In this chapter the methodology used in the study is described. A visualization of the choice of methodology is provided in figure 23.
Figure 23: A visualization of the methodology choices made for this study.
4.8 Methodology Problems
A number of methodological problems were faced during the carrying out of the study. The problems were of various difficulty and have affected the result and the quality of the study to a various degree.
The first problem occurred already when defining the research problem and when formulating the research questions, and it showed to be one of the most difficult tasks during the research. It is very important to make an appropriate problem definition
Summary of Research Methodology
Type of Research
Exploratory Descriptive Casual
Research Approach
Deductive Inductive
Qualitative Quantitative
Research Strategy
Experience Study Secondary Data Analysis Case Study Pilot Studies
Sample Selection
Nonprobability Sampling Probability Sampling
Classification of Data
Primary Data Secondary Data
Data Collection Method
Documentation Archival Interviews
Records Physical Artifacts Direct Observation Participant Observation Data Analysis
Within-case Analysis Cross-case Analysis
· Open-ended interviews · Personal interview · Telephone interview · E-mail correspondence
since it has great impact on whether the result of the study will be in line with the purpose of the study. The research problem and the research questions were thereby revised several times during the study and were finally approved by both supervisors. It was also difficult to find appropriate companies to interview and it proved to be a time consuming work. To make sure that the companies were suitable, I based the selection on recommendations from people having a lot of knowledge about the companies. In addition the companies were approved by the supervisor at the assigner company and I also made sure that they fulfilled the criteria’s declared in the section above, describing the defining of target population.
Another methodological difficulty occurred when performing the analysis of the CRM systems. It became clear that the functionality included in the CRM systems was sometimes termed differently than in theory. I chosen to categorize the CRM functionality included in the CRM systems after the categories of CRM functionality brought up in theory, this in order to see whether there were any functional areas that needed to be added to the frame of reference. Consequently the categorization was based on my understanding of CRM functionality, but it was also approved by my supervisor at the assigner company. However, there is a risk that I have interpreted the functionality wrong, which in this respect decreases the validity and reliability of this study. Thereby I would be interesting to conduct future studies on whether there are any differences in how CRM vendors and CRM researchers define and categorize CRM functionality.
There are also some aspects regarding the data collection that needs to be considered. The data collected concerning research question one, “How can CRM be described?” is not that extensive. This implies that the possibility to make a comparison with the theories describing the CRM approach is restricted. The reason why a limited amount of data was collected concerning this aspect is that I consider that the respondents at Company A and Company B doesn’t have enough knowledge about CRM as an approach. Their ability to provide interesting input is thereby restricted. I based my findings on that neither of the companies have a concrete CRM strategy, nor have they implemented CRM in their organization. Consequently, the answer to research question number one is primly based on the theories describing CRM, which are included in the frame of reference.
Furthermore, when preparing the data collection regarding companies’ CRM requirements and need for CRM functionality, it became clear that it is difficult to separate the concepts. This since, terms of CRM functionality often are used to express CRM requirements. Thereby, these issues are treated together in the empirical chapter, as well as in the analysis, and discussion and conclusion chapter. It’s important that the reader has this in mind when reading, in order not to be confused. During the data collection regarding CRM requirements and need for CRM functionality at Company A and B it was impossible to treat all functionality included in the frame of reference, it would have been too time consuming. However, this is a problem since the reason why a certain CRM function hasn’t been brought up by the respondents might be that the interviewer didn’t ask for it. Perhaps the respondent
findings. However, because of the complex and broad nature of the subject it was necessary to conduct a personal interview, focused- or survey interviews wouldn’t have been suitable. In addition the risk of omitting questioning about functionality important for the companies are quite little since the questions were based on the companies individual circumstances. At the point of the actual interview I had acquired a lot of knowledge about CRM functionality, as well as about the companies, and I used this knowledge when developing the question.
Finally, it proved to be difficult to find theories regarding research question four, “How can a CRM system be designed?”. I did not manage to find any theories treating the connection between the sales process and CRM functionality, where it’s described what CRM functionality that is used in what situation. Consequently, the sales process and the CRM functionality is described separately in the theoretical frame work for this study. However, during this study I have acquired knowledge about CRM functionality and at what situations it can be useful, as well as knowledge about the sales process. Consequently, based on my interpretation of the empirical findings and the theory, the connection between CRM functionality and the steps in the sales process could be described. There were only limitations regarding the possibility to compare the findings with theory.