Lower-quartile
performers
Lower-quartile companies (for example, low CMAT scorers) are
likely to operate a classic product organizational model with strong product
management disciplines and a focus on product sales. There will be a limited
focus on the overall proposition, and their approach to marketing will not be
focused on customers. Companies towards the top of this quartile believe that
better coordination in CM will improve customer satisfaction and loyalty.
However, customer management in these organizations is likely to be
'champion-based' (enthusiastic individuals), and senior, cross-enterprise
leadership not apparent.
Table 16.2 suggests
that these companies need to invest heavily in infrastructure and programmes.
Careful project planning is needed to allow the achievement of quick wins that
help justify continuing investment, but net benefits will be more apparent
towards the latter stages of, say, a three-year programme. With the
short-termism commented on earlier, does this imply that poorly performing
companies are unlikely to invest in customer management because the payback is
in two or three years? If they do not invest, our correlation work (see Figure 16.1) shows
that they will continue to under-perform from a business perspective. At best
they become targets for hostile merger or takeover activity. At worst they could
go out of business.
Table 16.2: Indicative estimate returns
|
Customer management performance |
Likely investment level needed |
Likely main investment areas |
Likely ROI year 1 |
Likely ROI year 2 |
Likely ROI year 3 |
Overall ROI (simple average over 3 years)
|
|
Lower quartile performer |
High |
Whole model |
1 |
3 |
7 |
3.67 |
|
Third quartile |
Medium-high |
Whole model |
2 |
3 |
7 |
4 |
|
Second quartile |
Low-medium |
Measurement, activity, proposition, IT |
3 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
|
Highest quartile performer (est) |
Tactical |
People, activity, customer experience |
4.5 |
5 |
5.5 |
5 |
The investment in these companies should not be biased
towards IT systems, as it often is in practice, but should be applied across the
enterprise for all aspects of CM. Our CMAT work shows that companies at this
stage benefit from making the customer management process more robust, but the
net benefits should be reinvested in developing infrastructure. Steady
investment for these companies is not an option. However, relative performance
might not increase if competitors are also investing from a more advanced
starting point. The decision facing senior managers and stakeholders in these
businesses is to look long and hard at their market potential, and either invest
significantly to achieve a step-change in customer management, or divest, sell
or merge. Commitment, strong leadership, higher investment and careful project
planning are required to generate attractive benefits over time.