BPM & Marketing
BPM & Marketing
the value, the resistance, and the connection
By
Sjoerd D. Seffinga
June 2008
Master of Science in Business Administration Specialization Business Development
Faculty of Economics and Business University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Student:
Sjoerd D. Seffinga Stud. nr: 1570684 Supervisors:
Ir. W. Lanting Dr. J. Kratzer
Faculty of Economics and Business Faculty of Economics and Business University of Groningen University of Groningen
Ing. Niels Visser Ir. Emile Vermeulen
Consultant O&I Consultant O&i
Preface
BPM is currently not a very popular term in the Netherlands because most people will identify the abbreviation with Car taxes. This research is focusing upon another kind of BPM, business process management. The only similarity with the car taxes is that both BPM’s sometimes create
resistance. In the case of business process management it is resistance from marketing departments. The resistance, BPM, and marketing departments are the ingredients for this research.
Writing a master thesis is a long process with ‘ups’ and ‘downs’. But when the circumstances are right, the ‘downs’ can be reduced to a minimum. And that is exactly what O&i, the University, my environment and myself tried to do, and I think we succeeded.
O&i offered me a perfect place to conduct this research, they gave me a nice working environment, freedom, education, the right contacts, resources and perfect guidance. For that I want to thank the whole organization. Special thanks goes to Niels Visser and Emile Vermeulen who supported me during the research period and shared their knowledge about the subject with me.
From the University of Groningen I want to thank Mr. W.Lanting for his support, interest and feedback during this period, I considered it as a pleasant ‘collaboration’.
I also want to thank my family and friends, who supported me and always where interested in the developments of the graduation process.
This final examination means the end of a very pleasant study time. I left Groningen and moved already to Utrecht and I can do nothing more than look back with a very satisfied feeling.
Up to the next phase in my life, which I will try to make as pleasant as possible for my family and friends, the rest of the world, and myself.
Utrecht, juni 2008
Abstract
Business process management (BPM) is a business philosophy to improve organizations and to work in a process oriented way. This philosophy is accepted and successful within many firms. However, O&i, a BPM consultancy organization, experienced a certain resistance against process management from marketing departments. While O&i is convinced of the appreciation of BPM for marketing departments. The resistance is based upon experiences of O&i and has to be seen as a one sided view, from an O&i perspective.
Based upon the motive of the research the following research question is formulated: What are the main reasons for the resistance (from an O&i perspective) against BPM from
marketing departments, and how can O&i overcome this barrier and serve marketing departments with their BPM services. The goal of the research is to exemplify the relationship between
marketing departments and BPM, and to give an advice to overcome the resistance and improve the relationship between marketing and BPM.
It is obvious that marketing departments need a trigger or driver to work according to BPM principles. BPM has to add value to a marketing department, this added value can be seen as a driver or trigger. Those drivers and triggers can be stimulated by certain issues marketing
departments have to deal with. Based upon the literature research the conclusion can be made that marketing departments are struggling with several issues. Issues like insufficient performance measurement, bad collaboration, lack of described processes and unaccountability. These issues of marketing departments are ideal situations to implement BPM, because the issues marketing departments have to deal with, could be perfectly solved by the advantages of BPM. Examples of advantages of BPM are: interdepartmental collaboration, ensure consistency, more control, best practices, increase of creativity and performance management.
So, according to the findings from literature the conclusion can be made that marketing departments have triggers and drivers to implement BPM.
No articles or books argue why BPM is not generally accepted by marketing departments. The only disadvantage of BPM is the specific implementation. When the implementation of BPM is not right, BPM will have a negative effect on the organization. But in general, a good implemented BPM system only has advantages. Even though BPM offers advantages and added value, it is not yet accepted by marketing departments. Another reason for resistance has to be the cause. The resistance against BPM is not tangible, there are no objective reasons to resist BPM. That is why a field research is conducted, this will clarify the intangible reasons of resistance.
The field research distinguishes four possible reasons for resistance. Firstly, BPM knowledge, there is a possibility of lack of knowledge about BPM and its possible advantages, which causes
disinterest. Secondly, disadvantages mentioned by the respondents, when BPM has disadvantages it is another reason to create resistance. Disadvantage is the absence or deprivation of advantage or equality, which causes objections. Thirdly, pre-conceptions about BPM, which means the opinions of BPM formed beforehand. This can cause a wrong image of BPM, causing a certain resistance. And last, marketing culture is also a possible reason for resistance. The culture of marketing possibly influences the attitude towards BPM.
The issues mentioned by literature are confirmed by the external stakeholders, the marketers did not mention any issues except from the difficulty of performance measurement. The different answers from external and internal respondents are remarkable and also the corresponding
outcomes of the literature and practice. All the internal marketers were positive about their process system, while external stakeholders where very sceptical about the process management
performances of marketing departments.
This can mean two things:
Firstly, differences between the researched firms. Which means that firms of the interviewed stakeholders have poor marketing departments without any process management which clarifies the negative image, while the marketing departments within the firms of the internal respondents do not have any issues and are working perfectly.
The second option is that the firms are the same but marketers do not recognize the issues within their marketing department, while external stakeholders do. Which is also reasonable because of the similarities with the research-outcomes of Leeflang (2005). The second implication means a certain competition between departments in stead of collegiate, which is also supported by literature (Richardson, 2007).
Based upon the second conclusion, it is a cultural aspect which influences the attitude towards BPM the most. ‘The opinion of being the most important department of the organization’ and the denial of issues can be seen as the major reason for the resistance. These beliefs and values (culture) influence the need for BPM. So, are not causing direct resistance but ‘do not recognize the need to measure, control and collaborate’ (BPM).
This research does not want to pretend that marketing departments have to have problems, it is even better when they work without any problem, but it is remarkable that different parties, independently, assert that marketing departments can improve their business while marketers do not come up with issues within their department. And this is not a new subject because the quote of Gloria Steinmen perfectly suits with this statement, ‘The first resistance to change is to say it is not necessary’.
The denial of issues is part of a cultural aspect of the resistance against BPM. The other possible reasons of resistance do not influence the resistance against BPM directly, because they are partly irrelevant through the cultural aspect. The denial of issues influences the BPM knowledge. Seven of the eight respondents know what process management is but not the issues it can solve. This issues within marketing departments are unknown by marketers, consequently BPM is not recognized as a problem solving tool.
Furthermore, the disinterest means a barrier to acquire more BPM knowledge. Marketers will not acquire more information about BPM when they do not see the appreciation of BPM. The interview respondents did not have negative pre-conceptions about BPM, they all saw the advantages of BPM but on a different level (maturity) this is also influenced by the knowledge of BPM. It is remarkable that the respondents themselves did not have negative preconceptions, but mentioned the
negative preconceptions of their colleagues.
The fourth possible reason, the disadvantages of BPM is proven as no reason of resistance. Literature and field research proved no disadvantages on condition that the implementation is perfectly executed.
Therefore, the marketing culture (denial of marketing issues/problems) is the main cause of resistance and influences the other possible reasons as well.
To overcome the resistance is the hardest part, it is very hard to sell a service or product to a department which does not need any service.
It is important to communicate with marketing departments about the problems other departments experience and to research which advantages BPM can create for specific marketing departments. This will create a clear image of the current situation which might influence the marketing opinion.
However, the implementation of BPM within the whole firm is just a matter of time. ‘Process management is high on the priority list of the general boards’, in every organization including marketing departments. These changes are difficult to make because of the enormous scale and can be seen as long term projects.
Nowadays, O&i have to brief and train organizations about BPM and show the advantages for the marketing departments. This will not influence the opinion of marketing departments directly, so, O&i has to convince boards of the merit of BPM for the whole organization. Small parts of the current client organizations are using BPM. O&i is currently hired to improve the organization, but this is still a suboptimal improvement without the marketing department as a part of the process structure.
Sheet of content
1. General introduction……… 9
1.1. Description of the O&i organization……… 9
1.2. Motive of research ……… 10
1.3. Content and structure ……… 10
2. Research Design……… 12
2.1. Goal of the research……… 12
2.2. Research method……… 12
2.3. Problem statement……… 13
2.3.1. Main research question……… 13
2.3.2. Research sub questions……… 13
2.4. Conceptual Model……… 15
2.4.2. Interview questions and the conceptual model……… 16
2.5. Delimitation of research……… 17
3. Theory……… 18
3.1. Business Process management……… 19
3.1.1. Development of BPM……… 19 3.1.2. Analysing BPM ……… 19 3.1.3. Processes……… 20 3.1.4. Reasons for BPM……… 21 3.2. Marketing……… 22 3.2.1. Marketing defined ……… 22 3.2.2. Specifying marketing ……… 23 3.3. Resistance……… 25 3.3.1. An O&i perspective……… 25 3.3.2. Reasons of resistance ……… 25 3.3.3. Positive resistance……… 26
4. Process oriented organizations……… 27
4.1. The desirable horizontal Structure……… 27
4.2. Marketing departments and Processes……… 28
4.2.1. Structure ……… 29
4.2.2. Processes……… 30
5. Objective research – literature study……… 31
5.1. Marketing Issues……… 32
5.1.1. Conclusion disadvantages marketing……… 34
5.2. Advantages of BPM from literature……… 35
5.2.1. Collaboration……… 35
5.2.2. Creativity……… 36
5.2.3. Innovation, responsiveness and change ……… 38
5.2.4. Performance management……… 39
5.2.4.2. Efficiency ……… 41
5.2.5. Further benefits of BPM for marketing departments……… 41
5.2.5.1. Strategy alignment ……… 41 5.2.5.2. Responsibilities ……… 41 5.2.5.3. Communication……… 41 5.2.5.4. Simplification……… 42 5.2.5.5. Ensure consistency ……… 42 5.2.5.6. Speed ……… 42 5.2.5.7. Best practice ……… 42 5.3. Disadvantages of BPM……… 43
5.4. Other possibilities for Resistance ……… 44
5.4.1. Explanation of reasons of resistance……… 44
5.4.2. Possibilities of resistance ………45
5.4.3. Conclusion reasons of resistance……… 47
5.5. Conclusions objective research……… 47
6. The field research – Outline……… 48
6.1. Interviews……… 49
6.2. General impression……… 49
6.3. Processes and Marketing……… 50
6.4. Structure of marketing departments……… 51
7. Subjective research – field research ……… 52
7.1. Marketing Issues in the field……… 52
7.1.1. Performance measurement………53
7.1.2. Collaboration……… 54
7.1.3. Described processes……… 55
7.1.4. Flow of employees……… 56
7.1.5. Short term vs. Long term………56
7.1.6. Conclusions……… 57
7.2. BPM knowledge……… 59
7.2.1. Problem solving knowledge………60
7.3. Disadvantages of BPM in the field……… 61
7.3.1. Disadvantage O&i ……… 61
7.4. Pre-conceptions about BPM………62
7.5. Marketing Culture……… 64
7.6. Conclusion of subjective field research……… 66
8. Reasons for Resistance ……… 68
9. Conclusions and Advice……… 70
9.1. Advice for O&i………72
10. Limitations of this research……… 74
1. General introduction
This chapter introduces the firm for which the research is conducted, the subject and motive of the research is going to be explained and the structure will be clarified.
1.1. Description of the O&i organization
‘Increasing business agility by introducing a process-oriented organisation’ (O&i).
‘O&i is a medium-sized, multidisciplinary organisational consultancy, specialised in business process management (BPM). The expertise of O&i in this area is versatile: varying from risk management to business process outsourcing, from process architecture to (re)designing, writing and modelling processes’ (www.oi.nl).
‘O&i started in 1992 as an organisation consultancy at the interface of Organisation and
Information. Since then, O&i has developed into a valued partner in business. O&i is proactive and studies issues in depth before confronting their clients. The organization wants to expand as well as share the knowledge and experience they have gained. Dissemination of knowledge is an important concern of O&i. O&i consultants regularly publish articles on BPM, speak at seminars and
conferences and participate in study days covering numerous topics’ (www.oi.nl).
’O&i has always prided itself on a relationship with its clients, which is based on trust, or in today's terms 'customer intimacy'. Their service concept is based on cooperation with the client.
Consultants cooperate closely with the client organisation in order to arrive at smart and efficient process solutions. O&i teaches the client organisation to work independently in accordance with BPM principles. O&i supports organisations in the introduction of business process management. By making an organisation think and work process-oriented they increase the business agility: its capability for change, flexibility, speed, and decisiveness’ (www.oi.nl).
’O&i’s consultancy groups constitute part of a community, rather than being part of a hierarchical structure. The consultants comprise groups based on market windows, and within those, on fields of expertise. O&i distinguishes seven fields of expertise: process design, process management, process architecture, performance management, project management, change management and rule management. Experts from different groups come together in study groups for professional development and further professionalisation. Study groups fulfil an important role as a centre of knowledge in a particular field of expertise, as opposed to constituting an organisational unit’ (www.oi.nl).
Mission
1.2. Motive of research
‘International competition and faster technological changes demand increasingly effective performances from organisations. Management needs to improve its ability to deal with
organisational complexity and to increase the swiftness of response of its organisation. According to O&i it is important to realise improvements in performance and prevent organisational rigidity, management must pay attention to the design of its processes’ (www.oi.nl).
O&i wants to improve the agility of complete organizations (all departments), most of the departments are convinced by the advantages of BPM but O&i experienced a certain resistance against process management from marketing departments, while O&i is convinced of the
appreciation of BPM for marketing departments. This resistance becomes clear when O&i tries to turn over their client organizations to a process orientated organisation. O&i wants to research why there is such a bad fit between marketing departments and BPM. This inadequate acceptance is, according to O&i, the main obstacle to improve organizations as a whole.
The resistance is based upon experiences of O&i and has to be seen as a one sided view, from an O&i perspective. Based upon the motive of the research the following research question is
formulated:
What are the main reasons for the resistance (from an O&i perspective) against BPM from marketing departments, and how can O&i overcome this barrier and serve marketing departments
with their BPM services.
The research question will be further explained in chapter 2.3. The answer will not only provide an answer to O&i but has also an academic relevance. Less is known about BPM and marketing, this research will explore this field, in an academic way, and will not only provide intelligibility for O&i but can also be used by marketing departments, other consultancy organizations and other academic researchers. This research can be a start for further research about BPM and Marketing. The managerial relevance is clear; provide O&i with an advice or support tool to approach
marketing departments and overcome the experienced resistance.
Such research is important for O&i because it will push the BPM service of O&i to the front end of client organizations, where, according to O&i, the decision makers and the large budgets can be reached. The answers of this research have to convince executive boards to implement BPM through the complete organization, including marketing.
1.3. Content and structure
outlines a process oriented structure, this will give more insight about the difference between a process oriented- and a functional oriented firm.
The fifth chapter is the start of the research and will discuss all the outcomes of the objective literature research. This research is based upon other researches and literature. The chapter will mention marketing issues, advantages of BPM, disadvantages of BPM and possibilities of
resistance. This will result in a short conclusion.
In chapter six, the second part of the research will be outlined, the field research / subjective research. Chapter six will mention the method of research and a general impression. The seventh chapter will evaluate the outcomes of the subjective research. Again the marketing issues, within the field, will be discussed, furthermore, BPM knowledge, disadvantages of BPM, pre-conceptions about BPM and Marketing culture. This will lead to a short conclusion.
Chapter eight will give answer upon the first question of the research question, the reasons of resistance, a combination of literature and field research. The advice of overcoming resistance (second part of research question) can be found in chapter nine, ‘Conclusions and Advice’.
Several limitations and implications of this research will be mentioned in the tenth chapter,
2. Research Design
This chapter explains the research methodology, this is the ‘roadmap’ how to conduct this
research. By following this ‘roadmap’ the research has a clear and straight route to the goal of this research, which is: to answer the research question.
2.1. Goal of the research
The goal of the research is to exemplify the relationship between marketing departments and business process management. O&i experienced a certain resistance against BPM from marketing departments. O&i can only speculate about the reasons of resistance, existing reasons of resistance are never proven. So, the goal is not only to exemplify the relationship but also come up with an advice to overcome the resistance and improve the relationship between marketing and BPM.
The research will result in a clear overview of what BPM can do for marketing departments and how O&i has to approach marketing departments to overcome the resistance and deliver value.
2.2. Research method
This research can be typed as an explorative research. The goal of the research is not to test formulated hypotheses but to investigate the topic of BPM and Marketing. Those two topics are the basis of the research and at the end of this research the context has to be clear. Not many articles or other literature investigated the relationship of BPM and marketing, consequently the research can not be based on literature only.
To achieve the goal of this research a literature review will be combined with a field research. Firstly, the developments of marketing and processes will be discussed according to academic literature. Secondly, the combination will be made. In a later section the literature has to be brought into practice during a field research.
The field research is necessary to gain primary data about BPM and marketing, secondary information about BPM and marketing opinions are scarce. The primary data has to give a good insight about the advantages of BPM for marketing departments, the disadvantages, the
resistances, and the problems of marketing which can possibly be solved by BPM. All those data have to give an answer on the problem statement and sub questions. The data from the field research are subjective; the data is based upon opinions from experts from the field and therefore, cannot be seen as objective data.
It is possible that literature and practice contradict, which can also declare a possible gap. The combination of both researches have to justify the gap (BPM – marketing) and will be the basis for a funded advice (based on De Leeuw, 1996).
2.3. Problem statement
The problem statement is already revealed in chapter 1.2. This chapter will explain why this question is formulated this way and how to interpret this question. Furthermore the supporting sub questions will be explained.
2.3.1. Main research question
What are the main reasons for the resistance (from an O&i perspective) against BPM from
marketing departments, and how can O&i overcome this barrier and serve marketing departments with their BPM services.
The resistance from an O&i perspective can be caused by several reasons, which will be the basis of the sub questions. Besides of the resistances it is even possible that marketing departments have such other work processes that BPM does not add value for marketing. The resistance against or rejection of BMP is in that case grounded. BPM is, in that case, not the right tool to use for marketing departments.
However, this is still a form or resistance, from an O&i perspective, which declares the addition between squares. The second part of the research question: ‘And how can O&i overcome this barrier and serve marketing departments with their BPM services’ is the continuation of the question. After the identification of the resistance against BPM, a solution needs to be found, to break down this resistance.
2.3.2. Research sub questions
The research contains two different researches, which will be combined at the end of this report. Firstly, a literature study will be conducted, the data from the literature can be seen as objective data, analyzing both marketing and business process management. Secondly, the literature will be verified in practice. The experienced resistance has to be clarified during the qualitative interviews. The opinions of marketing managers will be the input for the, so called, subjective research.
Objective research sub questions – Literature study - What is business process management?
- What is marketing? - What is resistance?
- What are the disadvantages of BPM for marketing departments in general?
- Which BPM advantages are surpluses for the different marketing departments?
- What are the advantages for the organization as a whole when marketing is accepting process management?
Subjective research sub questions – Field research
- What are the reasons of resistance (O&i perspective) against process management? - Do marketing departments have certain knowledge about BPM?
o Do marketing departments know the benefits of BPM? - Do marketing departments know any disadvantages about BPM? - Do marketing departments have pre-conceptions about BPM? - Does marketing have a culture which not fits with BPM?
- How can O&i improve the communication of her BPM service to their potential marketing department clients?
Concluding, how can BPM help the marketing departments? Does BPM add value to marketing departments and does it deal with marketing issues? If so, why the resistance? And what are the reasons of resistance (from an O&i perspective) and how can this resistance be overcome?
2.4. Conceptual Model
The conceptual model is a graphical model of all research areas. O&i experienced a resistance against BPM, which can be caused by several reasons. O&i has to overcome or get round this barrier of resistance. Figure 2.1. displays the conceptual model of this research. The model is the basis of the research and covers all aspects of the research which will lead to the final answer of the research question.
BPM(I) is the starting point of the research. BPM is, according to O&i, an extremely useful tool for marketing departments (II). But those two aspects do not have the right fit. There is a certain confrontation between marketing and BPM, which can be seen as resistance (III), from an O&i perspective.
This resistance can be caused by several reasons, which is separated in an objective and a
subjective part. This is done because of the different types of reasons for resistance. The objective research (IV) is based upon a literature study which will answer the questions about the
advantages and disadvantages of BPM for marketing departments. If BPM has more disadvantages than advantages for marketing department it will not add value to marketing and the resistance from marketing departments is grounded. Furthermore, section (IV) will discuss issues marketing departments have to deal with, this can also be a reason for resistance.
The subjective research (V) deals with intangible aspects which is based upon opinions and situations and can be seen as addition and as control data. The subjective research will research
Marketing Departments (II) Resistance (III)
Main reasons of Resistance Objective Subjective research (IV) research (V)
Conclusions (VI)
Advice of overcoming resistance (VII) Business Process
management (I)
the pre-conceptions about BPM, the marketing culture, BPM knowledge, marketing issues in the field and the disadvantages of BPM according to the experts in the field.
If BPM does not create value for marketing departments the rejection is not based upon resistance reasons but upon lack of added value. This is a possible conclusion after section IV and V. When a service does add value but is not accepted, the assumption can be made that resistance occurs. The reasons of resistance will be discussed (VI), based upon the objective and subjective research.
So the goal of the research is ambiguous. Firstly, to determine the (dis)advantages of BPM for marketing departments. To serve the marketing departments, problems have to be identified. The problems of marketing departments are investigated as well in literature as in practice. Those problems can, possibly, be solved by BPM which creates added value for marketing departments and partly reduces resistance.
Secondly the research has to identify the reasons of resistance, which can also be the main cause of the non acceptation of BPM from marketing. The field research has to answer the question if marketing departments know about the possible advantages of BPM and why there is an observed resistance.
Concluding, the box advice of overcoming resistance (VII) suggests which actions and changes have to be made/done to offer marketing a value added BPM service without the obstacle of resistance. To overcome the resistance the advantages have to be emphasized, the negatives have to be eliminated and the communication has to be on the same level as the marketing
departments.
2.4.2. Interview questions and the conceptual model
The conceptual model is, as mentioned, the basis for the total research, the model will also be the basis for the interview questions. As made clear in the previous section there is a separation between literature research and field research. The subjective part of the research is based upon the field research. The aspects which will be researched are, pre-conceptions, Marketing culture, BPM Knowledge, marketing issues in the field and BPM disadvantages according to the experts in the field. These aspects of the field research are the basis for the interview questions. In appendix XIV. ‘The interviews’, the questions are linked to the five mentioned aspects.
By using the model of De Leeuw (1996, fig. 2.2.) the research design has to be completed by explaining how the data is going to be analysed. Three of the five ‘balls’ are already explained (Problem statement, Sources of Data and Measurement and observation methods).
To complete the ‘ball model’ (fig. 2.2.) ‘the method of analyzing the data’ has to be explained. The qualitative interviews can be seen as the ‘measurement and observation method’. This data will be analysed by comparing the different interviews. The interviews will be recorded and documented, the interviews will be summarized in the appendixes (XV. till XXIII. in Dutch). The most important aspects of the subjective part and the answers to the problem statement and sub questions will be discussed in chapter 5. 6. and 7. The research can be, again, typed as an explorative research. No quantitative analysing methods will be used.
2.5. Delimitation of research
This proposal has been restricted to profit organisations which offer various products or services. The literature research will have a broad scope because of the possible differences between the marketing departments.
As mentioned before, no academic researcher conducted a research about marketing, BPM and the resistance between those two. Loads of articles and books are concentrating on one of the three subjects. The literature research will combine the separate subjects. According to those
combinations assumptions and conclusions can be made.
An example of the combination between the two separate subjects is the description of problems within marketing departments (Leeflang, 2005) and the drivers and triggers when and why to use BPM (Jeston and Nelis, 2006). This combination gives an excellent view of the usefulness of BPM. So, the literature research is based upon combined data of the separated subjects.
The field research is based on a limited amount of organizations, furthermore, all clients of O&i are linked with BPM in a certain way. Consequently, at least one part of the company deals with BPM. This means that the sample is not representative for all firms.
The research has to be conducted within 4 months. Problem statement Sources of Data Analyzing methods Measurement and observation methods Concepts
Fig. 3.1. Part of Conceptual model Business process management (I) Marketing Departments (II) Resistance
3. Theory
Business Process management, marketing and resistance are the main subjects of this research. It is important to state clear what those definitions mean before the research combines the three. These aspects can also be found in the conceptual model see figure 3.1.
The clear definitions are the starting point of further research. The definitions will be broadly described. By defining the terms too narrowly it is possible that the theory of marketing and BPM will not fit with the reality of the customer firms.
The first chapter (3.1.) will outline BPM by means of the development of BPM, a BPM analysis, the description of processes and the reasons for BPM.
The second chapter (3.2.), continuous to explain the definition of marketing and marketing department activities. Marketing is a broad definition, limitation for this research is needed. This will clarify the aspects of marketing which will be used during this research.
Fig.3.3 An overview of historical developments relevant for business processes and BPM
3.1. Business process management
‘BPM is regarded as a best practice management principle to help companies sustain competitive advantage’ by ‘overcoming the piecemeal improvements in isolated parts of business processes that often result in sub-optimal solutions, and so ensure that the critical activities affecting customer satisfaction are executed in the most efficient and effective manner’ (Hung 2006).
3.1.1. Development of BPM
The development of processes is not new, in the 1970s and 1980s within many organisations handbooks for administrative organisations (AO) has been established. A decennium later business process redesign (BPR) was introduced. BPR focused strongly on the rescheduling of activities within processes. Rigorous
redesign and changes of company processes had serious impact on the organisations. BPM, the newest way to deal with processes, is a supporting service and aims on improvement instead of change.
3.1.2. Analysing BPM
Jeston and Nelis (2006) suggest that BMP is: ‘The achievement of organization’s objectives through the improvement, management and control of essential business processes’. There are many business process management definitions, BPM is frequently considered as a multi-interpretable term. By analysing the term it is possible to get more insight.
Firstly, ‘a process is a scheduling of activities with an explicit beginning and end, it has been aimed at the determined realization of a product or service for (internal) customers’ (Hardjono and baker, 2001, Hammer & Champy, 1993). ‘By managing that process it is possible to master, influence, check and predict the processes’ (Hardjono and baker, 2001). ‘Processes are not the goal
themselves, as they are simply a means to achieve a business objective. Processes will not achieve a business objective automatically or by change; they need continuous and effective management’ (Jeston and Nelis, 2006).
Davenport and Short (1990) define business process as ‘a set of logically related tasks performed to achieve a defined business outcome’. A process is ‘a structured, measured set of activities designed to produce a specified output for a particular customer or market. It implies a strong
Business process management (I)
Controlling processes
Supplier processes Core Processes Customer Processes
Supporting Processes Fig. 3.4. (Tolsma & De Wit, 2005)
emphasis on how work is done within an organization’ (Davenport, 1993). So, processes have to be described and registered because otherwise they can not be measured and structured.
Organisations have to realize that the organization does not exist of several individual activities but contains a collection of partly structured and partly unstructured processes (Tolsma and De Wit, 2005). Process management includes continuous improvement and assurance that the
implementation meets the stated demands, by using all available resources in an optimal way (Tolsma and De Wit, 2005). The goal of process management is, beside customer satisfaction and quality, to increase sales and to decrease costs (Tolsma and De Wit, 2005).
Organisations are moving between chaos and control. Control can be seen as an obstacle by some organisations, while chaos is also seen as negative by the board of an organisation (Tolsma and De Wit, 2005). With BPM an organization can manage the right level of chaos and control. BPM is the perfect link between doing the right things (strategy and effectiveness) and doing things right (efficiency) (Tolsma and De Wit, 2005). Process management can be imbedded in organizations on different maturity levels. The maturity level can be calculated by the BPM scan (Tolsma and De Wit, 2005) and indicates the integration and orientation of processes in the organization, this will be mentioned in chapter 6.3. indicating the researched firms.
‘BPM does not equate to a technology tool or initiative for business processes. There is a significant business process improvement that can be achieved without technology. Technology can be
justified and a helping factor but only in the right circumstances’ (Jeston and Nelis, 2006).
3.1.3. Processes
Within an organisation several processes can be distinguished. Figure 3.4. indicates the different processes within an organization; controlling processes, core processes and supporting processes, moreover the organisation must take into account supplier processes and customer processes.
Figure 3.4. can be linked with Porter’s value chain (1985) which also makes a distinction between core and supporting processes (The value chain of Porter can be found in appendix I.). A firm’s value chain links the value chains of upstream suppliers and downstream buyers. This is considered as the main process of an organization. A process structured organization is mainly based on the horizontal structured core processes. An example of a controlling process is financial
According to Davenport and Short (1990) processes have two important characteristics: 1. ‘They have customers (internal or external)’ and
2. ‘They cross organizational boundaries, they occur across or between organizational subunits’. One technique for identifying business processes in an organization is, as mentioned before, the value chain method proposed by Porter (1985) (See also appendix I.). Processes are generally identified in terms of beginning and end points, interfaces, and organization units involved, particularly the customer unit. High impact processes should have process owners.
Examples of processes for marketing departments include: developing a new product; ordering goods from a supplier; creating a marketing plan and processing; etc. (Malhotra, 1998). The marketing activities and departments will be further discussed in the next paragraph 3.2. Marketing.
3.1.4. Reasons for BPM
As mentioned above BPM can help organizations to master, influence, check and predict their processes. Jeston and Nelis (2006) made a list of situations when BPM is needed or desirable. They called it drivers and triggers that may cause an organization to consider BPM (Jeston and Nelis, 2006). The most important aspects mentioned by Jeston and Nelis (2006) are firstly, unclear roles and responsibilities from a process perspective. Secondly, the need of a sustainable performance environment and thirdly, the need of control over processes. Many more triggers to introduce BPM can be found in table III. (appendix III.). The three triggers, mentioned above, will be explained further in chapter 5.2. Advantages of BPM, which will make clear the advantages of BPM and why it is a solution for the stated triggers.
3.2. Marketing
‘A long standing caricature of marketing practioners is that they love to spend money and hate to assess the results of that spending’ (Adler, 1967).
3.2.1 Marketing defined
For the last 50 years it has been generally agreed that marketing links a firm to its current and potential customers. McCarthy (1990) simply notes that marketing ‘provides needed direction for production and helps make sure that the right products are produced and find their way to consumers’. This formal statement reflects the cliché that marketing is all about ensuring that consumers get the right product at the right time, in the right place and at the right price (Murray, 1996). Kotler and Armstrong (1991) have also evolved a tight but complex definition: ‘Marketing is a human activity directed as satisfying needs and wants through exchange processes.’ These authors view the core concepts of marketing as: needs, wants, demands, products exchange, transactions and markets. So, ‘marketing as a phenomenon represents the customer focus of an organization’ (Gronroos, 2006).
‘Marketing is considered a specialist function managing certain decision-making areas to create exchanges that satisfy the customers’ and the firm’s goals alike. These decision-making areas are defined as the 4 Ps, in other words, product, place, price and promotion’. ‘The definition of marketing as making decisions about these four P’s goes back to McCarthy’ (1960).
In theory marketing should be a part of the strategy decision making process. However, Webster mentioned a difference between practice and literature. ‘In practice marketing is more about tactics than strategy and accomplish tactical sales tasks’ (Webster 2002).
Marketing seemed to lose its credibility and the marketing function was declining (Webster et al., 2005) because: ‘in too many companies marketing is poorly linked to strategy’. Of course this does not go for all firms in all countries, but it does look like a trend.
In 1999, Day and Montgomery expressed their concerns ‘with the tactical orientation and lack of adaptability to changing conditions of the four P’s framework of mainstream marketing. The role of marketing changed over time, an inherent tension exists between the old and new views of
marketing management’ (Day and Montgomery, 1999). The new view of marketing focuses on
- customers (not products) - marketing as process (not function) - customer value (not the four Ps) - relationships (not transactions)
- networked urbanizations (not bureaucracies) - multiple buying motives (not simply price) - responsiveness and organizational capabilities (not control) (Webster 2002).
Marketing Departments (II)
Because of the changes, the American Marketing Association (AMA) decided (in 2004) to update its 20 year old definition of marketing. The new definition is: ‘Marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders’ (AMA definition).
‘In the marketing literature, the terms marketing, marketing function and marketing department are also most frequently used interchangeably, almost as synonyms. The renewed marketing definition follows this line of thought using the phrase marketing is an organizational function, in other words, marketing is one organizational function among others’ (Gronroos, 2006).
The next step in literature is to recognize complete business processes in stead of functional departments. In 2006, Gronroos suggested ‘according to the new definition that marketing has to be seen as a process and not merely as a function, in other words not predominantly relying upon a list of decision-making variables’. ‘This means that the process nature of marketing should be the backbone of a marketing definition and structural aspects should only provide support to the facilitation of that process’ (Gronroos, 2006). Therefore, Gronroos (2006) suggests ‘a horizontal process structure is the most successful and effective structure’. This, of course, varies per organization, it is also possible to structure and manage processes within a functional structured organization. These possibilities will be described further in chapter 4. Process orientated
organizations.
The theory about marketing has changed over time, but, as Leeflang (2005) stated, the behaviour of marketing departments in practice did not change over time. From this research and the
research of Webster (2002) we can conclude that marketing practice and marketing theory is not the same. This conclusion supports the problem of O&i. In literature, marketing is a set of processes but are marketing departments aware of those processes? In the next chapters we will search for a gap-filling answer.
3.2.2. Specifying marketing
Marketing has several different activities to deal with, and varies in every organization. As mentioned before, marketing can also be seen as a department executing sales tasks. This research will focus on the activities of marketing which influences the core-business process directly. This specification is the function which is directly involved in the business process. O&i tries to improve client organizations by creating process structured organizations including the marketing department.
The schedule (Fig. 3.6.) of McDonald (2000) can be seen as the marketing management process which directly influences the business process of the whole organization. This classification of major marketing processes also proposes the integration with other departments. The four major
marketing processes according to McDonald are:
- Define markets and understand value - Create value proposition
‘These marketing processes have to be transparent for- and communicated to the other
departments of the organization. The process ‘communicate value’ is responsible for the integration of the departments’ (See Fig. 3.6.).
‘Value propositions may be communicated by a separate function, but the fulfilment of these propositions cannot. A number of other organizational functions get involved, and if those other functions do not take a customer focus, value will not emerge in the customers’ processes and marketing will probably fail’ (Kotler, 1994). ‘In the marketing literature, this problem, which by no means is a new one, has been addressed by offering marketing as the most important function or even as an integrative function’ (Kotler, 1994). ‘In practice, this suggestion never worked as a general solution to the problem. People in every business function are professionals in their own area, and all functions are needed for successful business operations’ (Gronroos, 2006). So
marketing departments have, according to the mentioned authors, to be seen as an element of the complete business process or as one of the departments who interact with each other.
Business Process
Primary process (R&D, Logistics, Operations, Service) Monitor Value
Define Markets & Understand Value
Create value proposition Communicate Value
Interaction
3.3. Resistance
‘Resistance is a thought transformed into feeling. Change the thought that creates the resistance, and there is no more resistance’ (Robert Conklin).
The goal of this research is to vanish the barrier between BPM and marketing. In this research the term resistance is chosen for this barrier. ‘Resistance is defined as any conduct that serves to maintain the status quo’ (Duncan, 1977). Or as ‘a complex, multi-faceted phenomenon that affect the outcomes of change, both negatively and positively’ (Waddell, 1998).
3.3.1. An O&i perspective
According to Ford (2008) resistance is decidedly one sided, in this research from an O&i
perspective. Therefore the outcomes have to be seen in perspective. The resistance is not the fault and problem of marketing departments. It is a problem for the service (consultancy) delivery organization because they have to convince their clients of the added value of their product and the unfunded resistance. When there is a certain resistance, the supplier does not succeed in delivering their product.
In this research the term resistance is chosen from an O&i perspective. O&i expects that BPM creates a significant advantage for marketing, the disapproval or the status quo attitude from marketing can be seen as resistance. The term resistance does not, per definition, mean a negative or unfunded reaction from marketing. It is possible that BPM does, simply, not create extra value and is not interesting for marketing departments.
Though, this is, from an O&i perspective, also seen as a resistance to overcome by improving the BPM service towards marketing standards. When this is impossible and the conclusion of this research justifies the lack of added value of BPM, the resistance of marketing towards BPM is also clarified.
3.3.2. Reasons of resistance
If there is no lack of added value and advantages for marketing, the resistance has to have other reasons. This research made four distinctions of resistance: pre-conceptions, lack of BPM
knowledge, marketing culture or/and disadvantages of BPM. Those four reasons can be the cause of the bad fit between marketing and BPM. The four aspects are used to describe and declare the resistance against BPM. Those four aspects will be discussed later.
These reasons have to be validated and when those reasons of resistance are known, a management advice can be given, how to overcome this resistance and how to deliver and
communicate BPM otherwise. Again, this is only possible when BPM has a significant advantage for marketing departments, otherwise the resistance is grounded. In that case, O&i presumed
resistance but actually tried to deliver a service with no added value for marketing or the complete client organization.
Resistance (III)
That is why this research is ambiguous. Firstly, a research for advantages and problem solutions for marketing, with the question if BPM does add value for marketing departments. Secondly, a research about the reasons of resistance against a (probable) value added system.
3.3.3. Positive resistance
4. Process oriented organizations
‘The most efficient way to produce anything is to bring together under one management as many as possible of the activities needed to turn out the product’ (Peter Drucker).
This chapter is not a part of the conceptual model but is essential in order to the subject and needs explanation. The following paragraphs will explain the differences between functional organized organizations and process organized organisations. A process structured organization is the ideal structure according to the BPM philosophy. Firstly, a desirable horizontal structure is going to be explained. Secondly the role of marketing within a process structured organization will be discussed.
4.1. The desirable horizontal Structure
‘In a regular functional structure, each function is given targets and the primary focus of activity is to meet those targets - not to implement strategy or meet customer needs. The inevitable
tendency is that the people in each function focus on their targets and line management structure rather than their customers’ (Richardson, 2007). ‘Unless there is a process-focused
counterbalance, individual functions can focus on the furtherance of their own agenda at the expense of the process and consequently the customer’ (Richardson, 2007). This horizontal structure is from O&i’s perspective and BPM philosophy the most favourable for an organization.
That is why there is a trend to turn an organization to a process structured organization which means, at macro level, customer value creation necessitates the accomplishment of three central organizational tasks:
- ‘The development of new customer solutions and/or the reinvigoration of existing solutions’; - ‘Continual enhancement of the acquisition of inputs and their transformation into desired
customer outputs’; and
- ‘The creation and leveraging of linkages and relationships to external marketplace entities, especially channels and end users’ (Rajendra, 1999).
‘To execute these tasks, an organization must design, foster, and leverage three core business processes. The first task is accomplished through a product development management (PDM) process that aims to create solutions that customers need and want’ (Rajendra, 1999). ‘The second task is implemented through a supply chain management (SCM) process that incorporates
‘Individual marketing tasks must be connected to specific sub processes within each core process’. The three tasks of Rajendra (1999) can be connected to the four processes of marketing explained in chapter 3.2. (fig. 3.6.). The four marketing processes of MacDonald (Define markets &
understand value, Create value proposition, Communicate value, and Monitor value, 2000) all deliver a part to the three core processes of Rajendra (1999).
‘These marketplace shifts result in business process redesign and realignment. For example, a shift away from vertical integration to horizontal alliances reinforces the need to move from stand-alone competition to networked rivalry. The ‘best’ products do not necessarily win. The best networked firms usually do’ (Rajendra, 1999). ‘Consequently, marketing strategy requires that a firm be in the right product system and then ensure mechanisms to get a fair share of the alliance value created’ (Rajendra, 1999). Furthermore, ‘horizontal alliances requires a focus on greater collaboration, information sharing, and trust across supply/value chains’ (Rajendra, 1999).
The structure, of course, varies per firm and depends on history, culture, size, products etc. The described desirable horizontal structure is shown in Fig. 4.1.D. of Hayes (1988).
4.2. Marketing departments and Processes
Looking broadly at the marketing literature, it appears that during the past ten years there has been a movement toward thinking of marketing less as a function and more as a set of values and processes. In this view, according to Greyser (1997), ‘marketing becomes everybody's job, which potentially diffuses the marketing function's role but increases marketing's influence’ (Greyser 1997). This theory suggest that processes are familiar within marketing departments.
Moorman (1999) notion of the differences between a functional marketing organization and a marketing process organisation is the following:
‘A functional marketing organization refers to the concentration of the responsibility for marketing activities (knowledge and skills) within a group of specialists in the organization’ (Moorman, 1999). ‘The benefits of functional structures are well documented and include enhanced efficiency and ability to develop specialized, distinctive capabilities’ (Thompson and Strickland, 1983). ‘The risks include the challenge of coordination between specialized functions, inter-functional conflict, functional myopia, and overspecialization’ (Thompson and Strickland, 1983).
‘A marketing process organization refers to the dispersion of marketing activities (knowledge and skills) across non-specialists in the organization’ (Workman, Homburg, and Gruner 1998). This approach can take a variety of forms. For example, Kohli and Jaworski (1990) define market orientation as ‘the organization wide generation, dissemination, and responsiveness to market intelligence’. Consistent with a process structure, they suggest that ‘a market orientation involves multiple departments sharing information about customers and engaging in activities designed to meet customers needs’ (Narver and Slater 1990). Day (1994) describes two key cross-functional processes of market-driven organizations: market-sensing and customer linking activities
Figure 4.1. (A,B,C,D) Four different organization structures (Streefland, 2008, Adapted from Hayes, 1988). 4.1.A.
4.1.B.
4.1.C. 4.1.D.
4.2.1. Structure
This literature raises the question if marketing departments really have a unique intellectual domain, to exist as a marketing function. Webster (2002) argues this, he thinks it is a fundamental problem finding a distinction between marketing and all the other functions of the business that are also involved in developing and delivering value to customers (Webster 2002). So, according to Webster (2002) we can say that the marketing in a process organization is dispensable. Although, Moorman (1999) is convinced that marketing departments have an important role to play. She recommends a structure with a strong function in a process structure (Moorman, 1999). This depends, of course, on several contingencies in both the environment and the organization (Workman, Homburg and Grunner, 1998). But it is possible to have subgroups within the
marketing function that reflect the connections they help to manage (Moorman, 1999). Managers in these subgroups then would be members of horizontal, cross-functional teams. ‘The customer – product subgroup would be similar to the existing marketing group in many companies. This group would manage products and brands and be responsible for product-related decisions, such as price, promotion, product design and redesign’ (Moorman, 1999). ‘Its responsibilities would include measuring, monitoring, improving and financial accountability’ (Moorman, 1999).
The two extremes are showed at the bottom of fig. 4.1. (C and D) linking those two structures to marketing departments creates two different types of marketing departments e.g.:
Marketing as a distinct function which means:
Marketing integrated with other business functions means:
Marketing responsible for program development Marketing pursues excellence in all phases of integrated marketing strategy
Functional departments Teams, functional silos broken down Weak integration with other business functions Customer focus
Ongoing conflict between Marketing & Sales Most successful form Slow response to market environment
Table 4.1. Marketing department structures (Webster, 1992).
Table 4.1 shows the difference between the two structures, a process orientated structure (right side) is much more focused on customers and collaboration with other departments to serve the customer. Marketing as a distinct function (left side) is much more individualistic. In chapter 5.1 this subject will be discussed further. The consequences of the different structures can be found in table 5.1 and can be seen as a continuation of table 4.1.
4.2.2. Processes
The new view of marketing management in the firm must start with the focus on customer value, conceiving marketing management as ‘the process of defining, developing, and delivering customer value’ (Webster 2002). The business can be managed both horizontally and vertically (See fig. 4.1.). ‘Functional identity is important to establish depth of knowledge; the process structure is important to explore the deep relationships between the internal and external focus in the customer connections’ (Moorman, 1999). According to Moorman, this combination gives the departments of marketing the advantages of both structures and is a smaller adjustment in the organization.
5. Objective research
‘Every problem has in it the seeds of its own solution. If you don’t have any problems, you don’t get any seeds’ (Norman Vincent Peale).
The objective research can, as mentioned in the chapter Research design, be seen as the literature research (Box IV of the conceptual model, fig. 5.1.). This research has two goals first to research if BPM can add value to marketing departments and second what the disadvantages are and possible reasons for resistance from the literature. BPM can add value when marketing deals with certain issues or problems which can be solved by BPM. That is why the first paragraph discusses current marketing issues, based on other researches. Subsequently, the advantages of BPM will be clarified by answering the question: what are the advantages of BPM for Marketing?
Because of the experienced resistance we have to presume negative aspects. This can be caused by disadvantages of BPM or other reasons of resistance. This will be discussed in paragraph 5.3 and 5.4. Again this research is based upon literature and can be seen as objective data.
Main Reasons of Resistance Objective Subjective
Research (IV) Research (V)
5.1 Marketing Issues
‘Integrated processes are necessary to improve the misalignment. Despite of enormous
investments in CRM, are most organization lacking fluent processes and quality processes. Almost 60% of the organisations do not register their marketing process steps, 80% with elaborated processes do not have an effective pipeline management process and 75% do not have a structured lead sequence process’ (Schmonsees 2005).
The following table (table 5.1.) is a comparison between the ‘frequently’ used functional process and the ‘desirable’ process driven organization. This is not specific for a marketing department but most of the processes have a strong link with marketing. This is an indication of the difference between a process management view and a functional department view.
Functional View V s. Process View Directors direct functional units and focus on
functional targets
Directors direct the way the organisation works. Focus on how the business works and the business targets. Focus on boss (understand what the boss needs) Focus on customer (understand what the customer
needs)
Internal focus - Improvement focused on functions. External focus – Improvement focused on customer. More inter-functional conflicts - functional objectives
can conflict.
Cooperate across functions with cross-functional teams. All working on the same process to serve the same customer so objectives tend to align.
'us and them' - other functions compete for resources 'us' - other functions are customers or suppliers
Political Collegiate
Building empires Building the business
Directive management – Individuals unclear of customer needs and therefore need more day-to-day management direction which, if not forthcoming, will lead people to pull in different directions.
Empowering management – people understand what the customer needs and need little direction to deliver it. People tend to pull in the same direction.
Decisions deferred to management Decisions made by the individual People unclear how what they do contributes to
delivering the strategy and meeting the business objectives
People know what they to contribute to deliver the strategy and meeting the business objectives Table 5.1. The process-driven approach to management compared with the functionally driven approach showing the different consequences of these two approaches to managing the overall organization (Richardson, 2007).
Besides the organization, marketing departments also have to deal with several other problems and issues. As mentioned before the image and role of marketing declined in the last few years. In 2005, Leeflang explained the decline. The decline is caused by; ‘More attention to short term results than to long term goals, tighter marketing budgets, less marketers within the boards and less appreciation for marketing existence’ (Schaal, 2007).
This is, according to Leeflang (2005) caused by a number of other aspects see table 5.2.
Table 5.2. Nine causes of the decline and problems within marketing departments (Leeflang, 2005)
1. No measurement of the outcomes of marketing
2. Marketers do not pay attention to resources and do not count.
3. The contemporary marketer feels him/herself untouchable.
4. Marketers promise much, but can not realize those promises.
5. The contemporary marketers have been trained badly.
6. Marketers suffer from recessions.
7. Everyone is a part-time marketer therefore the marketer themselves are needless (dispersion).
8. Marketers suffer from the fragmentation of markets, products, media and canals.
9. Marketing metrics are inadequate applicable and the use is minimal.
This research will find out if BPM can be a solution for these stated problems within marketing departments. Some of the causes are also possible explanations why marketing managers do not use business process management (point 3, 4 and 5 of table 5.2). Those three aspects can be seen as resistance against BPM.
The causes of the problems, measured by Leeflang (2005), will be mentioned in paragraph 5.2. Advantages. Which will indicate a possible solution for those specific marketing issues.
Furthermore, ‘prioritizing’ is a frequently described problem within (marketing) organizations. Many organizations are working for their shareholders, in stead of their clients. According to Cleland and Bruno (1996) organizations have to put their client on the first place, doing this will ‘indirectly influence shareholders results positively’. An organization will please their shareholders indirectly more by serving the customers.
Jeston and Nelis (2006) suggested drivers and triggers to implement BPM (see also appendix III.). These drivers and triggers also support BPM as a solution for the problems mentioned by Leeflang (2005). For example:
- Long lead times to meet request - Unclear roles and responsibilities
These triggers are in consensus with the stated issues within marketing departments (Leeflang, 2005). According to the findings of Leeflang (2005) and Jeston and Nelis (2006) we can conclude that marketing departments have triggers and drivers to implement BPM but do not take action.
Furthermore, the opening quote of paragraph 5.1 (Schmonsees, 2005) gives another example of a marketing issue. ‘Integrated processes are necessary to improve the existing misalignment’. ‘Marketing departments spending enormous amounts of money, but most organization lacking fluent processes and quality processes’ (Schmonsees 2005). This example indicates the waist of money of marketing department by investing heavily in systems but without any control.
The last issue from articles and researches is collaboration. Yu (2001) conducted a research about the relation between marketing and research & development (R&D). The research indicates a friction between both disciplines, while this relation is very important. The R&D department can refine her products when they require the right market information from marketing. With that information they can adapt to the wishes of the customer. ‘However, by the internal fight for budget, both departments use little information from both sides and the marketing knowledge is spoiled. Moreover the departments do not trust each others information’ (Yu, 2001). These findings emphasise the negative impact within organisations of the position and the image of marketing (Yu, 2001).
Not only the relationship with R&D appeared to be inferior, also the relationship with sales
departments is disturbed, this is the conclusion of Schmonsees (2005). Koster (2006) even states that marketing shows no interest in the sales departments. Furthermore the relation between marketing and finance is not good as well. The Ruyter and Wetzels (2000) conclude that marketing and finance have different thoughts, ‘which cause different solutions for the same problems. This results frequently in defensive behaviour of both sides’. ‘These differences in interpretation form the basis for barriers in the confidence and the communication between both departments’ (Ruyter and Wetzels, 2000). Concluding, marketing has a collaboration problem with several departments which negatively influences the effectiveness of the organization.
5.1.1 Conclusion disadvantages marketing
Marketing offers a good basis for BPM to add value. Marketing departments are coping with several issues. In the next chapter the research will discuss if the problems can be solved by the
5.2 Advantages of BPM from literature
‘Organisations that migrate to a process-driven structure can expect to enjoy glittering prizes’ (Richardson, 2007).
The previous chapter mentioned the issues and problems of marketing departments and
organizations. This chapter will discuss the advantages of BPM. Those advantages can be a solution for marketing departments. Those advantages are combined with ‘Leeflang issues’ in order to indicate the possible solution.
5.2.1 Collaboration (‘Leeflang issues’: 3, 7 and 8, Leeflang, 2005)
As stated in the chapter 5.1. marketing issues, collaboration is one of the issues, marketing departments have to deal with. The bad collaboration does not only influence the marketing department but the organization as a whole.
‘Most literature tends to overlook integration from an interdepartmental perspective, where the focus is the integration of marketing’s strategies with other departments’ strategies’ (Olson, 1995). ‘This is unfortunate because evidence suggests that ‘good’ integration between marketing and other departments contributes to successful marketing programs and successful company-wide initiatives, especially in the case of new product development’ (Olson, 1995).
Processes make it possible to better collaborate with other departments. Kahn (1998) proved that collaboration between departments will positively influence: its own department performance; overall company performance; product development performance; product management performance; and satisfaction with its interrelationship with other departments (Kahn, 1998). ‘Recommended first course of action would be for marketing managers to characterize their current interdepartmental activities and determine whether they are collaborative or interactive in nature’ (Kahn, 1998). By managing the processes, the different departments know what they can expect which stimulates the collaboration.
Brooks (2007) is putting it the other way by saying that marketing departments destroy
