Description
Relationship marketing has been suggested to be the new marketing paradigm, replacing the toolkit offered by the four P’s. While this concept dates back to the bazaars of ancient times, academic focus on the topic has sharpened in the last three decades.
Professional Service Firms are Relationship Marketers: But does size matter?
in press
Australasian Marketing Journal
Janet R. McColl-Kennedy, PhD*
Professor of Marketing
UQ Business School, University of Queensland
Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
Tel: 61 7 3365 6673
Email: [email protected]
Jillian C. Sweeney, PhD
Professor, UWA Business School University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Tel: 61 8 6488 1438
Email: [email protected]
Geoffrey N. Soutar, PhD
Professor, UWA Business School University of Western Australia
Graduate School of Management, University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Tel: 61 8 6488 7885
Email: [email protected]
Claudia Amonini, PhD
Research Associate
UWA Business School, University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Tel: 61 8 6488 2908
Email: [email protected]
* Please address all correspondence to this author
Acknowledgements: This study was supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery
Grant.
1
2
Authors
Janet R. McColl-Kennedy is Professor of Marketing and Director of Research at UQ Business
School, University of Queensland, Australia. She has published in The Leadership Quarterly,
Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Service Research, Journal of Business Research,
and Journal of Services Marketing.
Jillian C. Sweeney is a Professor in the UWA Business School University of Western Australia.
Her research has been published in Journal of Retailing, Psychology and Marketing, Journal of
Service Research and Journal of Services Marketing.
Geoffrey N. Soutar is Professor UWA Business School, University of Western Australia. His
research has been published in Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of International Business
Studies, Journal of Retailing, Decision Sciences, and Psychology and Marketing.
Claudia Amonini is a Research Associate at UWA Business School, University of Western
Australia.
Professional Service Firms are Relationship Marketers: But does size matter?
Abstract
There are few research-based insights into professional service firms’ (PSFs) contemporary
marketing practices. This is unfortunate as the professional services sector is a key contributor to
growth in Australian and other economies around the world. As professional services are unique
in a number of ways and their operations and marketing activities inextricably intertwined, the
present study investigated the extent to which PSFs practice marketing and whether this differs
according to size. Depth interviews were held with thirty seven Australian senior managers in
four key industries. We examined the extent of relationship marketing, conceptualised at an
overall managerial level as well as four sub-practices identified in research by Coviello and
colleagues. We found relationship management and interaction marketing were the most common
practices, which is consistent with the inseparability concept, and that relationship management
and database marketing were more common in larger firms, which is consistent with their relative
resource strength.
Keywords: Marketing practices, Professional service firms
1
Professional Service Firms are Relationship Marketers Too
1. Introduction
Relationship marketing has been suggested to be the new marketing paradigm, replacing the toolkit
offered by the four P’s (e.g. Webster 1992). While this concept dates back to the bazaars of ancient times,
academic focus on the topic has sharpened in the last three decades. Despite the importance of
relationship marketing, Coviello et al. (2002) found consumer service providers often used a transactional
marketing approach, which was also commonly used by business-to-business service firms. However,
little is known about the use and specifically the extent of use of relational or transactional marketing
among professional service firms (PSFs) as no prior research has examined this issue in this context.
PSFs have been slow to adopt formal marketing strategies and their attitudes towards marketing are
mixed (Hodge et al. 1990; Crane 1993; Yavas and Riecken 2001; Barr and McNeilly 2003). Nonetheless,
since However, professional services are people-centred, it is likely most PSFs practice some form of
relationship marketing, whether they specifically recognise it or not.
Given the unique challenges faced by PSFs, the present study investigated the appropriateness of
Coviello et al.’s (1997) four relationship marketing practices in such a context. Further, the study
attempted to identify the activities that supported such practices. Such an approach is consistent
with Kohli and J aworski’s (1990) approach to measuring market orientation and offers a practical
description as to what translates relationship marketing into practice. It is also follows Barr and
McNeilly’s (2003) suggestion that there is plenty of commentary on what professional service
firms should do, but little on what firms are actually doing. The study therefore examined the
practices of different types of PSFs, including law, consulting engineering, accounting and
finance and marketing and management consulting by addressing two questions:
2
• To what extent do PSFs undertake various relationship marketing practices and, more
specifically, what are the activities that underlie these practices?
• Does the size of a PSF impact on the relative emphasis placed on the relationship
marketing practices it undertakes?
Before the study that was undertaken to answer these questions is discussed, an overview of
relevant prior research into the services sector and the conceptualisation of marketing practices is
provided in the next section.
2. Background
2.1 Service sector growth
The service sector is an important contributor to economic growth (United Nations 2005).
Indeed, in some western economies, the service sector accounts for more than 70% of gross
domestic product (GDP). For example, services make up approximately 80% of the GDP in the
United States, 74% in the United Kingdom, 73% in the Netherlands and 72% in Canada and
Australia (Central Intelligence Agency 2004). Business and professional service firms account
for a sizeable share of this contribution (e.g. 11% of GDP in the United States (Kirkpatrick 2004)
and 15% of GDP in the United Kingdom (United Nations 2005)).
The United Nations Trade and Development Board recently noted that professional services are
“one of the fastest growth sectors in economies worldwide, achieving double-digit growth rates”
(United Nations 2004, p. 4). This is particularly evident in Australia. In the last decade full-time
employment in the business and professional services sector rose 64% compared to 6.5% for the
3
overall economy during the same period (Department of Industry, Science and Resources and
Australian Trade Commission 2001).
Although the focus of professional services has traditionally been on domestic growth,
international trade in this sector is mounting. Driven by globalisation and innovative
technologies, international trade in professional services has increased from approximately 18%
of world trade to 23% in the last two decades (Australian Trade Commission 2006; ABS
Catalogue 5302 2006). Professional services have become the fastest growing sector of world
trade and, thus, they are a primary source of growth for developed and developing countries
(United Nations 2004). Such trends highlight the importance of professional service providers
and suggest a need to examine their marketing practices.
2.2 Marketing in professional service firms
Professional service firms are different to many other firms. As Gummesson (1981, p. 108)
noted a quarter of a century ago:
“A professional service is qualified, it is advisory and problem solving, even though
it may encompass some routine work for clients. The professionals involved have a
common identity, like physicians, lawyers, accountants or engineers and are regulated
by traditions and codes of ethics. The service offered, if accepted, involves the
professional in taking on assignments for the client and those assignments are
themselves the limit of the professional’s involvement. Such assignments are not
undertaken to merely sell hardware or other services.”
4
In years gone by, many PSFs did not need to market themselves as demand exceeded supply.
However, several trends have changed this situation, including:
• More sophisticated and discerning customers, deregulation, increased competition and new
technologies (Morgan et al. 1994).
• Clients who no longer seem to hold professionals in high esteem, as can be seen in the
number of malpractice suits and a variety of other challenges to professional authority
(Herbig and Milewicz 1993).
• Increased competition in local markets and the opening of international markets that offer
significant opportunities for smart operators (Australian Trade Commission 2006; ABS
Catalogue 5302 2006).
Moreover, professional service firms face unique marketing challenges. Professional services are
known to be on the extreme intangibility end of the tangibility spectrum. Their ‘product’ is the
result of many years of specialised study and training and clients have difficulty evaluating these
‘products’ (Zeithaml 1981). In addition, professional services are complex (in terms of the
number of steps involved) and divergent (in terms of the range in the execution at each step)
(Hausman 2003). There also seems to be little standardisation in the offerings of many
professional services. These factors lead to increased client uncertainty, which means decisions
are difficult to make (Morgan et al. 1994; Kotler et al. 2002). Moreover, adherence to a
professional code of ethics and the acceptance of general professional standards means PSFs
must also take account of regulatory agencies and other members of their own profession (Kotler
et al. 2002).
5
Professional service providers have often been reported as having a negative view of marketing
(e.g. Morgan 1990; Dalkin 1994; Schimmel and Davis 1995; Kotler et al. 2002), largely due to a
desire to distance themselves from commercialism. This attitude is derived from a fear that
marketing will devalue their business and have a negative impact on customer perceptions and an
assumption on their part that marketing is only about selling or advertising (Morgan 1990).
Further, although bans on advertising have been lifted or liberalised in some professions (e.g. in
the legal market), restrictions on marketing still apply and several commentators have suggested
there is an anti-marketing and advertising culture in many PSFs (e.g. Gaedeke and Tootelian
1987; Hodge et al. 1990; Burton 1991; Kotler et al. 2002; Barr and McNeilly 2003). This
scepticism about marketing remains because there are relatively few professionals who are
trained in marketing and many firms do not employ marketing professionals. Such organisations
lack the marketing skills and the time required for the marketing process. Further, many
professionals view time spent marketing as “wasted” time as it is deducted from billable hours
(Barr and McNeilly 2003; Kotler et al. 2002). Thus, while some PSFs have realised the need to
engage in marketing (Hodge et al. 1990; Olson 2005), many are reluctant to take a formal
marketing approach (Hodge et al. 1990; Barr and McNeilly 2003).
The differences between PSFs and other service firms, plus the negative views held of marketing
by many professional service providers raises questions as to the mechanisms by which positive
customer perceptions and behaviours, and ultimately firm outcomes, are generated. Indeed, as
professional service processes are inseparable from the provider (Heil 1994), PSFs undoubtedly
undertake some form of relationship marketing activity, whether they recognise it as such or not.
Given our focus on relationship marketing, we were interested in identifying the relationship
marketing practices PSFs employ and how they are used. The research undertaken by Coviello et
6
al. (1997, 2002) in developing a classification framework of contemporary marketing practices
provided the framework for the present study. They focused on a “new relationship marketing
paradigm” and developed a typology of four types of marketing practices that they found was
common across a broad range of organisations. Believing that the definition of relationship
marketing was too broad and open to interpretation, Coviello et al. (1997) identified three
specific components, namely:
• Database marketing, which involves the use of technology-based tools to target and retain
customers.
• Interaction marketing, which is based on face to face interpersonal interactions within
relationships to create cooperative interactions between buyers and sellers for mutual
benefit.
• Network marketing, which focuses on developing interfirm relationships to coordinate
activities among multiple parties for mutual benefit.
Firms may also undertake transactional marketing activities, which are used to manage the
marketing mix so as to attract and satisfy customers and which sit at the opposite end of the
relationship strategy continuum (Grönroos 2000). We term the set of four practices, relationship
marketing practices, since transaction marketing refers to a point on the relationship marketing
continuum [Footnote 1].
While we understand Coviello et al’s (1997) rationale to examine specific aspects of relationship
marketing, we also believe that ‘relationship marketing and management’ should be included as
an additional related but distinct approach. Gronroos’s (1990) original definition of relationship
7
marketing implies a managerial component with respect to maintaining and enhancing
relationships. This is depicted clearly in the ‘ladder of customer loyalty’ in which relationship
marketing merges and acts synergistically with relationship management over the stages of the
relationship, with relationship management becoming dominant in the later, more established
stages of the relationship (Lovelock et al. 2004). The importance of managing the relationship is
also supported through the concept of service management trinity, that is the interrelationships
between marketing management, human resource management and operations management
(Lovelock et al., 2007). Grönroos (2007, p43) emphasises that the management of relationship
activities is crucial “Although improved communication with customers using planned means of
marketing communication is an essential element [of relationship marketing] the management of
activities relating to the facilitation, management and everyday handling of the interactions with
planning customers may be much more critical to successfully implemented relationship
marketing” (bracketed term added). From hereon the term relationship management rather than
relationship marketing will be used to refer to this concept [Footnote 2]. Thus the five practices
examined in the present study included a broader relationship management concept, which may
include a number of management practices, as well as Coviello et al.’s (1997) four relationship
marketing sub-practices.
Following Coviello et al.’s (2000, p. 541) call to fully understand “the scope of what is really
being practiced” and to “assess actual practices and expand on the detail accorded to the
measures for market planning and performance measurement” (p. 543) the present study also
sought to examine the activities used by PSFs in carrying out these practices. Thus we took an
operational approach to understanding PSFs marketing practices, in contrast to Coviello and her
colleagues, who discussed principles, such as managerial intent, focus and duration. Our
8
approach takes up Kohli and J aworski’s (1990) call to be specific as to how strategies are
implemented in practice in order to enhance their managerial relevance.
2.3 Size of firm
Most prior research has suggested small firms are informal and lack strategic orientation (e.g.,
Pearson and Ellram 1995; Prater and Ghosh 2005). However, although there is some evidence
that this informality is a sign of them being pragmatic and flexible in their reactions to customer
requirements, rather than a sign of them not understanding strategy (OECD 1997; Kalantaridis
2004). Coviello et al. (2000) examined the differences between larger and smaller firms’
marketing practices. While they expected smaller firms to emphasise interaction and network
marketing, they found firm size had only a minimal impact on these two practices and suggested
small firms’ marketing practices may not be very different from those of large firms. However,
they suggested further research was needed to better understand this issue.
Given the unique aspects of PSFs, such as their people-centred nature and the nexus between
their operations and marketing (Kotler et al. 2002) all PSFs, regardless of size, are likely to
practice interaction marketing. However, as smaller firms have fewer resources (e.g. marketing
expertise and time), it would seem that smaller PSFs are less likely to practice support activities,
such as database marketing and possibly network marketing. Smaller PSFs may also be less
formal in their marketing in terms of not having mission, vision statements (Coviello et al. 2000)
and strategic plans and may be less likely to have a strategic approach when planning
relationships (Gray et al. 2005) . Therefore we specifically propose that interaction marketing
would be common regardless of firm size (P1), while we expected database and network
marketing to be more common in larger firms (P2 and 3). Further, given the developmental
9
nature of our relationship management component, we propose this will be more evident in larger
firms (P4). These issues were also examined within the present study, which is discussed in the
next section.
3. Method
3.1 Sample and data collection method
A purposive sampling design was adopted since the goal of the research was developmental,
rather than theory testing or statistical generalisation (Neuman, 2000). Thirty seven senior people
who worked in a range of Australian PSFs, including consulting engineers, accountants, lawyers,
financial planners and marketing and management consultants, and who were knowledgeable
about the way their organisations interacted with their clients, were interviewed.. The depth
interviews were conducted in rural and metropolitan locations in three states (Queensland, New
South Wales and Western Australia) with firms that ranged in size from less than ten employees
to more than one thousand employees, although approximately two-thirds of the firms that
participated had less than 50 employees, as can be seen in Table 1, which provides some
summary information about the participating firms.
“take in Table 1”
Depth interviews are an excellent way to obtain insights into the phenomenon of interest as they
provide detailed contextual information that cannot be obtained from survey approaches
(Gwinner et al. 1998). A discussion guide was used for the interviews along the lines suggested
by Minichiello et al. (1995). Following a brief description of the research project, interviews
began with the collection of background information about the organisation, the organisation’s
10
customer base and its culture. After this phase, interviewees were asked about the ways their
firms interact with their customers (unprompted) and were then prompted about the use of
various practices. Relationship marketing was discussed first, followed by Coviello and her
colleagues’ (1997, 2002) marketing practices (interaction, database, network and transaction). To
aid discussion, respondents were handed a prompt card on which the definitions shown in Table 1
were listed. Probing statements were used to clarify and explore participants’ responses,
especially to help identify the activities used to implement each of the strategies mentioned (e.g.,
“tell me more about that”, “what sort of things do you do to implement that”, and “what do you
do you mean by that”). Respondents were also encouraged to discuss other marketing activities
the firm undertook.
At the end of the interview, participants were asked for additional comments and for descriptive
information, such as firm size, years of operation and performance. Interviews ranged from 45 to
90 minutes and all of the interviews were audio-taped and transcribed into Microsoft Word to
facilitate subsequent content analysis. Two judges analysed the data to identify evidence of the
various practices. One judge used NVIVO, while the other judge examined the transcripts
manually. The complete list of strategies and practices found is discussed in the findings section.
In assessing the extent of use of the various practices, a classification procedure similar to that
used to analyse critical incidents was employed. The two judges independently categorised the
extent to which each respondent actively used each strategy using a simple four point scale
(‘don't use at all’ (0); ‘little use/limited/have in the past, not now’ (1); ‘moderate use/do a range
of activities/frequent use’ (2); and ‘high use and do a range of activities’ (3)).
11
It was particularly important in the classification process, that the service provider demonstrated
behaviours, rather than merely viewing the practice as ‘important’. This analytic induction
process consisted of repeated careful reading and assessment of the interviews to identify the
various behaviours of interest. There were eleven discrepancies of two points or more across the
185 judgments (37 interviews by 5 types of practice), which were resolved through discussion
between the judges. Subsequently the evaluations of both judges were averaged. The definitions
of the various practices used by the two coders were adopted from Coviello et al. (1997) and are
described in Table 2.
“take in Table 2”
Due to the subjective nature of categorisation in qualitative research, inter-judge reliability was
assessed through Perreault and Leigh’s (1989) index of reliability, which is an improvement over
previous inter-judge agreement measures as it takes account of the number of coding categories
used. While this index was developed for nominal classification, it is suitable when examining an
ordinal scale. Further, the index is more conservative when used with ordinal scales rather than
with nominal scales due to the potential for greater overlap between categories (e.g., values of
two and three representing moderate to high use). The reliability measure was 0.77 for all
strategy types across the 37 service providers. Although Perreault and Leigh (1989) provided no
specific guidelines as to what value was acceptable in assessing the reliability of category
assignments, they suggested that 0.70 is reasonable for exploratory work, as in the present case.
4. Findings
Professional service firms’ use of relationship management is discussed first, followed by an
examination of the approach’s sub-themes (interaction, network and database marketing), after
12
which transaction marketing activities are discussed. Definitions for each of these strategies are
shown in Table 2.
As a preliminary investigation to our discussion, the formality of marketing in PSFs was
examined by asking participants whether their organisations had a mission or vision statement,
formal written goals or a strategic plan. Larger firms (50 or more employees) were more likely to
have these (92%, 69% and 83% respectively) than were small firms (1 to 10 employees) (17% in
each case). As might be expected medium sized firms (11 to 49 employees) were between the
two extremes (75%, 75% and 42% respectively).
4.1 Relationship management
Relationship marketing involves establishing, maintaining and enhancing relationships with
customers and other partners so the objectives of the parties involved are met (Grönroos 2000). A
key aspect of relationship marketing is managing the relationship, with attention to the interface
between marketing, human resources and operations management. Relationship management was
commonly used by the participating PSFs. Indeed, the majority of firms, irrespective of type or
size, spoke about the importance of having a relational, rather than a transactional focus. Many
respondents discussed the benefits of relationships. For example:
“Relationship marketing is all about Key Client Account Management, we have key
clients that we focus on and do not get distracted by other clients (Lawyer, large)
“I look for a long-term recurring work rather than short-term work of any sort. For two
reasons, one, you have a client that can then be sold on to, in succession planning and,
two, you get to know the client and, the first time through you might struggle with the
client, but the next year you might find it easier and therefore recover some of the costs
you burn in the first year or so. So the longer you have a client, the more chance that you
are going to average your costs out and not lose on them” (Accountant, small)
13
“We certainly are trying to gain the trust and establish those long term relationships.
That’s where we probably pride ourselves in probably being the oldest or second oldest
firm here, and perhaps in the region...If they [clients] are going to transfer something
over to one of their children, - the opportunity to sit down and go through it with them
and tell them the possible ramifications of what they’re going to do” (Lawyer, medium).
Further, relationship management was seen as enabling a firm to gain a sustainable competitive
advantage by working closely with its clients. This even extended to working in the client’s
offices, so that services could be tailored to specifically meet needs, making it difficult for the
client to leave or for other suppliers to copy the services provided.
“We become part of their business and part of their family, most of the time”
(Accountant, medium).
“We have got people actually in their office, So they’ve got ready access. They just walk
to the next door office and we’re there, sort of thing. So we’re right in there at the
‘ground roots’” (Consultant engineer, medium)
Communication, matching staff with the clients’ staff, team work and a relationship manager
were the most frequently mentioned business-related activities used to foster healthy
relationships. Communication activities included “being open, honest, genuine and friendly
when dealing with the client, rather than being ‘salesy’” (Law), as well as proactively informing
clients of issues (either relating to the specific work commissioned or to the broader industry) that
may impact, or be of value to, the client. The use of face-to-face and one-on-one meetings was
seen as important to get a better understanding of clients, particularly at the beginning of a
relationship. Relationship managers or partners who take overall responsibility of a team for
client relationships were more common in larger firms. Such a person typically took
responsibility for the strategic relationship with the client as well as coordinating the operational
aspects internally.
14
In larger organisations in particular, PSFs used a team of employees to service the client, rather
than relying on one employee. Such relationships were at various levels of operations and
typically consisted of a series of dyadic relationships. As well as helping to better service clients
(through a larger base of resources, skills and knowledge), it was particularly important in
protecting the longevity of relationships between firms, rather than between individuals, so if a
person left, the team would continue. The likelihood of a client contact leaving and having a
detrimental effect on the relationship was as relevant for small clients as for large clients, since in
the latter case, it seemed more likely a client contact would move for career advancement. Thus,
PSFs made efforts to introduce clients to the assigned team, to ensure client information was
shared among the team (e.g., through internal briefing sessions) and encouraged relationships at
all seniority levels.
“…you can’t be reliant on one person to, although you have a relationship Partner you
put yourself in a very difficult position if that relationship Partner, ever leaves, gets hit
by a truck, whatever, goes to a competitor. There’s a high likelihood that they’ll take that
client with them. And that’s why we try and make sure that the relationships are at all
levels of the organisation across lots of areas” (Lawyer, large)
“…we don’t just have one person from us and one person from the client, it’s a team…we
build it right through… so we build relationships with our equivalents…it’s about having
lots of links, rather than just one.” (Accountant, large)
“Our Regional Operations are where the company has come from… these are branch
operations, branch workshops and they, to be honest with you, they deal with both the
large, but a whole ratbag full of smaller customers, which I have to say, we don’t try to
spend a great deal of time analysing. Our primary focus is on larger contracts for
engineering and larger contracts for maintenance” (Consultant engineer, large)
To establish good rapport, PSFs matched their team to the client team through personal aspects
(e.g., personality, demographics), seniority and formality (including dress) and did not hesitate to
change team members if there was a problem, such as a personality clash. Some of the firms
15
(mainly the larger firms) also assigned an employee to develop new business or to coordinate and
manage the relationship by setting up meetings, addressing client concerns, identifying
opportunities or inviting clients to social events. In these cases, a person such as a Relationship
Manager, Marketing Manager or Business Developer was employed specifically for the role or a
senior staff member was made responsible. The formality and extent of the relationship
management activities ranged from casual chats to regular client audits with a formal report and
presentation back to the supplier team.
“We have relationship Partners designated for each client… or the most senior person
doing the work, so when they have a problem or whatever, they have got their
relationship partner to talk to and I think clients find that of value, because, someone who
they have a relationship with, they can be obviously a bit more candid and honest to talk
with them about what they expect and what they were hoping for and so forth.” (Lawyer,
large)
“Even though we are small, we have a guy who is full time doing the marketing and
prospecting for business, networking …the next step in the process is he will introduce
myself or one of the other technical guys,… we take over the relationship… and then he
will step aside.” (Accountant, medium)
In addition to teams and the relationship manager, the method of managing clients
differed somewhat according to the size of PSFs. While many service firms had various
tiers of clients categorised in terms of profitability, size or development (i.e. new or
established client), the larger firms were more likely to formalise this. Larger firms
appeared more focused on larger or more profitable clients, minimising contact with the
smaller less profitable potential clients.
“When I look at my clients, they are all the same so I have to give them all the same sort
of service. That’s important. They are all in the same category. Because there aren’t
enough of them to say, A, B, C or D’s. And even if they are big or small, it doesn’t matter.
That’s the disadvantage of talking to me in a small firm” (Management consultant,
small)“.
16
“.. the way that we tend to structure things, on, you know what we consider to be
significant relationships, , is that we’ll have allocated, particularly for the top two
hundred, although I think we’re about to do it for the top five hundred, clients, each one
has allocated a relationship Partner” (Lawyer, large).
“I think we have five tiers of customers. Our tier one clients, are those who are critical
to our revenue and profitability, and they would be mil- half million dollar plus clients.
…and tier five is pretty much the clients that are not really that worth while in terms in
terms of our revenue and profitability but, you know they just bubble along, but we could
just give them to some of our more junior staff…smaller jobs, that sort of thing“
(Management consultant, medium).
An analysis of the use of relationship management practices based on our judging procedure
indicated that relationship management was more prevalent in larger firms. The difference,
analysed using a non-parametric approach, was significant across firm size (p
Relationship marketing has been suggested to be the new marketing paradigm, replacing the toolkit offered by the four P’s. While this concept dates back to the bazaars of ancient times, academic focus on the topic has sharpened in the last three decades.
Professional Service Firms are Relationship Marketers: But does size matter?
in press
Australasian Marketing Journal
Janet R. McColl-Kennedy, PhD*
Professor of Marketing
UQ Business School, University of Queensland
Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
Tel: 61 7 3365 6673
Email: [email protected]
Jillian C. Sweeney, PhD
Professor, UWA Business School University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Tel: 61 8 6488 1438
Email: [email protected]
Geoffrey N. Soutar, PhD
Professor, UWA Business School University of Western Australia
Graduate School of Management, University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Tel: 61 8 6488 7885
Email: [email protected]
Claudia Amonini, PhD
Research Associate
UWA Business School, University of Western Australia
35 Stirling Highway
Crawley, Western Australia 6009
Tel: 61 8 6488 2908
Email: [email protected]
* Please address all correspondence to this author
Acknowledgements: This study was supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery
Grant.
1
2
Authors
Janet R. McColl-Kennedy is Professor of Marketing and Director of Research at UQ Business
School, University of Queensland, Australia. She has published in The Leadership Quarterly,
Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Service Research, Journal of Business Research,
and Journal of Services Marketing.
Jillian C. Sweeney is a Professor in the UWA Business School University of Western Australia.
Her research has been published in Journal of Retailing, Psychology and Marketing, Journal of
Service Research and Journal of Services Marketing.
Geoffrey N. Soutar is Professor UWA Business School, University of Western Australia. His
research has been published in Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of International Business
Studies, Journal of Retailing, Decision Sciences, and Psychology and Marketing.
Claudia Amonini is a Research Associate at UWA Business School, University of Western
Australia.
Professional Service Firms are Relationship Marketers: But does size matter?
Abstract
There are few research-based insights into professional service firms’ (PSFs) contemporary
marketing practices. This is unfortunate as the professional services sector is a key contributor to
growth in Australian and other economies around the world. As professional services are unique
in a number of ways and their operations and marketing activities inextricably intertwined, the
present study investigated the extent to which PSFs practice marketing and whether this differs
according to size. Depth interviews were held with thirty seven Australian senior managers in
four key industries. We examined the extent of relationship marketing, conceptualised at an
overall managerial level as well as four sub-practices identified in research by Coviello and
colleagues. We found relationship management and interaction marketing were the most common
practices, which is consistent with the inseparability concept, and that relationship management
and database marketing were more common in larger firms, which is consistent with their relative
resource strength.
Keywords: Marketing practices, Professional service firms
1
Professional Service Firms are Relationship Marketers Too
1. Introduction
Relationship marketing has been suggested to be the new marketing paradigm, replacing the toolkit
offered by the four P’s (e.g. Webster 1992). While this concept dates back to the bazaars of ancient times,
academic focus on the topic has sharpened in the last three decades. Despite the importance of
relationship marketing, Coviello et al. (2002) found consumer service providers often used a transactional
marketing approach, which was also commonly used by business-to-business service firms. However,
little is known about the use and specifically the extent of use of relational or transactional marketing
among professional service firms (PSFs) as no prior research has examined this issue in this context.
PSFs have been slow to adopt formal marketing strategies and their attitudes towards marketing are
mixed (Hodge et al. 1990; Crane 1993; Yavas and Riecken 2001; Barr and McNeilly 2003). Nonetheless,
since However, professional services are people-centred, it is likely most PSFs practice some form of
relationship marketing, whether they specifically recognise it or not.
Given the unique challenges faced by PSFs, the present study investigated the appropriateness of
Coviello et al.’s (1997) four relationship marketing practices in such a context. Further, the study
attempted to identify the activities that supported such practices. Such an approach is consistent
with Kohli and J aworski’s (1990) approach to measuring market orientation and offers a practical
description as to what translates relationship marketing into practice. It is also follows Barr and
McNeilly’s (2003) suggestion that there is plenty of commentary on what professional service
firms should do, but little on what firms are actually doing. The study therefore examined the
practices of different types of PSFs, including law, consulting engineering, accounting and
finance and marketing and management consulting by addressing two questions:
2
• To what extent do PSFs undertake various relationship marketing practices and, more
specifically, what are the activities that underlie these practices?
• Does the size of a PSF impact on the relative emphasis placed on the relationship
marketing practices it undertakes?
Before the study that was undertaken to answer these questions is discussed, an overview of
relevant prior research into the services sector and the conceptualisation of marketing practices is
provided in the next section.
2. Background
2.1 Service sector growth
The service sector is an important contributor to economic growth (United Nations 2005).
Indeed, in some western economies, the service sector accounts for more than 70% of gross
domestic product (GDP). For example, services make up approximately 80% of the GDP in the
United States, 74% in the United Kingdom, 73% in the Netherlands and 72% in Canada and
Australia (Central Intelligence Agency 2004). Business and professional service firms account
for a sizeable share of this contribution (e.g. 11% of GDP in the United States (Kirkpatrick 2004)
and 15% of GDP in the United Kingdom (United Nations 2005)).
The United Nations Trade and Development Board recently noted that professional services are
“one of the fastest growth sectors in economies worldwide, achieving double-digit growth rates”
(United Nations 2004, p. 4). This is particularly evident in Australia. In the last decade full-time
employment in the business and professional services sector rose 64% compared to 6.5% for the
3
overall economy during the same period (Department of Industry, Science and Resources and
Australian Trade Commission 2001).
Although the focus of professional services has traditionally been on domestic growth,
international trade in this sector is mounting. Driven by globalisation and innovative
technologies, international trade in professional services has increased from approximately 18%
of world trade to 23% in the last two decades (Australian Trade Commission 2006; ABS
Catalogue 5302 2006). Professional services have become the fastest growing sector of world
trade and, thus, they are a primary source of growth for developed and developing countries
(United Nations 2004). Such trends highlight the importance of professional service providers
and suggest a need to examine their marketing practices.
2.2 Marketing in professional service firms
Professional service firms are different to many other firms. As Gummesson (1981, p. 108)
noted a quarter of a century ago:
“A professional service is qualified, it is advisory and problem solving, even though
it may encompass some routine work for clients. The professionals involved have a
common identity, like physicians, lawyers, accountants or engineers and are regulated
by traditions and codes of ethics. The service offered, if accepted, involves the
professional in taking on assignments for the client and those assignments are
themselves the limit of the professional’s involvement. Such assignments are not
undertaken to merely sell hardware or other services.”
4
In years gone by, many PSFs did not need to market themselves as demand exceeded supply.
However, several trends have changed this situation, including:
• More sophisticated and discerning customers, deregulation, increased competition and new
technologies (Morgan et al. 1994).
• Clients who no longer seem to hold professionals in high esteem, as can be seen in the
number of malpractice suits and a variety of other challenges to professional authority
(Herbig and Milewicz 1993).
• Increased competition in local markets and the opening of international markets that offer
significant opportunities for smart operators (Australian Trade Commission 2006; ABS
Catalogue 5302 2006).
Moreover, professional service firms face unique marketing challenges. Professional services are
known to be on the extreme intangibility end of the tangibility spectrum. Their ‘product’ is the
result of many years of specialised study and training and clients have difficulty evaluating these
‘products’ (Zeithaml 1981). In addition, professional services are complex (in terms of the
number of steps involved) and divergent (in terms of the range in the execution at each step)
(Hausman 2003). There also seems to be little standardisation in the offerings of many
professional services. These factors lead to increased client uncertainty, which means decisions
are difficult to make (Morgan et al. 1994; Kotler et al. 2002). Moreover, adherence to a
professional code of ethics and the acceptance of general professional standards means PSFs
must also take account of regulatory agencies and other members of their own profession (Kotler
et al. 2002).
5
Professional service providers have often been reported as having a negative view of marketing
(e.g. Morgan 1990; Dalkin 1994; Schimmel and Davis 1995; Kotler et al. 2002), largely due to a
desire to distance themselves from commercialism. This attitude is derived from a fear that
marketing will devalue their business and have a negative impact on customer perceptions and an
assumption on their part that marketing is only about selling or advertising (Morgan 1990).
Further, although bans on advertising have been lifted or liberalised in some professions (e.g. in
the legal market), restrictions on marketing still apply and several commentators have suggested
there is an anti-marketing and advertising culture in many PSFs (e.g. Gaedeke and Tootelian
1987; Hodge et al. 1990; Burton 1991; Kotler et al. 2002; Barr and McNeilly 2003). This
scepticism about marketing remains because there are relatively few professionals who are
trained in marketing and many firms do not employ marketing professionals. Such organisations
lack the marketing skills and the time required for the marketing process. Further, many
professionals view time spent marketing as “wasted” time as it is deducted from billable hours
(Barr and McNeilly 2003; Kotler et al. 2002). Thus, while some PSFs have realised the need to
engage in marketing (Hodge et al. 1990; Olson 2005), many are reluctant to take a formal
marketing approach (Hodge et al. 1990; Barr and McNeilly 2003).
The differences between PSFs and other service firms, plus the negative views held of marketing
by many professional service providers raises questions as to the mechanisms by which positive
customer perceptions and behaviours, and ultimately firm outcomes, are generated. Indeed, as
professional service processes are inseparable from the provider (Heil 1994), PSFs undoubtedly
undertake some form of relationship marketing activity, whether they recognise it as such or not.
Given our focus on relationship marketing, we were interested in identifying the relationship
marketing practices PSFs employ and how they are used. The research undertaken by Coviello et
6
al. (1997, 2002) in developing a classification framework of contemporary marketing practices
provided the framework for the present study. They focused on a “new relationship marketing
paradigm” and developed a typology of four types of marketing practices that they found was
common across a broad range of organisations. Believing that the definition of relationship
marketing was too broad and open to interpretation, Coviello et al. (1997) identified three
specific components, namely:
• Database marketing, which involves the use of technology-based tools to target and retain
customers.
• Interaction marketing, which is based on face to face interpersonal interactions within
relationships to create cooperative interactions between buyers and sellers for mutual
benefit.
• Network marketing, which focuses on developing interfirm relationships to coordinate
activities among multiple parties for mutual benefit.
Firms may also undertake transactional marketing activities, which are used to manage the
marketing mix so as to attract and satisfy customers and which sit at the opposite end of the
relationship strategy continuum (Grönroos 2000). We term the set of four practices, relationship
marketing practices, since transaction marketing refers to a point on the relationship marketing
continuum [Footnote 1].
While we understand Coviello et al’s (1997) rationale to examine specific aspects of relationship
marketing, we also believe that ‘relationship marketing and management’ should be included as
an additional related but distinct approach. Gronroos’s (1990) original definition of relationship
7
marketing implies a managerial component with respect to maintaining and enhancing
relationships. This is depicted clearly in the ‘ladder of customer loyalty’ in which relationship
marketing merges and acts synergistically with relationship management over the stages of the
relationship, with relationship management becoming dominant in the later, more established
stages of the relationship (Lovelock et al. 2004). The importance of managing the relationship is
also supported through the concept of service management trinity, that is the interrelationships
between marketing management, human resource management and operations management
(Lovelock et al., 2007). Grönroos (2007, p43) emphasises that the management of relationship
activities is crucial “Although improved communication with customers using planned means of
marketing communication is an essential element [of relationship marketing] the management of
activities relating to the facilitation, management and everyday handling of the interactions with
planning customers may be much more critical to successfully implemented relationship
marketing” (bracketed term added). From hereon the term relationship management rather than
relationship marketing will be used to refer to this concept [Footnote 2]. Thus the five practices
examined in the present study included a broader relationship management concept, which may
include a number of management practices, as well as Coviello et al.’s (1997) four relationship
marketing sub-practices.
Following Coviello et al.’s (2000, p. 541) call to fully understand “the scope of what is really
being practiced” and to “assess actual practices and expand on the detail accorded to the
measures for market planning and performance measurement” (p. 543) the present study also
sought to examine the activities used by PSFs in carrying out these practices. Thus we took an
operational approach to understanding PSFs marketing practices, in contrast to Coviello and her
colleagues, who discussed principles, such as managerial intent, focus and duration. Our
8
approach takes up Kohli and J aworski’s (1990) call to be specific as to how strategies are
implemented in practice in order to enhance their managerial relevance.
2.3 Size of firm
Most prior research has suggested small firms are informal and lack strategic orientation (e.g.,
Pearson and Ellram 1995; Prater and Ghosh 2005). However, although there is some evidence
that this informality is a sign of them being pragmatic and flexible in their reactions to customer
requirements, rather than a sign of them not understanding strategy (OECD 1997; Kalantaridis
2004). Coviello et al. (2000) examined the differences between larger and smaller firms’
marketing practices. While they expected smaller firms to emphasise interaction and network
marketing, they found firm size had only a minimal impact on these two practices and suggested
small firms’ marketing practices may not be very different from those of large firms. However,
they suggested further research was needed to better understand this issue.
Given the unique aspects of PSFs, such as their people-centred nature and the nexus between
their operations and marketing (Kotler et al. 2002) all PSFs, regardless of size, are likely to
practice interaction marketing. However, as smaller firms have fewer resources (e.g. marketing
expertise and time), it would seem that smaller PSFs are less likely to practice support activities,
such as database marketing and possibly network marketing. Smaller PSFs may also be less
formal in their marketing in terms of not having mission, vision statements (Coviello et al. 2000)
and strategic plans and may be less likely to have a strategic approach when planning
relationships (Gray et al. 2005) . Therefore we specifically propose that interaction marketing
would be common regardless of firm size (P1), while we expected database and network
marketing to be more common in larger firms (P2 and 3). Further, given the developmental
9
nature of our relationship management component, we propose this will be more evident in larger
firms (P4). These issues were also examined within the present study, which is discussed in the
next section.
3. Method
3.1 Sample and data collection method
A purposive sampling design was adopted since the goal of the research was developmental,
rather than theory testing or statistical generalisation (Neuman, 2000). Thirty seven senior people
who worked in a range of Australian PSFs, including consulting engineers, accountants, lawyers,
financial planners and marketing and management consultants, and who were knowledgeable
about the way their organisations interacted with their clients, were interviewed.. The depth
interviews were conducted in rural and metropolitan locations in three states (Queensland, New
South Wales and Western Australia) with firms that ranged in size from less than ten employees
to more than one thousand employees, although approximately two-thirds of the firms that
participated had less than 50 employees, as can be seen in Table 1, which provides some
summary information about the participating firms.
“take in Table 1”
Depth interviews are an excellent way to obtain insights into the phenomenon of interest as they
provide detailed contextual information that cannot be obtained from survey approaches
(Gwinner et al. 1998). A discussion guide was used for the interviews along the lines suggested
by Minichiello et al. (1995). Following a brief description of the research project, interviews
began with the collection of background information about the organisation, the organisation’s
10
customer base and its culture. After this phase, interviewees were asked about the ways their
firms interact with their customers (unprompted) and were then prompted about the use of
various practices. Relationship marketing was discussed first, followed by Coviello and her
colleagues’ (1997, 2002) marketing practices (interaction, database, network and transaction). To
aid discussion, respondents were handed a prompt card on which the definitions shown in Table 1
were listed. Probing statements were used to clarify and explore participants’ responses,
especially to help identify the activities used to implement each of the strategies mentioned (e.g.,
“tell me more about that”, “what sort of things do you do to implement that”, and “what do you
do you mean by that”). Respondents were also encouraged to discuss other marketing activities
the firm undertook.
At the end of the interview, participants were asked for additional comments and for descriptive
information, such as firm size, years of operation and performance. Interviews ranged from 45 to
90 minutes and all of the interviews were audio-taped and transcribed into Microsoft Word to
facilitate subsequent content analysis. Two judges analysed the data to identify evidence of the
various practices. One judge used NVIVO, while the other judge examined the transcripts
manually. The complete list of strategies and practices found is discussed in the findings section.
In assessing the extent of use of the various practices, a classification procedure similar to that
used to analyse critical incidents was employed. The two judges independently categorised the
extent to which each respondent actively used each strategy using a simple four point scale
(‘don't use at all’ (0); ‘little use/limited/have in the past, not now’ (1); ‘moderate use/do a range
of activities/frequent use’ (2); and ‘high use and do a range of activities’ (3)).
11
It was particularly important in the classification process, that the service provider demonstrated
behaviours, rather than merely viewing the practice as ‘important’. This analytic induction
process consisted of repeated careful reading and assessment of the interviews to identify the
various behaviours of interest. There were eleven discrepancies of two points or more across the
185 judgments (37 interviews by 5 types of practice), which were resolved through discussion
between the judges. Subsequently the evaluations of both judges were averaged. The definitions
of the various practices used by the two coders were adopted from Coviello et al. (1997) and are
described in Table 2.
“take in Table 2”
Due to the subjective nature of categorisation in qualitative research, inter-judge reliability was
assessed through Perreault and Leigh’s (1989) index of reliability, which is an improvement over
previous inter-judge agreement measures as it takes account of the number of coding categories
used. While this index was developed for nominal classification, it is suitable when examining an
ordinal scale. Further, the index is more conservative when used with ordinal scales rather than
with nominal scales due to the potential for greater overlap between categories (e.g., values of
two and three representing moderate to high use). The reliability measure was 0.77 for all
strategy types across the 37 service providers. Although Perreault and Leigh (1989) provided no
specific guidelines as to what value was acceptable in assessing the reliability of category
assignments, they suggested that 0.70 is reasonable for exploratory work, as in the present case.
4. Findings
Professional service firms’ use of relationship management is discussed first, followed by an
examination of the approach’s sub-themes (interaction, network and database marketing), after
12
which transaction marketing activities are discussed. Definitions for each of these strategies are
shown in Table 2.
As a preliminary investigation to our discussion, the formality of marketing in PSFs was
examined by asking participants whether their organisations had a mission or vision statement,
formal written goals or a strategic plan. Larger firms (50 or more employees) were more likely to
have these (92%, 69% and 83% respectively) than were small firms (1 to 10 employees) (17% in
each case). As might be expected medium sized firms (11 to 49 employees) were between the
two extremes (75%, 75% and 42% respectively).
4.1 Relationship management
Relationship marketing involves establishing, maintaining and enhancing relationships with
customers and other partners so the objectives of the parties involved are met (Grönroos 2000). A
key aspect of relationship marketing is managing the relationship, with attention to the interface
between marketing, human resources and operations management. Relationship management was
commonly used by the participating PSFs. Indeed, the majority of firms, irrespective of type or
size, spoke about the importance of having a relational, rather than a transactional focus. Many
respondents discussed the benefits of relationships. For example:
“Relationship marketing is all about Key Client Account Management, we have key
clients that we focus on and do not get distracted by other clients (Lawyer, large)
“I look for a long-term recurring work rather than short-term work of any sort. For two
reasons, one, you have a client that can then be sold on to, in succession planning and,
two, you get to know the client and, the first time through you might struggle with the
client, but the next year you might find it easier and therefore recover some of the costs
you burn in the first year or so. So the longer you have a client, the more chance that you
are going to average your costs out and not lose on them” (Accountant, small)
13
“We certainly are trying to gain the trust and establish those long term relationships.
That’s where we probably pride ourselves in probably being the oldest or second oldest
firm here, and perhaps in the region...If they [clients] are going to transfer something
over to one of their children, - the opportunity to sit down and go through it with them
and tell them the possible ramifications of what they’re going to do” (Lawyer, medium).
Further, relationship management was seen as enabling a firm to gain a sustainable competitive
advantage by working closely with its clients. This even extended to working in the client’s
offices, so that services could be tailored to specifically meet needs, making it difficult for the
client to leave or for other suppliers to copy the services provided.
“We become part of their business and part of their family, most of the time”
(Accountant, medium).
“We have got people actually in their office, So they’ve got ready access. They just walk
to the next door office and we’re there, sort of thing. So we’re right in there at the
‘ground roots’” (Consultant engineer, medium)
Communication, matching staff with the clients’ staff, team work and a relationship manager
were the most frequently mentioned business-related activities used to foster healthy
relationships. Communication activities included “being open, honest, genuine and friendly
when dealing with the client, rather than being ‘salesy’” (Law), as well as proactively informing
clients of issues (either relating to the specific work commissioned or to the broader industry) that
may impact, or be of value to, the client. The use of face-to-face and one-on-one meetings was
seen as important to get a better understanding of clients, particularly at the beginning of a
relationship. Relationship managers or partners who take overall responsibility of a team for
client relationships were more common in larger firms. Such a person typically took
responsibility for the strategic relationship with the client as well as coordinating the operational
aspects internally.
14
In larger organisations in particular, PSFs used a team of employees to service the client, rather
than relying on one employee. Such relationships were at various levels of operations and
typically consisted of a series of dyadic relationships. As well as helping to better service clients
(through a larger base of resources, skills and knowledge), it was particularly important in
protecting the longevity of relationships between firms, rather than between individuals, so if a
person left, the team would continue. The likelihood of a client contact leaving and having a
detrimental effect on the relationship was as relevant for small clients as for large clients, since in
the latter case, it seemed more likely a client contact would move for career advancement. Thus,
PSFs made efforts to introduce clients to the assigned team, to ensure client information was
shared among the team (e.g., through internal briefing sessions) and encouraged relationships at
all seniority levels.
“…you can’t be reliant on one person to, although you have a relationship Partner you
put yourself in a very difficult position if that relationship Partner, ever leaves, gets hit
by a truck, whatever, goes to a competitor. There’s a high likelihood that they’ll take that
client with them. And that’s why we try and make sure that the relationships are at all
levels of the organisation across lots of areas” (Lawyer, large)
“…we don’t just have one person from us and one person from the client, it’s a team…we
build it right through… so we build relationships with our equivalents…it’s about having
lots of links, rather than just one.” (Accountant, large)
“Our Regional Operations are where the company has come from… these are branch
operations, branch workshops and they, to be honest with you, they deal with both the
large, but a whole ratbag full of smaller customers, which I have to say, we don’t try to
spend a great deal of time analysing. Our primary focus is on larger contracts for
engineering and larger contracts for maintenance” (Consultant engineer, large)
To establish good rapport, PSFs matched their team to the client team through personal aspects
(e.g., personality, demographics), seniority and formality (including dress) and did not hesitate to
change team members if there was a problem, such as a personality clash. Some of the firms
15
(mainly the larger firms) also assigned an employee to develop new business or to coordinate and
manage the relationship by setting up meetings, addressing client concerns, identifying
opportunities or inviting clients to social events. In these cases, a person such as a Relationship
Manager, Marketing Manager or Business Developer was employed specifically for the role or a
senior staff member was made responsible. The formality and extent of the relationship
management activities ranged from casual chats to regular client audits with a formal report and
presentation back to the supplier team.
“We have relationship Partners designated for each client… or the most senior person
doing the work, so when they have a problem or whatever, they have got their
relationship partner to talk to and I think clients find that of value, because, someone who
they have a relationship with, they can be obviously a bit more candid and honest to talk
with them about what they expect and what they were hoping for and so forth.” (Lawyer,
large)
“Even though we are small, we have a guy who is full time doing the marketing and
prospecting for business, networking …the next step in the process is he will introduce
myself or one of the other technical guys,… we take over the relationship… and then he
will step aside.” (Accountant, medium)
In addition to teams and the relationship manager, the method of managing clients
differed somewhat according to the size of PSFs. While many service firms had various
tiers of clients categorised in terms of profitability, size or development (i.e. new or
established client), the larger firms were more likely to formalise this. Larger firms
appeared more focused on larger or more profitable clients, minimising contact with the
smaller less profitable potential clients.
“When I look at my clients, they are all the same so I have to give them all the same sort
of service. That’s important. They are all in the same category. Because there aren’t
enough of them to say, A, B, C or D’s. And even if they are big or small, it doesn’t matter.
That’s the disadvantage of talking to me in a small firm” (Management consultant,
small)“.
16
“.. the way that we tend to structure things, on, you know what we consider to be
significant relationships, , is that we’ll have allocated, particularly for the top two
hundred, although I think we’re about to do it for the top five hundred, clients, each one
has allocated a relationship Partner” (Lawyer, large).
“I think we have five tiers of customers. Our tier one clients, are those who are critical
to our revenue and profitability, and they would be mil- half million dollar plus clients.
…and tier five is pretty much the clients that are not really that worth while in terms in
terms of our revenue and profitability but, you know they just bubble along, but we could
just give them to some of our more junior staff…smaller jobs, that sort of thing“
(Management consultant, medium).
An analysis of the use of relationship management practices based on our judging procedure
indicated that relationship management was more prevalent in larger firms. The difference,
analysed using a non-parametric approach, was significant across firm size (p