Transitioning to artificial intelligence-based key account management: A critical assessment
Open accessAbstract
Research suggests that Artificial intelligence (AI) use for sales and marketing activities improves firm performance. Underpinning these AI applications are datasets that reflect large volumes of sales transactions and interactions with a broad range of customers. Conversely, key account relationships involve deep and focused engagements with a small number of strategically important customers at multiple levels, and this has important implications for AI data inputs and uses. Whether AI is appropriate or relevant to key account management (KAM) is currently unclear. In this paper, we critically evaluate AI applications for KAM. The paper highlights the amenability of a firm’s KAM capabilities to AI and evaluates the opportunities and challenges that AI-based KAM offers. The paper also outlines a set of moderating factors likely to affect the impact of AI on KAM and provides a conceptual model to better understand the potentially transformative effects of AI on KAM. The paper concludes with a set of theoretical and managerial implications of AI-based KAM and develops a comprehensive research agenda to contribute to the further exploration of AI-based KAM. • Develops an AI-based KAM capabilities framework that highlights and describes AI implications for KAM. • Describes a series of moderating factors that could impact AI-based KAM. • Outlines a series of theoretical and managerial implications for AI-based KAM. • Develops an extensive research agenda that establishes AI-based KAM as a field of research.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483 · see citing works
Duan, Y., Edwards, J. S., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2019) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.021 · Cited by 2,628 · see citing works
Dwivedi, Y. K., Ismagilova, E., Hughes, D. L., Carlson, J., Filieri, R., Jacobson, J., Jain, V., Karjaluoto, H., Kefi, H., Krishen, A. S., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102168 · Cited by 2,620 · see citing works
Consumers and artificial intelligence: An experiential perspective
Puntoni, S., Reczek, R. W., Giesler, M., & Botti, S. (2021) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242920953847 · Cited by 1,193 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence in Utilitarian vs. Hedonic Contexts: The “Word-of-Machine” Effect
Longoni, C., & Cian, L. (2022) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242920957347 · Cited by 831 · see citing works
An Emerging Theory of Avatar Marketing
Miao, F., Kozlenkova, I. V., Wang, H., Xie, T., & Palmatier, R. W. (2022) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/0022242921996646 · Cited by 688 · see citing works
Mariani, M. M., Perez‐Vega, R., & Wirtz, J. (2022) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21619 · Cited by 631 · see citing works
Bouschery, S. G., Blazevic, V., & Piller, F. T. (2023) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12656 · Cited by 444 · see citing works
Paschen, J., Wilson, M., & Ferreira, J. J. (2020) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2020.01.003 · Cited by 410 · see citing works
Hello marketing, what can artificial intelligence help you with?
Wirth, N. (2018) · International Journal of Market Research · doi:10.1177/1470785318776841 · Cited by 221 · see citing works
Letting the computers take over: Using AI to solve marketing problems
Overgoor, G., Chica, M., Rand, W., & Weishampel, A. (2019) · California Management Review · doi:10.1177/0008125619859318 · Cited by 194 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Prior, D. D., & Marcos-Cuevas, J.
- Affiliations
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Prior, Daniel D.
- ORCID
- Prior, Daniel D.
- Venue
- Industrial Marketing Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2025-04
- Volume
- 126
- Pages
- 72-84
- ISSN
- 0019-8501 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4407554663
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 11
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 5
- FWCI
- 7.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Industrial Marketing Management (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- UNSWorks (University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- CERES (Cranfield University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Digital Innovation in Industries
- Keywords
- artificial intelligence, key account management, artificial intelligence adoption, moderators, sales and marketing, customer data, firm performance, conceptual model
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review