Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A novel methodology for evaluating the risk of CRM projects in fuzzy environment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to obtained reports, most of customer relationship management (CRM) projects fail. Thus, a structured approach is needed to identify, prioritize and evaluate risks in CRM projects. This helps project managers of CRM implementation to find out how to treat such risks. The nature of CRM is multi-dimensional, and it is one of the most complicated innovations in organizations. In this paper, because of multi-dimensional nature of CRM projects, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process is used to evaluate CRM risk factors based on active project managers’ judgments as experts in organizations which sale CRM software or provide service and consult in Iran. The analyses are performed by the judgments of CRM experts using a questionnaire including 49 pair-wise comparisons. In Iranian organizations, based on experts’ judgments, in the first life cycle phases of CRM, “changes in the stakeholders and top management” has the highest importance among risk factors in CRM projects. According to our experts’ beliefs, management permanence is one of the most important factors for IS projects failure in Iran which is resulted from Iranian organizations’ culture. In the next life cycle phases of CRM, the risk factors such as general factors of classification “dynamic assessment and monitoring” have the lowest priority.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alavi M, Leidner D (1999) Knowledge management systems: emerging views and practices from the field. In: Hawaii International conference on system sciences, Los Alamitos

  2. Al-Hudhaif SA (2011) The critical success factors for implementation of customer relationship management in the banking sector of Saudi Arabia. J Glob Bus Manag 7(1):1–7

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aloini D, Dulmin R, Mininno V (2007) Risk management in ERP project introduction: review of the literature. Inf Manag 44(6):547–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Au KF, Wong WK, Zeng XH (2006) Decision model for country site selection of overseas clothing plants. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 29(3):408–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Azadeh A, Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Hatami-Shirkouhi L, Ansarinejad A (2011) A unique fuzzy multi-criteria decision making: computer simulation approach for productive operators’ assignment in cellular manufacturing systems with uncertainty and vagueness. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 56(1):329–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Azadeh A, Shirkouhi SN, Rezaie K (2010) A robust decision-making methodology for evaluation and selection of simulation software package. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 47(1):381–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Beldi A, Cheffi W, Dey PK (2010) Managing customer relationship management projects: the case of a large French telecommunications company. Int J Proj Manag 28(4):339–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Boulding W, Staelin R, Ehret M, Johnston WJ (2005) A customer relationship management roadmap: what is known, potential pitfalls, and where to go. J Mark 69(4):155–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bouma, JT (2009) Why participation works: the role of employee involvement in the implementation of the customer relationship management type of organizational change. Ph.D. thesis, SOM Research School, University of Groningen, Groningen

  10. Bouyssou D, Marchant T, Pirlot M, Perny P, Tsoukias A, Vincke Ph (2000) Evaluation and decision models: a critical perspective. Kluwer, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Buckley JJ (1985) Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17(3):233–247

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Chalmeta R (2006) Methodology for customer relationship management. J Syst Softw 79(7):1015–1024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chan FT, Kumar N (2007) Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Omega 35(4):417–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chang DY (1996) Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95(3):649–655

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Chang H (2007) Critical factors and benefits in the implementation of customer relationship management. Total Qual Manag 18(5):483–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen Q, Chen HM (2004) Exploring the success factors of eCRM strategies in practice. J Database Mark Cust Strategy Manag 11(4):333–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chen IJ, Popovich K (2003) Understanding customer relationship management (CRM): people, process and technology. Bus Process Manag J 9(5):672–688

  18. Cheng CH (1997) Evaluating naval tactical missile systems by fuzzy AHP based on the grade value of membership function. Eur J Oper Res 96(2):343–350

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Cooper MJ, Gwin CF, Wakefield KL (2008) Cross-functional interface and disruption in CRM projects: is marketing from Venus and information systems from Mars? J Bus Res 61(4):292–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Croteau A, Li P (2003) Critical success factors of CRM technological initiatives. Can J Adm Sci 20(1):21–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dagdeviren M, Yüksel İ (2008) Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model for behavior-based safety management. Inf Sci 178(6):1717–1733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fox T, Stead S (2001) Customer relationship management: delivering the benefits. White Paper, CRM (UK) and SECOR Consulting, New Malden

  23. Gargeya VB, Brady C (2005) Success and failure factors of adopting SAP in ERP system implementation. Bus Process Manag J 11(5):501–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Haq N, Kannan G (2006) Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process for evaluating and selecting a vendor in a supply chain model. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 29(7–8):826–835

    Google Scholar 

  25. Iranmanesh H, Shirkouhi SN, Skandari MR (2008) Risk evaluation of information technology projects based on fuzzy analytic hierarchal process. Int J Comput Inf Sci Eng 2(1):38–44

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kale SH (2004) CRM failure and the seven deadly sins are your CRM undertakings lost in a sea of failed or uncompleted projects? Mark Manag 13(5):42–47

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kaufmann A, Gupta MM (1988) Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science. Elsevier Science Inc, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Keramati A, Afshari-Mofrad M, Kamrani A (2011) The role of readiness factors in E-Learning outcomes: an empirical study. Comput Educ 57:1919–1929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Keramati A, Mojir N, Afshari-Mofrad M, Jahanandish I, Derakhshani A (2012) An artificial neural network-based DSS to prioritise information technology and its complementary investments in industrial firms. Int J Bus Inf Syst 9(2):149–168

    Google Scholar 

  30. Keramati A, Zavareh JT, Ellioon A, Moshki H (2008) The adoption of customer relationship management (CRM): an empirical study on Iranian firms. Int J Electron Cust Relationsh Manag 1(4):354–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kimberling E (2006) In search of business value: how to achieve the benefits of ERP technology”, white paper. Panorama Consulting Group, Denver

    Google Scholar 

  32. King SF, Burgess TF (2008) Understanding success and failure in customer relationship management. Ind Mark Manag 37(4):421–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Krigsman M (2009) CRM failure rates: 2001–2009. Technology News, Analysis, Comments and Product Reviews for IT Professionals ZDNet, 2001–2009

  34. Li L, Shi ZH, Yin W, Zhu D, Ng SL, Cai CF, Lei AL (2009) A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) approach to eco-environmental vulnerability assessment for the danjiangkou reservoir area, China. Ecol Model 220(23):3439–3447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Lindgreen A, Palmer R, Vanhamme J, Wouters J (2006) A relationship-management assessment tool: questioning, identifying, and prioritizing critical aspects of customer relationships. Ind Mark Manag 35(1):57–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Liou TS, Wang MJ (1992) Ranking fuzzy numbers with integral value. Fuzzy Sets Syst 50(3):247–255

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Lopes F (2011) Critical success factors of customer relationship management implementation in residential real estate. Dissertação de Mestrado. Universidade Técnica de Lisboa. Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestão, Technical report

  38. Mack O, Mayo MC, Khare A (2005) A strategic approach for successful CRM: a European perspective. Probl Perspect Manag 2:98–106

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mao-qin G, Ling G, Qi X (2011). The critical success factors for the banks implementing e-CRM. In: E-Business and E-Government (ICEE), 2011 international conference on (pp 1–4)

  40. McFarlan FW (1981) Portfolio approach to information systems. Harv Bus Rev 59(5):142–150

    Google Scholar 

  41. Mendoza LE, Marius A, Perez M, Grimán AC (2007) Critical success factors for a customer relationship management strategy. Inf Softw Technol 49(8):913–945

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mikhailov L (2000) A fuzzy programming method for deriving priorities in the analytic hierarchy process. J Oper Res Soc 51(3):341–349

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Mikhailov L, Tsvetinov P (2004) Evaluation of services using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Appl Soft Comput 5(1):23–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Naghadehi MZ, Mikaeil R, Ataei M (2009) The application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) approach to selection of optimum underground mining method for Jajarm Bauxite Mine, Iran. Expert Syst Appl 36(4):8218–8226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Nazari-Shirkouhi S, Ansarinejad A, Miri-Nargesi S, Dalfard VM, Rezaie K (2011) Information systems outsourcing decisions under fuzzy group decision making approach. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 10(06):989–1022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw Hill, New York, pp 214–286

    Google Scholar 

  47. Okoli C, Pawlowski SD (2004) The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manag 42(1):15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. O’Malley L, Mitussis D (2002) Relationships and technology: strategic implications. J Strateg Mark 10(3):225–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Özdağoğlu A, Özdağoğlu G (2007) Comparison of AHP and fuzzy AHP for the multi-criteria decision making processes with linguistic evaluations. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi 6(11):65–85

    Google Scholar 

  50. Özgener S, Iraz R (2006) Customer relationship management in small-medium enterprises: the case of Turkish tourism industry. Tour Manag 27(6):1356–1363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Papadopoulos T, Ojiako U, Lee K (2011) The criticality of implementation risk factors in CRM projects. Project Manag J (in press)

  52. Payne A (2006) Handbook of CRM: achieving excellence in customer management. Butterworth-Heinemann

  53. Payne A, Frow P (2006) Customer relationship management: from strategy to implementation. J Mark Manag 22(1):135–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Peelen E, van Montfort K, Beltman R, Klerkx A (2009) An empirical study into the foundations of CRM success. J Strateg Mark 17(6):453–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Plouffe CR, Williams BC, Leigh TW (2004) Who’s on first? Stakeholder differences in customer relationship management and the elusive notion of “shared understanding”. J Pers Sell Sales Manag 24(4):323–338

    Google Scholar 

  56. Raman P, Wittmann CM, Rauseo NA (2006) Leveraging CRM for sales: the role of organizational capabilities in successful CRM implementation. J Pers Sell Sales Manag 26(1):39–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Reichheld FR, Sasser WE (1990) Zero defections: quality comes to services. Harv Bus Rev 68(5):105–111

    Google Scholar 

  58. Rigby DK, Reichheld FF, Schefter P (2002) Avoid the four perils of CRM. Harv Bus Rev 80(2):101–109

    Google Scholar 

  59. Roberts ML, Liu RR, Hazard K (2005) Strategy, technology and organizational alignment: key components of CRM success. J Database Mark Cust Strategy Manag 12(4):315–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Roh TH, Ahn CK, Han I (2005) The priority factor model for customer relationship management system success. Expert Syst Appl 28(4):641–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Ryals L, Knox S (2001) Cross-functional issues in the implementation of relationship marketing through customer relationship management. Eur Manag J 19(5):534–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Ryals L, Payne A (2001) Customer relationship management in financial services: towards information-enabled relationship marketing. J Strateg Mark 9(1):3–27

    Google Scholar 

  63. Saaty TL (1977) A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15(3):234–281

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  64. Saaty TL (1980) The analytical hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  65. Saaty TL (1986) Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Manag Sci 32(7):841–855

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  66. Salmeron J, Herrero I (2005) An AHP-based methodology to rank critical success factors of executive information systems. Comput Stand Interfaces 28(1):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Salmeron JL, Lopez C (2010) A multicriteria approach for risks assessment in ERP maintenance. J Syst Softw 83(10):1941–1953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Schmidt R, Lyytinen K, Keil M, Cule P (2001) Identifying software project risks: an international Delphi study. J Manag Inf Syst 17(4):5–36

    Google Scholar 

  69. Shang SSC, Lin SF (2010) People-driven processes in customer relationship management. Serv Ind J 30(14):2441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Sin LYM, Tse ACB, Yim FHK (2005) CRM: conceptualization and scale development. Eur J Mark 39(11/12):1264–1290

    Google Scholar 

  71. Strauss J, Frost R (2008) E-marketing. Prentice Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  72. Sun CC (2010) A performance evaluation model by integrating fuzzy AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Expert Syst Appl 37(12):7745–7754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Torkzadeh G, Chang JC, Hansen GW (2006) Identifying issues in customer relationship management at Merck-Medco. Decis Support Syst 42(2):1116–1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Torkzadeh G, Chang JC, Hansen GW (2006) Identifying issues in customer relationship management at Merck-Medco. Decis Support Syst 42(2):1116–1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Tüysüz F, Kahraman C (2006) Project risk evaluation using a fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: an application to information technology projects. Int J Intell Syst 21(6):559–584

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  76. Van Laarhoven PJM, Pedrycz W (1983) A fuzzy extension of Saaty’s priority theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11(1–3):199–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Wilson H, Daniel E, McDonald M (2002) Factors for success in customer relationship management (CRM) systems. J Mark Manag 18(1):193–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Wu J (2008) Customer relationship management (CRM) implementation in China: a case study of legend group. Res Practical Issues Enterp Inf Syst II 255:1441–1447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Xia D, Chen B (2011) A comprehensive decision-making model for risk management of supply chain. Expert Syst Appl 38:4957–4966

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  80. Yang CC, Chen BS (2004) Key quality performance evaluation using fuzzy AHP. J Chin Inst Ind Eng 21(6):543–550

    Google Scholar 

  81. Yim FH, Anderson RE, Swaminathan S (2004) Customer relationship management: its dimensions and effect on customer outcomes. J Pers Sell Sales Manag 24(4):265–280

    Google Scholar 

  82. Zablah AR, Bellenger DN, Johnston WJ (2004) An evaluation of divergent perspectives on customer relationship management: towards a common understanding of an emerging phenomenon. Ind Mark Manag 33(6):475–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Zaerpour N, Rabbani M, Gharehgozli A, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R (2009) A comprehensive decision making structure for partitioning of make-to-order, make-to-stock and hybrid products. Soft Comput 13(11):1035–1054

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the valuable comments and suggestion from the respected reviewers. Their valuable comments and suggestions have enhanced the strength and significance of our paper. The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of University of Tehran for this research under grant number 7314812/1/06.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    A. Keramati & H. Moshki

  2. Young Researchers Club, Roudbar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudbar, Iran

    S. Nazari-Shirkouhi

  3. Information Technology Management Department, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

    M. Afshari-Mofrad

  4. Department of Management, Payame Noor University (PNU), Tehran, Iran

    E. Maleki-Berneti

Authors
  1. A. Keramati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Nazari-Shirkouhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Moshki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Afshari-Mofrad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. E. Maleki-Berneti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Nazari-Shirkouhi.

Appendix: Questionnaire appraising relative importance of criteria

Appendix: Questionnaire appraising relative importance of criteria

1.1 Questionnaire instruction

If the criterion noted on the right is more important than the one on the left, please check the cells on the right of the cell “Equally important”. Vice versa, if the criterion noted on the right is less important than the one on the left, please check the cells on the left of the cell “Equally important”. Please note that from right to left the relative importance of the criterion on the right to the criterion on the left decreases. Empty cells between the importance cells show intermediate importance between the according cells (for example the cell between “Very strongly important” and “Absolutely important” shows importance more than “Very strongly important” but less than “Absolutely important).

 

Absolutely important

Very strongly important

Essentially important

Weakly important

Equally important

Weakly important

Essentially important

Very strongly important

Absolutely important

 

Organization and its context

         

Stakeholders and top management

Organization and its context

         

Project organization

Organization and its context

         

Final users

Organization and its context

         

Dynamic monitoring and review

Stakeholders and top management

         

Project organization

Stakeholders and top management

         

Final users

Stakeholders and top management

         

Dynamic monitoring and review

Project organization

         

Final users

Project organization

         

Dynamic monitoring and review

Final users

         

Dynamic monitoring and review

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Keramati, A., Nazari-Shirkouhi, S., Moshki, H. et al. A novel methodology for evaluating the risk of CRM projects in fuzzy environment. Neural Comput & Applic 23 (Suppl 1), 29–53 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-1216-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-1216-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation