Critical Success Factors of CRM Technological Initiatives
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As an increasing number of organizations realize the importance of becoming more customer‐centric in today's competitive economy, they are also discovering that they must deliver authentic customer knowledge across multiple organizational functions and at all customer touch points. This paper compiles the critical success factors of customer relationship management (CRM) technological initiatives realized by 57 large organizations in Canada. The data analysis is performed using structural equation modeling techniques such as PLS. Résumé Évoluant dans une économie fort compétitive, un nombre croissant d'organisations réalisent l'importance de mieux comprendre leurs clients. Elles découvrent alors qu'elles peuvent gérer les connaissances acquises á leur sujet lors des contacts pris avec eux, et les intégrer adéquatement aux multiples fonctions organisationnelles. Cet article relate les facteurs critiques de succés nécessaires lors de l'implantation d'initiatives technologiques supportant la gestion de la relation client (GRC). L'analyse des résultats obtenus auprés de 57 grandes organisations canadiennes est réalisée en testant plusieurs équations structurelles à l'aide de la méthode des moindres carrés partiels (PLS).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it