Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Industry
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compind

Understanding CRM adoption stages: empirical analysis building

on the TOE framework
Frederico Cruz-Jesus* , Andreia Pinheiro, Tiago Oliveira
NOVA Information Management School (NOVA IMS), Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campus de Campolide, 1070-312 Lisboa, Portugal

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Despite the considerable benefits of CRM, there is a paucity of research considering CRM adoption stages
Received 13 September 2018 (evaluation, adoption, and routinization). Thus, we developed a conceptual model using the technology-
Received in revised form 28 March 2019 organisation-environment (TOE) framework to examine the antecedents that affect CRM adoption stages
Accepted 29 March 2019
in firms. We used partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) with data from 277 firms
Available online xxx
to test the conceptual model. Data quality and integration, top management support and competitive
pressure positively influence CRM evaluation. Technology competence, data quality and integration, top
Keywords:
management support and CRM evaluation positively influence CRM adoption. However competitive
Customer relationship management (CRM)
Information technology (IT)
pressure negatively affects CRM adoption. Finally, competitive pressure and CRM adoption positively
Adoption influence CRM routinization. Interestingly, each included construct influences every CRM adoption stage
Adoption stages differently.
Technology-organisation-environment © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
(TOE) framework
Data quality and integration

improving customer satisfaction, sustaining customer loyalty,

1. Introduction and thus, differentiating firms from their competitors [7–9].
Due to continuous attention from the academic community,
According to Gartner [1], Customer Relationship Manage- and huge investments by organisations for integrating CRM into
ment (CRM) became the largest software market in 2017 with their systems, there remains a prominent assumption about CRM,
$39.5 billion spent, replacing database management systems an understanding that is usually perceived as either an exclusively
(DBMSs), and will be the fastest growing software in 2018, with technological or simply a marketing tool. Theoretically, CRM
an expected growth of 16%. The growing importance of CRM for should be seen as a dynamic innovation that should be well
organisations is deeply connected with technological develop- managed in order to maximize operational efficiency and
ments (e.g., increase in data storage space, analytic methods and competitive agility for sustainability of the company [10–14].
computational power) in recent years, as well as with new ways Nevertheless, while literature often cites CRM projects or CRM
of communication, enabled by ICT and social networks, which is performance (see, e.g. [15–17]), there is a perceived need for a
shifting consumer behaviours and actively influencing customer holistic perspective of CRM adoption, which can help clear a vision
relationships [2,3]. Nowadays, managers have more data, which or understanding about its adoption process at the firm level [6,13].
can be a challenging factor to generate customer insights and Considering these significant gaps in CRM literature, this study
manage long-term customer relationships [4]. Hence, CRM is a aims to understand how CRM is implemented at a company level,
powerful tool for improving the organisation’s ability to interact and how that could be influenced by determinants from the
with customers, as well as to build a sustainable competitive contexts of the TOE framework (i.e. technology-organisation-
advantage [5,6]. CRM involves a combination of people, environment). Therefore, this study offers a better understanding
practices and technology, providing a better understanding of about the CRM adoption process as a dynamic technology, by
customers’ needs, and personalising its products and services, examining the positive relationship between CRM adoption stages
(i.e. evaluation, adoption, and routinization) and its factors. To the
best of the authors’ knowledge not enough attention has been
given in the literature, as the number of studies considering
* Corresponding author. Present: NOVA Information Management School (NOVA
different CRM adoption stages is scarce. By incorporating adoption
IMS), Campus de Campolide, 1070-312 Lisboa, Portugal.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (F. Cruz-Jesus), stages in our conceptual model, we can explore how, in magnitude
[email protected] (A. Pinheiro), [email protected] (T. Oliveira). and direction, the hypothesised CRM antecedents affect each of the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2019.03.007
0166-3615/© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
2 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13

three adoption stages individually. Although it is commonly categorised into three distinct categories: i. Operational, enhanced
assumed in the information systems (IS), and CRM literature, it by the determination to automate and increase the efficiency of the
seems plausible that the effects of one CRM antecedent may vary CRM processes, customer service and support systems, sales force
throughout its adoption process. Investigating this possibility is automation and marketing automation belong to this category [19];
worthwhile and therefore, one of the main contributions of this ii. Analytical, used to provide better knowledge about consumer
paper for CRM literature. Moreover, the proposed perceived data behaviour as a perceived need of individuals, containing several
quality and integration construct, drawn specifically for the CRM business intelligence applications such as data mining; and iii.
context, helped to gain some interesting findings for scholars and Collaborative, used to manage and integrate communication
managers as it offers a new perspective about contexts of the TOE channels and customer interaction touchpoints, an institutional
framework. Thus, our study also contributes to extending the great website. E-mails and Facebook pages are examples of collaborative
potential of the TOE framework over information technology. systems [13,19,25]. Additionally, some authors suggest Strategic
This study is organised as follows: In the next section, it CRM as a fourth element to complement the other three [13,20]. The
explores the concept of CRM providing a background on this literature refers to CRM strategy as a core of business management
technology. In the third section, it presents the conceptual model because its processes determine how a firm will relate to its
subsequently providing hypotheses for consideration. In section customers for the purpose of creating long-term and valuable
four it describes the study method and design. In section five we relationships with them, thus increasing higher profitability and
present the results. In section six we discuss the major findings for sustainable advantages over competitors [13].
managers and academics, followed by purported limitations of the All in all, CRM systems enable organisations to acquire and
study. In the last section, we present future lines of research. generate customer knowledge, across different and multiple
touchpoints in order to obtain comprehensive knowledge about
2. Theoretical background consumer behaviour [25]. When considering technological ad-
vancement, some companies are more prepared than others to
2.1. The concept of CRM achieve competitive advantage by gathering continuous informa-
tion from different practices, which optimises the interaction with
The concept of CRM does not have an appropriate definition the customers, increasing customer value, and companies’
within both business and academic communities [13]. Some profitability [25,26]. For these reasons, in the literature, some
authors argue that a lack of understanding regarding CRM exists studies were already conducted in the field of CRM. Perhaps one of
[18,19]. Other authors argue that the resultant misunderstanding the most relevant studies in the context of CRM was by Reinartz
built around the concept of CRM is combined with the distinct et al. [27] In their study, the authors contributed to the CRM
academic backgrounds of the researchers, and because of the literature in a twofold manner: i) by providing a much-needed
multidisciplinary nature of CRM, which are all a combination of comprehensive definition, and operationalisation suggestion, of
management, marketing and IS subjects, this lack of understanding CRM from a customer-facing perspective. In doing so, the authors
is promulgated [19–21]. contemplated the main activities of CRM into three stages of
CRM could be seen as a business philosophy, which defines CRM as relationships with customers – initiation, maintenance and
a science of marketing focus in customer relationship orientation [19]. termination; and ii) by assessing the association of these three
Indeed, this perspective aims to understand customers’ needs, stages with firms’ subjective and objective performance, moder-
building long-term relationships and ensure reliability/profitability ated by the compatibility of firms towards CRM, and their CRM
[21]. As a business strategy, CRM seeks to satisfy customer’s needs and technology itself. In this aspect, this study concluded that although
preferences, treating each of them differently and uniquely [19,22]; the three previously mentioned dimensions of CRM were
Thus, within this vision, a firm invests its available resources (assets, associated with higher objective economic performance, only
knowledge and business processes) to design and implement a the first two (relationships’ initiation and maintenance) were so
customer-centred strategy [17]. CRM is also related to a firm’s with perceived economic performance. This finding led to the
willingness to integrate and deploy (limited) resources to achieve a conclusion that “the more firms engage in implementing CRM
competitive advantage [17,19]. As a technological tool, CRM is referred processes, especially at the initiation and maintenance stage, the
to as an enabler for organisations to develop closer relationships with better they perform” ([27], p. 299). Ko et al. [24] developed in their
its customers, across different and new points of contact [13,19,20]. research on the intention, adoption and implementation of CRM,
This perspective supports firms that are customer-oriented, as with also exploring the impact about organisational characteristics in
the introduction of social media tools, firms have an opportunity to CRM adoption process, in the Korean context. Hung et al. [28],
improve their capabilities to communicate better with customers suggested an integrated model that incorporates both organisa-
([20] [4];). As a result, a new concept emerged, that of Social CRM tional and technological factors, as the main determinants of CRM
(SCRM), which has some similarities with the concept of relational solutions in hospitality. Alshawi et al. [[27]], proposed studying the
information processes [17,20]. As a business process, CRM is organisational, technical and data quality factors as influence
considered a positive influence in changing an organisation’s whole drivers to CRM adoption in small and medium-sized enterprises
structure from different activity levels, such as marketing, customer (SMEs). Garrido-Moreno and Padilla-Melendez [12] examined the
service, production, or channel management, all with a common effect of knowledge management to support CRM performance.
purpose – creating a customer knowledge base, taking fact-based Furthermore, Jaber and Simkin [6] analysed the antecedents of
decisions, and improving customer relations [19,22]. Therefore, CRM CRM adoption. Some of the studies were applied to contribute to
involves the integration of people, business processes and technology the CRM understanding (see, e.g., [8,13,19]). According to CRM
which in many aspects, is defined as a form of relationship strategy for success, Peltier et al. [29] provided an organisational learning
the business context or as a relationship marketing technique in the framework by linking organisational processes, customer data
academic community [8,13]. quality and firm performance.
Even in the new era of social media relations, CRM has been
widely regarded as a technological solution, that enables organ- 2.2. Determinants of CRM adoption following a TOE perspective
isations to manage customer relationships more efficiently through
the detailed and accurate analysis of consumer data [23,24]. In the Tornatzky and Fleischer [30] developed the Technology
context of a technological solution, CRM systems are often Organisational and Environment (TOE) framework. Its name
 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13 3

comes from the three aspects that this theory claims to impact the theoretical model to shed light on eCRM adoption in the hospitality
process of organisational adoption and implementation of sector. Their model, also grounded on the TOE framework,
technological innovations, i.e., the technological, the organisa- proposed perceived direct and indirect benefits of eCRM, as well
tional, and the environmental ones [31]. The technological context as the compatibility of eCRM adoption drivers within the
describes both the internal and external technologies relevant to technological context of a firm. Existing technical skills, financial
the organisation, including the ones existing inside the organisa- resources, top management support, customer knowledge man-
tion, as well as those available for possible adoption by the agement, and firm size are eCRM adoption antecedents within the
organisation, i.e., are available outside but have not yet be adopted organisational context; whereas perceived threats from compet-
([30], p. 153). Note that within this context, one may consider itors, pressure from partners and industry and customer expect-
technology in material (e.g., equipment) and/or immaterial (e.g., ations would work as drivers within the environmental context.
data and methods in use) terms [31]. The technological context is Note that some of these antecedents are shared with Rogers [43]
separated to emphasise attention on how the attributes of the diffusion of innovations theory (DOI). Ahani et al. [44] combined
specific technology can influence its adoption decision. The SEM with Neural Networks to explain social CRM (sCRM) adoption
organisational context is related to the company’s resources and at Malaysian SME companies. Their conceptual model was based
assets such as the company’s size, hierarchy, procedures, on the TOE framework contexts added with information process
administrative structure, human resources, extra resources and elements (information capture, sharing and use). Technology (cost,
the connection between works. Organisational context comprises relative advantage, compatibility); organisational (top manage-
several features of the organisation ([30], p. 153), such as the ment support, IT/IS readiness); and environmental contexts
number of employees, sales, business processes, hierarchical (customer and competitive pressures) were found confirmed as
structure, resources, among others [32]. Lastly, the environmental significant antecedents of sCRM adoption. Hasani et al. [45] also
context consists of “the arena” in which an organisation conducts presented a study, which combined some aspects of DOI with TOE,
its activity, comprising its industry, competitors, suppliers, and to assess the intention to adopt social sCRM across start-up
relations with governmental entities [30,33]. companies. Most of their hypotheses were supported. Perceived
The TOE framework has been used in numerous studies to advantage, compatibility, observability, and trialability (within
assess the adoption of technology innovations such as technological dimension); financial resources (within organisa-
electronic data interchange (EDI) (e.g., [34]), enterprise tional dimension); as well as external pressures and support
resource planning (ERP) [32], e-business (see, e.g. [35,36]), (within the environmental dimension) were found to be significant
e-commerce (see, e.g. [37,38]), green IT [31], hospital IS [39], or drivers of sCRM adoption. For a summary of studies on
Software-as-a-Service [40]. technological innovation following a TOE perspective, please see
Even for the specific case of CRM, TOE already proved to be a Table 1.
useful lens to understand its adoption process. Chang et al. [41] for
example, studied electronic CRM (eCRM) performance in the 2.3. Prior research considering different adoption stages
Taiwanese service sector. To do that, the authors grounded their
conceptual model on the TOE framework, concluding that Rogers [43], in his DOI, stated that innovation adoption was a
technological and organisational aspects positively influence process occurring over a sequence of phases, through an awareness
eCRM performance whereas environmental pressure did not or knowledge phase about the innovation itself including the
prove to have any effect. Racherla and Hu [42] proposed a advantages and disadvantages to adopt it for organisations. This

Table 1
Studies using TOE to assess technological adoption and significant antecedents found.

Technology studied Adoption stage(s) Source Adoption factors

Technological Organisational Environmental Context

context context

TC TR TI SC PB CS TMS FS MO GS CP RS
Cloud computing Adoption [46] X X X X X X X
E-business Adoption [47] X X X X X
E-business Initiation, adoption routinization [38] X X X X X X X
Mobile supply chain (SCM) Evaluation, adoption, routinization [48] X X X X X X X
Radio frequency identification Evaluation, adoption, routinization [49] X X X X X X
Software-as-a-service Intention, adoption, routinization [40] X X X X
E-signature Adoption [50] X X
EDI Adoption [34] X X X X
Hospital IS Adoption [39] X X X
Broadband mobile applications Initiation, adoption, implementation [51] X X X X
B2B Ecommerce Intent to adopt [52] X X
ERP ERP assimilation [53] X X X
Green IT Initialization, integration, maturation [31] X X X
Radio frequency identification Adoption [54] X X X X
Business intelligence Evaluation, adoption, use [55] X X
ERP systems Evaluation, adoption, routinisation [32] X X X X
eCRM Performance [41] X X
eCRM Adoption [42] X X X X
sCRM Adoption [44] X X X X X
sCRM Adoption [45] X X

Notes: 1. TC-technology competence, TR-technology readiness, TI-technology integration, SC-security concerns, PB-perceived benefits, CS-cost savings, TMS-top
management support, FS-firm size, MO-managerial obstacles, GS-global scope, CP-competitive pressure, RS-regulatory support.
2. Some adoption factors are comprised in different TOE context factors (e.g., technology competence, technology readiness, cost savings may appear in technological or
organisational contexts depending on the study) because TOE is a framework and not a strict theory that is completely defined.
4 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13

stage is followed by a perspective, attitude and a formal decision to elements of the organisation, and possibly, with other supply chain
adopt the innovation, and then, implementation, as a confirmation members, as well [48,56].
of the decision. According to Hameed et al. [56] the implementa- Ko et al. [24] developed a conceptual model for understanding CRM
tion stage is when the innovation is adjusted and implemented adoption in three different stages – perception, adoption and
across the entire organisation. implementation. For each stage, the authors hypothesised that firms’,
Most studies in the literature consider three stages of adoption, products and top management characteristics would significantly
even though there is no consensus regarding the names of each. influence the CRM adoption process. Their studied enriched CRM
Some authors consider the three stages of adoption to be literature as it is one of the few that provided a comprehensive
perception, adoption and implementation [24]; others use approach in the sense that it is hypothesised as an antecedent of CRM
evaluation, adoption and routinization [32,49]; evaluation, adop- within the context of a specific adoption stage. In other words, it seems
tion, use [55]; initiation, adoption and routinization [38]; or reasonable to assume that one aspect/attribute may work as an
adoption, assimilation and implementation [57], just to cite a few. antecedent of one specific adoption stage and not necessarily for every
Note that, however, it is noticeable that the three stages are stage. Note that the studies considering different CRM adoption stages
concordant across studies. The first stage relates to initial are scarce. Our study intends to fill this gap.
awareness and assessment of an innovation; the second stage
comprises the adoption process, i.e., after the decision to adopt has 3. Conceptual model for CRM adoption stages
been taken, and efforts are being made accordingly, whereas the
third pertains to the routinization, or maturing of the technology in The proposed conceptual model was based on the literature
the firm. In other words, the adoption process is described within a review (please see Table 1), where technology competence, top
certain series of activities which include initiation and progression management support, and competitive pressure emerged as the
through to the adoption, adaptation, acceptance, routinization, and most used factors for technological, organisational and environ-
infusion [56]. Rogers [43], presented five stages, stating that a mental contexts, respectively, of the TOE framework. Additionally,
technology will go through the process of knowledge, persuasion, we propose data quality and integration as a specific antecedent of
decision, implementation, and confirmation stages [49]. However, CRM adoption stages, within the technological context of an
early adoption of IT innovation studies have been widely organisation. Hence, we considered these constructs to explain
summarized into three stages: evaluation, adoption, and routini- three stages of CRM adoption process (evaluation, adoption and
zation, and are often stated as pre-adoption, adoption-decision and routinization). The reason why we considered adoption stages in
post-adoption in the IS literature [56]. They are consistent with the our model is twofold: first and foremost, because one adoption
most previous studies on innovation adoption, such as e-business factor may be an antecedent of CRM adoption in one particular
assimilation, which focuses on the initiation, adoption and stage, but not on the other, or even with different sign effects; and
routinization of internet platforms to conduct value chain secondly, because there is a gap in the literature in this aspect. We
activities, that simplify the communication with suppliers and formulated the following hypotheses to test the proposed
customers [38]. The diffusion process of software-as-a-service conceptual model (please see Fig. 1).
(SaaS) was examined considering the intention, adoption and
routinisation stages [40]; Chen and Chen [51] assessed the 3.1. Hypotheses
evaluation, adoption, and routinisation stages of broadband mobile
applications. Bose and Luo [31] studied the implementation of 3.1.1. Technology competence
Green IT initiatives across initialisation, integration and matura- Technology competence (TC) corresponds to the technology
tion stages. Wang et al. [54] examined Radio frequency identifica- resources available in the organisations, such as the IT infrastruc-
tion based on only a single-stage adoption, whereas Chong and ture, which incorporates installed technologies, systems, and
Chan [49] studied the Radio frequency identification in the health applications [58]. IT specialists, refers to people in the organisation
care industry, through the three-stage diffusion model: evaluation, who have the expertise to implement and use information
adoption, and routinisation. Afterwards, [48] applied the same solutions [40]. Ritter and Gemunden [59], affirm technology
three stages to study mobile supply chain management system competence as an enabler for organisations, to understand, use and
diffusion. Puklavec et al. [55] investigated the implementation of a exploit technology internally. In fact, technology competence is a
business intelligence system in the context of small and medium method of support in preparing a technology infrastructure,
enterprises (SMEs), through the evaluation, adoption and use including adoption of a basic level of knowledge as it relates to the
diffusion stages. Junior et al. [32] applied the three stages: available technology [54,60]. Therefore, when organisations
evaluation, adoption and routinisation, to examine the adoption of realise the benefits generated by a particular technology, such
ERP systems in the context of farms. In consideration of this study, as CRM solutions, technology competence has an important role in
the theory of adoption stages is relevant. It explains the CRM the context of the firm [60]. According, to San-Martín et al. [60], a
adoption, which could vary in each stage according to its relevant high level of technology competence has a positive influence on a
factors [49], which makes the current study viable in obtaining a willingness to achieve an attitude that will improve the manage-
comprehensive understanding of CRM across different adoption ment of employees and customer information. Also, to innovate a
stages. Initiation, or evaluation, is the first stage, where potential process or a product, which derives a greater benefit through
benefits of CRM solutions are being evaluated across all chain technology development. Therefore, we might assume that
activities of the organisation, thus forming an attitude towards the technology competence is key for perceiving benefits, derived
CRM adoption [38]. CRM adoption is the next stage, defined as the from the adoption of CRM solutions. This concept has been
formal stage where the decision to adopt was made [38]. This stage proposed in prior studies, such as mobile-CRM strategy or
consists in accepting the idea and evaluating the technical, electronic commerce context [60]. Note that CRM entails a wide
financial and strategic perspectives with the all resources needed range of hardware (e.g., servers, computers) and software
for its acquisition and implementation [56]. The final stage is applications. It also requires technological skills from its employ-
routinization, which involves the implementation and integration ees to take advantage of its potentials. Throughout the CRM
of CRM solutions, through the organisation, preparing them for use adoption process, organisations need not only technological but
of the CRM technology, performing a trial system for validation of also human resources with enough skills and experience Hence,
the CRM, including the acceptance and continued adoption of all organisations with higher technological competence are more
 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13 5

Fig. 1. Conceptual model of CRM adoption stages.

Notes: Order of the path coefficients: (evaluation, adoption, routinization) * p < 0.10; **p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01.

likely to be successful in every stage of the CRM adoption process. support, and validate an innovation technology adoption (see, e.g.
Thus, we formulated the following hypothesis: [48,56,14],). Lacity et al. [62] concluded, after a complete literature
review, that TMS is one of the organisational contexts’ that yields
H1. Technology competence positively influences CRM evalua-
more influence on IT outsourcing. Farhan et al. [63] found that lack
tion (H1a), adoption (H1b), and routinization (H1c).
of top management support is one of the most important reasons
for CRM failure. Shobaki et al. [64] point out TMS as a determinant
3.1.2. Data quality and integration factor into organisations that can control all processes of strategy
In the same way, Alshawi et al. [7], mentioned that there is a planning, and decision making behind Innovation technology.
common language between CRM and data quality through all of the Moreover, a CRM perspective arises from top management
processes involved. Effectively, the importance of data quality and support, who align and have a commitment within all practices
data integration processes, which include CRM applications, all of the particular organisation [65]. Indeed, Garrido-Moreno and
transactions, interactions, and networked touchpoints, have been Padilla-Melendez [12] indicate that top management support as a
one of the main inhibitors of success in evaluating CRM results. related factor is able to moderate and thus impact CRM
Indeed, behind the issues of data quality and data integration performance, which is a key factor for CRM adoption. Hence,
processes, many relative aspects such as, managerial, operational, TMS is one of the most important antecedents of technology
and strategical factors exist. Therefore, the CRM infrastructure and innovation at firm level [61]. As implicated by Zhu et al. [38], in the
organisational system compromises an effective strategy including context of e-business – another impactful technology within an
the revenue and profitability of the firm/company [29]. organisation – “top managers should put a high priority on
integrating fragmented technologies and linking those ‘islands of
H2. Data quality and integration positively influence CRM
automation’ to support key information processes across the value
evaluation (H4a), adoption (H4b), and routinization (H4c).
chain”. Considering CRM’s unique characteristics, e.g., high
financial costs and the potential to revolutionise the way a firm
3.1.3. Top management support relates with its customers, it may be especially dependent of TMS
Top management support (TMS) is the degree to which the [66]. Hence, TMS is vital in the context of CRM adoption process,
adoption of a technological innovation, CRM in this case, is from evaluation to routinization. For these reasons, we developed
supported by senior management of a firm. Young and Jordan ([61], the following hypothesis:
p. 720) also define it “when a senior management project sponsor/
H3. Top management support positively influences CRM
champion, the CEO and other senior managers devote time to
evaluation (H2a), adoption (H2b), and routinization (H2c).
review plans, follow up on results and facilitate management
problems”. TMS has been used in various studies of technology
innovation, especially in those technologies that imply meaningful 3.1.4. Competitive pressure
changes in the organisations’ processes and way of doing business In the context of innovative technology, competitive pressure
[31]. In fact, many scholars found TMS statistically significant to corresponds to the degree of pressure felt by an organisation from
6 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13

their competitors, being recognised as an important driver in the Therefore, the three adoption stages assuming dependence
adoption of innovation [36,38,67]. According to Missi et al. [68], level to each other, we formulated the following hypothesis:
the more competitive pressure a firm has perceived, the more
H6. CRM evaluation positively influences CRM adoption.
likely the firm is convinced to adopt CRM. Effectively, with the
market competition, organisations are looking for approaches,
H7. CRM adoption positively influences CRM routinization.
solutions and resources more often, to improve customer service
or even reduce costs, to achieve competitive advantage [69]. As
competition from other players in the market increases, an 3.1.6. Controls
organisation is more prone to seek ways of achieving sustainable The use of controls is very common in IS studies. These controls,
competitive advantage through innovative technologies. CRM are therefore considered essential when data variation cannot be
fulfils this objective, as with CRM adoption, organisations may explained by the explanatory variables [40]. We use firm size and
benefit from better customer relations, brand awareness and industry as control variables.
visibility, more and better data and, thus, decisions. With CRM
firms can put their customers at the centre of their business 4. Methodology and results
activities [70], relating to them in a one-to-one way, getting to
know them better. Furthermore, by means of data analytics, firms 4.1. Measurement
can identify customers more prone to abandon, which occurs
more often in highly competitive markets. Firms, acting on this The authors developed a questionnaire to survey firms covering the
and other insights, may be more willing to adopt CRM to become manufacturing, construction, services, financial and banking, distribu-
more efficient and profitable, as they have more tools to reduce tion, and commerce industries, to evaluate the conceptual model and
churn and, at the same time, boost sales with cross- and up- the associated proposed hypotheses. In developing this questionnaire
selling campaigns. As mentioned earlier, one advantage of (please see Appendix A) are the following processes to be implemented
including different adoption stages in our study is the ability for the evaluation as follows: Technology competence, as measured
to differentiate effects throughout the adoption cycle. According- with 4 items, was based on Martins et al. [40]Ritter and Gemunden [59],
ly, in deference to the positive effects on evaluation and adoption and San-Martín et al. [60]; Top management support, as measured with
stages, competitive pressure can also bring negative effects on the 5 items, was based on Garrido-Moreno and Padilla-Melendez [12], Reis
routinization stage. This outcome occurs because some firms do and Peña [65], and Shobaki et al. [64]; Competitive pressure, as
not have technical, and managerial skills to reach innovation measured with 4 items, was based on Melville et al. [69], Missi et al. [68],
technology requirements [38]. Zhu et al. [38] indicate that too Oliveira et al. [46], and Zhu et al. [38]; and Data qualityand integration, as
much competitive pressure drives organisations to change measured with 4 items, was based on Alshawi et al. [7], Even et al. [71],
rapidly from one innovation to another without effectively Khalil and Talha [72], Missi et al. [68], and Watts et al. [73] CRM
implementing the prior innovation into the organisation. Hence, evaluation, as measured with 4 items, was based on Hameed et al. [56],
we believe, higher competitive pressure is not a driver of CRM and Zhu et al. [38]; CRM adoption, as measured with 13 items, was based
routinization, but probably an inhibitor. Thus, we present the on Goodhue et al. [74]Hameed et al. [56], and Zhu et al. [38]; and CRM
following hypothesis: routinization, as measured with 4 items, was based on Hameed et al.
[56], Jia et al. [75], and Zhu et al. [38]. These criteriawere measured using
H4. Competitive pressure positively influences CRM evaluation
a five-point range scale where 1 was defined as “strongly disagreeing” to
(H3a) and CRM adoption (H3b), but negatively influences CRM
5 defined as “strongly agree”. All developments were operationalised as
routinization (H3c).
reflective to be consistent with the literature review. Therefore,
dichotomous questions measured the CRM adoption.
3.1.5. The three stages of CRM adoption
The three stages of CRM adoption begin with the CRM evaluation, 4.2. Data
referring to when a firm perceives CRM as an advantage for the
processes of an organisation. In this stage of implementation, a A pilot test was made to evaluate the consistency of the
proposal could be to adopt CRM solutions [38,56]. Following, the questionnaire. We received 30 responses. Then, an online survey
suggested proposal, the affirmative or negative decision is made in was conducted over eight weeks. We invited firms of different
this CRM adoption stage. If CRM is therefore accepted, it will be sectors randomly, from a Dun & Bradstreet database which possesses
necessary to reorganise all processes, and resources for the an impressive and important list of commercial information and
implementation and integration of the CRM system into the insight on businesses. the invitation also contained certain qualifying
organisation, thus providing CRM routinization [38]. questions to qualify the potential respondents. We guaranteed

Table 2
Sample characteristics (N = 277).

Obs. % By firm size (number of employees) Obs. %

By industry
Manufacturing 49 18% <=10 13 5%
Construction 17 6% 11-50 93 34%
Services 114 41% 51-250 109 39%
Financial and banking 22 8% >250 62 22%
Distribution and commerce 73 26%

By respondent’s position
CRM managers, CRM technical 9 3% Administration/Finance managers, CFOs 70 25%
Sales and Marketing, managers 39 14% Business operations, managers, COOs 44 16%
IS managers, Directors 43 16% Others 36 13%
CEOs, CIOs, Presidents, Directors 30 11%
 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13 7

Table 3
Composite reliability (CP) and average variance extracted (AVE).

Construct CR AVE TC TMS CP DQ CRME CRMA CRMR

Technology competence (TC) 0.91 0.71 0.84
Data quality and integration (DQ) 0.91 0.72 0.42 0.85
Top management support (TMS) 0.98 0.89 0.17 0.13 0.95
Competitive pressure (CP) 0.89 0.67 0.39 0.35 0.27 0.82
CRM evaluation (CRME) 0.96 0.86 0.32 0.41 0.33 0.54 0.93
CRM adoption (CRMA) na na 0.32 0.39 0.36 0.34 0.73 na
CRM routinization (CRMR) 0.98 0.91 0.35 0.38 0.35 0.49 0.83 0.69 0.95

Notes: Composite reliability (CP), average variance extracted (AVE), the diagonal in bold is the square root of AVE, non-diagonal is correlation.

anonymity to the respondents to reduce any biased response, and the Hetrotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) ratios are below 0.9 (see, e.g.,
opportunity to receive the findings of the study. [78]), which suggest discriminant validity (please, see Table 5).
We obtained a sample of 277 responses from various sectors Hence, we conclude that all the developmental components
(please see Table 2). 41% of the respondents belonged to the services demonstrate evidence of discrimination.
sector, 26% to distribution and commerce, 18% to the manufacturing
sector, 8% to financial and banking, and 6% to the construction sector. 5.1.2. Structural model
Based on the respondents’ position, 25% of the respondents were We developed some assessment procedures to assess the
administration or finance managers, or CFOs, 16% were IS managers results of the structural model. First, we analysed the variance
or directors, and business operations experts, managers, or COOs inflation factor (VIF). As VIF shows values lower than 5, all latent
with 14% belonging to sales and marketing operational or managers, variables reveal no concerns of multicollinearity. Moving forward,
13% had other specific positions, 11% of the respondents were CEO, we tested path coefficients and t-statistics levels, which were
CIO, president or director, and 3% of the respondents were CRM estimated using the bootstrapping method with 5000 samplings.
managers or specialists. We also considered the size of the firms Based on Fig. 2, we can see the r-squares (R2). The conceptual
questioned, thus: 39% of the respondents were from medium firms, model explains 40.5% of the variation in CRM evaluation, 57.6% of
and 34% were from small firms; a little less, 22% of the respondents the variation in CRM adoption, and 57.3% of the variation in CRM
were from large firms, against 5% which represent respondents from routinization. In Fig. 2, we also present the Q2, values higher than
micro-firms. zero, this factor implies the model has predictive relevance [79].
Thus, we consider this a satisfactory model.
5. Data analysis and results Based on Fig. 2, we can see that within the technological
context, we found that technology competence has a significant
5.1. Results path in CRM adoption (H1b) (b ^ = 0.097; p < 0.05), being statistically
significant in explanation of this stage. However, it doesn’t explain
We used Partial least squares (PLS) to test the conceptual ^ = 0.038; p > 0.10), and CRM routinization (
CRM evaluation (H1a) (b
model. This estimation alternative from “Structural Equation
H1c) (b^ = 0.044; p > 0.10) are not statistically significant. Data
Modelling” (SEM) does not require a normal distribution, focusing
on the variance of the dependent variables [76]. Because all items quality and integration are statistically significant to CRM
in our data are not normally distributed (p < 0.01, based on evaluation (H2a) (b ^ = 0.198; p < 0.01), also to CRM adoption
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test), PLS seems to be adequate for ^ = 0.102; p < 0.05) but are not statistically significant to
(H2b) (b
application. Using smart PLS 3 software (see, e.g., [77],), we
explain CRM routinization (H4c) (b ^ = 0.028; p > 0.10). Within the
estimated the dependent variables, testing the measurement ^ = 0.178;
organisational context, top management support (b
model, and the structural model, to obtain support for con-
^
p < 0.01), (b = 0.137; p < 0.01) is found to be statistically significant
clusions about our model.
in explaining the evaluation and adoption but is not statistically
5.1.1. Measurement model ^ = 0.064; p > 0.10). Hence
significant in explaining routinization (b
We evaluated the measurement model based on composite H3a and H3b are supported. Within the environmental context,
reliability, convergent validity, indicator reliability, and discrimi- competitive pressure has positive paths to CRM evaluation (H4a)
nant validity. Firstly, to analyse the indicator reliability, we ^ = 0.399; p < 0.01), and CRM routinization (H4c) (b
(b ^ = 0.263;
analysed the loadings. All of them are greater than 0.7 (Table 3) ^ = 0.137;
p < 0.01), but negative path to CRM adoption (H4b) (b
and statistically significant. Second, Table 3 shows the composite
p < 0.01). Consequently, Hypothesis 3 is partially supported.
reliability (CR), and with the square root of the average variance
Within the three adoption stages, CRM evaluation is statistically
extracted (AVE), these indicators are used to evaluate the
significant to explain CRM adoption (b ^ = 0.690; p < 0.01). CRM
developmental reliability and validity. As seen in Table 3, all
constructs have CR above 0.7, assuming good levels of reliability, adoption has a positive and statistically significant path to explain
and also demonstrate evidence of internal consistency [76]. ^ = 0.535; p < 0.01). Hence, we conclude that
CRM routinization (b
Table 3, also shows a sufficient degree of convergent validity, as H5 and H6 are both supported.
AVE for each construct is greater than 0.5, we can conclude that the
latent variable explains more than half of the variance of its 6. Discussion
indicators [76]. In addition, we also evaluate discriminant validity:
i) the square root of AVE is higher than the correlations between 6.1. Discussion of findings
the constructs, thus this criterion is satisfied [76]. ii) Table 4 shows
the cross-loadings, based on the criterion which requires, that the Several interesting findings arise from our empirical model. The
loading of each indicator should be greater than all cross-loadings findings will be discussed for each of the TOE contexts included in
[76]. As presented in Table 4, this criterion is also satisfied. iii) The this study.
8 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13

Table 4
Loadings and cross-loadings.

Technology competence Data quality and integration Top management support Competitive pressure CRM evaluation CRM routinization
(TC) (DQ) (TMS) (CP) (CRME) (CRMR)
TC1 0.85 0.33 0.13 0.29 0.25 0.26
TC2 0.83 0.37 0.12 0.30 0.24 0.24
TC3 0.86 0.29 0.16 0.34 0.26 0.31
TC4 0.84 0.43 0.15 0.36 0.31 0.35
DQ1 0.36 0.91 0.12 0.34 0.39 0.37
DQ2 0.37 0.93 0.14 0.34 0.40 0.37
DQ3 0.37 0.74 0.07 0.23 0.27 0.22
DQ4 0.36 0.79 0.12 0.27 0.31 0.31
TMS1 0.17 0.13 0.96 0.26 0.35 0.35
TMS2 0.15 0.16 0.95 0.25 0.34 0.34
TMS3 0.14 0.14 0.96 0.24 0.31 0.31
TMS4 0.15 0.10 0.93 0.24 0.27 0.31
TMS5 0.16 0.11 0.93 0.25 0.28 0.32
CP1 0.41 0.37 0.27 0.78 0.50 0.49
CP2 0.23 0.17 0.15 0.77 0.41 0.35
CP3 0.28 0.31 0.22 0.86 0.41 0.39
CP4 0.31 0.27 0.21 0.87 0.42 0.35
CRME1 0.26 0.33 0.27 0.45 0.89 0.69
CRME2 0.28 0.38 0.30 0.51 0.92 0.77
CRME3 0.32 0.42 0.35 0.51 0.95 0.82
CRME4 0.30 0.40 0.32 0.53 0.96 0.81
CRMR1 0.32 0.38 0.32 0.46 0.82 0.96
CRMR2 0.32 0.34 0.31 0.42 0.77 0.95
CRMR3 0.37 0.39 0.35 0.52 0.81 0.96
CRMR4 0.32 0.34 0.34 0.47 0.78 0.95

Table 5
Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT).

Construct TC TMS CP DQ CRME CRMA CRMR

Technology competence (TC)
Data quality and integration (DQ) 0.49
Top management support (TMS) 0.18 0.14
Competitive pressure (CP) 0.43 0.39 0.29
CRM evaluation (CRME) 0.34 0.45 0.34 0.59
CRM adoption (CRMA) 0.34 0.42 0.36 0.36 0.75
CRM routinization (CRMR) 0.37 0.41 0.36 0.53 0.87 0.70

Technology competence was proven to be a significant driver adoption process (H2a and H2b), whereas no evidence was
of CRM, but only for the adoption stage (H1b), not for evaluation found for routinization (H2c). Nevertheless, the two confirmed
(H1a) nor routinization (H1c). Hence, the higher the technology hypotheses reinforce the suitability of our model for the specific
competence is, the higher is the CRM adoption level. Investi- case of CRM. Without proper data quality and integration in an
gating with more detail at what is behind the three different organisation, adopting CRM is a very difficult, not to say virtually
CRM adoption stages, it is noticeable that it is in the adoption an impossible task, as this factor is essential to have suitable
stage that technology competence is more likely to be critical. In information to realise CRM as a valuable tool, being an
the evaluation stage, technology is not yet a critical requirement advantage for organisations.
for an organisation, a reason why technology competence is not Within the organisational context, we hypothesised top
yet required to recognise CRM as an advantage. Conversely, management support as a driver of CRM adoption stages. Results
during CRM routinization, it is reasonable to assume that have confirmed this relationship, but only for CRM evaluation and
requirements in terms of technological competence were adoption (H3a and H3b) and not for routinization (H3c). It makes
already met. Hence, it is in the intermediate point between sense, on analysis of the results, that top management support is
these two stages – the adoption stage – that companies invest especially important before CRM is routinised, or until its being
the most on CRM, in both intensity and extent of use. It is within adopted. Once it is, CRM’s benefits become more visible, thus
this stage of the adoption process that companies really need to diminishing the critical role TMS has on CRM (routinization).
be able to use CRM as a core and enterprise-wide asset, thus With all of CRM’s benefits in a way organisation conduct their
needing the technological resources available, including IT business, it seems reasonable to accept that, after full adoption,
infrastructure and professionals, to support and increased employees of an organisation continue (and increase) CRM use
awareness about CRM potential benefits. This finding is because its benefits become apparent. This finding is consistent
consistent with those from other studies [40]. Still, within with conclusions from related studies (see, e.g., [48,49]), which
technological context, the adoption factor we proposed espe- have found top management support as a significant driver to
cially for CRM– data quality and integration – proved to be a recognise, adopt and implement a new technology at the firm
statistically significant driver at the first two stages of CRM level.
 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13 9

Fig. 2. Structural model results of CRM adoption stages.

As for the environmental context, competitive pressure proved to proven to be significant antecedents of CRM for some specific
be the stronger, and more complex, antecedent of CRM adoption adoption stages or presented even opposite effects across CRM
stages. It is the only factor that is significant for every CRM adoption adoption stages (the case of competitive pressure). These results
stage and, at the same time, the only one presenting opposite effects were only possible because our model incorporated three CRM
throughout the adoption process. Interestingly, although we hypoth- adoption stages, contrarily to what is usually done in the CRM
esised the existence of opposite effects, they have not been confirmed literature. Hence, from a theoretical standpoint, researchers should
exactly where we suspected they would (H4b and H4c). We believed be aware that in the technology adoption context, some aspects of
competitive pressure would work as a CRM driver at the evaluation an organisation may have different effects throughout its adoption
and adoption stages, working as an inhibitor in routinization. Although process. What is positively perceived in the context of innova-
it is indeed a CRM driver in evaluation (H4a), it is also apparent during tiveness, and is sometimes engendered, may backfire, in the sense
routinization, being an inhibitor during the CRM adoption stage. It that some actions thought to promote innovativeness may turn to
seems straightforward that higher competitive pressure leads work as inhibitors. This is also an important implication for
organisations to be more prone to look for possible sources of practitioners, in CRM but also in other technological contexts. The
sustainable competitive advantage, thus confirming H4a. Considering fact that the construct we proposed specifically for the context of
our results, it also seems reasonable to assume that after the CRM this study (CRM) was proven to be significant at the first two CRM
adoption stage, higher competitive pressure also leads to higher CRM adoption stages, highlights the importance for researchers to
routinization, to increase CRM’s benefits in terms of customer and tailor-make their conceptual models for each specific context, i.e.,
sales knowledge. However, during the adoption stage, where CRM technology, avoiding the temptation to use generic theories/
dividends are perhaps, not yet completely noticeable, higher models in a “one-size-fits-all manner”. Each technology has
competitive pressure, combined with some scepticism regarding specific attributes and characteristics that can be hardly consid-
CRM success, may work as an inhibitor for adoption, as organisations ered by a generic model.
quit adopting a CRM solution, moving to other alternatives. Past Another theoretical implication pertains to the complexity and
studies mentioned similar findings (see, e.g., [38,49]), which point out predictability of the different CRM adoption stages. It is
that, a high level of competition incentivises organisations to seek CRM interesting to note that as every factor but one (technology
solutions more aggressively. This phenomenon could occur without competence) was confirmed as a significant antecedent of CRM
understanding the requirements established from prior technology on evaluation and adoption, whereas only one (competitive pres-
the business processes which could ultimately threaten CRM sure) was confirmed for routinization. At the same time, the
performance. explained variation in CRM routinisation (57.3%) is virtually the
same as CRM adoption (57.6%), both being much higher than CRM
6.2. Theoretical implications evaluation (40.5%). This means that the most sensitive part of the
CRM adoption process is in the two earlier stages, as these are the
Perhaps one of the most theoretical implications of our study is main antecedents of the last one (routinisation). Note that even
that every adoption factor tested in our model were either only though CRM routinisation is only explained by competitive
10 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13

pressure and CRM adoption, its explained variation is still very adoption stages may be too narrow, we suggest adding other
high (57.3%). relevant variables that shape the stages of CRM in a different way.
Thirdly, another limitation has to do with the activity sectors of the
6.3. Managerial implications respondent companies, as this study included manufacturing,
construction, services, financial and banking, and distribution and
For management, when one is evaluating CRM adoption, their commerce industries. Hence, a future study could be conducted on
focus should be concentrated on other aspects than technological using other industries not analysed in this, or even conducting
competence, as there is evidence that other factors play a more cross-industry comparisons. Finally, it seems reasonable to
important role at this stage of adoption. Obviously, technological acknowledge that despite our efforts to provide a comprehensive
competence plays a critical role at a later stage of the CRM adoption study, some factors that can possibly be significant antecedents of
process. Given the significance of data quality and integration CRM CRM adoption stages, were not tested. Hence, future studies should
evaluation and adoption stages, those with the responsibilities of try to give a step forward in this sense, especially given the
implementing CRM in organisations need to be completely aware dynamic nature of technology, and CRM in particular. Due to this
of this factor importance before start pursuing that task. Hence, we dynamic nature, longitudinal studies should also be conducted in
urge managers to emphasise data quality and integration in their the future.
firms when assessing CRM adoption, an appeal consistent with
Peltier et al. [29]. 7. Conclusions
If we look at top management support, results suggest that top
managers should cultivate CRM in their business strategy, In this study, we developed a conceptual model for
engaging all the professionals for a clear definition of CRM and understanding the three CRM adoption stages (evaluation,
its benefits, with the alignment of the overall organisation mission. adoption and routinization). The model was based on the TOE
Thus, the effective commitment from top management in all framework and comprised technology competence, data quality
business activities serves as a proxy for CRM implementation in and integration, top management support and competitive
organisations and contributes to increased success results [48]. pressure as CRM adoption stages antecedents. Moreover, each
Otherwise, without the support from top managers through the CRM adoption stage was hypothesised to be influenced by the
whole process of CRM adoption, the probability to finish before the preceding one. Most of our hypotheses were confirmed. We
effective use is huge. Thus, it is advisable to carry out top were able to explain 40.5%, 57.6% and 57.3% of the variation in
management support at the outset, to ensure the effective CRM evaluation, adoption and routinization, respectively.
implementation, and optimal use in the firms. Moreover, having contemplated different adoption stages, our
Perhaps one of the most significant managerial implications of study could draw interesting insights. Technology competence
our study pertains to the opposite effect of competitive pressure is only important for CRM adoption. Data quality and integra-
throughout the CRM adoption process, and a possible weak point tion, as well as top management support, are important for CRM
existing in this process. Managers should be aware that, evaluation and adoption (not routinization). Competitive
apparently, higher competitive pressure inhibits the CRM adoption pressure is important for every CRM adoption stage, but with
stage, while it promotes CRM evaluation and routinisation. The negative effects in CRM adoption. Moreover, CRM evaluation
adoption stage is perhaps the stage where the greater effort is affects CRM adoption, which consequently, influences CRM
being made without the results from that effort are completely routinization. Interestingly, every included construct affects
noticeable. Hence, those companies facing fierce pressure may be each of the three CRM adoption stages in a different way.
tempted to look for more immediate solutions that lead to (instant)
results and competitive advantages. If managers give in to this Declarations of interest
impulse, the whole CRM adoption process is called into question.
Thus, managers should have time to understand, learn and None.
integrate CRM into the business processes, to recognise the full
advantage of this technology, hopefully improving the overall Appendix A. Constructs and items
profitability of the organisation. Otherwise, competitive pressure
does not have an impact on CRM adoption, thus, in this stage, we Constructs and its items Based on
can assume that managers do not need to be concerned about Technology competence (five-point range scale where [40,59,60]
market trends, and local context, when deciding to adopt CRM. 1 - “strongly disagreeing” to 5 - “strongly agree”)
Finally, practitioners should be aware that the three CRM Rate the following statements in terms of technological
competence (1–5):
adoption stages are independent of each other. This expected result
TC1- Adequate IT infrastructure to implement CRM systems
is consistent with early research [40,48]. Thus, we may assume TC2- Adequate IT infrastructure to operate with CRM systems
that each stage of CRM adoption is crucial to ensure an effective TC3- Adequate skills to implement CRM systems
CRM implementation in companies. TC4- Adequate skills to operate with CRM systems
Data quality and integration (five-point range scale where [7,68,
1 - “strongly disagreeing” to 5 - “strongly agree”) 71–,72,73]
6.4. Limitations and further research Rate the following statements in terms of Data quality and
integration (1–5):
DQ1 Data quality issues are relevant to your organisation
This study has some limitations, as it also outlines proposals for
when implementing CRM systems
future investigations. First, the sample is limited to 277 companies DQ2- Data integration issues are relevant to your organisation
in a Southern European country. It would be interesting to test our when implementing CRM systems
conceptual model using a different country, especially aside from DQ3- CRM systems are supported with data quality and data
the European Union or compare with another country out of the integration tools
DQ4- Customer data needs to be integrated and checked for
EU, in the same study. This facet would allow testing if different quality
cultural environments would lead to different antecedents of CRM Top management support (five-point range scale where 1 - [12,65,64]
adoption stages. Secondly, considering our definition of CRM “strongly disagreeing” to 5 - “strongly agree”)
 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13 11

(Continued) Appendix B. Effect size (f2)

Constructs and its items Based on
CRM Evaluation CRM Adoption CRM
Rate the following statements in terms of support from Top
(CRME) (CRMA) Routinization
Management (1~5):
(CRMR)
TMS1- Top management supports the adoption of CRM
systems Technology competence 0.002 0.016 0.003
TMS2- Top management supports the operation of CRM (TC)
systems Data quality and 0.048 0.017 0.001
TMS3- Top management is actively involved in the CRM integration (DQ)
business philosophy and are able to link this to their Top management 0.049 0.039 0.008
enterprise strategy and objectives support (TMS)
TMS4- Top management is willing to take risks (financial and Competitive pressure 0.205 0.028 0.122
organisational) involved in the adoption of CRM systems (CP)
TMS5- Top management is willing to take risks (financial and CRM Evaluation (CRME) 0.667
organisational) involved in the operation of CRM systems CRM Adoption (CRMA) 0.474
Competitive pressure (five-point range scale where 1 - [69,68,46,38]
2
“strongly disagreeing” to 5 - “strongly agree”) Notes: f values of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represent respectively
Rate the following statements in terms of competitive small, medium, and large effects [79].
pressure (1–5):
CP1- Firms think that CRM system has an influence on
competition in their industry.
CP2- Our firm is under pressure from competitors to adopt
References
CRM systems.
CP3- Some of our competitors have already started using CRM [1] Gartner (2018). Retrieved from https://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/
systems. 3871105).
[2] R. Batra, K.L. Keller, Integrating marketing communications: new findings, new
CP4- Our competitors know the importance of CRM system
lessons, and new ideas, J. Mark. 80 (6) (2016) 122–145, doi:http://dx.doi.org/
and are using them for operations
10.1509/jm.15.0419.
CRM evaluation [56,38]
[3] S. Wan, D. Li, J. Gao, R. Roy, Y. Tong, Process and knowledge management in a
(five-point range scale where 1 - “strongly disagreeing” to collaborative maintenance planning system for high value machine tools,
5 - “strongly agree”) Comput. Ind. 84 (2017) 14–24, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
Please indicate how significant each of the following potential compind.2016.11.002.
benefits of CRM systems was rated when your organisation [4] A. Payne, P. Frow, Relationship marketing: looking backwards towards the
was considering using CRM: future, J. Serv. Mark. 31 (1) (2017) 11–15, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/
CRME1- To reduce costs JSM-11-2016-0380.
CRME2- To expand the market for existing and new products/ [5] A. Garrido-Moreno, N. Lockett, V. Garcia-Morales, Paving the way for CRM
services success: the mediating role of knowledge management and organizational
CRME3- To improve the relationship with customers commitment, Inf. Manag. 51 (8) (2014) 1031–1042, doi:http://dx.doi.org/
CRME4- Increase revenues and profitability 10.1016/j.im.2014.06.006.
CRM adoption (yes/no) [74,38] [6] F. Jaber, L. Simkin, Unpicking antecedents of CRM adoption: a two-stage model,
J. Strateg. Mark. 25 (5-6) (2016) 475–494, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
Check the box describing applications of CRM systems (Check
0965254x.2016.1149212.
many as apply):
[7] S. Alshawi, F. Missi, Z. Irani, Organisational, technical and data quality factors in
Marketing and Sales: CRM adoption — SMEs perspective, Ind. Mark. Manag. 40 (3) (2011) 376–383,
CRMA1- Advertising and Marketing doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.08.006.
CRMA2- Possibility of building relationships and loyalty [8] A. Payne, P. Frow, A Strategic framework for customer relationship
program management, J. Mark. 69 (2013) 167–176.
CRMA3- Tests of communication effectiveness [9] M. Steel, C. Dubelaar, M.T. Ewing, Developing customised CRM projects: the
After- Sales Services: role of industry norms, organisational context and customer expectations on
CRMA4- After- sales customer service and support CRM implementation, Ind. Mark. Manag. 42 (8) (2013) 1328–1344, doi:http://
CRMA5- Single customer view dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2012.08.009.
CRMA6- Historical purchase [10] S. Calegari, P. Avogadro, M. Dominoni, Building a knowledge portal for
CRMA7- Customize answer communities based on personalized functionalities, Comput. Ind. 92-93 (2017)
Inbound Logistics: 194–207, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2017.08.005.
[11] D.J. Finnegan, W.L. Currie, A multi-layered approach to CRM implementation:
CRMA8- Generating predictive models for sale
an integration perspective, Eur. Manag. J. 28 (2) (2010) 153–167, doi:http://dx.
CRMA9- RFM (frequency and monetary value) analysis.
doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2009.04.010.
CRMA10- Up-sell and Cross-sell actions
[12] A. Garrido-Moreno, A. Padilla-Melendez, Analyzing the impact of knowledge
Outbound Logistics: management on CRM success: the mediating effects of organizational factors,
CRMA11- Real-time answer to consumer Int. J. Inf. Manage. 31 (5) (2011) 437–444, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
CRMA12- Customer value creation through processes ijinfomgt.2011.01.002.
management [13] K.A. Richards, E. Jones, Customer relationship management: finding value
CRMA13-Segmentation by expected customer lifetime value drivers, Ind. Mark. Manag. 37 (2) (2008) 120–130, doi:http://dx.doi.org/
CRM routinization (five-point range scale where 1 - “strongly [56,75,38] 10.1016/j.indmarman.2006.08.005.
disagreeing” to 5 - “strongly agree”) [14] I. van de Weerd, I.S. Mangula, S. Brinkkemper, Adoption of software as a service
CRMR1- Extent CRM system is used in generating customer in Indonesia: examining the influence of organizational factors, Inf. Manag. 53
and sales knowledge (7) (2016) 915–928, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.05.008.
CRMR2- Extent CRM system is used in delivering customer [15] O. González-Rojas, L. Ochoa-Venegas, A decision model and system for
planning and adapting the configuration of enterprise information systems,
and sales knowledge
Comput. Ind. 92-93 (2017) 161–177, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
CRMR3- Extent CRM system is used in integrating customer
compind.2017.08.004.
and sales knowledge
[16] A. Josiassen, A.G. Assaf, L.K. Cvelbar, CRM and the bottom line: do all CRM
CRMR4- Extent CRM system is used in exploiting customer dimensions affect firm performance? Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 36 (2014) 130–136,
and sales knowledge doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.08.005.
12 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13

[17]
K.J. [44] A. Ahani, N.Z.A. Rahim, M. Nilashi, Forecasting social CRM adoption in SMEs: a
Trainor, J. Andzulis, A. Rapp, R. Agnihotri, Social media technology usage and combined SEM-neural network method, Comput. Human Behav. 75 (2017)
customer relationship performance: a capabilities-based examination of social 560–578, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.032.
CRM, J. Bus. Res. 67 (6) (2014) 1201–1208, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. [45] T. Hasani, J. Bojei, A. Dehghantanha, Investigating the antecedents to the
jbusres.2013.05.002. adoption of SCRM technologies by start-up companies, Telemat. Inform. 34 (5)
[18] A. Payne, P. Frow, A strategic framework for customer relationship (2017) 655–675, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.12.004.
management, J. Mark. 69 (4) (2005) 167–176, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/ [46] T. Oliveira, M. Thomas, M. Espadanal, Assessing the determinants of cloud
jmkg.2005.69.4.167. computing adoption: an analysis of the manufacturing and services sectors,
[19] K. Rababah, H. Mohd, H. Ibrahim, Customer relationship management (CRM) Inf. Manag. 51 (5) (2014) 497–510, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
processes from theory to practice: the pre-implementation plan of CRM im.2014.03.006.
system, Int. J. E-Educ. E-Bus. E-Manag. E-Learn. 1 (2011). [47] S. Xu, K. Zhu, J. Gibbs, Global technology, local adoption: a cross-country
[20] F. Buttle, S. Maklan, Customer Relationship Management: Concepts and investigation of internet adoption by companies in the United States and
Technologies, Routledge, 2015. China, Electron. Mark. 14 (1) (2004) 13–24, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
[21] A. Zablah, D. Bellenger, W. Johnston, An Evaluation of Divergent Perspectives 1019678042000175261.
on Customer Relationship Management: Towards a Common Understanding [48] F.T.S. Chan, A.Y.L. Chong, Determinants of mobile supply chain management
of an Emerging Phenomenon, Vol. 33(2004) . system diffusion: a structural equation analysis of manufacturing firms, Int. J.
[22] D. Peppers, P.D.M. Rogers, Managing Customer Relationships: A Strategic Prod. Res. 51 (4) (2013) 1196–1213, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
Framework, (2016) . 00207543.2012.693961.
[23] W. Chang, J.E. Park, S. Chaiy, How does CRM technology transform into [49] A.Y.L. Chong, F.T.S. Chan, Structural equation modeling for multi-stage analysis
organizational performance? A mediating role of marketing capability, J. Bus. Res. on Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) diffusion in the health care industry,
63 (8) (2010) 849–855, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.07.003. Expert Syst. Appl. 39 (10) (2012) 8645–8654, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
[24] E. Ko, S. Kim, M. Kim, J. Woo, Organizational characteristics and the CRM eswa.2012.01.201.
adoption process, J. Bus. Res. 61 (1) (2008) 65–74, doi:http://dx.doi.org/ [50] I.C. Chang, H.G. Hwang, M.C. Hung, M.H. Lin, D.C. Yen, Factors affecting the
10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.05.011. adoption of perspective of hospital electronic signature: executives’
[25] F. Khodakarami, Y.E. Chan, Exploring the role of customer relationship information department, Decis. Support Syst. 44 (1) (2007) 350–359, doi:
management (CRM) systems in customer knowledge creation, Inf. Manag. 51 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2007.04.006.
(1) (2014) 27–42, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2013.09.001. [51] S. Chen, C.-l. Chen, An integrated perspective of TOE framework and
[26] P. Kotler, Customer value management, J. Creat. Value 3 (2) (2017) 170–172, innovation diffusion in broadband mobile applications adoption by
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2394964317706879. enterprises, Int. J. Manag. 6 (2017) 14–39.
[27] W. Reinartz, M. Krafft, W.D. Hoyer, The customer relationship management [52] A. Alsaad, R. Mohamad, N.A. Ismail, The moderating role of trust in business to
process: its measurement and impact on performance, J. Mark. Res. 41 (3) business electronic commerce (B2B EC) adoption, Comput. Hum. Behav. 68
(2004) 293–305, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.41.3.293.35991. (2017) 157–169, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.040.
[28] S.Y. Hung, W.H. Hung, C.A. Tsai, S.C. Jiang, Critical factors of hospital adoption [53] W. Xu, P. Ou, W. Fan, Antecedents of ERP assimilation and its impact on ERP
on CRM system: organizational and information system perspectives, Decis. value: a TOE-based model and empirical test, Inf. Syst. Front. 19 (1) (2015) 13–
Support Syst. 48 (4) (2010) 592–603, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. 30, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10796-015-9583-0.
dss.2009.11.009. [54] Y.M. Wang, Y.S. Wang, Y.F. Yang, Understanding the determinants of RFID
[29] J.W. Peltier, D. Zahay, D.R. Lehmann, Organizational learning and CRM success: adoption in the manufacturing industry, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77 (5)
a model for linking a organizational practices, customer data quality, and (2010) 803–815, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.03.006.
performance, J. Interact. Mark. 27 (1) (2013) 1–13, doi:http://dx.doi.org/ [55] B. Puklavec, T. Oliveira, A. Popovi9c, Understanding the determinants of
10.1016/j.intmar.2012.05.001. business intelligence system adoption stages: an empirical study of SMEs, Ind.
[30] L.G. Tornatzky, M. Fleischer, The Processes of Technological Innovation, Manag. Data Syst. 118 (1) (2018) 236–261, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-
Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 1990. 05-2017-0170.
[31] R. Bose, X. Luo, Integrative framework for assessing firms’ potential to [56] M.A. Hameed, S. Counsell, S. Swift, A conceptual model for the process of IT
undertake Green IT initiatives via virtualization – a theoretical perspective, J. innovation adoption in organizations, J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 29 (3) (2012)
Strateg. Inf. Syst. 20 (1) (2011) 38–54, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. 358–390, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2012.03.007.
jsis.2011.01.003. [57] I.L. Wu, J.L. Chen, A stage-based diffusion of IT innovation and the BSC
[32] C.H. Junior, T. Oliveira, M. Yanaze, The adoption stages (Evaluation, Adoption, performance impact: a moderator of technology-organization-environment,
and Routinisation) of ERP systems with business analytics functionality in the Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 88 (2014) 76–90, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
context of farms, Comput. Electron. Agric. 156 (2019) 334–348, doi:http://dx. j.techfore.2014.06.015.
doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.11.028. [58] F.J. Mata, W.L. Fuerst, J.B. Barney, Information technology and sustained
[33] R. Martins, T. Oliveira, M. Thomas, S. Tomás, Firms’ continuance intention on competitive advantage: a resource-based analysis, Mis Q.19 (4) (1995) 487–505.
SaaS use – an empirical study, Inf. Technol. People (2019), doi:http://dx.doi. [59] T. Ritter, H.G. Gemunden, The impact of a company’s business strategy on its
org/10.1108/ITP-01-2018-0027. technological competence, network competence and innovation success, J.
[34] K.K.Y. Kuan, P.Y.K. Chau, A perception-based model for EDI adoption in small Bus. Res. 57 (5) (2004) 548–556, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963
businesses using a technology-organization-environment framework, Inf. Manag. 38 (02)00320-X.
(8) (2001) 507–521, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00073-8. [60] S. San-Martín, N.H. Jiménez, B. López-Catalán, The firms benefits of mobile
[35] K. Zhu, K. Kraemer, Post-adoption variations in usage and value of e-business CRM from the relationship marketing approach and the TOE model, Spanish J.
by organizations: cross-country evidence from the retail industry, Inf. Syst. Mark. - Esic 20 (1) (2016) 18–29, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
Res. 16 (1) (2005) 61–84, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.1050.0045. reimke.2015.07.001.
[36] K. Zhu, K. Kraemer, S. Xu, Electronic business adoption by European firms: a [61] R. Young, E. Jordan, Top management support: mantra or necessity? Int. J. Proj.
cross-country assessment of the facilitators and inhibitors, Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 12 Manag. 26 (7) (2008) 713–725, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
(4) (2003) 251–268, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000475. ijproman.2008.06.001.
[37] W. Hong, K. Zhu, Migrating to internet-based e-commerce: factors affecting e- [62] M.C. Lacity, S.A. Khan, L.P. Willcocks, A review of the IT outsourcing literature:
commerce adoption and migration at the firm level, Inf. Manag. 43 (2) (2006) insights for practice, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 18 (3) (2009) 130–146, doi:http://dx.
204–221, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2005.06.003. doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2009.06.002.
[38] K. Zhu, K. Kraemer, S. Xu, The process of innovation assimilation by firms in [63] M.S. Farhan, A.H. Abed, M.A. Ellatif, A systematic review for the determination
different countries: a technology diffusion perspective on e-business, Manage. and classification of the CRM critical success factors supporting with their
Sci. 52 (10) (2006) 1557–1576, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0487. metrics, Future Comput. Inform. J. 3 (2) (2018) 398–416, doi:http://dx.doi.org/
[39] H. Ahmadi, M. Nilashi, L. Shahmoradi, O. Ibrahim, Hospital information system 10.1016/j.fcij.2018.11.003.
adoption: expert perspectives on an adoption framework for Malaysian public [64] M.J.A. Shobaki, Y.M.A. Amuna, S.S.A. Naser, The Impact of Top Management
hospitals, Comput. Hum. Behav. 67 (2017) 161–189, doi:http://dx.doi.org/ Support for Strategic Planning on Crisis Management: Case Study on UNRWA-
10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.023. Gaza Strip, 1(2016) , pp. 20–25.
[40] R. Martins, T. Oliveira, M.A. Thomas, An empirical analysis to assess the [65] D. Reis, L. Peña, Linking customer satisfaction, quality, and strategic planning,
determinants of SaaS diffusion in firms, Comput. Hum. Behav. 62 (2016) 19–33, Rev. Adm. Empresas (2000) 42–46.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.049. [66] G.H. Gessner, L. Volonino, Quick response improves returns on business
[41] T.-M. Chang, L.-L. Liao, W.-F. Hsiao, An empirical study of the e-CRM intelligence investments, Inf. Syst. Manag. 22 (3) (2005) 66–74, doi:http://dx.
performance influence model for service sectors in Taiwan, 2005 IEEE doi.org/10.1201/1078/45317.22.3.20050601/88746.8.
International Conference on E-Technology, E-Commerce and E-Service, (2005) [67] C.L. Iacovou, I. Benbasat, A.S. Dexter, Electronic data interchange and small
, pp. 240–245. organizations: adoption and impact of technology, Mis Q. 19 (4) (1995) 465–
[42] P. Racherla, C. Hu, eCRM system adoption by hospitality organizations: a 485, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/249629.
technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework, J. Hosp. Leis. Mark. [68] F. Missi, S. Alshawi, G. Fitzgerald, Why CRM efforts fail? A study of the impact
17 (1-2) (2008) 30–58, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10507050801978372. of data quality and data integration, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii
[43] E.M. Rogers, Lessons for guidelines from the diffusion of innovations, Comm. J. International Conference on System Sciences (2005), doi:http://dx.doi.org/
Qual. Improv. 21 (7) (1995) 324–328. 10.1109/hicss.2005.695 00, 216c-216c.
 F. Cruz-Jesus et al. / Computers in Industry 109 (2019) 1–13 13

[69] N. Melville, K. Kraemer, V. Gurbaxani, Review: information technology and [75] Q. Jia, Y. Guo, S.J. Barnes, Enterprise 2.0 post-adoption: extending the
organizational performance: an integrative model of IT business value, Mis Q. information system continuance model based on the technology-
28 (2) (2004) 283–322. organization-environment framework, Comput. Hum. Behav. 67 (2017)
[70] T.H. Davenport, L.D. Mule, J. Lucker, Know what your customers want before 95–105, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.022.
they do, Harv. Bus. Rev. 89 (12) (2011) 84–92. [76] J. Henseler, M.C. Ringle, R.R. Sinkovics, The use of partial least squares path
[71] A. Even, G. Shankaranarayanan, P.D. Berger, Evaluating a model for cost- modeling in international marketing, in: E.G.P. Limited (Ed.), New Challenges
effective data quality management in a real-world CRM setting, Decis. Support to International Marketing, Vol. 202009, pp. 277–319.
Syst. 50 (1) (2010) 152–163, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.07.011. [77] J.F. Hair, M. Sarstedt, C.M. Ringle, S.P. Gudergan, Advanced Issues in Partial
[72] O.E.M.H. Khalil, D. Talha, SAM Advanced Management Journal. 75.3, SAM Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling, (2017) .
Advanced management journal, 1999, pp. 1–10. [78] J. Henseler, C.M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, A new criterion for assessing discriminant
[73] S. Watts, G. Shankaranarayanan, A. Even, Data quality assessment in context: a validity in variance-based structural equation modeling, J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 43
cognitive perspective, Decis. Support Syst. 48 (1) (2009) 202–211, doi:http:// (1) (2015) 115–135, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2009.07.012. [79] W.W. Chin, The partial least squares approach for structural equation
[74] D.L. Goodhue, B.H. Wixom, H.J. Watson, Realizing business benefits trough CRM : modeling, Modern Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum
Hitting the right target in the right way, MIS Q. Exec. 1 (No. 2) (2002) 79–94. Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, US, 1998, pp. 295–336.