Customer Relationship Management

BCE CRM process improvement

CaRM Project, the University of Hull

Final Project Report

Project Director: Project Manager: Project Officer:

Chris Awre (c.awre@hull.ac.uk) Vicky Mays (v.mays@hull.ac.uk) Vladimir Kislicins (v.kislicins@hull.ac.uk)

Date: 10 March 2010 Version: 0.1

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................................................. 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.0 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.0 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................................ 7 3.0 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.0 IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................................................................. 9 4.1 INITIAL ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................................................ 10 4.2 BASELINE ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................................................... 10
4.2.1 Baseline Assessment: Part 1.............................................................................................................................. 10 4.2.2 Baseline Assessment: Part 2.............................................................................................................................. 11

4.3 USER REQUIREMENT SURVEY ............................................................................................................................. 11

4.3.1 URS: Aim and Objectives ................................................................................................................................... 12 4.3.2 Sample Group ................................................................................................................................................... 12 4.3.3 Structure and Format ........................................................................................................................................ 13

4.4 JISC CRM SELF-ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK .............................................................................................................. 13 5.0 OUTPUTS AND RESULTS ......................................................................................................................................... 15 5.1 OUTPUTS AND RESULTS FROM THE BASELINE ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 15 5.2 OUTPUTS AND RESULTS OF THE USER REQUIREMENT SURVEY ................................................................................... 16 6.0 OUTCOMES ......................................................................................................................................................... 18 6.1 LIST OF DELIVERABLES AND ONLINE ACCESS .......................................................................................................... 20 7.0 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 21 8.0 IMPLICATIONS...................................................................................................................................................... 22 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................... 23

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the JISC and JISC CETIS Relationship Management Support, Analysis and Synthesis Project for the opportunity to contribute towards an important development for the whole HE sector. With the assistance of the JISC funding the University of Hull performed a significant selfevaluation activity identifying the importance of Customer Relationship Management and managed to provide recommendations regarding the development of the JISC CRM Self-Analysis framework. In particularly we would also like to thank Sharon Perry from the JISC CETIS RMSASP project team for all of her support and guidance throughout the project. We would also like to thank the University of Hull Enterprise Centre team, specifically Bill Walker for his time, support and advice, Margaret Puller for collecting and providing necessary information for process mapping activities and Jennifer Douglas for always keeping a positive attitude. We would like to thank Hull University Business Scholl and specifically Alison Smyth, Sarah Longthorn and Emma Peacock for their input into the project as well as Maria Fletcher and Jane Ellison from the Faculty of Arts and Social Science for their constant interest in the project and participation in all of the project activities. In addition we would like to thank the University of Salford for disseminating their Employer Engagement project results. Their experience helped us to collect primary data for the analysis of the HE sector.

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Executive Summary
The CaRM project is a case study analysis of the implementation of the CRM Self-Analysis Framework and the outcomes from it. The work was undertaken from a peripheral-tactical perspective aiming for a long-term strategic implementation. The project considered the cross-boundary issues, focusing on the relationships between the University and external businesses. The aims and objectives of the project included the following: Using the JISC CRM Self-Analysis Framework to understand how the University could best move forward with BCE; Achieving a better understanding of the University experience, needs and expectations in regards to CRM; Analysing the benefits or otherwise of using a pilot system implementation of CRM across the institution; Evaluating the potential of raising awareness and adoption of CRM across departments; Identification of the relationship between CRM for BCE and the use of SupportWorks for managing contacts with internal users of University systems and services. The CaRM project was undertaken in the context of existing preliminary work to implement a CRM system within two key departments at the University, the Business School (including the Logistics Institute) and the Knowledge Exchange, to assist them in their interactions with external businesses. The project was developing this initial work to provide a basis upon which the Self-Analysis Framework was used to identify a process for wider cross-institutional CRM implementation, maximising the value of using CRM overall. The main project achievements included but were not limited to: Production of a Case study and a list of recommendations for further development of the JISC CRM Self-Analysis Framework; Increased awareness of CRM across a number of departments and business units; Business reports summarising the Universitys experience, needs and expectations in regards to CRM; Better understanding of the CRM implementation complexities and potential user resistance.

It was concluded that the University of Hull is still in the preliminary stage of CRM maturity and that there are clear evidences of CRM requirement across the institution. 4

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

1.0 Background
The University of Hull has an excellent track record of effective working with businesses and regional organisations. For each of the past two years the value of that interaction has been around 19 million. The University has established a Business and Community Knowledge Exchange to lead and co-ordinate this activity, providing external parties with a simple, single route to the broad range of expertise, services and facilities the University brings to bear. The Knowledge Exchange, operating from a state-of-the art Enterprise Centre at the heart of the Hull campus, also co-ordinates University involvement in knowledge transfer, enterprise and employer engagement. Such work underpins the core activities of teaching and research and seeks new markets and opportunities, which place the University at the centre of regional economic development. The Universitys Strategic Plan states: We aim to be a national leader in working with business and our surrounding communities through exemplary knowledge exchange and technology transfer. Relationships between the University and businesses range from the strategic to the personal with all manner of discipline and activity-based associations in between. Many result from friendships, or discussions at conferences, and are often dealt with in a private manner. Links can be disciplinebased, again deriving from relevant conferences or through subject-oriented societies. In a majority of cases the links are point-to-point, a contact at the University has a contact at the business, and the interaction is conducted through this interface. Whilst this may work for the people involved, it can become unproductive if the University and business have multiple point-to-point contacts, which may be ignorant of each other. It is inefficient for the business because it is using multiple resources to manage relationships with a single body, the University: it is unhelpful for the University because it is not in a position to provide a rounded, comprehensive service supporting the business. Effective Customer Relationship Management (CRM) ties together the strands of such, often ad-hoc, activities and produces a professional and consistent approach. In the course of 2005 and 2006, a number of areas of the University expressed a serious interest in customer relationship management systems. It was agreed that there was a particular need to manage these relationships in a complex organisation such as a university, due to the scenarios described above.

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report At the end of 2006 the University Senior Management Team sanctioned the implementation, essentially on a restricted pilot basis, of the Microsoft CRM product in the two major business focussed departments: the Knowledge Exchange and the Logistics Institute (now part of the Business School). The pilot has concentrated on the use of the system to manage relationships with business partners and has continued on an informal basis up until the current time.

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

2.0 Aims and Objectives

At the beginning of the project the CaRM team identified the following Aims and Objectives: 1. Use the CRM Self-Analysis Framework to understand how the University can best move forward and provide the basis on which it can do so; 2. Achieve a better understanding of the experience of coordinating CRM analysis and implementation through a knowledge exchange and transfer organisation within the University, and the pros and cons of this approach; 3. Gain awareness of the benefits or otherwise of using a pilot system implementation within key departments to guide the wider adoption of CRM across the University; 4. Understand the advantages or disadvantages of taking a centralised vs. a devolved approach to raising awareness and adoption of CRM across diverse departments; 5. Identification of the relationship between CRM for managing contacts with external customers and the use of SupportWorks, the University Helpdesk software, for managing contacts with internal users of University systems and services. During the project implementation, the aims and objectives were reviewed and slightly altered to suit the progression of the project. The following reviewed aims were confirmed: 1. Implement suitable parts of the CRM Self-Analysis Framework and provide a critical analysis of the framework; 2. Achieve a better understanding of the experience of coordinating CRM activities within the University and HE sector in general; 3. Identify whether the pilot system implementation within key departments is the preferred user option and might guide the wider adoption of CRM across the University; 4. Assess the advantages or disadvantages of taking a centralised vs. a devolved approach to raising awareness and adoption of CRM across diverse departments; 5. Understand the user and stakeholder needs and requirements of CRM activities; 6. Evaluate how the University can best move forward with improving BCE and provide the basis on which it can do so.

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

3.0 Methodology
The methodology selected for the CaRM project has been commonly used throughout the University of Hull and reflected the institutional approach to the projects carried out within the University. Through this approach it was possible to ensure that the user was placed at the centre of the project activities and the evidence surfaced during the project research were relevant for the purpose at hand. The project was split into 3 main phases. The first phase started from a review work and baseline assessment. The second phase was focused on the user experience and user requirements. The third phase centred on a detailed review of the JISC CRM Self-Analysis framework. During the first two stages the CRM Self-Analysis framework was referred to in order to build up the case study for the third phase of the project. The first part of the baseline assessment focused on the evaluation of the University of Hull when the second part reviewed the situation within the HE sector in regards to CRM and analysed a specific case study of a successful CRM implementation. Such an approach allowed to assess the individual challenges the University was facing in regards to CRM implementation as well as to position the case of the University of Hull CRM implementation in the industry-wide environment. For the first part of the baseline assessment a review of previous work focussed on CRM was carried out as a combination of desk research of previous reports, business cases and other outputs as well as a series of personal interviews of key CRM users and stakeholders. The work was carried out in liaison with the Hull University Enterprise Centre Knowledge Exchange (KE), Hull University Business School (HUBS) and Hull University Logistics Institute (LI). For the second part of the baseline assessment primary data was collected from the experience of the University of Salford in their Employer Engagement project. Secondary data source used for the comparative analysis originated from the KSA Partnership study of CRM Issues in UK Higher Education Institutions (2007). The second phase evolved around one of the main aims of the CaRM project to understand whether there was a need for CRM within the University of Hull. A sample group of employees who would be more likely affected by CRM were asked for their opinions in a form of an online survey. The survey was rolled out in two stages. For the first stage the survey was distributed through the carefully selected sample of users (administrative business units, CaRM project team contacts and

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report stakeholders identified during the baseline assessment). For the second stage the survey was distributed among the academic and administrative staff within the faculties of the UoH. It was envisaged that such an approach would reduce the bias and make sure the collected data included academic opinion as it was previously identified that the lack of interest from academics was a potential risk factor. The third phase was a critical review and a pilot of the JISC CRM Self-analysis framework on the case study at the University of Hull. As a sequential step from the baseline assessment and the user requirement survey, it was foreseen that an application of the framework would assist the University in understanding where to move forward with CRM and BCE. The feedback acknowledged during the process was reported through CaRM Project Case Study.

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

4.0 Implementation
4.1 Initial Activities
After the initial project proposal and acceptance of the project by the JISC CETIS, the implementation started with the development of a detailed project plan. The project plan was based around the work packages identified in the proposal although provided a much more detailed approach. The project plan was created in Microsoft Office Project 2007 which allowed easy access to the project progress at every step of the research. The project plan was regularly updated with progress details and reviewed/circulated within the project team. Another initial activity was to create a project website. The purpose of the website was to share the project progress with a wider audience and raise the overall awareness within the University and the community. The downloadable files, including the intermediate reports and the project plan, were linked to the project and updated on a regular basis. In addition to the website a project blog was created. The purpose of the blog was to communicate the project related news and any updates happening on the website. The project blog was also used as an intermediate reporting tool for the JISC CETIS team.

4.2 Baseline Assessment

Following the initial preparation and the administration around the CaRM project, the first phase focussing on the baseline assessment was rolled out. As mentioned in Chapter 3 the baseline assessment was performed in two parts. The results of analysis were communicated to the stakeholders in a form of a business report as well as a presentation and a networking event. 4.2.1 Baseline Assessment: Part 1 The first part focused on the existing CRM outputs within the University. The initial desk research included a review of a significant amount of work performed previously within the University on the introduction of CRM. Along with CRM proposals and reports from previous work, business cases in support of CRM from the following departments were analysed: HUBS, LI and KE. The desk research in combination with suggestions from the JISC CRM Self-Analysis framework allowed for the creation of a set of main topics and areas of interest for further analysis through a range of interview with key stakeholders and existing CRM users. A unified definition of CRM was identified and introduced to the stakeholders to avoid any confusion in the following work. The stage of CRM maturity within the university was identified. 10

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report 4.2.2 Baseline Assessment: Part 2 The second part of the baseline assessment was focused on the current Higher Education sector adaptation and use of CRM. Understanding how the University was managing its customer relationships would not be complete through analysis of the present internal situation alone. It was considered essential to put those findings in the context of the whole HE sector in order to assess the results using a more holistic approach. It was envisaged that the selected approach would identify whether the University needed to re-evaluate its CRM development in line with the growing interest in CRM within the HE sector, analyse what challenges other organisations have encountered with regards to CRM development and understand how the institutional experience of the University of Hull (UoH) could assist further development of CRM within the HE sector. The approach to second part of the baseline assessment was selected as a comparative analysis. Primary data was collected from the experience of the University of Salford during their Employer Engagement project. Secondary data source used for the comparative analysis originated from the KSA Partnership study of CRM Issues in UK Higher Education Institutions (2007). The comparative analysis was performed across 6 topics including but not limiting the research to the following: CRM usage level within institutions and integration with other systems; The awareness of CRM across the campuses and business functions/faculties; Staff engagement in CRM implementation; Issues, challenges and impacts of CRM introduction.

The analysis focused on highlighting the common areas between the existing CRM development within the University of Hull and the HE sector. Potentially important unique areas were identified.

4.3 User Requirement Survey

The next logical step following on from the Baseline Assessment was to enable the project team to reach an understanding on how the UoH established and managed its relationships with the business community. In addition to this it was also important to understand how the HE sector in general perceived and accepted such a commercialised philosophy as CRM. This information was obtained by asking the opinions of a sample group of employees deemed likely to be affected by CRM. The User Requirement Survey (URS) was run as a means to collect a sample of data large enough to identify a trend in how the users comprehend the CRM concept and whether there would be 11

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report potential benefit for a centralised implementation of CRM. The survey is available in full in Appendix 1. 4.3.1 URS: Aim and Objectives The aim of the User Requirement Survey was to collect evidence of the institutional requirement for CRM or the absence of it and, if the size of the sample permitted, to generalise the results in order to establish some themes applicable on a larger scale. Through the collection of opinions of a wide range of employees, specifically including the representation from the Academic as well as the Administrative areas of the University involved in Business Community Engagement (BCE), it was expected to cover the optimal average attitude towards requirements for CRM. The objectives of the survey were identified as the following: 1) To disseminate information about the CaRM project and CRM for BCE in the HE sector across the institution in order to raise the awareness; 2) To understand whether there is a requirement for CRM within the UoH; 3) To establish the scope of the CRM requirement within the University (Institutional, Interdepartmental, Departmental, Individual or None); 4) To identify how CRM could be used within the recognised requirement scope, which processes would form CRM and what would be the main CRM system requirements; 5) To summarise the findings and recommend whether there is a need for pursuing CRM development any further and at what level (Individual or higher). 4.3.2 Sample Group The sample group for the URS was selected in a combination of methods: convenience/snowball sampling and quota sampling. It was considered very important for the research to include the opinions of the academia within the University as well as the administration. For that reason the survey was rolled out in two stages. At the first stage the survey was distributed through the carefully selected sample of users and stakeholders identified in WP2 research (convenience method). For the second stage the survey was distributed among secretaries of each faculty of the UoH requesting that the survey be distributed within their individual faculty (quota and snowball methods). As many employees as possible were encouraged to participate in the survey. Previous knowledge of CRM or experience managing external contacts were not selected as prerequisites for completing the survey. This was considered to be interfering with the objective to understand if there was a 12

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report requirement for CRM in the UoH. The only prerequisite for participating in the survey was for the respondent to have some level of contact with business or the community outside of the University. Students were specifically excluded from the list of customers in order to focus on BCE. 4.3.3 Structure and Format The survey format was selected as a web-based survey in order to make access to the survey as easy as possible and collect the results in digital format ready for further analysis. The survey was distributed among the sample group through emails and the internally printed newsletter (The Bulletin). The last approach was the least successful. The survey was hosted online using Surveymonkey.com. This particular online survey service was selected according to the previous experience of the CaRM project team. The survey remained open for 3 weeks.

4.4 JISC CRM Self-Analysis Framework

Throughout the CaRM project most of the project team activities, networking events, feedback sessions, data collection activities and findings analyses have referred to the framework at some point for guidance and inspiration. It was acknowledged from the beginning of the project that even if the framework had its own limitations, it was providing a basis for an institution on which to develop and build further CRM investigation. As the University of Hull had already some experience implementing islands of CRM activities with limited success, it was considered useful to apply the framework to establish potential for further CRM development and to identify what should be the next step forward in the improvement of the BCE processes. Due to the specifics of the University of Hull case study some sections of the framework were modified to adjust to the requirements of the institution when other sections, for the same reason, were followed through on a discussion/theoretical level rather than the actual implementation. Feedback on such instances is provided throughout the CaRM Case Study report. The University of Hull approached the framework as a holistic tool that was designed as a best practice guide for those institutions that were interested in the development of BCE CRM. Focusing on the analysis of each of the individual chapters, the following criteria were considered: 1) Structure and substance (including the logical structure and relevance of subject coverage); 2) Self-analysis tools introduced (including the feedback from the tools implementation);

13

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report 3) Overall opinion and recommendations (summary about the chapter as well as recommendations about any issues that need to be addressed for further development). The completed analysis was submitted as CaRM Case Study report.

14

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

5.0 Outputs and Results

5.1 Outputs and Results from the Baseline Assessment
Summarising the findings from the baseline assessment research, the following issues were identified as most likely responsible for the situation with CRM across the institution: 1) Limited understanding of the CRM concept affecting the use of CRM systems across departments; 2) Limited support from the institution due to limited evidence of CRM success, affecting the importance and prioritisation of CRM across the institution; 3) Cultural issues affecting the difficulties in accepting changes and resistance to CRM implementation. It was identified that the issue of data and information sharing across the University was not an end problem on its own as the reasons for unwillingness to share contacts with other departments were the combination of the above issues. The results from the conducted interviews have established that all of the stakeholders felt that a strong need for CRM to support BCE. The findings made it possible to conclude that the University was at a Peripheral stage of maturity in CRM practice and the need for further research was identified to discover whether the University would like to move from that stage to Tactical and/or Strategic. Through the comparative analysis of the KSA Partnership report and the University of Salford and BCE case study, it was concluded that the HE sector was well aware of the CRM and BCE importance. Although the majority of institutions were identified to be in a similar position regarding their CRM and BCE development as the University of Hull, there were institutions like UoS that were far ahead of the rest and very willing to share their experience. Acknowledgement that the institution was on the right track with its interest in CRM, the range of challenges experienced and expected to be experienced by the University of Hull was confirmed through the KSA Partnership report as well as the University of Salford case study. It was concluded from the comparative analysis that the findings of the baseline assessment were quite similar to the experience of the HE sector in CRM BCE.

15

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report In the light of the analysis it was recommended that the University of Hull review the importance of BCE to the strategic goals of the institution and accept CRM as a necessary part of any further development of BCE.

5.2 Outputs and Results of the User Requirement Survey

The URS had a relatively good response rate with excellent representation of a range of job roles across a variety of departments (please see Appendix 2 for details). 20 out of 54 people were interested in the CaRM project and provided their contact details so that they could be contacted for further CRM related activities such as focus groups and other follow up events. From the survey results analysis it was possible to conclude the following: There is a requirement for CRM within the UoH. However, it was not entirely clear whether the requirement truly existed on an institutional level as the sample group represented only a fraction of employees; The majority of respondents would use a centralised system if one existed; The resistance to implementing CRM should be relatively low (3 out of 48 respondents were clearly against the implementation of CRM) although a further study might be required and a detailed explanation about CRM is essential; More than half of respondents (63%) required a system to manage relationships with private/public sector businesses, 44% are interested in relationships with funding bodies and 33% - with Charities/Trusts; The main required activities of a CRM system should be focused on the improvement of customer experience and information sharing; There is a requirement for more support of CRM activities than currently exist; The majority of respondents are expecting to see some development in their work activities where CRM would be beneficial. Most of that development is focused on the expansion of the existing CRM activities; Most of the sample group expected the University to make a decision regarding CRM in the near future. In conclusion it was possible to summarise that the majority of the sample group seems to be quite open and positive about the introduction of CRM. Members of both academia and the administration were interested in the survey and participated in significant numbers. The majority of respondents against the introduction of an institution-wide CRM replied in a way that suggested 16

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report unfamiliarity of individuals with CRM due to the limited awareness of both CRM as a concept and the operations of other departments/faculties. Recommendations for raising awareness and training colleagues on the matter of CRM were defined. It was also recommended that there was a strong basis on which to explore the possibility of rolling out a centralised CRM.

17

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

6.0 Outcomes
The following outcomes against set activities were delivered: 1. Implement suitable parts of the CRM Self-Analysis Framework and provide a critical analysis of the framework; Parts of the framework were implemented throughout the project. The framework was analysed and a detailed report was prepared in the form of the CaRM Case Study report. 2. Achieve a better understanding of the experience of coordinating CRM activities within the University and HE sector in general; Baseline assessment reports (2 parts) summarised the findings on the experience of coordinating CRM activities within the University and HE sector. 3. Identify whether the pilot system implementation within key departments is the preferred user option and might guide the wider adoption of CRM across the University; Project results were inconclusive on whether the pilot system implementation within key departments is the preferred user option for adoption of CRM. 4. Assess the advantages or disadvantages of taking a centralised vs. a devolved approach to raising awareness and adoption of CRM across diverse departments; The research indicated that a mixed opinion exist between the management and the front-line members of staff. It emerged that senior members of staff tended to have a more strategic view on CRM implementation and preferred a devolved approach. Most junior members of staff believed that as the University had already tried the devolved approach for several years with little positive result therefore a centralised approach needed implementing. More details available in baseline assessment report (part 1). 5. Understand the user and stakeholder needs and requirements of CRM activities; A good foundation for understanding user requirement in CRM activities was laid through the User Requirement Survey. Details available in URS report. 6. Evaluate how the University can best move forward and provide the basis on which it can do so.

18

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report The project results highlighted that the University is unable to move forward with a CRM implementation until a good understanding of the CRM concept is reached among the users as well as developing a specific BCE strategy. To summaries the project outcomes it is possible to conclude the following: The project provided the University of Hull with a better understanding of the situation with CRM and BCE within the university; The project allowed the University of Hull to gain a momentum to review the current CRM and BCE related activities; The project might provide a foundation for further development in the area by the newly appointed PVC for Engagement; The project allowed to conclude the importance of the strategy on BCE as well as the requirement for the senior managers involvement in the development; The project helped identifying potential benefits in CRM that could be reflected on the community if developed further; The project created a case study through a set of reports that allows other institutions to reflect on and learn through the University of Hull experience in CRM implementation. It is also important to notice that during the CaRM project the institution started shifting from the peripheral approach to BCE CRM towards a more tactical approach. Referring to the diagram on the CRM continuum it is possible to re-assess the current position of the institutional CRM activities due to changes in the uptake across the institutions business units as well as functions and functional integration. There was an increased uptake of the CRM system due to the increased awareness created by the CaRM project the user numbers accessing the current CRM system nearly doubled and initial steps were taken towards using the system beyond the concept of a records management database and towards a tool for analysing the performance of BCE-related processes activities as well as sharing the business contacts on a departmental level. In the last few months the CaRM project team with the crucial support of the IT Engineers have overcome the network infrastructure difficulties that prevented the integration of the CRM system with MS Outlook. Currently the main CRM system is integrated with Outlook which also moves the institution position in relations to CRM towards tactical stage. The methodology selected for the project proved to be successful and would be recommended for any institution working towards similar goals in CRM BCE development.

19

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

6.1 List of Deliverables and Online Access

The following reports were delivered by the CaRM project: 1) WP1, Project plan 2) WP2, Part 1 - Existing CRM outputs within the University; 3) WP2, Part 2 - CRM and HE sector; 4) WP3, User requirement survey analysis; 5) WP4, Self-analysis framework assessment CA; 6) WP7, Future action plan 7) CaRM Final Report 8) CaRM Case Study All of the project deliverables are available for public access on the CaRM Project website: http://www2.hull.ac.uk/acs/information-management/carm-project.aspx

20

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

7.0 Conclusions
It is possible to conclude that such a fundamental development as CRM implementation is unlikely to succeed without the following criteria: Institutional strategy on CRM and BCE supported and championed by the senior management; Understanding among the users of CRM as a philosophy, the need for CRM and ways to communicate and coordinate activities; Recognition of the University as a whole institution rather than a number of fragmented departments, with a willingness to share information on an institutional level; Acceptance of the importance of revenue generation by the users and vision of the bigger picture; Recognition that the focus should be on the people and processes rather than the system and a strategy to achieve such recognition in the users; Incentives for users to exchange information, develop best practice approaches to CRM activities, coordinate system requirement and work collaboratively on CRM implementation; Developed plan on achieving all of the above.

More progress needs to be made on some of these criteria at the University of Hull and this needs to be carried out in the form of a structured project in close collaboration with key stakeholders across the University. Interest in customer relationship management and associated IT systems has certainly increased since the beginning of the CaRM project. For example, KE introduced CRM to all of their activities due to a clear requirement of the Customer First renewal conditions. Although it is hard to assess whether such an immediate, key requirements driven implementation proved to be efficient as there is less motivation within the department to keep up with the changes after accreditation. However it is the intention that this momentum should be maintained and an action plan for taking CRM forward is developed and with the input and agreement from the senior management team. In addition is important to highlight that only through the CaRM project it was possible for the institution to understand the issues that need to be in place in order to succeed in implementing CRM.

21

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

8.0 Implications
There is potential for the CaRM project results to become a foundation for further development of CRM implementation. The project results provide a detailed and accessible research and analysis of the current situation regarding CRM within the University of Hull and insight into areas of activities where CRM is used or could be used. The research should ease any further requirements gathering by providing the baseline information and reflecting on the success of the activities used during the project. Assuming the criteria listed in the Conclusions (chapter 7) are in place, further development could be undertaken towards the technological aspect of CRM in the form of a system requirements gathering, analysis and system development or purchasing activities. The current situation at the University of Hull means that resources need to be focussed on further technical developments and support. Strong commitment is also needed by senior management to strategically engage with business and community engagement and embed this approach across relevant areas of the institution. The recent appointment of a Pro Vice Chancellor for Engagement certainly signals an appetite for this approach in the near future. Potential development of CRM as a part of the departmental Marketing Strategy might also be looked into if no centralised initiative can be identified.

22

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

List of References
KSA Partnership, (2007), Study of Customer Relationship Management (CRM) issues in UK Higher Education Institutions, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/themes/bce/crmstudyfinalreport20070817.pdf, accessed 08/10/09.

23

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Appendix 1
CRM User Requirement Survey 1. Please state your job title: 2. Please state which department you are based in: 3. How familiar are you with CRM concept?

Very much familiar with the concept Somewhat familiar with the concept I have heard about it I have never heard about it before
4. What system do you use the most to manage your customer relations?

No system for managing customer relations (keeping the contact details in the head) Basic MS Office tools (inc. Outlook, Excel, Word, etc) Other basic PC tools (inc. Notepad, etc) Complex MS Office tools (Access and Access-based databases) Complex CRM System (MS Dynamics CRM, Sage CRM, etc) Basic non-digital tools (inc. keeping a paper diary, notepad, etc)
5. Why do you use that particular system?

Personal preference - I do not have a specific reason, I just like that system; No choice - no other system is available for me Easy to use I find other systems significantly more complicated to use Functionality others systems do not support the functionality I require Other (please specify)
6. How often do you use your CRM system? 24

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Every day, for most of my work-related activities On a daily basis, for some of my work-related activities Several times a week, for a few of my work-related activities Every now and then, for an occasional work-related activity
7. How often are you contacted by the customer with a query you cannot resolve immediately as you do not hold the required information (information is being held elsewhere in the institution or you do not have the required access rights)?

This happens often enough to be a serious problem I have noticed this happening occasionally This has happened a couple of times This has never happened to me
8. How often do you need to exchange or share your data with your colleagues from other departments across the institution?

All the time (80% - 100% of work activities) Very often (60% - 80% of work activities) Sometimes (40% - 60% of work activities) Occasionally (20% - 40% of work activities) Rarely (5% - 20% of work activities) Never (0% 5% of work activities)
9. Have you ever lost any business from a client due to any of the following:

Client being contacted by another part of the University Client being frustrated from having to deal with many different parts of the University about the same issue

25

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Client being unhappy with the time the University takes to respond to an enquiry That has never happened to me Other (please specify)
10. What type of relationships do you manage or would like to manage with a CRM system (select several if applicable)?

Private sector businesses Public sector businesses Charities/trusts Funding bodies Internal colleagues Other (please specify)
11. Please select activities and functions you currently use or would like to use on your CRM system:

Current Desired Activities Activities Creating, updating and storing contact details of customers and business partners Mail shots, e-marketing, target marketing campaigns, cross-selling activities Strategic workload management, prioritisation and task distribution via CRM system Managing events (e.g. booking rooms and food, planning itinerary, organising reminders) Sharing the project/client related information through a CRM system Recording CRM activities and any ongoing communication with customers and business partners on a CRM system

26

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Current Desired Activities Activities Producing Management Information reports from a CRM system Improving customer satisfaction level through follow up activities and additional services Unique and uncategorised activities (please list below)
12. Do you think there is a need for an institution-wide CRM system and why?

Yes (please specify why) No (please specify why)

13. Assuming an appropriate centrally supported CRM system with good level of security, technical support and training is available, would you consider using it?

Yes No (please specify why)

14. Do you anticipate any further development in your area of work where CRM could be beneficial?

Yes No
15. What are your expectations from the University in regards to CRM?

I have no expectations from the University in regards to CRM My expectations are...

16. Would you like to be contacted for further CRM related activities, such as focus groups and other follow up events?

No Yes (please specify your email address)

17. Any other comments?

27

University of Hull, CaRM Project Final Report

Appendix 2
Respondents by department

Respondents by job groups

28