hence, it also revealed that
managing KAM teams could be a difficult task, since they need access to several
departments within the organization, thus, a need for managing the internal
alignment. Therefore, could it be beneficial for an organization to somehow analyze
the state of internal alignment, and why misalignment within the organization could
emerge. Shared values, style, skills, staff, strategy, structure, and systems cover both
an organization's tangible and intangible capabilities, which, therefore, could provide
a base for analyzing the state of an organization's internal alignment, and also expose
what factors that could cause misalignment internally. Hence, this thesis supposes
that KAM and KAM teams need to manage the ‘7S’ in order to reach internal
alignment, otherwise, misalignment could occur.
18
3 Methodology The third chapter presents the methodology chosen for this thesis, it declares the
reasons for why certain methods and approaches were chosen.
3.1 Research Approach
A research approach refers to the method applied in order to tackle a specific
research problem (Bryman and Bell, 2015; Creswell, 2014). The following research
approaches are commonly applied in business research; deductive, inductive and
abductive (Bryman and Bell, 2015). The research approach is important as it enables
the thesis to explore the relationship between theory and research, either by having
the theory guiding the research, by obtaining a deductive approach, or if the theory is
an outcome of the research, obtaining an inductive approach (Ibid). In addition to the
previously mentioned research approaches, is there a third research approach known
as abductive (Bryman and Bell, 2015). The abductive research approach is not
deductive or inductive. However, it can be considered as a mixture of the two (ibid).
This thesis applied an abductive research approach since it studied the research area
both from a theoretical and empirical background. The study firstly took an inductive
research approach, since the aim was to extend the KAM literature by gaining an
understanding of how cross-functional teams are internally aligned in order to
identify causes of misalignments within KAM teams. However, the research also
collected empirical data that was used to analyze the relevance of the theoretical
findings which, in turn, is in line with deductive research. Therefore, was an
abductive research approach appropriate since the study has both inductive and
deductive influences and aimed to establish a relationship between them. The
research approach was chosen since the research area is somewhat understudied, and
a further understanding of internal alignment within KAM teams is needed to
provide a conceptual framework rather than being able to generalize the findings
(Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009).
3.1.1 Quantitative vs. Qualitative Research Approach
Quantitative research is often used when researchers want to test the existing
concepts or theories, with the purpose to see if any connections can be found
between the variables. Further, it most often includes quantified data or numbers
instead of detailed in-depth information which the qualitative research method
collects (Bryman and Bell, 2015). Qualitative methods are usually done through
observations, in-depth interviews or by examining documents relevant to the topic
(Ibid). Furthermore, it has been argued that using a qualitative method when
collecting data contributes to a more correct analysis and understanding of the
respondents’ behavior, rather than applying a quantitative method (Aborisade, 2013).
Hence, this research has used a qualitative research approach, since the objective was
to collect in-depth and rich data, which provided insights in order to fulfill the
purpose of the research (Bryman and Bell, 2015). The qualitative method contributed
with insights of how the KA manager work, and gave the opportunity to ask further
questions during the interviews, which also provided relevant and accurate data.
19
Further, using semi-structured questions provided a good base for the thesis, and was
therefore considered as the most suitable option (Ibid).
3.2 Research Design
A research design refers to the chosen structure in which the collection of data has
taken place. The research design decision frames the research, and the research
question should be in line with the design chosen (Bryman and Bell, 2015). The
following five research designs are the most prominent ones in business research;
experimental, cross-sectional, longitudinal, case study and comparative designs
(ibid).
Hence, this thesis applied a cross-sectional research design, which aimed to study a
particular phenomenon at a particular time (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009).
The design is often associated with social surveys and is applicable when studying
variations of more than one case, using qualitative data, trying to establish patterns of
association. Bryman and Bell (2015) once explained “[…] that variation can be in
respect of people, organizations, nation, or whatever” (p. 61). Cross-sectional
studies are commonly applied in academic research projects since academic projects
often are time constrained (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009. Furthermore, cross-
sectional research design can describe a phenomenon in a range of different ways
such as incidences, factors related etc. The design is typically applied in quantitative
methods. However, the design is also applicable in qualitative methods (Ibid).
According to Bryman and Bell (2015) is the most typical form of cross-sectional
design when applied in qualitative methods, qualitative interviews.
Accordingly, this thesis utilized a cross-sectional design in order to capture the
empirical data at a specific point of time, from specific individuals. The time aspect
is of importance in research (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009), especially in this
thesis since it represents the present time, which lacks research on internal alignment
in KAM. Additionally, another time specific aspect is that KAM is somewhat newly
introduced in B2B organizations.
3.2.1 Research Purpose
It is important when conducting a study that the research purpose is in line with the
objective of the study. There are three main classifications of research purposes
which include descriptive, explanatory or exploratory research, which should be
considered before conducting a study (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). The
principal way of conducting descriptive research is to identify a profile of persons or
situations. Therefore, it is important to have knowledge about the phenomena in
order to collect the data that is desired for the research (Ibid). However, the main
objective of exploratory research is to seek new insights about a phenomenon or a
concept (Creswell, 2014; Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). The last type of
research purpose is explanatory research which seeks to establish causal relationships
between variables (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). When deciding a research
purpose, it is inevitable not to consider the research objectives and research
questions, therefore can a research purpose as well as research objective serve more
than one purpose (Ibid).
20
The purpose of this thesis is both descriptive and exploratory, which is referred to as
descripto-exploratory. The main purpose of exploratory studies is to add new
insightful information to existing literature. This type of purpose is especially useful
when uncertainty as to the nature of an issue has arisen whilst the main objective
with descriptive research is to describe how situations have come to exist. Since the
purpose of this study is to ‘extend the KAM literature by exploring how cross-
functional teamwork is aligned within KAM teams in B2B organizations’, the
research purpose consists of both descriptive and exploratory components. The part
of the purpose that intends to explore cross-functional teamwork in KAM inherits
exploratory elements whilst the second part that aims to identify reasons for
misalignment in cross-functional teams inherit descriptive ones.
3.3 Data Sources
There are two types of data that can be used when collecting material for research,
primary and secondary data, and the data should be chosen in order to fulfill the
purpose of the study (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). The secondary data
could both include raw data and published summaries, whilst the primary data is
collected by the researcher, in order to gain valid and reliable data which is of
relevance for the research questions and objectives (Ibid). This thesis is, therefore,
going to collect primary data, by having semi-structured interviews in order to fulfill
the purpose.
3.3.1 Data Collection Method
An important factor in all research projects is the data collection method, which to a
great extent affects the outcomes of the study. In order to collect the data, the most
common approaches are to do interviews, questionnaires and/or observations
(Bryman and Bell, 2015). Moreover, audiovisual technologies have become a more
common and accepted tool in qualitative research, as these multimedia tools have
grown more popular when doing interviews (Aborisade, 2013). Data collection
methods need to be carefully evaluated before chosen, as problems in the collection
process could occur, such as finding sources of information for the research
(Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009).
3.3.1.1 Qualitative Interviews
Qualitative interviews are a non-standardized method of data collection, which can
be advantageous in certain situations, such as when detailed data is required for the
research purpose (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Semi-structured interviews
are less formal than structured interviews. Whilst a structured interview is
standardized, semi-structured or in-depth interviews are non-standardized. In turn,
this contributes to collect richer data as this type of interview allows changing the
order of questions, as well as adding questions if a certain topic needs further
explanation (Ibid). Moreover, Bryman and Bell (2015) argued that the use of non-
standardized interviews allows theories and concepts to emerge from the collected
data. However, the competence of the interviewer grows more important in semi-
structured and in-depth interviews, as it could affect the quality of the data
21
(Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009) as well as the amount of data collected by
follow-up questions (Aborisade, 2013).
For the research purpose of this thesis, qualitative interviews were selected as the
source of empirical data to collect detailed answers. Furthermore, the interviews
were semi-structured in order to gather relevant information and thereby enable the
interviewers to follow up on interesting topics discussed during the meetings. The
interviews were audio-recorded in order to capture the data, which is common in
non-standardized interviewing (Aborisade, 2013; Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill,
2009).
3.4 Sampling
Sampling is an important factor to consider since all types of empirical research
require it (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Hence, it can be hard to manage
since there often is a large population suitable for the research (Bryman and Bell,
2015). Therefore, it is important to have clear objectives for the study in order to
know how large sample size that is required (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009).
However, scholars have identified two types of sampling techniques, probability and
non-probability sampling (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009; Bryman and Bell,
2015). Probability sampling is when the researcher uses random selection criteria,
meaning that all units of the population have the same probability of being selected.
Non-probability sampling on the other hand is when the researcher does not use a
random selection method, meaning that all units do not have an equal chance of
being chosen, since some are more relevant for the research (Bryman and Bell,
2015). This thesis aims to explore and understand the KA managers experience of
KAM teams, and therefore was the choice of following a non-probability sampling
made.
Further, when doing a qualitative research, the most common approach is to follow
the purposive sample selection (Bryman and Bell, 2015). The purposive sample
enhances the purpose of the research, and to approach participants in a strategic way
in order to access samples relevant to the research question (Ibid). A purposive
sample is considered as an effective approach as it allows the researcher to collect in-
depth information which contributes to a greater understanding of the problem.
However, it demands access to key informants relevant for the data collection (Suri,
2011). Since, this thesis aims to sample KA managers, the purposive sample seemed
to be appropriate, since it enables the research to collect data relevant for the
purpose. In addition, when conducting a purposeful sampling the chances of
obtaining data saturation increases (Ibid), hence, this was not possible to achieve as
the timeframe was limited. Furthermore, the research should not be generalized as
this method of sampling is selective (Bryman and Bell, 2015). Moreover, a self-
selection sample was obtained since it enabled the research to;
• firstly, contact samples relevant for the research, in this case KA managers
from different organizations;
• and secondly to collect data from the ones that responded (Saunders, Lewis
and Thornhill, 2009).
22
The chosen sample selections allowed the researchers to quickly collect information
from KA managers to address the purpose, and further to gather information in
regards to their experience of the KAM teams.
3.4.1 Respondent Validation
Respondent validation is considered being important in qualitative research since it
refers to the process of when the researchers present the participants of the research.
This is important to present due to the increased interest of receiving insights of
which samples that have been included in the research (Bryman and Bell, 2015).
Table 2 provides information about the interviews conducted in this thesis. Notably,
the KA managers’ names are referred to as KAM1 etc., as it was requested to be
anonymous. Further, the specific location of each interview is excluded as some of
the companies have few facilities in Sweden, and would therefore easily be revealed
if mentioned. As presented, the sample size was limited to five qualitative interviews
with five different KA managers (see table 2), as the thesis was conducted as a
bachelor thesis with a limited timeframe. Hence, in order to undertake an in-depth
analysis, a larger amount of empirical data could have had consequences on the
result, as all information would have been overwhelming to process. Three of the
interviews were held at the interviewees head offices, whilst two of the interview
were held via Skype. However, all authors were present at all interviews, two took
notes and one asked the questions. The notes were later used together with audio
recordings to transcribe the interviews.
Key
Account
Manager
Company
Overview
Type of
Interview
Date of
Interview
Years of
Employment
as KAM
Duration
(minutes)
KAM1 A B2B full service
provider
of everything for
offices/warehouses,
mainly in Sweden.
Face-to-
Face
25/4-2019 5 72
KAM2 A Swedish B2B
market leader in the
health food
industry.
Face-to-
Face
30/4-2019 3 47
KAM3 A B2B IT company
operating all over
Sweden.
Skype 3/5-2019 10 49
KAM4 A B2B company in
the chemical
industry based in
Sweden.
Face-to-
Face
10/5-2019 19 61
KAM5 A B2B IT company
operating all over
Sweden.
Skype 13/5-2019 15 60
23
Table 2: Interview Settings.
3.5 Ethical Principles
There is a wide range of ethical issues in business research and dilemmas that should
not be overseen (Bryman and Bell, 2015). However, in business research and
particularly student projects are the most apparent ethical principles discussed in
relation between researcher and participants. The following four principles are most
commonly applied; invasion of privacy, deception, harm to participants and lack
informed consent (Ibid). These principles will be further described in upcoming
sections, with a further explanation of how the principles were controlled in this
research.
3.5.1 Invasion of Privacy
This principle refers to the researcher’s responsibility not to invade the participant’s
privacy such as personal life and values (Bryman and Bell, 2015). In this research,
was this principle controlled by a careful consideration when developing the
interview, and not to ask sensitive questions. Also, at the beginning of the interviews,
the authors disclaimed to the participants that they did not have to answer questions
they considered being invasive of their privacy.
3.5.2 Deception
This principle refers to the researcher’s responsibility not to deceive the participants
by misleading the aim of the study to something other than it truly is (Bryman and
Bell, 2015). In this research, this principle was controlled by disclaiming the true aim
of the report in the interview guide, that all participants were provided prior to the
interviews. Additionally, the purpose of the participant’s contribution was discussed
both prior to and during the interviews.
3.5.3 Harm to Participants
This principle refers to the researcher’s responsibility to assess the physically or
emotionally harm that the participants are exposed to in the research (Bryman and
Bell, 2015). This principle was not considered relevant in this research. However, the
principle was controlled by considering the risk of harm and proceeding accordingly
to reduce it. Additionally, in order to reduce risk of emotional harm, all respondents
and companies were anonymous in the report.
3.5.4 Lack Informed Consent
This principle refers to the researcher’s responsibility to inform the participants of
what techniques that will be used during interviews, such as recording and ultimately
get the participants consent to include their statements in the research, either
anonymously or not (Bryman and Bell, 2015). In this research, was this principle
controlled by asking for consent to record the interview for transcribing purposes.
24
3.6 Data Analysis
As aforementioned, this thesis undertook a qualitative approach, including semi-
structured interviews in order to collect as in-depth and rich data as possible. Hence,
having in-depth interviews can be hard to manage due to the amount of data that is
collected during the interviews (Bryman and Bell, 2015). Saunders, Lewis and
Thornhill (2009) argued for the absence of having standardized procedures when
analyzing the data collected when doing qualitative studies. Hence, they identified
three different processes that the data could be grouped into:
• summarizing the data;
• categorizing/grouping the data;
• structuring using narrative (Ibid).
These processes were developed in order to ease the interpretation of the data
collected for the research, and the processes can both be used alone and in
combination with each other (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). The two first
mentioned processes will be more thoroughly described in upcoming sections, thus,
the last one will be excluded in this thesis. The ‘structuring using narrative’ is
described by Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009) as telling a story with having
“[…] a beginning, middle and end […]” (p. 497), hence, this thesis will categorize
the data, instead of structuring it as a story. Therefore, is the third process considered
being irrelevant for this research and therefore excluded (Ibid).
3.6.1 Summarizing of Data
When the interviews have been transcribed, it is suggested to produce a summary of
the most important findings, since some data could be irrelevant, and/or needs to be
compressed, which could be described as “[…] condensing the meaning of large
amounts of text into fewer words” (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009, p. 491).
The summarizing will also reveal themes that are of relevance to further explore
(Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). As aforementioned, this thesis collected data
through semi-structured interviews, which made it necessary to summarize and
exclude data not relevant for the purpose of the study. Hence, some questions went
out of topic, and including all data would therefore have made it both irrelevant and
too heavy.
3.6.2 Categorization of Data and Data Coding
In accordance to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009) there are two different
activities when categorizing data “[…] developing categories and, subsequently,
attaching these categories to meaningful chunks of data” (p. 492). The categories
could either be developed from the data collected, or from the theoretical framework,
and the main purpose of having categories is to develop codes and/or labels
(Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009). Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009) further
explained that “They provide you with an emergent structure that is relevant to your
research project to organise and analyse your data further” (p. 492). Also,
according to Basit (2003) coding helps to build the theory and provides an
understanding of the phenomenon from the collected data.
25
After the interviews, a large amount of data was collected and due to the opportunity
of providing open-ended answers, data coding or categorization seemed necessary in
order to manage it. In line with the literature, coding is considered being an
important aspect in data analysis of qualitative data collection, as it helps to organize
the gathered data which often is unstructured due to open-ended questions (Basit,
2003). Dividing the data into categories could therefore be an effective tool in order
to achieve structure which is important for the outcome (Ibid). The coding helped
unveil similarities and differences from the interviews and categorize the information
and thereby build theories from the data. The data gathered from the interviews were
categorized and presented according to the elements of the 7S.
3.6.2.1 Operationalization Scheme
Operationalization according to Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2009) is “[…] the
translation of concepts into tangible indicators of their existence” (p.597) which is
presented in the scheme below (table 3). In line with this, was the purpose of the
operationalization to translate and conceptualize the existing literature on KAM into
the 7S framework in order to develop somewhat more tangible elements.
Furthermore, developing tangible elements that could be translated into meaningful
questions in order to narrow down the focus of the interview (see Appendix A), and
to develop questions that could contribute to answering what is of most significance
for internal alignment and/or what elements that is the main cause for misalignment
within KAM teams. Hence, in order to indirectly explore what elements that are
considered being most crucial for internal alignment/misalignment within KAM
teams from the KA managers perspective were the research question divided into
several questions that aim to collectively answer the research question.
Concepts and
Interview
Questions
Reasoning Authors
Shared Value
(13, 14, 15, 16)
These questions relate to
the values and culture of
the team
Anisimova and Mavondo (2014);
Guenzi and Storbacka (2015);
Guesalaga and Johnston (2010);
Guesalaga et al. (2018); Håkansson,
Henjesand and Waluszewski (2004);
Homburg, Workman and Jensen
(2002); Nätti and Palo (2012); Ojasalo
(2001); Pardo et al. (2006); Workman, Homburg and Jensen (2003).
Style
(21, 22, 23)
These questions relate to
the overall leadership of
the team.
Guesalaga and Johnston (2010);
Homburg, Workman and Jensen
(2002); Jones et al. (2005); Pardo,
Ivens, and Wilson (2014); Pressey,
Gilchrist and Lenney (2014);
Storbacka (2012); Workman, Homburg
and Jensen (2003); Zupancic (2008).
26
Skills
(10, 11, 12)
These questions concern
the team’s capabilities. Mahlamäki, Rintamäki and Rajah
(2018); Zupancic (2008); Ryals and
Rogers (2007); Jones et al. (2005);
Homburg, Workman and Jensen
(2002).
Staff
(19, 20)
These questions concern
the employees of the
team.
Cova and Salle (2008); Davies, Brady
and Hobday (2007); Guesalaga et al.
(2018); Hakanen (2014); Jones et al. (2005); Ojasalo (2001); Workman,
Homburg and Jensen (2003).
Strategy
(4, 5, 6)
These questions refer to
the team’s and the
management's goals and
visions.
Davies, Brady and Hobday (2007);
Geiger and Guenzi (2009); Guesalaga
et al. (2018); Ivens et al. (2009);
McDonald, Millman and Rogers
(1997); Philippe Gosselin and André
Bauwen (2006); Storbacka (2012);
Workman, Homburg and Jensen
(2003).
Structure
(6, 7, 8, 9)
These questions refer to
the general structure of
the team and how well it
is organized.
Birkinshaw, Toulan, and Arnold
(2001); Guesalaga et al. (2018);
Ojasalo (2001); Ryals and Rogers
(2007); Workman, Homburg and
Jensen (2003); Zupancic (2008).
Systems
(17, 18)
These questions refer to
the systems and
processes that the team
applies.
Guenzi and Storbacka (2015);
Guesalaga and Johnston (2010); Lai
and Yang (2017); Malshe (2011);
Marcos-Cuevas et al. (2014); Pardo,
Ivens, and Wilson (2014); Reinartz,
Krafft and Hoyer (2004); Tzempelikos
and Gounaris (2015).
Internal
Alignment/Misalign
ment (based on the
7S elements)
(24a+b+c, 25)
These questions were
asked in order to see
what elements the KA
managers considered
being most important for internal alignment and
which that is the main
cause for misalignment.
Other questions
(1,2,3)
The first three
questions were asked to
get an understanding of
how the KAM teams
were formulated.
Table 3: Which questions that were askes and which authors that contributed to the
development of the questions.
27
In order to answer the research questions, a semi-structured interview was developed
based on the elements included in the 7S framework, and as seen in table 3, did the
authors develop questions from each ‘S’. Nonetheless, the authors also developed
questions on ‘internal alignment/misalignment’ and ‘other questions’. The questions
in regard to internal alignment/misalignment was also developed from the
operationalization of the 7S framework, as the authors were interested in what
elements that the KA managers considered being most important for internal
alignment, the main cause for misalignment, what element that is the main
contributor for effectiveness within a KAM program as well as if they considered
internal alignment to be important for KAM teams. In order to gain sufficient
knowledge, it is recommended to ask additional questions regarding the participants
to evaluate the validity of the answers (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2009),
therefore were ‘other questions’ developed to gain a general understanding of how
each team is formulated in their organization. The questions were further sent and
discussed with the first examiner, Dr. Tatiana Anisimova, as the authors lack the
expertise of how to formulate interview questions of academic standard. Thereafter,
interviews were held with KA managers from five different companies in order to
collect data about KAM’s experience of cross-functional teamwork. The application
of McKinsey’s 7S framework, allowed the interviews to explore alignment based on
an established framework, rather than exploring new elements in isolation from
previous research.
3.7 Quality Criteria
Bryman and Bell (2015) once described validity as it is “[…] concerned with the
integrity of the conclusions that are generated from a piece of research” (p. 50).
There has been some debate in whether validity is an appropriate term and if so, how
the term should be perceived in qualitative research (Bryman and Bell, 2015). As a
result, has the concept of validity in qualitative research been adopted in various
ways and described by terms such as quality and trustworthiness which could be
considered more appropriate since qualitative research generally cannot be validated
(Ibid). It could be considered difficult to validate the trustworthiness of qualitative
research since the validity and reliability is hard to justify (Shenton, 2004).
Nevertheless, scholars have argued for that a qualitative research could be validated
and replicated by four different quality criteria; credibility, transferability,
confirmability and dependability (Ibid), which will be more thoroughly described in
upcoming sections, as this study will apply quality criteria as a basis for validity.
3.7.1 Credibility
The credibility of a research project refers to the internal validity and is also seen as
the key criteria in order to ensure trustworthiness. The credibility refers to the
accuracy of the data and should seek to measure and test what is intended by the
study, one should answer the question of how consistent the findings are in
accordance to reality (Shenton, 2004). The internal validity of this thesis is rather
high since all processes have been provided, the interviews have been recorded as
well as the processes of the development of the interview guide. However, the
validity could also be seen as weak since only one person from each company was
interviewed. Hence, the authors of this thesis chose to take the stand of trusting the
28
participants, since they seemed to reveal both positive and negative aspects of their
organization. Nonetheless, the findings will not be generalized, due to the nature of
the study.
3.7.2 Transferability
Transferability in research refers to the study's external validity, if the findings could
be applied in another context and/or if the findings could be generalized (Shenton,
2004). The external validity is a rather weak measure in this report since it is a
qualitative research based on semi-structured interviews with only five KA
managers. However, since the purpose is to explore internal alignment within KAM
teams, the participants were considered of relevance since they are the ones which
coordinates the team, which further could support the applicability of the findings
somewhat.
3.7.3 Confirmability
The confirmability in research projects concerns the impartialness of the study, that
the finding does not include the author's own personal values (Shenton, 2004). Since
this research aims to explore a somewhat unexplored research area, specifically by
the application of a theoretical lens, the authors stayed unbiased of what results were
to be acquired which supports the conformability of this study. Additionally, all
interviews were developed by prior research of each element of the 7S model which
further support the conformability of this thesis, nonetheless, the authors are not
experts within the field, and someone that has more expertise could have interpreted
the theory differently which decreases the confirmability.
3.7.4 Dependability
According to Shenton (2004) the dependability of a research should address
“[…] techniques to show that, if the work were repeated, in the same
context, with the same methods and with the same participants,
similar results would be obtained” (p. 71).
Due to the nature of the study, dependability is difficult to establish. Nonetheless, in
accordance to Shenton (2004), does the study increase dependability if it could be
repeated, hence, this thesis has thoroughly explained all procedures, which makes it
possible for another researcher to repeat the work. However, another way to foster
dependability is by the use of external auditors (Bryman and Bell, 2015). This thesis
was written by the help and guidance through tutoring and seminars with the tutor,
Ph.D. Tomas Nilsson, and the examiners Ph.D. Tatiana Anisimova and Ph.D.
Richard Afriyie Owusu, who all have extensive knowledge and expertise in both
academic writing and the research area. Additionally, all interviews have been
recorded and transcribed to further establish dependability.
3.8 The Work Process
This thesis was written by three students, and during the writing process, has there
been a constant dialogue between the authors, in order to have everyone ‘on the same
page’. To achieve this, have the authors had daily communication, both via telephone
and meetups. This was decided upon before starting the thesis as the authors thought
29
it would be a good way to avoid misunderstandings as well as dividing the workload
equally. Despite the intense work progress, has the authors managed to keep a good
group dynamic. Hence, there has been some disagreements and conflicts during the
process, but when those emerged, did the authors try to solve them as soon as
possible by discussions until agreements were achieved.
Before starting the writing process, the authors met in order to discuss topics that
were of interest, and made research together in order to find something that was
relevant to research. Nonetheless, since the timeframe of finishing certain sections
were limited, the authors decided to divide the main responsibility of certain parts of
the thesis in order to manage the deadlines. Therefore, was Julia Weltman handed the
main responsibility to research what methods that seemed to be most appropriate for
the purpose of the thesis. Elias Johansson took responsibility upon collecting samples
and booking meetings in order to collect empirical data. Lastly, Charlotte Ramstedt
took the responsibility of starting with the theoretical framework and find relevant
sources. Furthermore, the first, fifth and sixth chapter did all authors have equal
responsibility over. Hence, all authors have contributed to each chapter, and when
the sections were finished, all authors went through them together in order to see if
something needed to be added, and also to get insight.
30
4 Empirical Data The fourth chapter presents the data collected from the semi-structured interviews.
All interviewees are anonymous, and will therefore be referred to as in table 2 found
in section 3.4.1. The data is first structured in accordance with the 7S framework and
then are two additional sections presented.
4.1 Shared Values
All participants agreed that company culture and shared values are important for
efficient KAM practice, KAM2 further explained that the organizational culture
creates loyalty towards the company. Furthermore, KAM1 described that their sales
methods are highly influenced by their shared values, as the company values
‘helpfulness’, which also is a goal by the team to be characterized by. Further,
KAM1 explained that their top-management encourage their KA managers to spend
as much time as possible visiting KA’s, in order to highlight their availability and
helpfulness. In addition, KAM4 stated that “[…] the company values show us in
what direction to work toward, and how we should work with each other, such as
delivering on commitment”. In extension, KAM5 described that the team has a
‘handbook’ with guidelines of how the team should work, which contributes to the
creation of shared values within their team. Nonetheless, KAM3 argued that it could
be useful for the team to have different values, and explained that “[…] useful
conflicts rather than complete aligned opinions can be beneficial for organizational
advancement […]”, meaning that team members with different opinions allow for
discussions, which further could contribute to the development of the organization.
In accordance with the findings, there has been a change in the value creation
process, whereof KAM1 explained that the collaboration between departments is
important today. Hence, both KAM1 and KAM2 explained that the KA managers do
not longer have to be experts in all areas, instead, can they utilize the expertise from
the appropriate departments when it is needed. KAM4 further suggested that KA
managers should have a holistic view over the company, in order to have insight into
the internal departments to know where to find the specific expertise. It was also
found that internal and external collaboration is of importance, which KAM4 further
explained:
“When we start a new project, we try to have an introductory meeting
together with the customers with all relevant functions from both
parties in order to build direct networks with each other”.
KAM3 also explained that the volume of external involvement in the value creation
process vary depending on company, where some are more dependent on the external
and internal collaboration, in order to solve the problems, often based on the
supplier’s competencies and the customer’s needs.
31
4.2 Style
The findings suggested that hierarchy in KAM teams differs depending on what
company one belong to, where KAM4 stated that he has a veto over the team, whilst
KAM1 does not. In addition, KAM5 explained that they have a rather flat
organization which enables fast decision making and effectiveness. However,
KAM1, KAM2 and KAM4, all mentioned that there is an agreement within the
KAM program, that the KA manager has the authority over contracts and economic
decisions connected to their KA’s. KAM1 further described his role as “I am more
or less a CEO over my own accounts, and over my portfolio. It is, therefore, my
responsibility to take decisions”. Nonetheless, when conflicts appear within the team
or if problems with retrieving information from other departments, all participants
interviewed explained that they try to solve the problem internally. Further, KAM1,
KAM3 and KAM4 mentioned that when the conflicts cannot be solved internally, the
top-management gets involved.
It was further found that the bonus systems vary depending on the organization,
hence, all interviewed KA managers explained that they have some sort of bonus
systems for reaching commercial goals. Nonetheless, no monetary bonuses for
individual KAM team achievements were described, thus, KAM3 argued that “we
earn money when the company is performing well”, meaning that the whole
organization is rewarded when the company is successful. However, KAM1 on the
other hand explained that they have different sales competitions with monetary
rewards to motivate members of the sales departments. KAM3 further explained that
all employees in their organization have a fixed salary, in order to eliminate gaps, he
further argued that this decreases the tensions between employees. The findings
further showed that the organizations not solely focus on the monetary motivating
factors, hence, KAM1 stressed that employees could be motivated by challenges,
KAM2 stressed that having clear goals for each quarter, and KAM3, KAM4 and
KAM5 suggested rewards such as celebrating through different activities. The
findings further suggested that some employees are motivated by meeting goals
whilst it could have the contrary effect on others, being unmotivated by the goals,
due to increased pressure. In line with this, KAM3 explained that they have no clear
turnover goals communicated to the team members due to lack of relevance and
stated: “[…] that is management problems”.
According to the findings, the internal training of the teams differ, both in regards to
volume and type. KAM1 and KAM5 stressed the importance of introduction and
joint visits to their customers and exchanging experiences, whilst KAM3 explained
that their employees attend conferences, have follow-ups (internal monthly meetings
to restate what they have learned), and exchange expertise from colleagues. Further,
KAM2 and KAM4 stressed that training is of high importance in order for the
company to stay updated, and explained that their employees are provided with
information when new processes or systems are implemented. Hence, KAM3
stressed the importance of training and highlighted that they need to improve the
educating procedures, for instance, educate the team when they are assigned a new
account in order to ease the process of managing it. Furthermore, it was found that
the KA managers need to stay updated of the market themselves, hence, different
32
methods were explained such as reading newsletters from companies, industry
magazines and have meetings with colleagues and customers.
4.3 Skills
The findings suggested different skills that are desirable when including members of
a KAM team. KAM3 stressed the importance to include employees that are solution
oriented, whilst KAM2 highlighted the importance of including members that have
the right core competencies in order to manage problem-solving. Hence, KAM5
argued for the importance of including the right competencies and explained that
they require certain certificates, which is received by education and examination at
the beginning of the employment. Moreover, intangible aspects of skills were found
to be important, emphasizing certain personality traits of the members. In
accordance, KAM1 stated that “In a team, you need persons that are both extroverts
and introverts in order to create diversity which contributes to developing the team”,
more specific he described that an antipole is beneficial to improve the performance,
as it creates depth by an alternate perspective in the problem-solving. Additionally,
KAM2 argued that “[…] disagreements can be beneficial for teams sometimes”, as it
contributes to a wider perspective. Creativity was further added by KAM4, as he
would like to see the company prioritize more time for creativity as it creates
interaction between the departments. KAM5 further added that it is important for
team members to be percipient and advisory towards the customers. Furthermore, it
was found that having a well-designed team enables the members to complement
each other. For instance, KAM4 explained that when presenting to a customer, the
KA manager contributes with the business perspective which is of interest for the
buying stakeholder, while the experts (i.e. research and development) provides
important details.
Hence, when discussing experienced weaknesses in the different KAM teams,
KAM2 and KAM3 mentioned that it is most commonly due to the different
departments having different priorities. KAM2 explained that goals tend to differ
between the departments, an example was provided by KAM3 which argued that
“[…] most of our employees come to us because they want to work with exciting
projects” and refers to that they might ignore the commercial perspective.
Furthermore, KAM4 argued that:
“Many of us salespersons think ‘good enough, let's do this’ whilst
research and development wants to authenticate and assure the
quality to nearly 100%, however, this is a question regarding the time
aspect, to achieve those last 10% is what really consumes time, and
that time is not available today”.
Hence, an aspect of how size affects the KA team was provided by KAM5, who
claimed that it could both have positive and negative effects on the work, as he
argued that a large company yields certain benefits in the marketplace, hence, it
makes the company slower and less flexible. In addition, he further argued that it
involves more bureaucracy which he considered to be a weakness as it decreases the
effectiveness and flexibility.
33
4.4 Staff
Within a team, it was found being important that the members complement each
other, as KAM1 explained that both practical knowledge and personality traits are of
significance. KAM1 further argued that a KAM team should be built by departments
throughout the supply chain, in order to easily access and exchange information and
he stated that “[…] it could for example, simplify the process to develop new
products which are adapted to the customers”. Furthermore, KAM 2 explained that
as their organization has grown larger, each members’ task has become more
specified, which has contributed to a higher level of core competencies. This could
further be explained by KAM5 which stressed the importance of having the ‘right
knowledge at the right time’, emphasizing that all members are necessary within a
KAM team, as they can support each other and access help from the relevant
colleagues when needed. Moreover, KAM3 suggested that the composition of a team
depends on the customer, that it is important to match the customer, both with
competence and personality. KAM4 further described that when adding new
members to the team, they always search for employees who are dedicated to their
role, or the company’s products, in addition to their core competencies.
4.5 Strategy
According to the findings, KAM programs could be costly for organizations in the
short-term. However, the findings also suggested that organizations have to accept
the short-term consequences (time and cost) in order to achieve both long-term
benefits and relationships. Accordingly, KAM1 argued that “The first-year
expectations should not be too high […]”, also KAM4 argued that “[…] it is
connected with many costs and resources in the beginning, without any certainty that
we will get through”. Therefore, was it suggested being vital for the KA manager to
coordinate between the two parties as their employees spend a lot of time with the
KA, KAM2 explained the KA manager’s role as working as a filter between the
internal and external organizations. However, it was also found that KAM entails
positive short-term aspects, as the KA manager is the person responsible for the
profitability and business perspective inside the KAM team. The findings further
suggested that this is beneficial for organizations as it insurances that the KA’s are
well managed, as KAM4 explained that it helps to maximize the business potential.
KAM5 further described KAM as a tool for helping the customer to solve problems
more proactively.
However, all participants believed that KAM is beneficial for the company, as the
organization strives to build strong relationships with its customers, making it harder
for them to change supplier. Accordingly, KAM1 argued that “[…] the strategic
priorities are to find, develop and create long-term relationships, as well as
dismantling unprofitable ones”. KAM3 further explained that the close relationships
enable more in-depth knowledge about the customers, such as their ambitions. This
further creates an understanding of their culture, which all is important information
when serving them. This goes in line with KAM4 who explained that “KAM’s goal
is to maximize customer satisfaction by adding more value to their products, which is
done by adding expertise, and this demands a team”. KAM2 further describes that a
long-term positive aspect of KAM is that strategic decisions that concern the account
34
could be taken rapidly as the KA manager handles their own accounts. However, it
was also suggested being important to constantly evaluate the company's KA, as
KAM3 explained that the accounts which not yield a good return on investment,
should be reconsidered.
4.6 Structure
There were some conflicting opinions concerning the importance of structure for
effective KAM practice in the findings of the thesis. KAM2, KAM4 and KAM5
described structure as essential for success whilst, KAM1, and KAM3 described it as
time-consuming and negative for the problem-solving process. Notably, KAM2,
KAM4 and KAM5, are in comparison to the other participants, all significantly
larger in size and operates globally to a greater extent. Further, KAM3 described
their KAM team as a ‘mini organization’ within the organization. The findings
suggest that goals within the organization vary depending on what department one
belongs to. KAM4 explained that the different departments are measured by its key
performance indicators (KPI) such as production measured in production costs whilst
the KA manager on sales. KAM3 described an example of conflicting goals
connected to employee turnover on one of their KA’s, where the software developers
in the team found the account unsatisfying to work with, however, the account was
profitable. KAM2 explained that this could affect KAM negative since the different
departments have their own priorities, he further explained that:
“In order to convince the departments to prioritize the KA, the KA
manager sometimes need to act as an internal salesperson, that sells
the task to the team members and provide an understanding of why it
is of importance”.
The findings also showed that all participants goal is to sell more and create
profitability, however, KAM1 stressed that it is important that the management is
aware of the increased workload that more sales generate. In addition, KAM1
stressed the importance of receiving support from the whole organization and that it
is therefore of significance for the KA manager to have knowledge about the entire
chain in order to avoid creating bottlenecks.
The findings showed that when conflicts occur within a team, it is most often solved
internally. However, in accordance to KAM1, KAM2 and KAM3, top-management
gets involved when the team has difficulties solving their problems internally. Hence,
KAM4 explained that “[…] there is an underlying understanding that the KA
manager takes the decisions, as they have the general responsibility for the result”.
KAM1 emphasized the importance of alignment within the KAM team, and not
having any personal disputes since it could have a negative effect on the practice and
the customer. KAM1 further explained that if there are personal conflicts or disputes
within the team that cannot be resolved, it is the top-managers’ responsibility to
remove one of them to another account. Hence, according to the findings, the
majority of decisions are taken by the KA manager, nevertheless, when extensive
decisions need to be made, it was shown that those are taken together with the top-
management. KAM4 further emphasizes the importance of taking decisions in
consensus together with the team and explained that:
35
“[…] if you really want people to work in the same direction you
should strive for some sort of consensus. Because when we eventually
are going to the customer it is not sustainable if the decision is
unanimous”.
The findings also showed that the KAM teams have regular meetings, every other
week or once per month in order to function smoothly. In some cases, as mentioned
by KAM3 and KAM5, the meetings are more informal and scheduled whenever
reconciliation is needed together with the customer.
4.7 Systems
The findings suggested that there is a range of important processes for KAM
effectiveness, since all participants described different ones. KAM2 argued in benefit
for the processes which manage the planning and developing KPI’s together with the
KA, whilst KAM3 argued for the measurement of customer satisfaction processes,
and KAM1 stated that the most important process is “[…] to know what it is that
makes everything work”. KAM4 described that their most important process is to
maintain a trusted supplier status from the customer, which is to deliver just in time
as well as having an environmental sustainable mindset. Hence, it was found that
some KA managers are unsatisfied with their processes.
KAM1 explained that their CRM system is ineffective and could be improved, as it is
important that the systems work in order to access detailed information about the
customers. KAM3 explained that shared spreadsheets are a frequently used system
throughout the organization, hence, they also have a CRM system, however, it is
only used by the KA managers. Nonetheless, it was also found that some systems are
working well, as KAM2, KAM4 and KAM5 argues that their enterprise systems
work properly and they are satisfied with the outcome of the system as it helps the
team and organization to work more effectively. Furthermore, it was found that all
participants use internal communication systems, such as email, Slack and Microsoft
Teams.
4.8 Internal Alignment
All participants interviewed agreed that collaboration internally and working towards
the same goals is important in order to achieve internal alignment in KAM. KAM3
and KAM4 argued that it is important to guide the organization with common goals
and information to achieve an effective KAM team, as all of the team members
might not share the interest of creating profitability. In line with this, KAM1 further
emphasized to find common denominators within the team as “[…] in the end you
are working for the company and they pay your salary”. KAM4 further explained
that he most commonly gathers the team and thoroughly present the new customer,
the goals connected to it as well as their challenges, and let each department discuss
how they could contribute. KAM4 further stated that “It gives a boost to the team to
have common goals” as well as increases the interaction between departments.
KAM5 also described the internal collaboration as the foundation for employees and
customers to thrive, he further argued that internally a company needs to support
each other, no matter what position one holds.
36
4.9 Dimensions for Internal Alignment in KAM
All participants argued that internal alignment is of importance. However, when
discussing what elements that were considered being most important for internal
alignment, different answers were given. KAM1, KAM2 and KAM4 all stressed the
importance of strategy. KAM1 further argued that strategy is the most important
element for internal alignment since it involves goals and visions about the present,
short-term and long-term future. Moreover, KAM1 further explained that he had
experienced an ambiguity related to what comes next when the annual objectives are
achieved, which he sees as a weakness and states that “we are not aware of the long-
term strategies in our organization” which he believes has a negative impact and
could be a cause for misalignments within his KA team. In addition, KAM4 added
that:
“In my opinion is strategy equals tactic, and tactic is crucial for
success. It is like a game of chess against our competitors, you might
have to sacrifice the peasant in order to get the runner”.
However, according to KAM3 was staff and structure most important for internal
alignment, since outspokenness contributes to improved performance. He further
explained that by having an internal structure that allows staff members to have
‘healthy conflicts’ does not only improve the overall performance but also the
collaboration, which is an indicator of internal alignment. Another dimension of
structure was presented by KAM5 who argued that structure is important for making
the company effective and enable growth. KAM4 and KAM5 argued for the
importance of shared values as an important element for reaching internal alignment,
as stated by KAM4 “Without shared values and culture you will not go far”.
Hence, KAM2, KAM3 and KAM5 argued for employees not having shared values is
a prominent cause for misalignment. According to KAM3, are most conflicts
initiated by personal differences and/or perspectives in such as values and cultures.
KAM2 expressed a similar thought, however, he appointed it to staff. KAM5 argued
that staff and shared values are connected and are a common reason for conflict, “It
is always the human who is the problem, because we have different values, each
person thinks differently”. Further, KAM1 and KAM2 suggested that structure and
style are the most common cause for internal misalignment. KAM4 agreed that style
affects the team, and emphasized the need for a ‘modern leadership’ where everyone
is allowed to share their thoughts. KAM4 further suggested strategy as a reason for
tensions in the teams, as it tends to center around creating profitability, and explained
that “Other departments can sometimes think that there is too much focus on
monetary aspects”.
All participants argued that the most important dimension for KAM effectiveness is
having a clear strategy. KAM3 described the importance of having clear objectives in
order to be effective in KAM as it provides the KAM team with knowledge of why
they are working, what they are working toward, and that knowledge allows the
KAM team to approach the problem more streamlined. KAM5 suggested strategy as
it “[…] breaks down the organization to the individual”. Moreover, style was
highlighted by KAM4 and KAM5, as leadership is central in KAM teams. KAM4
37
illustrated how the combination of structure and style impacts the effectiveness and
argued that “I see the structure as a platform/foundation, a solid platform/foundation
gives you the right conditions, but to succeed a good leadership style is needed”.
Lastly, KAM1 expressed that he believed that all dimensions are of importance for
KAM effectiveness.
38
5 Analysis The fifth chapter presents the analysis of the thesis, where the theory and results will
be connected. Also, this chapter will divide the first sections accordingly to the 7S
framework, with two additional sections, discussing the internal alignment and what
elements that are most important for a KAM team.
5.1 Shared Values to Reach Internal Alignment
The theory suggested that shared values and culture are important for KAM
programs (Anisimova and Mavondo, 2014; Nätti and Palo, 2012; Guenzi and
Storbacka, 2015), which is in line with the result, where all participants agreed upon
its significance. KAM2 further argued that it could contribute to higher loyalty
towards the company, which could be an effect from the employees feeling more
comfortable in their role within the organization (Ojasalo, 2001). Also, the shared
values should be developed from the company's vision and goals (Ibid), which
KAM4 explained that it provides guidelines to how they should work and how to
empower each other. However, in contrast, KAM3 explained that having different
values could develop the team, by contributing with new ideas. The results also
showed that working closely together has become more common, and also necessary,
as KAM1 and KAM2 agreed that a KAM team needs access to different expertise in
order to manage the KA, which indicated that not obtaining ‘esprit de corps’ within
the organization could have a negative effect on the buyer-seller relationship
(Guesalaga et al., 2018). Hence, having a common company culture and shared
values that are customer oriented was shown being important, as KAM1 explained
that their organizational values stresses ‘helpfulness’, where the team works closely
to its customers, which implies that the culture and values influence how the team
members execute their work tasks (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010; Homburg,
Workman and Jensen, 2002; Håkansson, Henjesand and Waluszewski, 2004;
Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). In addition, was it argued that esprit de
corps and the company culture could impact the effectiveness of KAM practice
(Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). KAM2 and KAM4 also confirmed the
change of creating value, that the creation of value in today's business world depend
on both the internal and external parties (Håkansson, Henjesand and Waluszewski,
2004; Pardo et al., 2006), which again stresses the importance of developing close
relationships with the customers, since the value creation cannot be developed
otherwise (Guesalaga et al., 2018). Nevertheless, KAM3 explained that some
accounts are more dependent on the collaboration than others, depending on what
industry, hence, it has been argued that developing close relationships eases the
process of exchanging information between the two parties (Workman, Homburg and
Jensen, 2003).
5.2 The Impact of Style for Internal Alignment
The theory suggested that internal alignment within KAM teams can be difficult to
manage due to the KA managers lack of hierarchical power (Homburg, Workman
and Jensen, 2002; Storbacka, 2012), in line with the results, KAM1 had no veto over
his team, solely the business agreements concerning his accounts, in contrast to
KAM4 who argued for having veto over his team members. Hence, this could be that
39
KAM4 might have more confidence which provides greater informal powers
(Homburg, Workman and Jensen, 2002). Nonetheless, when difficulties of managing
the internal alignment, KAM1, KAM2 and KAM4 explained that top-management
gets involved (Zupancic, 2008). KAM5, on the other hand, explained that they try to
keep their organization as ‘flat’ as possible, avoiding organizational hierarchy.
Hence, top-management involvement regarding the departmental coordination
seemed not to be the case of any of the interviewed KA managers (Pardo, Ivens, and
Wilson, 2014). Nevertheless, none of the KA managers interviewed seemed to have
full hierarchical power over its team and/or all of the decisions makings, which
indicates that there has to be some sort of top-management involvement as certain
decisions have to be taken by someone with authority to do so.
Jones et al. (2005) argued for the importance for KA manager to stay updated on the
market which also was confirmed by the findings. All participants explained that
they are kept updated by reading newsletters, industry magazines and exchanging
information with colleagues and customers etc., which confirms that KA managers
constantly have to be updated in order to satisfy their accounts. Jones et al. (2005)
further argued for the KA managers’ ability to commit the employees to the team, in
which all of the participants explained that they have bonus systems for reaching
commercial goals. Thus, KAM3 explained that the employees are rewarded when the
company perform well. Additionally, KAM3, KAM4 and KAM5 described that their
organizations often have shared rewards such as having team-based rewards, which
also have been suggested to be beneficial as it contributes to higher level of
collaboration efforts (Jones et al., 2005), which also KAM3, KAM4 and KAM5
confirmed as the goal. Other motivating factors was also mentioned, such as clear
objectives, targets and measures by KAM1 and KAM2 (Pressey, Gilchrist and
Lenney, 2014). In contrast to the literature, KAM3 argued that having clear
outspoken goals could pressure the team members, and therefore suggested that the
managers should be responsible for meeting the company's goals, in order to
decrease the pressure towards the members. Further, all participants interviewed
agreed that training is an important factor for the team, where both regular meetings
and informing the employees when new processes and systems are integrated was
given as examples. Nonetheless, KAM3 expressed the need for improvements with
the internal training (Jones et al., 2005), hence, it seemed like all participating
managers were aware of the degree of training that their organization provides for
their employees and where they could improve.
5.3 How Different Skills Could Affect Internal Alignment
KAM4 argued for the importance of having employees that have creativity skills
within the team, and KAM3 stressed the importance of having employees that are
solution oriented. Both aforementioned skills could be considered having employees
that ‘thinks outside the box’, which has been suggested to be an important
personality trait in literature, since it has shown being beneficial when managing
KA’s (Mahlamäki, Rintamäki and Rajah, 2018). Hence, KA managers have to
constantly develop their accounts, and improve their performance (Storbacka, 2012)
which KAM2 suggested could be managed by including different types of members
in the team, which not always agree upon everything, as this allows discussions
40
which further provides the team with a wider perspective. Also, KAM1 agreed that
having different ‘mindsets’ could be beneficial, but more in the problem-solving
context, he further argued that a team could benefit by including both introverts and
extroverts, as all kind of individuals are valuable to include in a team in order to
create the best value to its KA’s. This could further be an argument for why KAM
should be integrated in the organization, as it requires different resources and
competences, where KAM2 highlighted the importance to involve the right
competences to each KA in order to satisfy the customer needs (Jones et al., 2005;
Zupancic, 2008). Hence, KAM2, KAM3 and KAM4 all mentioned that when
aligning several departments, difficulties could appear since different departments
have different priorities. Further, KAM5 explained that managing KAM teams in
larger companies could be more difficult since they often are bureaucratic which
could create inefficiency and less flexibility. This could have a negative impact on
the buyer-seller relationship on the long-term, since the KA’s expect the KAM
program to improve their business performance which could be affected by
organization not being as flexible (i.e. in product adaptations) as required (Homburg,
Workman and Jensen, 2002; Storbacka, 2012). Nonetheless, all interviewed KA
managers argued in favor for organizational cross-functionality, as in line with the
literature, since a wide range of expertise is needed in order to serve the KA, and
provide additional activities to them. Hence, literature also suggested additional
activities in reference to provide more tangible services such as KAM5 stressed the
importance of advisory towards the customers (Homburg, Workman and Jensen,
2002; Jones et al., 2005).
5.4 Staff Members Impact on Internal Alignment
As already mentioned, does literature emphasize the need of aligning different
departments in order to successfully manage the KAM program, in line with this,
KAM1 argued that the KAM team should be built on different staff members from
the entire supply chain in order to ease the process of information exchange (Jones et
al., 2005; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). KAM2 also argued that including
different staff, with different core competencies are of importance when forming a
KAM team. Further, it seemed to be of importance to know which competencies that
should be included for each KA, as managing a KA is complex (Cova and Salle,
2008; Ojasalo, 2001). Hence, KAM5 emphasized having the right knowledge at the
right time (Ojasalo, 2001). This also indicates that designing the right team for a KA
could be a difficult task, since each team member has to contribute to the value
creation (Cova and Salle, 2008; Hakanen, 2014). Hence, the team should be formed
depending on each KA’s specific need, where KAM1 and KAM3 stressed the
importance of designing the team as it should match the KA, both in regard to
practical knowledge (i.e. industry) and personality traits (i.e. personal affections)
(Davies, Brady and Hobday, 2007). This shows that not only competencies are of
significance, but also the internal and external parties have to match on a personal
level. KAM1 further argued that the members within the team should complement
each other, which also confirms that different members are needed in order to
manage the relationship. KAM4 further emphasized the importance of having staff
members that are dedicated to their role, since the members’ main task is to improve
41
the KA’s results, the team have to include staff that brings enthusiasm to the team in
order to create value, both internally and externally (Hakanen, 2014).
5.5 Obtaining a Clear Strategy for Internal Alignment
According to the literature, is one of the utmost strategic challenges of KAM to
fulfill both short-term and long-term objectives (Davies, Brady and Hobday, 2007;
Geiger and Guenzi 2009; Ivens et al., 2009). According to the empirical findings, all
participants argued that KAM programs could be costly in the short-term. However,
in order to achieve the long-term benefits of KAM, is it suggested that organizations
have to accept the short-term consequences, such as time, in order to create long-
term relationships. In accordance, KAM1 added that first-year expectations should
not be too high. Therefore, the process of evaluating what accounts in the customer
portfolio that is of highest importance, since all customers do not contribute to a
return on investment, and should therefore not be considered as KA’s (Ivens et
al.,2009). However, according to KAM3, could the KAM program also entail
positive short-term aspects, such as a sense of security that the current accounts are
handled, and that the responsible persons assigned to those accounts are securing
both short- and long-term profitability.
According to KAM1, is the main strategic functions of KAM to strive for building a
strong relationship with the customers which further makes it harder for them to
change supplier, hence, to develop and create long-term relationships, as well as
dismantling unprofitable ones. However, all organizations have different selection
criteria when evaluating a potential KA, depending on size, strategy and sector
(Storbacka, 2012). In line with this, management has to consider the KA’s as
customers that can provide a potential to return the investments of the practice of the
relationship (McDonald, Millman and Rogers, 1997). Another strategic challenge in
KAM is related to the creation of customized value propositions (Philippe Gosselin
and André Bauwen, 2006). KAM2 described that in their organization, the KA
manager serves as a filter between the internal and external organization. Further,
according to KAM4, is a goal in KAM to maximize the customer satisfaction, adding
more value to the products, which could be done by providing expertise to help the
customers, which demands a team. In line with this, the literature suggests that, in
order to provide customized value, all team members have to be active in the value
creation process, hence, a need for a KA manager, in order to coordinate the
members and to achieve common goals (Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003).
5.6 How Structure Affects Internal Alignment
According to both the theoretical and empirical findings of this research, is an
organized structure crucial for aligning the members in a team (Birkinshaw, Toulan,
and Arnold, 2001; Guesalaga et al., 2018). Accordingly, the empirical findings
indicated that the impact of internal structure could depend on the size of the
organization. This was revealed by all participants’ various enthusiasm for the
impact of structure in KAM in relation to their internal organization. Having
different interpretations of the impact of structure can be caused by various factors
such as business model, size and orientation (Guesalaga et al., 2018; Ojasalo, 2001).
The findings further suggest that goals within an organization vary depending on
42
what department one belongs to. In line with this, an organized structure is highly
dependent on a company’s goals (Ojasalo, 2001). KAM4 described that the internal
departments have different goals which need to be organized within the teams, this
was further confirmed by KAM2 who described that including different goals within
a team assists the team in the process of prioritizing in decision making, and
selection of new customers. Accordingly, Ojasalo (2001) highlighted a need for
structure in organizations, since teams usually consist of multiple members with
diverse goals. This highlights the need for structure in KAM teams and that they
should be built on shared company goals. Therefore, does the level of structure
depends on the spread of goals within the KAM teams. Additionally, KAM1 further
described their KAM team as an independent organization within their organization
which also require structure in order to align internally within the team and
externally towards the rest of the organization.
In order to provide structure in KAM teams, the literature suggests that KA planning
is of essence (Guenzi and Storbacka, 2015). Birkinshaw, Toulan, and Arnold (2001)
once stressed the need of having well-developed procedures and policies in order to
manage the cross-functionality of the organization. This was supported by KAM4
who underlined the importance of taking decisions in consensus with the team, as it
is of significance to move all team members in the same direction within KAM.
Additionally, having set procedures and policies coordinating the team was shown
having a positive effect on providing value to the customers (Guesalaga et al., 2018).
Furthermore, did KAM1 highlight the importance of knowing each other’s
responsibilities within a team in order to coordinate the them, since most conflicts
tend to originate from personal disputes. KAM5 further supported this by explaining
that having set procedures and structures minimizes the risk of conflicts, which is of
significance, as conflicts can be both costly and time-consuming. Hence, the theory
suggested that having well-developed procedures within an organization, that
increases the organizational learning should be invested in, as it aligns the members
(Zupancic, 2008). KAM1 further supported this by explaining the importance of
having an underlying understanding of how to proceed if conflicts occur in order to
minimize the impact of the conflict on the organization and the customer.
5.7 Internal Alignment Through Systems
According to the literature, information sharing in KAM teams is of great
importance, as it enables the high expertise which is required to serve the KA’s
(Marcos-Cuevas et al., 2014). Furthermore, it is important for the internal alignment
since it prompts the communication internally (Guesalaga and Johnston, 2010;
Pardo, Ivens, and Wilson, 2014). The findings suggested that there is a range of
different processes that are important for KAM effectiveness. The internal processes
provide greater understanding between departments which also reduces the risk of
conflicts (Malshe, 2011). KAM2 argued that management and planning of KPI’s
together with the customer as their most important process. In line with this, having
shared processes contribute positively to the organization’s alignment, since it
enables the organization to work towards common goals more effectively by
adjusting to the customers need more rapidly (Reinartz, Krafft and Hoyer, 2004).
KAM3 and KAM4 highlighted the measurement of customer satisfaction as of most
43
importance. Accordingly, sharing information within the company increases the
source credibility, openness and accuracy of the information and it can also provide
alignment between the employees that are of importance for customer’s satisfaction
(Lai and Yang, 2017). KAM1 stated that the most important process is the evaluation
of past successes and failures. By sharing information within the organization has
shown having a positive relationship between KAM practices and its outcomes
which further could have a positive effect on the company's profits and increased
sales (Tzempelikos and Gounaris, 2015). Furthermore, the literature suggested that
information sharing platforms are of importance for KAM effectiveness (Guesalaga
and Johnston, 2010; Pardo, Ivens, and Wilson, 2014). This was confirmed by the
findings, where all participants described their application of various information
sharing systems in their KAM practise. However, all participants had variations of
internal communication systems.
Systems used in KAM should work as a coordination device which should ease the
process of other departments to commit to the team (Pardo, Ivens, and Wilson,
2014). The findings supported the importance of efficient information systems by
identifying that KAM 2, KAM3, KAM4 and KAM5 had functioning systems and
was further satisfied with the effectiveness of the systems. In contrast, KAM1 was
unsatisfied with both the system and its effectiveness. Additionally, performance
measurement systems should exist within KAM programs, since it enables the
organization to measure how well the company has met initial goals, which further
indicates what needs to be improved within the organization (Guenzi and Storbacka,
2015).
5.8 Managing Internal Alignment in KAM Teams
The literature argues that in order to create new solutions and value propositions for
customers, there is a need to utilize the resources and skills from the KAM team
(Guenzi and Storbacka, 2015). The purpose of the team is to support the KA
manager (Cova and Salle, 2008) which are responsible for coordinating both internal
and external activities (Pardo et al., 2006). This emphasizes the need for internal
collaboration within the KAM team, which also is mentioned as a factor to achieve
internal alignment in practice by all participated KA managers. KAM5 further
suggested that internal collaboration serves as the foundation for the well-being of
the employees as it could contribute with increased support towards each other, in
addition, theory further implied that organizational culture creates well-being in the
team (Ojasalo, 2001). Hence, this could be seen as an indication to build a strong
internal alignment and an organizational culture that strives to increase the
helpfulness and collaboration between employees, as it could be beneficial for the
organization.
Moreover, the nature of different perspectives connected to members within the team
has been pointed out as an obstacle for internal alignment (Guesalaga and Johnston,
2010). This is highlighted by both KAM3 and KAM4, that all departments do not
necessarily share the same interest to create strong profitability, which often is
coordinated by the KA manager. In accordance, KAM1 emphasized that common
denominators should be located instead. Leischnig et al. (2018) argued that the KAM
44
team needs to have the same goals in order to succeed with internal alignment and to
avoid misalignment between the different departments and these goals could, in turn,
be interpreted as the common denominator. The findings further presented a possible
solution in how to create goals that are of relevance for each function within the
team, as KAM4 described, by breaking down the overall goals of each account and
present the customers problems in a workshop environment. KAM4 further
explained that this contributes to increased interaction inside the team as an
interdepartmental discussion is created. To create relevant and similar goals within
KAM teams, this practice could be of high relevance as it increases the interaction
between the departments, allowing them to contribute in determining the goals, and
thereby possibly feel more committed. All of the goals would not per definition be
the same for all departments, but as everyone completes their own goals, could it
directly contribute to the final objective set by the KA manager and therefore restrain
the risk of misalignment mentioned in previous literature.
5.9 Elements that Foster Internal Alignment or Misalignment
The theory suggested that a KAM program is highly dependent on its internal
practices, which is done by employee participation, hence, internal alignment
(Pressey, Gilchrist and Lenney, 2014; Tzempelikos and Gounaris, 2015). In line with
this, the results revealed that all participants agreed that internal alignment is crucial
for a KAM program. Further in order to achieve internal alignment, KAM1, KAM2
and KAM4 suggested that strategy is an important factor, as KAM1 described that it
involves goals and visions, and KAM4 that it provides tactics crucial for success,
which is in line with the theory that stressed the importance of setting clear
objectives for the KAM team (Pressey, Gilchrist and Lenney, 2014). Nonetheless, the
literature also argued for including several departments within the organization in
order to provide value to the KA (Guesalaga et al., 2018; Salojärvi and Saarenketo,
2013; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003), hence, KAM3 argued for staff and
structure being most important for internal alignment within the team, as having an
internal structure that allows discussions between staff members, which could
improve both the performance and collaboration. Also, KAM5 argued for the
importance of structure, but in the context of the organization being able to work
more effectively which further contributes to the company growth. KAM4 and
KAM5 further suggested that shared values are important for the internal alignment,
which indicates that formalized KAM teams cannot provide exceptional value to its
KA without internal alignment (Guesalaga et al., 2018; Salojärvi and Saarenketo,
2013; Workman, Homburg and Jensen, 2003). Hence, in accordance with KAM2,
KAM3 and KAM5 which argued that misalignment occurs if not having shared
values.
KAM3 stressed that misalignment most commonly is due to differences in values,
cultures and managing difficult situations, KAM2 also agreed to this but referred to it
as staff, and KAM5 claimed that both shared values and staff are connected and is
the main cause for conflicts, hence, misalignment. Furthermore, KAM1 and KAM2
emphasized that structure and style are the main reasons for misalignment, and
KAM1 also argued that strategy could be a reason. Hence, KAM4 agreed upon both
style and strategy as being reasons for misalignment. With these results, a conclusion
45
cannot be drawn upon which elements that are most commonly the cause for
misalignment, since it appears to be dependent on the KA managers’ perception and
organization. Hence, the conclusion could be made that it must be a complex task to
manage, design and form a KAM team, since the only elements that were excluded
as causes for misalignment were ‘systems’ and ‘skills’, which makes most of the
elements crucial for successfully aligning the organization (Salojärvi and Saarenketo,
2013; Storbacka, 2012). Nonetheless, the findings revealed that having poorly
functioning information systems is important for internal alignment and that the
different skills often contribute to conflicts based on different priorities within the
organization, which therefore could indirectly be explained as indicators for
misalignment.
In regards to achieving an effective KAM program, all but one (KAM4) of the
participants agreed that having a clear strategy is of most importance. As argued by
KAM3, it provides clear objectives of why and how the team pursues their work as
they do, which further gives guidelines on how to manage potential problems. Since
the KAM teams also are in charge of developing the sales strategy for their accounts,
this could contribute to a more consistent way of developing those (Salojärvi and
Saarenketo, 2013). KAM5 further argued in benefit of the strategy as it breaks down
the organization and its goals to the individual, and as the literature suggested, that
the KAM program could be seen as an ‘organization within the organization’, this
could be beneficial for the company as the team has clear objectives to work from
(Brehmer and Rehme, 2009). Further, was style suggested as an important element
for KAM effectiveness, since the leadership is central and important in KAM teams.
As Guenzi, Pardo and Georges (2007) argued for the KA managers’ role is to build
the bridge between its own company and its customers, and could therefore be seen
as a central factor for the success of a KAM program.
46
6 Conclusions and Implications The sixth chapter presents the conclusions and implications of this thesis. It starts by
restating the purpose and research questions provided in the first chapter, which is
followed by a section that answers the research questions. Then theoretical,
managerial, societal and policy implications are presented. This is followed with
providing the limitations of the thesis. The chapter ends with suggestions for further
research avenues based on the findings of this thesis.
6.1 Conclusion
Regardless of what form a KAM program has, cross-functionality is crucial to gain
KAM benefits, such as long-term relationships. In cross-functional teams, such as
KAM teams, is internal alignment central in order to be effective and to reach
common objectives. Similarly, internal alignment is central in order to create a
coherent experience within a KAM team. However, when researching the topic, little
research was found in regard to the role of internal alignment within KAM which
spurred an interest in researching the following questions;
RQ 1: What contributes to internal alignment within KAM teams?
RQ 2: How does misalignment within KAM teams emerge?
In order to explore this, a theoretical framework was conducted by applying the 7S
framework as a theoretical lens since it is considered being an applicable tool for
analyzing internal alignment within B2B organizations. The 7S framework was
therefore used as a basis for the exploration of internal alignment in KAM teams
rather than B2B organizations in its entirety. Based on the theoretical framework,
empirical data was collected by qualitative semi-structured interviews with five KA
managers.
6.1.1 Answering the Research Questions
The findings of this report clearly suggest that internal alignment is central in KAM
and KAM teams. This suggestion is grounded on the in-depth analysis of the
different elements of an organization presented in previous chapters of the thesis. In
order to get a holistic view on the role of internal alignment in KAM, an inside-out
approach was applied by studying the core of the microenvironment, namely the KA
manager and their surrounding team. The elements studied in this thesis (7S) were
chosen due to the diversity of aspects that they represent in an organization, which
assesses its overall strengths and weaknesses. This was found relevant according to
both the empirical and theoretical findings since KAM was portrayed as an
independent unit of B2B organizations. However, in contrast to the previous
application of the elements, they were in this thesis, studied in relation to its impact
on internal alignment. Therefore, by studying each element independently, it could
be claimed that it provides a holistic view of the role of internal alignment in KAM
since all elements presented, collectively represent a wide range of aspects of the
phenomenon.
Having shared values was found being of significance in order to achieve internal
alignment in KAM teams, as well as being the main source for misalignment. The
central reason for the importance of having shared values in KAM teams is due to the
47
nature of team dynamics, expressly multiple members with different perspectives
with the ambition of achieving mutual agreements. In order to accomplish such
agreements, the members have to collaborate and sometimes compromise in order to
take decisions that are of best interest for the entirety of the team. However, it was
found that most disputes are based on personal matters such as different cultural
perspectives and values, which emphasizes the need for a strong corporate culture
that guides the teams in regards to what their interests are. In accordance with our
findings, it was also discovered that the style of a KAM team varies depending on
the organization, whereof some KA managers have more authority over its team than
others. Furthermore, it was found being important for the KA managers to both find
ways to motivate its team members as well as staying updated on the KA’s industry.
Nonetheless, style did not stand out for being the most important reason for internal
alignment. Hence, it was found that style was one of the major reasons for
misalignment within KAM teams, as it was stressed that KAM cannot be managed
well without good leadership. Furthermore, style was considered being a major cause
for the effectiveness of KAM teams, as for the same reason as it was a cause for
misalignment, that a good leadership is needed in order for the KAM team to work
effectively, the leadership is needed to align the team in order to manage both the
internal and external parties. Hence, even though style was not considered being
most crucial for internal alignment, one could argue that it is indirect highly
important for achieving internal alignment within a KAM team. In regard to the
skills of a KAM team, did the findings suggest that it can impact the alignment
within the team since the range of skills in a team comprise its competence which
can facilitate the process of decision making and value provision. However,
unavoidably does a range of skills also provide causes for misalignments due to the
fact that different skills are often derived from dissimilar backgrounds. As a result of
multiple members of different backgrounds is that it is usually affiliated with
different perspectives. Therefore, it is important for the success of a KAM team to
have a spread of specialized tangible skills, however, in order to avoid misalignment
is it of importance to ensure that all members have common intangible skills, such as
flexibility. According to the findings, internal alignment in a KAM teams are also
impacted by staff. In contrast to the skills of a team, does staff also entail additional
personal attributes such as personality. Such attributes were found being of
significance since it is important that there is a match on both an organizational and a
personal level between the internal and external parties. Likewise, can poor
characteristics lead to a mismatch which can cause misalignments to arise in KAM
teams. Therefore, should personal attributes of individual staff members be evaluated
especially in the development of a team.
Furthermore, having a clear strategy was according to the findings of great
importance for internal alignment since it guides the KAM team in the direction to
achieve the long-term objectives set by the team and the top-management. The
findings revealed that in order to create value, all actors have to be active, which
contributes to a spread of perceptions of value within the team which can be a cause
for misalignment. Therefore, is a clear strategy needed in order to know what
objectives should be prioritized over others for achieving the overall objective of the
organization. This also contributes to the common direction of the team which
48
strengthens the internal alignment. In contrast, systems was not considered being a
crucial element, as it was excluded as a main cause for internal
alignment/misalignment. Further, it was not considered being the most crucial factor
for KAM effectiveness neither. Nonetheless, even if systems were neglected as the
main cause for internal alignment within KAM teams, the findings revealed that it is
of high importance, as it is the systems that hold all important information needed for
the team to serve the KA’s. Hence, systems contribute to the internal alignment of
the team. The findings further suggest that structure is one of the most impactful
elements of internal alignment in KAM teams. The reasoning for the essence of
structure again derives from the nature of teams. Hence, organizations and teams
need to have an organized structure in order to align multiple members of a team.
However, the findings also suggested that structures contain certain drawbacks in
regard to flexibility in teams which is specifically needed in KAM to provide
customized solutions which could be a cause for misalignment. Additionally, the
findings also suggested that the level of structure needed may depend on factors such
as size which suggests that organizations have to evaluate their needs in the
development of a specific structure.
With this, did the findings of this report clearly suggest that internal alignment is
central in KAM and KAM teams. However, in the process of categorizing the
theoretical and empirical data, a comprehension was made that the elements applied
in this research are dependent on each other, meaning that when one element is
strengthened, other elements are compromised (i.e. when structure is emphasized,
skills are comprised, as strict structure decreases the space for creativity). Thus, the
answers to the research questions in regards to cause for internal alignment and
misalignment are highly related and will therefore be answered collectively. One of
the main contributors to internal alignment is the development of common goals.
This process is of importance, due to the complexity of aligning a range of team
members with different perceptions of value and the corporate culture. The findings
suggest that in order to create shared values internally, it is of importance to have
clearly stated guidelines and objectives based on the company values. Having shared
values does in some sense improve internal alignment and KAM efficiency since less
conflicts occur in regard to personal disputes. However, from a strategic perspective
could such conflicts enhance innovation and in turn improve KAM performance, this
could also be a cause for conflicts and in turn misalignment. Additionally, another
way to enhance shared values from a structural perspective is to reward the team
collectively rather than based on individual performance since that can cause
misalignment due to the pressure it puts on the staff members of the team. According
to the findings of this study, is misalignment most often caused due to personal
disputes. This is problematic since, in order to provide value, a wide range of
competence is needed and that often requires multiple members with different
personality traits. In order to align multiple members of a KAM team, it is of essence
that the members are flexible and open to change in order to fulfill the common goals
of the team which also improves the value creation process. Additionally, one of the
main challenges from a strategic perspective is to align the goals of the KAM team
with those of the overall organization which further emphasizes the need for
49
flexibility of the team to align with rest of the organization. The findings suggest that
in order to achieve such alignment, clear organizational objectives are necessary.
The findings, in regard to the importance of structure are somewhat conflicting. On
the one hand, is structure of great essence in order to ‘remove’ misalignment from
organizations prone to it such as large companies. However, a consequence of
structure in KAM is the lack of innovation which is needed to provide customized
solutions and value propositions. The findings suggest that the internal authority
model affects the internal alignment of a KAM team, since both a lack and excess of
authority within the team seems to be a cause for misalignment. Therefore, can it be
assumed, based on the findings, that the best authority model is a balanced one that
involves top-management when necessary. Such a model allows the KA manager to
coordinate the team and provides guidelines for how decisions should be made
and/or whom that has authority for certain decisions in order to increase the teams’
efficiency, as it could reduce the risk of misalignment. Lastly, the findings suggested
that having efficient systems and processes can improve internal alignment since it
provides the team members with a platform to get insights, such as progress,
guidelines and other account specific sources of information that is needed to
perform KAM practice. Additionally, effective systems could serve as an indirect
contributor for internal alignment since it minimizes personal interactions, which
according to the findings is one of the main sources for misalignment. However,
inefficient systems and processes are also a source of misalignment.
6.2 Theoretical Implications
This thesis has focused on internal alignment within KAM teams and why
misalignment could emerge. The main conclusion that could be drawn, based on the
findings, is that internal alignment is not a target state, it is rather a measure of
progress. This is based on the finding that the elements studied in the report are
heavily dependent on each other in the progress of achieving internal alignment in
KAM teams. Accordingly, the findings suggest that all elements that do contribute to
internal alignment also entail cause for misalignment. Further, in order to improve
internal alignment, it is of importance to analyze the current state of internal
alignment and take actions thereafter with the notion that misalignment can emerge
accordingly. Therefore, could a continuous internal analysis of the current state of
alignment of the KAM team be beneficial in order to improve KAM performance
since internal alignment is of great importance for KAM effectiveness. Hence, a
revised conceptual framework was developed, suggesting how an organization could
evaluate the current state of internal alignment within KAM, and how they could
achieve internal alignment within the teams (see figure 2). Such a framework has not
been provided before this study, which as a result extended the literature on KAM.
As the findings showed that internal alignment within KAM teams are highly
important in order to successfully manage the KAM programs, and therefore, could
this model become useful when there is a need for evaluating the current state of
internal alignment within KAM teams.
50
Figure 2: Revised Conceptual Framework (Source: own model).
Figure 2 suggests that KAM and KAM teams could have two different outcomes
depending on the 7S elements, either they reach internal alignment or internal
misalignment. Hence, a KAM team should always strive to be internally aligned and
therefore, the importance of analyzing the state of alignment. If the team would fail
in one, or more elements, leading them towards internal misalignment, the model
suggests that they should go back to the seven elements and analyze which one that
could be the cause for misalignment. This should be done in order to discover the
cause for misalignment, which further reveals what necessary changes that needs to
be done to improve the alignment within the team. By constantly evaluating and
analyzing the state of alignment, will according to our model, eventually lead to
internal alignment. Hence, as our findings also suggest, that internal alignment is not
a target state, it is rather a measure of progress, we claim that even though a KAM
team would reach internal alignment today, internal misalignment could be caused
tomorrow if one or more elements would be neglected. Thus, the elements should be
re-evaluated in order to find what elements that caused the misalignment.
6.3 Managerial Implications
The findings highlighted that internal alignment is highly dependent on the internal
collaboration. Therefore, is one implication that the top-management should aim to
create a company culture which is characterized by supporting the colleagues to
increase the internal collaboration within the organization. Furthermore, it was found
that conflicting goals, and prioritizing differently amongst departments are a
common issue. Therefore, should the KA manager, try to involve the team in the
early stages, present customers and their problems, let the members get to know the
KA as well as the goals connected to it. This could be achieved by workshops in
which the KA manager lecture the employees about their KA’s. This can be
beneficial since it could encourage the employees to interact with other departments
to create solutions and increase commitment to the common goals. Another
suggestion could be that the top-managers and KA managers should constantly
evaluate the state of internal alignment and also be aware of why misalignment
emerge in order to create an effective organization, which we suggest could be done
by using our revised conceptual framework in order to build a solid KA team. In
51
accordance with our findings, were all elements shown being relevant for achieving
internal alignment. Furthermore, they could also be used to identify problems that
could lead to misalignment inside the team constellations, and thereby ensure that the
efforts are relevant. Furthermore, the internal alignment is, as aforementioned, a
process which constantly needs to be developed, and therefore constantly analyzed in
order to successfully manage the KAM program within the organization. Hence, as
the internal alignment was considered being important for a successful KAM
program, it is suggested that the organizations should put more focus on the activity
as it could provide long-term benefits for the organization.
6.4 Societal and Policy Implications
One implication of this thesis that deserves consideration because it can potentially
provide policymakers with a new way of thinking in regards to internal alignment but
also misalignment. Although, internal alignment was found being of importance for
efficiency and performance in KAM, did the findings also suggest that misalignment
can provide a certain extent of value to a company, especially in the innovation
process of customized value propositions which is of importance for enterprises and
overall business innovation. This new way of thinking is based on the main
conclusion of this thesis, that internal alignment is a measure of progress that should,
according to this study, be a continuous process because exclusions of causes of
misalignment can deprive innovation in KAM teams. Accordingly, if policymakers
were to consider this in regards to KAM and KAM teams, more autonomy could be
provided to teams. However, this attention by policymakers could also be applied in
other business units in order to improve innovation which could positively impact
business performance. Additionally, having a systematic approach of improving
alignment is of benefit for various teams that have to take consensus decisions such
as management teams, governmental teams and other teams of the business
environment.
Further, the findings showed that internal alignment has an increased effect on the
teams’ collaboration between departments, and in order to achieve this, it was found
being important to have clear objectives and goals communicated to the team
members in order to increase their motivation. Thus, the findings further showed that
communicating goals and objectives could have the opposite effect, particularly that
the team members feel pressured to reach those goals which have a negative impact
on the team members’ well-being. This is a contribution to the society to consider, as
this finding could be applied to other businesses and teams, and not only KAM
teams. Developing business environments that take care of its employees are
important, as aforementioned, it has an impact on the individuals’ well-being and if
the organization does not take care of its employees, it could further affect the
‘employee turnover’ negatively. In the long-term could business performance be
compromised as a substantial employee turnover could contribute to instability
within an organization. An unstable organization could potentially compromise the
work environment which eventually could lead to occupational burnout amongst the
employees, developed from factors such as pressure from managers. Moreover, this
could culminate in employees being on long-term sick leaves which, in turn, is an
52
expense for the society. Hence, the need for constant work on the internal alignment
within businesses, as a good society is built on individuals that are healthy.
6.5 Limitations
This thesis was conducted within a limited timeframe which contributed to
limitations of data collection, as it would not be possible to analyze a larger amount.
Therefore, was it also hard to achieve a data saturation with the number of
interviews, which could have provided the thesis with more accurate insights of the
research area. A longer timeframe would have enabled the authors to include a larger
sample, both in number and geographically. As of now, the participating KA
managers all are stationed in Sweden, therefore our findings might not be applicable
in other countries and cultures. Also, to have in mind is that all interviews were not
conducted in the same setting. Two of the interviews were conducted via Skype
whilst three were face-to-face. However, in this case, did it not impact the empirical
data negatively according to the authors opinion, but it is still notable that this was
under considerations and all interviews would have been conducted face-to-face if
possible.
6.6 Suggestions for Further Research
As this study was a bachelor thesis and written with a constricted time frame, it
would be interesting to further research the subject. One suggestion for further
research could be to obtain quantitative correlation studies on internal alignment
within KAM teams, investigating if there is an interrelationship between internal
alignment/misalignment and business performance. Another suggestion for further
research could be to conduct a quantitative study to test the suggested framework, by
having a larger sample which could achieve generalization of what element that
seems to be most crucial for alignment and misalignment.
Furthermore, doing a multiple case study could be of interest in order to collect data
from all team members, which could provide a more accurate result of how the team
actually work, not only taking the KA managers perspective. Another case study that
would be of interest to further research, is to compare companies that both work with
KAM programs and those which do not, contributing with comparison if the internal
alignment is better accessed in an organization with a KAM program. Also, doing a
longitudinal study could be of interest, to follow a team during a certain time period
in order to observe how they work within the team.
53
References Aborisade, O .P. (2013). Data Collection and New Technology. International Journal
of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 8 (2), 48-52.
Anisimova, T. and Mavondo, F. (2014). Aligning Company and Dealer Perspectives in
Corporate Branding: Implications for Dealer Satisfaction and Commitment.
Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 21(1), pp.35-56.
Basit, T. (2003). Manual or electronic? The role of coding in qualitative data analysis.
Educational Research, 45(2), pp.143-154.
Biemans, W., Makovec Brenčič, M. and Malshe, A. (2010). Marketing–sales interface
configurations in B2B firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(2), pp.183-
194.
Biggart, N. and Delbridge, R. (2004). Systems of Exchange. Academy of Management
Review, 29(1), pp.28-49.
Birkinshaw, J., Toulan, O., & Arnold, D. (2001). Global Account Management in
Multinational Corporations: Theory and Evidence. Journal Of International
Business Studies, 32(2), pp.231-248.
Blois, K. (2003). Using value equations to analyse exchanges. Marketing Intelligence
& Planning, 21(1), pp.16-22.
Brehmer, P. and Rehme, J. (2009). Proactive and reactive: drivers for key account
management programmes. European Journal of Marketing, 43(7/8), pp.961-984.
Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2015). Business research methods. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford
Univ. Press.
Colletti, J. and Tubridy, G. (1987). Effective major account sales management. journal
of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 7(2), pp.1-10.
Cova, B. and Salle, R. (2008). Marketing solutions in accordance with the S-D logic:
Co-creating value with customer network actors. Industrial Marketing
Management, 37(3), pp.270-277.
Creswell, J. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. 4th ed. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Davies, A., Brady, T. and Hobday, M. (2007). Organizing for solutions: Systems seller
vs. systems integrator. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(2), pp.183-193.
Dewsnap, B. and Jobber, D. (2009). An exploratory study of sales‐marketing
integrative devices. European Journal of Marketing, 43(7/8), pp.985-1007.
54
Geiger, S. and Guenzi, P. (2009). The sales function in the twenty‐first century: where
are we and where do we go from here?. European Journal of Marketing, 43(7/8),
pp.873-889.
Guenzi, P. and Storbacka, K. (2015). The organizational implications of implementing
key account management: A case-based examination. Industrial Marketing
Management, 45, pp.84-97.
Guenzi, P., Pardo, C. and Georges, L. (2007). Relational selling strategy and key
account managers' relational behaviors: An exploratory study. Industrial
Marketing Management, 36(1), pp.121-133.
Guesalaga, R., Gabrielsson, M., Rogers, B., Ryals, L. and Marcos Cuevas, J. (2018).
Which resources and capabilities underpin strategic key account management?.
Industrial Marketing Management, 75, pp.160-172.
Guesalaga, R. and Johnston, W. (2010). What's next in key account management
research? Building the bridge between the academic literature and the
practitioners' priorities. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(7), pp.1063-1068.
Hakanen, T. (2014). Co-creating integrated solutions within business networks: The
KAM team as knowledge integrator. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(7),
pp.1195-1203.
Harzing, A. (2018). Journal Quality List. [online] Harzing.com. Available at:
https://harzing.com/resources/journal-quality-list [Accessed 8 Apr. 2019].
Hitt, W. (1995). The learning organization: some reflections on organizational renewal.
Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 16(8), pp.17-25.
Homburg, C., Workman, J. and Jensen, O. (2000). Fundamental Changes in Marketing
Organization: The Movement toward a Customer-Focused Organizational
Structure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(4), pp.459-478.
Homburg, C., Workman, J. and Jensen, O. (2002). A Configurational Perspective on
Key Account Management. Journal of Marketing, 66(2), pp.38-60.
Håkansson, H., Henjesand, L. and Waluszewski, A. (2004). Rethinking Marketing.
IMP Group, pp.1-14.
Ivens, B. and Pardo C. (2016). Managerial implications of research on inter-
organizational interfaces. IMP Journal, 10(1), pp.25-49.
Ivens, B., Pardo, C., Niersbach, B. and Leischnig, A. (2016). Firm-internal key account
management networks: Framework, case study, avenues for future research.
Industrial Marketing Management, 58, pp.102-113.
55
Ivens, B., Pardo, C., Salle, R. and Cova, B. (2009). Relationship keyness: The
underlying concept for different forms of key relationship management.
Industrial Marketing Management, 38(5), pp.513-519.
Jones, E., Roberts, J. and Chonko, L. (2000). Motivating Sales Entrepreneurs to
Change: A Conceptual Framework of Factors Leading to Successful Change
Management Initiatives in Sales Organizations. Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, 8(2), pp.37-49.
Jones, E., Dixon, A., Chonko, L. and Cannon, J. (2005). Key Accounts and Team
Selling: A Review, Framework, and Research Agenda. Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 25(2), pp.181–198.
Kotler, P., Rackham, N. and Krishnaswamy, S. (2006). Ending the war between sales
and marketing. Harvard Business Review, 84, pp.68–78.
Lai, C. and Yang, Y. (2017). The role of formal information sharing in key account
team effectiveness: does informal control matter and when. Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 37(4), pp.313-331.
Leischnig, A., Ivens, B., Niersbach, B. and Pardo, C. (2018). Mind the gap: A process
model for diagnosing barriers to key account management implementation.
Industrial Marketing Management, 70, pp.58-67.
Mahlamäki, T., Rintamäki, T. and Rajah, E. (2018). The role of personality and
motivation on key account manager job performance. Industrial Marketing
Management. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.11.013
[Accessed 29 Apr. 2019].
Malshe, A. (2011). An exploration of key connections within sales‐marketing interface.
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(1), pp.45-57.
Marcos-Cuevas, J., Nätti, S., Palo, T. and Ryals, L. (2014). Implementing key account
management: Intraorganizational practices and associated dilemmas. Industrial
Marketing Management, 43(7), pp.1216-1224.
McDonald, M., Millman, T. and Rogers, B. (1997). Key account management: Theory,
practice and challenges. Journal of Marketing Management, 13(8), pp.737-757.
McDonald M., Wilson K. (1989). Processual issues in key account management.
Underpinning the customer-facing organization. Journal of Business and
Industrial Marketing, 14(4), pp. 328-337.
Moncrief, W. and Marshall, G. (2005). The evolution of the seven steps of selling.
Industrial Marketing Management, 34(1), pp.13-22.
56
Nätti, S. and Palo, T. (2012). Key account management in business-to-business expert
organisations: an exploratory study on the implementation process. Service
Industries Journal, 32(11), pp.1837-1852.
Ojasalo, J. (2001). Key account management at company and individual levels in
business‐to‐business relationships. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,
16(3), pp.199-220.
Pardo, C., Henneberg, S., Mouzas, S., & Naudè, P. (2006). Unpicking the meaning of
value in key account management. European Journal Of Marketing, 40(11/12),
1360-1374.
Pardo, C., Ivens, B. and Wilson, K. (2013). Assessing and strengthening internal
alignment of new marketing units: An interpretative tool. Industrial Marketing
Management, 42(7), pp.1074-1082.
Pardo, C., Ivens, B. and Wilson, K. (2014). Differentiation and alignment in KAM
implementation. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(7), pp.1136-1145.
Philippe Gosselin, D. and André Bauwen, G. (2006). Strategic account management:
customer value creation through customer alignment. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing, 21(6), pp.376-385.
Pressey, A., Gilchrist, A. and Lenney, P. (2014). Sales and marketing resistance to Key
Account Management implementation: An ethnographic investigation. Industrial
Marketing Management, 43(7), pp.1157-1171.
Reinartz, W., Krafft, M. and Hoyer, W. (2004). The Customer Relationship
Management Process: Its Measurement and Impact on Performance. Journal of
Marketing Research, 41(3), pp.293-305.
Ryals, L. and Rogers, B. (2007). Key account planning: benefits, barriers and best
practice. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 15(2-3), pp.209-222.
Salojärvi, H. and Saarenketo, S. (2013). The effect of teams on customer knowledge
processing, esprit de corps and account performance in international key account
management. European Journal of Marketing, 47(5/6), pp.987-1005.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business
students. 5th ed. [ebook] Pearson Education. Available at: Google.com [Accessed
21 Apr. 2019].
Shenton, A. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research
projects. Education for Information, 22(2), pp.63-75.
57
Storbacka, K. (2012). Strategic account management programs: alignment of design
elements and management practices. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,
27(4), pp.259-274.
Storbacka, K., Polsa, P. and Sääksjärvi, M. (2011). Management Practices in Solution
Sales—A Multilevel and Cross-Functional Framework. Journal of Personal
Selling & Sales Management, 31(1), pp.35-54.
Suri, H. (2011). Purposeful Sampling in Qualitative Research Synthesis. Qualitative
Research Journal, 11(2), pp.63-75.
Tzempelikos, N. and Gounaris, S. (2015). Linking key account management practices
to performance outcomes. Industrial Marketing Management, 45, pp.22-34.
Ulaga, W. and Reinartz, W. (2011). Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms
Combine Goods and Services Successfully. Journal of Marketing, 75(6), pp.5-23.
Wilson, K. and Millman, T. (2003). The global account manager as political
entrepreneur. Industrial Marketing Management, 32(2), pp.151-158.
Waterman, R. & Peters, T. & Philips, J. (1980). Structure is Not Organization. Business
Horizons, 23(3), pp. 14-26.
Workman, J., Homburg, C. and Jensen, O. (2003). Intraorganizational Determinants of
Key Account Management Effectiveness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 31(1), pp.3-21.
Zupancic, D. (2008). Towards an integrated framework of key account management.
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 23(5), pp.323-331.
I
Appendices
Appendix A – Interview Guide
INTERVIEW GUIDE
The following questions are designed to investigate a key account manager’s experience of internal
alignment within their own key account team practice. The answers of the interview will be used as
empirical material in our bachelor thesis. Note: Your name and company will be kept anonymous in
the thesis.
1. Do you in your position as key account manager have an assigned team?
2. If yes, what internal departments are represented in the team?
3. If no, what internal departments are you regularly collaborating with in your
practice?
4. What are the main short-term strengths and weaknesses of having KAM practice
for your firm?
5. What are the main long-term strengths and weaknesses of having KAM practice
for your firm?
6. Is there hierarchy within the team? If yes: How? If no: How are decisions made?
7. How are activities coordinated within the team?
8. How do the team members organize and align themselves if
disagreements/conflicts occur?
9. Where are the lines of communication?
10. What business activities are crucial to its successes is the team?
11. Based on the previous answer: What are your teams’ main strengths and
weaknesses?
12. Is your performance in line with the firms and your team goals? Do they differ?
13. How does the objectives/goals differ among the team members and management
of the firm?
14. Based on the previous answer: What objectives are usually prioritized in the
decision-making process?
15. Is firm culture and shared values of importance within the team?
16. Who is involved in the value creation process both internally and externally?
17. What are the most important processes within the team?
18. What are the most important information systems within the team? What
variables are monitored and controlled most closely?
19. Are all team members equally important?
20. What is your view of success and how does that differ across the team and
management?
21. What are the most-watched indicators of meeting expectations and values among
the team members?
22. How are decisions made within the team?
23. How are team members motivated?
24. What of the previously discussed conditions (7s);
II
a) are of most importance for internal alignment?
b) the cause for tensions within the group?
c) are of most importance for KAM effectiveness
25. Do you believe that internal alignment is of importance for efficient KAM
practice?
