Cited by 491Corporate Governance and ManagementInnovation and Knowledge ManagementKnowledge Management and Technology

Knowledge‐enabled customer relationship management: integrating customer relationship management and knowledge management concepts[1]

Gebert, Henning, Geib, Malte, Kolbe, Lutz, Brenner, Walter·2003·Journal of Knowledge Management

Abstract

The concepts of customer relationship management (CRM) and knowledge management (KM) both focus on allocating resources to supportive business activities in order to gain competitive advantages. CRM focuses on managing the relationship between a company and its current and prospective customer base as a key to success, while KM recognizes the knowledge available to a company as a major success factor. From a business process manager’s perspective both the CRM and KM approaches promise a positive impact on cost structures and revenue streams in return for the allocation of resources. However, investments in CRM and KM projects are not without risk, as demonstrated by many failed projects. In this paper we show that the benefit of using CRM and KM can be enhanced and the risk of failure reduced by integrating both approaches into a customer knowledge management (CKM) model. In this regard, managing relationships requires managing customer knowledge – knowledge about as well as from and for customers. In CKM, KM plays the role of a service provider, managing the four knowledge aspects: content, competence, collaboration and composition. Our findings are based on a literature analysis and six years of action research, supplemented by case studies and surveys.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/13673270310505421

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 41 · Cited by 491

Authors
Gebert, H., Geib, M., Kolbe, L., & Brenner, W.
Affiliations
University of St.Gallen (CH)
Venue
Journal of Knowledge Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2003-12-01
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
107-123
ISSN
1367-3270 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2033826632
Cited by
491
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 35
FWCI
40.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Knowledge Management (publishedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (acceptedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Governance and Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Knowledge Management and Technology
Keywords
customer relationship management, knowledge management, customer knowledge management, knowledge integration, competitive advantage, business process management, knowledge content, knowledge competence, knowledge collaboration, knowledge composition

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