Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Industrial Marketing Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/indmarman

Key account managers and customer experience: A service

ecosystem approach
Laurianne Schmitt a,*, Michel Klein b , Bruno Lussier c
a
IESEG School of Management, Univ. Lille, CNRS, UMR 9221 - LEM - Lille Economie Management, F-59000 Lille, France
b
EM Strasbourg Business School, Université de Strasbourg, HuManiS EA 7308, France
c
HEC Montréal, 3000, chemin de la Côte-Sainte-Catherine, Montréal, QC H3T 2A7, Canada

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

Keywords: Providing a positive customer experience is essential for building and maintaining long-term customer loyalty,
Key account management especially when it comes to key accounts—the most strategic clients for a business. Although Key Account
Customer experience Managers (KAMs) are responsible for overseeing these critical relationships, there is a limited understanding of
Service ecosystem perspective
how they directly influence customer experience. Based on 43 interviews with KAMs, this study draws on the
Crossing points
Business-to-business marketing
service ecosystem perspective and on the concept of crossing points. The findings reveal that KAMs play a pivotal
role in refining customer experiences by better managing crossing points. Specifically, KAMs participation in the
thinning of crossing points by establishing the company’s credibility, building relationships with several actors,
and implementing automation to improve processes. Our study illustrates that KAMs rely on their ecosystem of
actors within their organization and leverage technology to create a better customer experience. Our findings
also warn that KAMs need to carefully balance their approach, as crossing points can become problematic if they
are either too thick or too thin, potentially disrupting the customer experience. The article’s broader contribution
is that KAMs play an essential role in providing customer experience and can guide businesses in refining their
approach to key account management and ultimately strengthen long-term customer relationships.

1. Introduction Customer experience is vital in key account management, as key

account managers (KAMs) oversee the firm’s most valuable and strategic
Eighty-eight percent of buyers say that customer experience is as customers (Ivens, Leischnig, Pardo, & Niersbach, 2018). Creating a
important as a firm’s products or services (Forbes, 2023). As customer positive customer experience, often referred to simply as “customer
expectations have increased to an all-time high, over 80 % of firms experience,” is different in the context of key account management than
expect to compete mainly based on customer experience (Gartner, in the general B2B selling context for two main reasons. First, in the key
2023). Customer experience is a dynamic process that characterizes the account management context, KAMs are the main contacts for accounts
customer’s response to a firm by considering the sequence of touch­ and serve as resource orchestrators (Dessaigne & Pardo, 2020; Ivens,
points the customer encounters during their customer journey (adapted Pardo, Niersbach, & Leischnig, 2016). In other words, they are respon­
from Brakus, Schmitt, & Zarantonello, 2009; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016; sible for organizing the customer experience for their customers. Sec­
Verhoef et al., 2009). Firms strive to optimize the frequency and quality ond, the literature suggests that customer experience management
of customer touchpoints, as effectively managing customer experience is should be based on the firm’s business model, whether transactional or
essential for fostering long-term loyalty and driving firm growth relational (Witell et al., 2020). We therefore posit that customer expe­
(Homburg, Jozić, & Kuehnl, 2017). For example, Cisco Systems strate­ rience management requires a different approach within a key account
gically manages customer experience by encouraging attendance at management framework. Despite the critical role that KAMs play in
Cisco Live events and providing comprehensive training (Cisco Systems, shaping customers’ experience, there is a limited understanding of how
2024). Understanding the development and dynamics of customer they actively engage in this process. This highlights the need to explore
experience in business-to-business (B2B) contexts is undoubtedly a top this phenomenon.
priority (Gounaris & Almoraish, 2024). The current key account management literature emphasizes the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: l.schmitt@ieseg.fr (L. Schmitt), michel.klein@em-strasbourg.eu (M. Klein), bruno.lussier@hec.ca (B. Lussier).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2025.02.008
Received 29 September 2023; Received in revised form 30 January 2025; Accepted 4 February 2025
Available online 13 February 2025
0019-8501/© 2025 Elsevier Inc. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

importance of partnerships and the long-term nature of relationships customer experience (Sandesh et al., 2023). Second, we develop the
between KAMs and their customers (Guenzi, Pardo, & Georges, 2007; literature on customer experience by introducing more granularity
Tzempelikos & Gounaris, 2013). However, beyond a dyadic view, KAMs through the concept of crossing points. Third, we offer a qualitative
need to adopt an ecosystem perspective, ensuring a delicate balance application of the service ecosystem perspective (Plouffe et al., 2024;
between multiple ecosystem actors (Gupta, Kumar, Grewal, & Lilien, Plouffe, Hartmann, & Hochstein, 2024).
2019; Kumar, Sharma, & Salo, 2019). In this context, KAMs navigate Our paper is structured as follows. We first identify the relevant
complex social environments and organizational ecosystems comprising literature on customer experience and key account management and
internal and external actors (La Rocca, Moscatelli, Perna, & Snehota, develop our theoretical framework, focusing on the notion of crossing
2016), where they orchestrate internal resources (Ivens et al., 2016). points. We then present our qualitative methodology and our findings,
Hence, effective key account management entails cross-functional which are illustrated by selected quotes. Next, we discuss our findings,
collaboration within a firm, and its success relies on the ability of highlight the contributions of our study, and provide managerial im­
KAMs to create value within their ecosystems (Leone, Schiavone, & plications. Finally, we discuss our limitations and suggest areas for
Simoni, 2021). future research.
However, a holistic approach that considers the ecosystem of actors
(who is involved) and the value exchange over time (the process of 2. Literature review and theoretical background
customer experience) is missing from the literature (Sandesh, Sreejesh,
& Paul, 2023). We argue that the service ecosystem perspective is To understand how KAMs contribute to customer experience, we first
suitable to better understand value exchange within an ecosystem. review the customer experience literature. This allows us to highlight
Hartmann, Wieland, and Vargo (2018) developed the service ecosystem the dynamic process that needs to be considered. Next, we develop the
perspective in sales and consider ecosystems in a dynamic perspective current knowledge about key account management, focusing on what is
where actors exchange value. It is therefore particularly suited to un­ known about how KAMs navigate their ecosystem. We then present the
derstanding the dynamic process of customer experience among KAMs. theoretical background by drawing on the service ecosystem perspec­
Within this perspective, the concept of crossing points is defined as “the tive, which highlights the relationship between ecosystems identified in
location at which service can be efficiently exchanged for service” the key account management literature and the dynamic processes
(Hartmann et al., 2018, p. 7). Although the current customer experience examined in the customer experience literature. This connection is
literature focuses on touchpoints, i.e. the points of contact between the elucidated through the concept of crossing points.
firm and the customer (Homburg et al., 2017), it primarily focuses on Fig. 1 illustrates that our study engages three fields of academic
whether interactions occur, while largely overlooking how these in­ literature to which we seek to contribute at the intersections by 1)
teractions take place. Using the concept of crossing points helps to introducing dynamic customer experience into the key account man­
determine whether a point of contact (i.e., touchpoint) occurs and agement literature, 2) refining the touchpoint concept in the customer
provides insights into whether the interaction is straightforward and experience literature through the lens of crossing points, and 3) pro­
easy (thin crossing points) or complex and complicated (thick crossing posing a novel theoretical framework within the key account manage­
points). ment field.
Building on these gaps, our study aims to explore the customer
experience that KAMs provide by addressing the following research 2.1. Customer experience
questions: (1) How do KAMs shape the customer experience of their key
accounts? (2) What are the optimal adjustments that KAMs can make to We conceptualize customer experience as a dynamic process that
thin or thicken crossing points to ensure an ongoing, positive customer characterizes the customer’s response to a firm by considering the
experience? sequence of touchpoints the customer encounters during their journey
To address these research questions, our study explores the customer (adapted from Brakus et al., 2009; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016; Verhoef
experience concept within the context of key account management, et al., 2009). A touchpoint is any point of contact, encompassing both
drawing on the service ecosystem perspective (Hartmann et al., 2018). verbal and non-verbal exchanges, where an interaction occurs. Cus­
To do so, we gathered insights from 43 semi-structured interviews with tomers form perceptions of a firm or brand during these interactions (see
KAMs across some countries in Europe. From our findings, we developed Duncan & Moriarty, 2014; Homburg et al., 2017). The customer’s
a conceptual model, which we illustrate in Fig. 3. The model represents touchpoint journey consists of all its interactions with the firm over time
how KAMs use thin crossing points to create and maintain the customer and across all touchpoints (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). In other words,
experience while avoiding crossing points that are thick or too thin and customer experience is a subjective view which emphasizes how a
that would disrupt the customer experience. customer feels about a firm or brand (Gounaris & Almoraish, 2024). The
Our findings reveal that KAMs contribute to customer experience by dynamic process has been noted in the literature (Lemon & Verhoef,
engaging in a three-step process to thin crossing points. First, they 2016) because customers can quickly change how they feel about the
demonstrate institutional alignment by strengthening their firm’s firm if a negative incident (i.e., touchpoint) occurs. When forming their
legitimacy. Second, KAMs develop relationships that can be cognitive customer experience, customers will consider all the touchpoints they
(defined as relationships based on the customer’s perception of the skills have had and their impression of the firm (Kranzbühler, Kleijnen,
and competence of the KAMs, their reliability, and their ability to be Morgan, & Teerling, 2018). The customer experience is therefore
solution providers) or affective (defined as relationships based on the different from the B2B relationship literature because the customer
customer’s perception of the KAMs’ benevolence and genuine interest in experience is considered to be the process that enables an increase in
the customer at a personal level) (see Johnson & Grayson, 2005). Last, relationship outcomes (Gounaris & Almoraish, 2024; Lemke, Clark, &
KAMs contribute to customer experience by encouraging automated Wilson, 2011; Lemon & Verhoef, 2016).
processes. To ensure the success of the customer experience, they rely on The customer experience literature emphasizes that touchpoints can
facilitators, i.e., the ecosystem of actors and technology that support the be initiated and managed by different actors (e.g., the brand, the part­
thinning of crossing points. We identify points of caution where ner, the customer, or external actors) (Lemon & Verhoef, 2016). Build­
customer experience can be disrupted if crossing points become too thin ing on recent B2B literature (Homburg et al., 2017), our paper focuses
or too thick. solely on KAM-owned touchpoints, i.e., where KAMs engage in direct
The present study contributes to the literature in three ways. First, exchanges with the customer. As this could limit our understanding of
we develop the key account management literature by identifying the the general customer experience, our objective is to focus on how KAMs
dynamic perspective that KAMs should adopt to provide a positive contribute to customer experience and how this is integrated into their

119
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

Fig. 1. Overview of relevant literature.

actual role. We expect that customer experience is handled differently (Schmitt, Casenave, & Pallud, 2021).
by KAMs compared to conventional B2B selling. For example, in con­ Although taking a dyadic perspective, the key account management
ventional B2B selling, while salespeople handle the customer experi­ literature considers the systems of actors that compose an ecosystem.
ence, there are several touchpoints that occur independently of their Successful KAMs must have an integrative view of the client’s entire
involvement. However, an effective key account management strategy business environment, encompassing suppliers, competitors, and even
requires KAMs to be both aware of and actively involved in all touch­ the client’s customers (Ivens & Pardo, 2007). Although KAMs are seen as
points between the firm and the customer. This approach ensures a high the main actors in key account management (Pardo et al., 2020), other
level of service and customization tailored to the customer’s needs. To actors are also involved in the selling process. For example, KAMs can
better understand the KAM role, we first explore the literature on key rely on other functions (e.g., customer success managers) to enhance the
account management. value of a product’s use (Hochstein et al., 2023). The internal networks
of KAMs (i.e., internal system of actors) make them more knowledge­
2.2. Key account management able, enabling them to provide detailed information to their customers
(Hengstebeck, Kassemeier, & Wieseke, 2022; Lai & Yang, 2017). This
Key account management can be viewed as a strategy that provides information exchange occurs both within the firm and between intra­
particular care to a firm’s most strategic customers—i.e., the key ac­ firm and interfirm networks (Gupta et al., 2019), therefore allowing for
counts. Key account management was essentially developed to create greater exchange between actors. However, research has called for a
and maintain relationships with customers (see Gounaris & Tzempeli­ more holistic approach (Sandesh et al., 2023) and our study therefore
kos, 2014; Guenzi, Georges, & Pardo, 2009; McDonald, Millman, & both identifies the ecosystem of actors and investigates the enhancement
Rogers, 1997; Pardo, 1997; Tzempelikos & Gounaris, 2013). KAMs play of the interactions between actors. To understand the dynamic view of
a crucial role in overseeing strategic relationships and long-term part­ how KAMs manage the customer experience, we build on the service
nerships with customers. They do not just sell a good or service but ecosystem perspective, which we develop next.
cultivate, maintain, and expand relationships (e.g., Pardo, Ivens, &
Niersbach, 2020). They can do so using emerging technologies, such as 2.3. Service ecosystem perspective
social media, which can be integrated into every stage of the customer
journey (Lacoste, 2016) once they are institutionalized in the firm The service ecosystem perspective introduces selling as “the

120
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

interaction between actors aimed at creating and maintaining thin crossing points are framed as less efficient service exchanges. As such, an
crossing points—the locations at which service can be efficiently efficient exchange of resources occurs when the exchange is mutually
exchanged for service—through the ongoing alignment of institutional valuable to both actors and when the benefits of the exchange exceed the
arrangements and the optimization of relationships” (Hartmann et al., costs (Burchett et al., 2024). In other words, thin crossing points are
2018, p. 3). Hartmann et al. (2018) suggest that any actor who con­ ideal because they “involve mutually valuable resource exchange”
tributes to these exchange points is a selling actor. In highlighting the (Burchett et al., 2024, p. 5).
broader involvement of actors, the service ecosystem perspective of Building on this service ecosystem perspective, Goad et al. (2024)
selling de-emphasizes the influence that a single selling actor has on the highlight that thin crossing points make it easier for customers to gain
selling process. This perspective is rooted in service-dominant logic and value. Indeed, the thinning of crossing points enhances the efficiency of
suggests that actors evolve to offer increasingly complex combinations creating and delivering customer value while simultaneously fostering
of resources to each other, giving rise to systemic interdependencies increased customer reliance on the seller’s products via customized of­
based on networks of exchange (Chandler & Vargo, 2011; Vargo & ferings, thereby thickening the crossing points of competitors. Similarly,
Lusch, 2011). The term “ecosystems” highlights the dynamic in­ Plouffe and colleagues (2024) frame the objective of salespeople as both
teractions between actors and is therefore particularly useful for un­ the creation and maintenance of thin crossing points for the sales­
derstanding the dynamic customer experience process. Furthermore, the person–customer dyad and the thickening of crossing points for
service ecosystem perspective derives from institutional theory and the competing actors with their customers.
concept of institutional work, which considers that actors can purposely Fig. 2 provides an illustrative example of two ecosystems, high­
create, maintain, or disrupt institutions (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006). lighting the potential thin and thick crossing points between actors
This perspective further enables us to study the actions of KAMs toward (micro level) and at the firm level (meso level). In the example shown in
their customers. For these reasons, we suggest that the service ecosystem Fig. 2, there is a thin crossing point at the micro level between the KAM
perspective proposed by Hartmann et al. (2018) offers a strong theo­ and actors in the internal research and development (R&D) team which
retical framework for examining customer experience through the thin facilitates seamless value exchange. For example, the actors might ex­
crossing points between KAMs and their customers. change information about the customer’s needs (crucial for optimizing
product development) and the R&D team’s technical knowledge
2.3.1. Crossing points (essential for responding to the customer). However, there is a thick
Service exchange refers to the exchange and integration of resources, crossing point between the KAM and the customer’s R&D team, which
such as information, knowledge, or skills among actors, which indicates that their exchanges are difficult. For example, the actors
contribute to the process of value cocreation (Vargo & Lusch, 2016). The involved in the exchange may refrain from sharing strategic information
crossing point concept emerges from Baldwin (2007) who employs a on solution design which would benefit the KAM and lead to an
transaction cost perspective to differentiate between thin and thick enhanced offer. At the meso level, Fig. 2 illustrates a thick crossing point
crossing points. While thin crossing points are less costly because they between the KAM’s firm and the customer’s firm, suggesting that the
involve resource transfers between actors with minimal costs, thicker value exchange is complex. This complexity may arise when the KAM’s
crossing points are more costly because they are “complex, numerous, solution does not align with industry standards. In this case, the cus­
and interdependent” (Baldwin, 2007, p. 47). tomer’s firm may be reluctant to switch, making it difficult for the KAM
Hartmann et al. (2018) explain the significance of creating and to offer an effective solution. Hence, our research builds on the service
sustaining “thin crossing points” in selling. Indeed, thin crossing points ecosystem perspective and the concept of crossing points to provide a
are framed as efficient locations of service exchanges, while thick nuanced understanding of how KAMs optimize customer experience. In

Fig. 2. Service Ecosystem Perspective including crossing points.

121
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

the following section, we describe the methodology, including the software. Each interview lasted between 10 and 78 min (with an average
research design, data collection, description of informants, and data of 40 min). All interviews were recorded and fully transcribed. They
analysis. were transcribed and analyzed in French to maintain the richness of the
language and, to avoid misunderstanding through translation, only the
3. Methodology selected verbatim comments included in our findings were translated
into English. The interviews followed an interview guide (see Appendix
3.1. Research design and data collection A), and informants were encouraged to disclose their customer experi­
ence practices. As the responses provided during the final interviews
We adopted an exploratory qualitative approach, conducting semi- closely mirrored the data we had already gathered, we concluded that
structured interviews with KAMs to collect in-depth material. Semi- theoretical saturation had been reached (Zeithaml et al., 2020).
structured interviews can provide a platform for in-depth exploration
of informants’ perceptions, enabling them to express their views using
their own vocabulary and deliver comprehensive answers. Moreover, 3.2. Data analysis
this research method can encapsulate the intricacies of individual ex­
periences and perceptions, enabling holistic comprehension of a subject The main objective of our paper is to understand how KAMs
(Brinkmann, 2016). The informants were selected through purposive contribute to the customer experience. To maintain the richness of the
sampling (Patton, 2015) and were contacted by email or on LinkedIn. data, we did not rely only on questions about customer experience;
This allowed us to cross-check their profile information and ensure the rather, we coded all the interviews while keeping the focus of customer
quality of the sample. experience in mind. The analysis followed the Gioia methodology to
We conducted 43 interviews with KAMs based in France and the ensure qualitative rigor (Gioia, Corley, & Hamilton, 2013). The first step
French-speaking parts of Belgium and Switzerland who had job titles was to open code the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1998), keeping close to the
such as “Key Account Manager,” “Global Account Manager,” and “Na­ informants’ statements and meanings. Through this process we identi­
tional Account Manager.” The interviews included B2B salespeople fied over 100 codes, a number that matched the process of Gioia et al.
whose titles included the words “in charge of large accounts.” The KAMs (2013). This led us “to get lost” in the data to better understand the
operated in the national, European or international markets (see “cus­ overarching phenomenon (Gioia, 2021, p. 24). From these open codes,
tomer’s location” in Table 1). The KAM job title often appears under we proceeded to identify similarities and differences between categories
synonyms that encapsulate the same core functions—managing and to obtain a more manageable number of first-order concepts (Gioia et al.,
nurturing a company’s most crucial client relationships. KAM is the most 2013). For example, one of our open codes was labeled “listening,” and
accepted term and is frequently used to subsume all approaches we categorized it as “demonstrate skills that provide customer value.”
(Homburg, Workman Jr, & Jensen, 2002). Our informants included 11 This categorization process allowed us to reduce our codes to 20 first-
women and 32 men (KAM tends to be a male-dominated function; see order concepts.
Ivens, 2023) from different sectors, including information technology The second step was built on theory and integrated the previous
(IT), healthcare, construction, retail, food/beverage, and banking (see literature to explain the data. This helped us to move from the partici­
“industry” in Table 1). The KAM role is rarely an entry sales position, pant’s perspective to the researcher’s perspective and to integrate the
and our informants had an average sales experience of ten years. theoretical view. We organized our first-order concepts into seven
However, we decided to include informants with less experience (often second-order themes. For example, the first-order codes “risk of too
KAM positions in start-ups or small firms), as this could inform us about much automation” and “risk of too close relationship” were combined
potential new strategies among smaller firms, which are known to be into the concept of “risk of thin crossing points,” using Hartmann et al.’s
more flexible (Baraldi, Havenvid, Linné, & Öberg, 2019). (2018) idea of crossing points. In this step, we built the data structure
The interviews were conducted via Zoom video conferencing (Gioia, 2021) (see Appendix B). Finally, we tried to link our themes
again to our main objective of explaining the phenomenon of customer

Table 1
Details of informants.
KAM G Exp Industry Customer’s location KAM G Exp Industry Customer’s location

1 F 20–25 Chemistry EMEA 23 F 0–5 IT EMEA

2 M 5–10 Food/Beverage France 24 F 0–5 IT France
3 M 5–10 Clothing/Sports-wear France 25 M 20–25 Energy Benelux / Switzerland
4 F 25–30 Healthcare France 26 F 5–10 Communication Technology International
5 F 0–5 Communication Technology Belgium* 27 M 10–15 Retail France
6 M 30–35 Aeronautics Europe 28 F 25–30 Communication Technology International
7 F 5–10 Advertising France 29 M 5–10 Transport France
8 M 5–10 Engine motorization France 30 M 10–15 Electrical equipment France
9 M 10–15 IT International 31 M 15–20 Communication agency France
10 M 20–25 Healthcare EMEA 32 M 10–15 Retail France
11 M 5–10 Construction Switzerland* 33 M 0–5 IT France
12 F 15–20 IT France 34 M 25–30 Food/Beverage International
13 M 10–15 Aeronautics International 35 M 5–10 Car renting Europe
14 M 5–10 Construction Europe 36 M 20–25 Healthcare France
15 M 10–15 Food/Beverage France 37 F 5–10 Online Retail France
16 M 15–20 Banking France 38 M 25–30 Industrial equipment Europe
17 M 5–10 Healthcare Europe 39 M 5–10 IT France
18 M 15–20 Building material France 40 F 0–5 Banking International
19 M 25–30 Formation France 41 M 20–25 Construction France
20 M 5–10 Automotive International 42 M 5–10 Healthcare France
21 M 5–10 Retail Europe 43 M 10–15 Industrial equipment France/ Benelux
22 M 10–15 Healthcare International

G stands for Gender; Exp stands for Sales experience (in years); EMEA stands for Europe, Middle East, and Africa. All KAMs are based in France except KAM5 and
KAM11, based in their customer’s location (Belgium, Switzerland).

122
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

experience. Therefore, we built on our second-order themes to set the norms to find common ground (i.e., to adjust the two subsystems)
data structure in motion (Gioia, 2021). We developed the grounded (KAM37, Online Retail). Beyond values and norms, KAMs align objec­
model (Nag, Corley, & Gioia, 2007) to create a dynamic structure that tives by understanding the customer’s objectives and pointing their or­
explains how the concepts are linked together (see Fig. 2 for the con­ ganization toward similar objectives:
ceptual model), thereby highlighting the three interlinked aggregate
The most important thing is to always be there for them and to commu­
dimensions.
nicate with them so that we’re in phase and in alignment with their ob­
jectives. [My firm]’s objectives are communicated to us by management.
4. Findings In addition, these objectives must also be supported by our partners.
KAM12 (IT).
Fig. 3 presents the suggested conceptual model grounded in the data.
This model captures the process through which KAMs cocreate customer KAMs ensure that their customers recognize and identify with the
experience. Central to this model is the use of crossing points, which reputational value of working with the KAM’s firm. They project a
KAMs leverage to optimize interactions and exchanges across three positive image of their firm by stating that it is a premium brand
different levels. (KAM20, Automotive) or by providing references from satisfied cus­
Fig. 3 synthesizes the complex dynamics of cocreation within the tomers (KAM41, Construction). To further assess reputational value,
framework of the service ecosystem perspective (e.g., Hartmann et al., they rely on events that are organized for the firm’s customers (KAM20,
2018), highlighting the integrative practices of KAMs in their Automotive; KAM10, Healthcare) to ensure that the customer “gets
ecosystems. involved in the firm’s life” (KAM9, IT).
KAMs also rely on their firm’s resources and market advantage to
thin crossing points based on product value in order to offer an optimal
4.1. Creating a customer experience by thinning crossing points between customer experience. They ensure the product is innovative for the
the KAM and customers customer, is customer-focused (KAM23, IT), provides additional “ser­
vices” (KAM2, Food/Beverage) and is personalized (KAM29, Transport;
To ensure an optimal customer experience, KAMs rigorously follow a KAM9, IT): “If there’s a need to develop something specific to the customer,
specific sequence of steps to thin crossing points. They first thin crossing […] we will have to do that” KAM29 (Transport).
points at the firm level and then proceed to thin them at the individual Furthermore, they provide knowledge as a value, which thins the
level. Finally, they decisively engage in automated processes that thin crossing point by ensuring that their customers are well informed and
the crossing points. trained on essential topics (KAM12, IT). For example, KAM5 (Commu­
For customers to have an optimal experience, the KAMs noted that it nication) said that their firm organized events to discuss trends, such as
is necessary to start the customer experience process at the firm level. cybersecurity, and invited customers to provide them with insights into
This firm-level experience means that KAMs must ensure that there is an these trends. KAMs provide knowledge and develop customer experi­
exchange of value between their firm and their customers’ firm. ences when they position themselves as partners who will help cus­
KAMs ensure that institutional arrangements are aligned between tomers to deal with major changes in the market:
the two firms. They communicate their firm’s organizational values and
norms and simultaneously take account of the customer’s values and

Fig. 3. Conceptual Model.

123
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

It is a whole process of change management that we also have to carry out gives the customer greater autonomy if the information is provided in
with our network of partners. Historically, our partners have tended to sell shared folders or on an extranet specific to the customer.
licenses, and today, the economic model and the market mean that we are
I’m providing a good experience by setting up something that is for the
gradually moving increasingly toward SaaS, which is increasingly in de­
customer. For example, by linking [the ERP] so that invoices enter
mand from our customers. KAM12 (IT).
directly, we set up systems that we have in our firm to ease the jobs of
Once the crossing points have become thinner at the organizational buyers and warehousemen. All this saves time, and time is money, so, of
level, KAMs can focus on the crucial thinning of the crossing points at course, the customer indirectly earns money with us. KAM11
the individual level: “Simply having a perfect product, price, and conditions (Construction).
aren’t enough. In the end, the [KAM’s] personality makes the difference”
KAM29, Transport. Therefore, KAMs engage in increased cognitive and
4.2. Maintaining customer experience with the help of facilitators to ease
affective relationships.
the thinning of crossing points
To ensure a cognitive relationship, KAMs engage in active listening,
understanding their customers’ needs, and providing personalized offers
To further optimize the thinning of crossing points and maintain thin
(KAM9, IT; KAM24, IT). They also suggest creative solutions (KAM17,
crossing points, KAMs can rely on crossing point “facilitators,” which we
Healthcare; KAM18, Building Material) and improve customer processes
identify as 1) the ecosystem of actors and 2) technology usage.
(KAM9, IT), for example by taking over customer roles and creating the
KAMs rely on internal actors to obtain specific, technical knowledge
customer’s sales pitch for them (KAM25, Energy). At the end of the day,
from every department. This internal knowledge sharing increases the
the KAM’s objective is to ensure that the customer understands their
value they provide for the customer and it therefore thins the crossing
value as knowledge providers because of their “360-degree view”:
points, as, for instance, when KAM6 (Aeronautics) mentioned using
The customer sees that there is a partnership between you and him when engineers to obtain technical expertise on a product. For example, in­
you’re giving him the information that will enable him to enter a market or ternal actors can better adapt to the customer using customer- or sector-
develop a product or product range that he was afraid to develop because specific jargon: “I need to get help from people who are talking the same
he did not have this or that information about the market. KAM18 language” (KAM42, Healthcare). The KAMs mentioned several internal
(Building Material). actors and emphasized the need to work as a team with different de­
partments. Indeed, they stated that each department has a specific role
Furthermore, to strengthen their cognitive relationship, KAMs want
that contributes to the customer experience; aligning the internal actors
to ensure that they are reactive and responsive (KAM10, Healthcare;
therefore helps to thin the crossing points between the KAM and the
KAM12, IT; KAM20, Automotive) so that their customers feel they are
customer:
being treated like “VIPs.” To maintain a continuous cognitive relation­
ship, KAMs mentioned the need for regular customer visits, especially as The KAM is there to get everyone in house to work, not just the sales
a follow-up, as this strengthens their customers’ feelings about the teams, but the technical teams, the accounting teams, the legal teams, and
reliability of the KAMs. the operations team, to make sure we offer the best deal to the customer.
KAM35 (Car renting).
Our customers will resell our solutions. We will help them with the sale,
but they will be the ones who will have to deal with any problems that arise Building on team knowledge and internal support, one KAM
afterward. We mustn’t say that once we have sold, it is no longer our mentioned that this creates a virtuous circle (KAM3, Sportswear),
problem, not at all. We must be there for them. KAM12 (IT). allowing it to better serve its customers and optimize the value propo­
sition for customers:
Another way to thin crossing points and increase customer experi­
ence is to favor an affective relationship between the KAMs and the I’m as close to my factories, plant managers and production managers as I
customer. Thus, KAMs rely on a human-to-human approach to genuinely am to my customers, because if I was not close to my factories to deter­
connect with the customer at a personal level. They therefore rely on mine how we can improve packaging and profitability on certain refer­
their personality (KAM29, Transport) and humor (KAM20, Automotive). ences, then I would not be able to improve my customer’s production gains
In line with these findings, the use of humor may be central to devel­ and profitability gains. KAM18 (Building Material).
oping strong relationships (i.e., perceived customer trust) in a B2B
Furthermore, internal actors can facilitate the follow-up process.
setting (Lussier, Grégoire, & Vachon, 2017). They also discuss non-
KAM33 (IT) relies on customer success managers to obtain operational
work-related matters, congratulating each other about personal events
information about the customer’s use of the software directly from his
(e.g., the birth of a baby) (KAM23, IT) in informal contexts (e.g.,
internal network, thereby ensuring the maintenance of thin crossing
breakfast, sporting events).
points with the customer.
Both cognitive and affective relationships enable crossing points to
Demonstrating close internal collaboration strengthens the image of
be thinned by increasing trust between KAMs and customers. KAMs
the KAM’s firm and the professionalism of its different actors, ensuring a
mostly choose whether to create a cognitive or an affective relationship,
positive customer experience at various levels. To foster this, KAMs can
or both, by adapting to their customers’ preferences:
interact with both their internal teams and their customers’ teams.
Above all, it is a human relationship. There are customers with whom I Relatedly, collaboration is fundamental for developing strong business
talk about anything and everything, just like friends. Then, I have cus­ relationships (Lussier & Hall, 2018). For example, KAM18 (Building
tomers who are very professional; we talk about work, and that is it; we do Material) holds “team building” sessions between internal actors and
not step out of line. Once again, it all depends on the person I’m talking to. customer actors. KAM11 (Construction) brings the people who get the
KAM20 (Automotive). customer orders to meetings so they can understand who—as a per­
son—sends the documents to them.
Finally, KAMs can create an even better customer experience by
KAMs who develop thin crossing points between all customer actors
automating processes. However, this is only possible when the
will help the customers to be more open in their dealings with the KAM.
individual-level crossing points are already thin. KAM2 (Food/
According to KAM1 (Chemistry), seeing various customers can create
Beverage) stated that customers are willing to engage in the automated
“customer intimacy.” This allows the KAMs to be better informed and
process of sharing their data, for example, when they trust the KAM. This
therefore to respond better to customer needs, creating a great customer
enables the KAM to optimize the value proposition for the customer
experience. KAMs also mentioned that what helps them optimize the
without having to meet the customer (KAM2, Food/Beverage). This also
customer experience (and maintain thin crossing points) is when a

124
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

customer becomes an “advocate.” When this happens, KAMs accurately strategies with your customer, that will make your company credible and
identify the customer’s “pain point” and offer a strong solution to the not the person you are. KAM32 (Retail).
problem (KAM22, Healthcare; KAM26, Communication Technology).
As mentioned in the first section, thinning the crossing point at the
This finding reinforces the thin crossing points, as the KAMs demon­
individual level is contingent on thinning the crossing point at the firm
strate that they can provide value to the customer.
level, and KAMs need to ensure the constant maintenance of thin
Finally, to further enhance a firm’s image, KAMs can use third-party
crossing points at the firm level—or, in other words, avoid at all costs
validation. KAM2 (Food/Beverage) works with prescriptors to create
thick crossing points at the firm level. When a KAM engages in thin
positive word-of-mouth praise for his firm. A third party can also
crossing points at the firm level, this does not mean that these crossing
conduct interviews (KAM1, Chemistry) or questionnaires with a scoring
points will remain thin. KAM11 (Construction) explained that his firm
system (KAM12, IT) which validates the firm’s customer experience:
had proposed a new system to the customer, who had agreed to it,
Companies are going to organize what we call customer interviews, which thereby creating thin crossing points at the firm level. However, once the
will be conducted by outside companies to verify the customer experience system was in place, the customer had not understood its value and this
we are actually developing with our own customers. KAM1 (Chemistry). disrupted the thin crossing points, turning them into thick crossing
points:
KAMs also identified technology usage as a facilitator of customer
experience because it allows them to maintain thin crossing points. If a company implements something and the customer ultimately says they
When it comes to firm reputation, the use of social media allows KAMs to don’t understand or benefit from the system, it is because we have not
continuously demonstrate market knowledge and share product infor­ done our upstream work properly; it’s not what the customer was asking
mation with their customers (KAM1, Chemistry). This maintains and for. […] Customers may feel cheated and look for another supplier.
reinforces thin crossing points at the firm level. Furthermore, the use of Losing a customer can happen quickly. KAM11 (Construction).
technology enables virtual meetings with the customer (i.e., more reg­
At the individual level, thick crossing points can originate from
ularity) (KAM29, Transport) and enhanced organization (KAM9, IT).
customers who refuse to have a relationship with the KAM. KAM15
Taken together, these findings increase the potential of KAMs to
(Food/Beverage) explained that customers may be in positions or firms
contribute to their customers’ experience.
that require a focus on price. This can also occur when the customer
refuses to communicate with the KAMs. In this case, the customer
4.3. Risk of disrupting the customer experience experience is limited. KAM25 (Energy) had experienced this with one of
his key customers in Germany, where he had tried to communicate and
Putting this into perspective, KAMs who engage in the thinning of provide more value and follow-up which would have strengthened the
crossing points need to understand 1) the risks associated with some thin customer’s experience, but the customer had refused:
crossing points and 2) the importance of maintaining thin crossing
We’re not very reassured about the partnership with my biggest customer,
points.
but they have ordered a million and a half in the ten months we have been
The highest level at which KAMs thin crossing points is when there is
working with them. We’ve made efforts to engage with the account in line
direct and automated information sharing between their customers and
with our digital and acquisition strategy, but they are not responding to us.
their firm. However, KAMs mentioned that when they decide to rely on
We cannot follow up of the projects, whereas normally, we follow up 100
automated processes there is a risk of losing the relationship between
% of the projects. KAM25 (Energy).
them and the customer.
However, thick crossing points at the individual level can also be
The danger is that we break off contact with our distributors [i.e., the
caused by the KAM. KAM39 (IT) explained that sometimes the KAM does
prescriptor] because today, as I told you, you will never be as good a KAM
not manage to “establish a strong connection” or “get a feeling” with the
as when you are present with these distributors and with your customers.
customer. Therefore, he acknowledged that, in this case, the experience
KAM2 (Food/Beverage).
will be bad for the customer. This also happened to KAM9 (IT), who had
This KAM mentioned that they learn a great deal in face-to-face in­ decided to ask his firm to provide another contact person for a customer
teractions, which leads to greater knowledge sharing. However, auto­ with whom he was not able to build a relationship:
mation processes can be imposed by the customer. KAM5
I once went to see my sales manager about a customer, and I had to tell
(Communication Technology) explained how some customers rely on
him that things were not going well. Every time this customer talked to me,
tools that send out direct requests to their suppliers, preventing the KAM
we got in each other’s faces. I could not understand his request, and he did
from creating a positive customer experience.
not explain it properly. I asked someone else to take over, thinking that
When KAMs have thin crossing points at the individual level, these,
maybe a change of contact would improve things. KAM9 (IT).
especially those based on affective relationships, can create a negative
customer experience. When the focus is only on the affective relation­ In summary, KAMs create a positive customer experience by
ship, the customer may be happy to help the KAM, even doing some sequentially thinning crossing points using their ecosystem and tech­
panic buying (KAM32, Retail), but this does not help the customer nology as facilitators that maintain thin crossing points. However, as the
experience as it offers no value for the customer. KAM7 (Advertising) thinning of crossing points is dynamic, KAMs may voluntarily, or
explained that, in one customer firm, the buyer with whom she had a involuntarily, disrupt the customer experience when they fail to main­
great relationship had left and that this was “very impacting” for her firm. tain crossing points at each level.
KAM32 (Retail) explained that focusing on a cognitive relationship en­
ables the establishment of a set of clear business bases that can be 5. Discussion
transferred to another KAM if there is turnover. However, focusing on an
affective relationship will mean that the customer relies only on “liking” Our findings offer a holistic view of how KAMs enhance customer
the KAM. Therefore, he recommended building a strong firm-level experience by taking account of the various actors involved in the
connection with the customer and demonstrating individual cognitive ecosystem and the dynamic interactions between them. We therefore
relationships instead of focusing on affective relationships: build on the thinning of crossing points, i.e., the efficiency of these in­
teractions or, in other words, ensuring that the exchanges create optimal
I have a long-term relationship with my customers, which means that if
value for both parties. We identify how KAMs thin crossing points at the
tomorrow I leave my job, someone else will take over and continue the
firm level, at the individual level, and using automated processes. This
relationship. […] It’s your credibility, your ability to deliver good

125
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

strategy simplifies interactions and enhances the efficiency and effec­ how value is dynamically created through collaborative efforts between
tiveness of exchanges, thereby enhancing the customer experience. We actors in the ecosystem. Thus, having a key account management
provide a summary of our findings in Table 2. strategy in which KAMs are the main actors who lead the customer
Our findings reveal that crossing points should be thinned following experience makes it possible to overcome the challenge within B2B firms
specific steps and that KAMs must ensure that the crossing points at each of having a siloed customer experience, where different customers, as
level are thin before moving to the next level crossing point. Starting at actors, have different types of experience (Witell et al., 2020). Ensuring
the firm level, KAMs first ensure thin crossing points by validating the consistency of experience and actors is paramount (Homburg & Tischer,
firm’s legitimacy in the market and the institutional alignment between 2023); having a KAM lead this customer experience enables more con­
firms. Thus, our findings reveal that, to ensure a positive customer sistency in the customer experience journey.
experience, KAMs prioritize collective value (Eggert, Kleinaltenkamp, & Furthermore, recent literature has emphasized that technological
Kashyap, 2019). By ensuring that the crossing points are thin between advancements, such as AI, can either automate or augment some tasks
the KAM’s firm and the customer’s firm, KAMs ensure the baseline for (Goel, Baliga, Rangarajan, & Lussier, 2024; McClure, Epler, Schmitt, &
the partnership and thicken the crossing points of their competitor firms Rangarajan, 2024). Our findings reveal that automation can create a
(see Plouffe, DeCarlo, et al., 2024; Plouffe, Hartmann, & Hochstein, great customer experience through the creation of thin crossing points.
2024). Once thin crossing points have been created at the firm level, However, automated processes should not lead to fewer face-to-face
KAMs create relationships with actors and ensure individual value exchanges between KAMs and their customers. KAMs must maintain
(Eggert et al., 2019) for the different actors in the ecosystem. We find strong relationships and ensure thin crossing points at the firm level to
that the relational experience is twofold; KAMs can develop a cognitive avoid disrupting the customer experience. KAMs also use technology to
or an affective relationship (see similar findings from Gounaris & “augment” the customer experience by enabling useful information to be
Almoraish, 2024). However, our findings show that these relationships shared and enhancing relationships through more regular meetings.
should be adapted to the customer’s preference—while some prefer a Finally, the findings show that the integration of resources (e.g.,
cognitive relationship, others encourage a more affective relationship. knowledge) underscores a dynamic and ongoing interaction loop that
KAMs need to avoid a “mismatch of relationships” (Witell et al., 2020) continuously shapes and reshapes the value that customers perceive.
through ongoing adaptation to all actors. Finally, KAMs engage in Through the prism of service-dominant logic (e.g., Vargo & Lusch, 2016)
automated processes that ensure optimal exchange with their customers. and the service ecosystem perspective (e.g., Hartmann et al., 2018;
Therefore, they need to find the appropriate resources to make the ex­ Plouffe, Hartmann, & Hochstein, 2024), customer experience and
change efficient in the long term by engaging in unstructured practices, customer value are cocreated by the active participation of both the
or bricolage (Epler & Leach, 2021). KAM and the customer. Each interaction presents an opportunity for
Customer experience is a dynamic process which requires the value cocreation, positioning customer experience as both an input into
maintenance of thin crossing points at each level. Our findings highlight and an outcome of the value realization process. From this perspective,
the quality of customer experience is fundamentally determined by how
well the KAM’s value proposition aligns with and adapts to the cus­
Table 2 tomer’s context and needs, thereby impacting how customers perceive,
Summary of findings. experience, and realize value. This relational and contextual view of
Topic Insights from current Insights from our study customer experience emphasizes its role as a critical component in the
literature continuous and collaborative process of value creation.
KAMs increase firm legitimacy
and work toward the 6. Theoretical contributions
institutionalization of their
Firm-level: KAMs as
solution. This represents the first First, our study contributes to the key account management litera­
knowledge integrators (
step of the customer experience
Hakanen, 2014). ture. By merging key account management with the customer experi­
process and this legitimacy needs
to be maintained throughout the ence, we are able to offer a more dynamic view of KAM practices.
whole customer experience. Indeed, because the long-term relationship between KAMs and their
KAMs adapt to customers by customers has always been an overarching objective (e.g., Kumar et al.,
creating both cognitive and
Individual level: KAMs 2019), the customer experience allows us to understand what makes a
affective relationships. This
Key Account
cultivate and expand
represents the second step of the
successful relationship (Gounaris & Almoraish, 2024) and to focus on
relationships (Gounaris & the interactions that take place between the KAM and the customer at
Management customer experience process and
Tzempelikos, 2014, Pardo
et al., 2020).
the KAMs need to ensure a different levels and throughout the customer journey. The key account
balanced relationship that is management literature also calls for a more diverse use of theories
adapted to their customer.
(Sandesh et al., 2023). Our use of the service ecosystem perspective
Technology allows thin crossing
points by providing information/ (Hartmann et al., 2018) responds to this call by employing the concept
Technology: Technology (e. resource exchange immediacy. of crossing points and the foundations of service-dominant logic (Lusch
g., social media) can be used This represents the third step of & Vargo, 2014) and institutional theory (Lawrence & Suddaby, 2006).
to reach customers (Lacoste, the customer experience process.
This further allows us to navigate at the KAM level (individually) and to
2016). However, it can backfire and,
once implemented, hinder
obtain a holistic view that integrates the macro, meso, and micro levels
relationships. (Hartmann, Wieland, Vargo, & Ahearne, 2020).
Siloed customer experience, KAMs ensure consistency of Second, we extend the customer experience literature through the
different actors have customer experience by ensuring concept of crossing points. Indeed, as customer experience is defined
different experiences (Witell thin crossing points among
with the concept of touchpoints being “interactions,” the crossing points
et al., 2020). various actors.
Technology enhances concept offers more granularity as it considers that actors can “thin”
B2B Customer Technology enhances customer
customer experience (Witell crossing points (i.e., ease the value exchange), or “thicken” crossing
experience experience specifically by
et al., 2020), with specific
facilitating the exchange of value points that make the value exchange more difficult (Hartmann et al.,
tools (e.g., augmented and 2018). Furthermore, as value is considered an antecedent of customer
(e.g., information). But
virtual reality, Wieland,
Ivens, Kutschma, &
technology might also disrupt experience (Becker & Jaakkola, 2020), the use of a service ecosystem
customer experience. that considers value to be cocreated by multiple actors allows a deep
Rauschnabel, 2024).
understanding of 1) what is exchanged to create value, 2) who

126
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

exchanges value, and 3) what is the optimal value exchanged. This face-to-face meetings and digital interactions to provide a seamless and
therefore opens a new possibility to study what Homburg and Tischer engaging customer experience across various touchpoints.
(2023) call “value anchoring of touchpoint,” or the degree of value Our findings indicate that the relationship between KAMs and cus­
creation during a touchpoint, by directly characterizing the intensity of tomers can be cognitive or affective. As KAMs adapt to their customers’
value exchange because the crossing points are either thick or thin. preferences, they will each naturally favor one type of relationship over
Finally, although there has been extensive work to develop the sales the other. However, mismatches between the customer’s preferred
service ecosystem framework from a conceptual standpoint (Plouffe, relationship type and the KAM’s personal style are likely to occur. To
Hartmann, & Hochstein, 2024), empirical research remains scarce, prevent disruption to the customer experience, we recommend that
which limits the use of the service ecosystem perspective (Hartmann KAMs collaborate with a complementary team member, such as an actor
et al., 2018). We therefore illustrate how the service ecosystem from the technical department, to provide additional support, thereby
perspective can be implemented in an empirical setting. The service ensuring a balanced and effective relationship.
ecosystem framework is essential for understanding how systemic de­ Moreover, to enhance customer experience, top management should
pendencies and interdependencies among actors facilitate complex recognize the importance of both cognitive and affective relationships
service exchanges. Our study’s emphasis on thinning crossing points that KAMs develop with customers. Cognitive relationships, based on
reflects the mechanisms through which KAMs optimize these service the customer’s perception of the KAM’s competence and problem-
interactions to enhance efficiency and effectiveness. We show how solving abilities, can be strengthened through training. Affective re­
KAMs integrate resources across their networks and employ technology lationships, rooted in the KAM’s personal interest and care for the
to automate interactions, and how they align their practices with cus­ customer, can be nurtured through training, coaching, and mentoring.
tomers’ institutional norms and organizational values. Thus, the current Top management should encourage KAMs to collaborate with other
study is a practical application of the service-dominant logic’s principle team members who complement their natural relationship style,
that service ecosystems are relatively self-contained, self-adjusting sys­ ensuring a balanced approach that aligns with customer expectations
tems of resource-integrating actors connected by shared institutional and prevents disruption to the customer experience.
arrangements (Lusch & Vargo, 2014; Vargo & Lusch, 2016). Our find­ Additionally, KAMs should focus on maintaining thin crossing points
ings also offer a practical illustration of mutual value creation processes that are standardized for quick and efficient exchanges. For example,
in the KAM ecosystems. Thus, as well as shedding light on the opera­ implementing standardized project management tools across customer
tional tactics that KAMs employ to enhance customer relationships and interactions can help to streamline processes and reduce complexity,
streamline service delivery, our study also enriches the theoretical un­ ensuring consistent and efficient exchanges. To maintain the efficacy of
derstanding of how these practices are embedded within and bolstered these interactions, periodic assessments and updates of engagement
by the service ecosystems framework. The study contributes to the strategies are necessary. This could involve biannual strategy sessions
literature by contextualizing the role of KAMs within these ecosystems, with all KAMs to review current practices, discuss new industry trends,
emphasizing their strategic use as facilitators to maintain efficient ser­ and adjust approaches accordingly. Finally, conducting regular seminars
vice exchanges and continuously cocreate value. or training sessions that emphasize the importance of balancing personal
and organizational connections can enhance the effectiveness of KAMs
7. Managerial implications in managing their customers and fostering a culture of continuous
improvement and mutual value creation within the firm.
It is critical to implement comprehensive training programs that
underscore the importance of customer experience within key account 8. Limitations and future research
management. These training programs can equip KAMs with the
necessary skills to align their interactions with the institutional norms Our research is not without limitations, which open new research
and practices that facilitate optimal exchange and value cocreation with opportunities. While our study focused on interviews with KAMs, a
actors of their ecosystem, including, of course, the key account firms. relevant next research direction would be to consider other ecosystem
These training programs should include modules on institutional actors involved in the creation of the customer experience. This could be
alignment to ensure that every customer interaction, whether in formal done by conducting interviews with internal actors (e.g., marketing
meetings or more casual settings such as business lunches, consistently department, supply chain department) or by considering external actors
reinforces the organization’s coordinating practices, such as adherence who are involved in decision-making processes within the customer’s
to shared norms and values. Capability training, in particular, increases firm. In addition, valuable insights could be provided by investigating
adaptive selling and creativity (Epler, Schmitt, Mathis, Leach, & Hoch­ what customers expect from a KAM, as customers may have different
stein, 2023), enabling the KAMs to provide creative solutions. To ensure expectations about their preferred experience depending on their
that these interactions are as effective as possible, it is essential to competence or industry. For example, Terpoorten, Klein, and Merfeld
establish continuous feedback loops. For instance, after a product (2024) studied the cloud-computing industry and identified different
launch, KAMs could use digital surveys to collect immediate feedback touchpoints depending on the tech savviness of customers. Future key
from customers which can then be analyzed and discussed in monthly account management research should explore the distinct characteris­
review meetings to drive continuous product improvement. Another tics of customers and examine how a customized customer experience
example of this could be the implementation of a “Customer Portal” strategy could be implemented. In this line of inquiry, future research
which allows KAMs to access real-time feedback and analytics on ac­ could further explore customers’ preferences for a cognitive or an af­
count health, enabling them to quickly adapt strategies as needed. fective relationship with KAMs, and how to find the right balance.
KAMs require a well-structured plan for strategically deploying in­ The geographic scope of the data collection presents certain limita­
ternal resources to enhance customer interactions. This could involve tions to this study. The findings are based on interviews with KAMs in
organizing quarterly customer appreciation events that give customers a French-speaking regions of Europe (i.e., France, Belgium and
first look at new products or services, thereby creating exclusive expe­ Switzerland). This may limit the generalizability of the results to other
riences that demonstrate their importance to the firm. These plans linguistic or cultural contexts. Future research might benefit from
should be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect the evolving needs considering other regions and cultural contexts to investigate how the
of customers and the dynamics of the market. Creating multiple effi­ leveraging of crossing points for customer experience varies across
cient, yet adaptable, interaction points (i.e., crossing points) between different cultural contexts. Furthermore, key account management
KAMs’ and customers’ firms is also vital. This can be achieved by emerged in the 1970s among multinationals and has recently evolved
diversifying the communication and interaction channels—using both into a more agile approach which has also been adopted by smaller

127
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

firms. As intrafirm knowledge sharing is salient particularly in multi­ CRediT authorship contribution statement
nationals (Schmitt, Epler, Casenave, & Pallud, 2024), future studies
could explore the different ways in which KAMs operate when helping to Laurianne Schmitt: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original
create the customer experience in multinationals and smaller firms, and draft, Visualization, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation,
how this changes the management of crossing points. Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Michel Klein:
Future research should also explore the role of power dynamics in Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Methodology, Data
the shaping of customer experience by KAMs, as understanding these curation, Conceptualization. Bruno Lussier: Writing – review & editing,
dynamics could provide valuable insights into how influence and au­ Writing – original draft.
thority impact the experience of key accounts.

Appendix A. Interview guide

The participants were prompted to expand on their answers by asking how or why one or other answer was given.
Opening questions

• [Professional experience] Can you briefly describe your career path and how you came to be a key account manager?
• [Key account management within the firm] How many key accounts do you follow? Do you attach the same importance to all your key accounts?
Taking your most important customer as an example, can you explain how you manage this account?
• [External network] Who are the contacts you interact with within the key account’s firm? Explain
• [Internal network] Which people in your firm do you work with the most? Explain

Customer experience

• What does the customer experience of a key account mean to you?

• What does your company do to improve the customer experience?
• How do you personally improve the customer experience of your key accounts?
• What are the characteristics of a key account manager that delivers a GOOD customer experience?
• What is a bad customer experience?
• What are the consequences of customer experience?
• What conditions are necessary to deliver a good customer experience?
• What added value do you bring in a context where digital is omnipresent?

Other questions

• What are the new challenges for key account managers and your firm?
• Is there anything else you’d like to add, anything important we haven’t covered in this interview?

Appendix B. Data structure

128
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

Data availability Gartner. (2023). Realizing the benefits of superior customer experience – A Gartner trend
insight report Accessed on 29.08.2023, available at: https://www.gartner.com/e
n/doc/3874972-realizing-the-benefits-of-superior-customer-experience-a-gart
The data that has been used is confidential. ner-trend-insight-report.
Gioia, D. (2021). A systematic methodology for doing qualitative research. Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 57(1), 20–29.
References
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in
inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research
Baldwin, C. Y. (2007). Where do transactions come from? Modularity, transactions, and Methods, 16(1), 15–31.
the boundaries of firms. Industrial and Corporate Change, 17(1), 155–195. Goad, E. A., Chase, K. S., Brauer, D. B., Chefor, E., Chaker, N. N., Rabago, R., …
Baraldi, E., Havenvid, M. I., Linné, Å., & Öberg, C. (2019). Start-ups and networks: Hansen, J. D. (2024). Orchestration of value: The role of customer success managers
Interactive perspectives and a research agenda. Industrial Marketing Management, 80, within sales ecosystems. European Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 756–781.
58–67. Goel, A., Baliga, A. J., Rangarajan, D., & Lussier, B. (2024). Technology use in B2B sales:
Becker, L., & Jaakkola, E. (2020). Customer experience: Fundamental premises and examining the extant literature and identifying future research opportunities using
implications for research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(4), morphological analysis. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 1–17.
630–648. Gounaris, S., & Almoraish, A. (2024). A dynamic, relational approach to B2B customer
Brakus, J. J., Schmitt, B. H., & Zarantonello, L. (2009). Brand experience: What is it? experience: A customer-centric perspective from a longitudinal investigation. Journal
How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52–68. of Business Research, 177.
Brinkmann, S. (2016). Methodological breaching experiments: Steps toward theorizing Gounaris, S., & Tzempelikos, N. (2014). Relational key account management: Building
the qualitative interview. Culture and Psychology, 22(4), 520–533. key account management effectiveness through structural reformations and
Burchett, M. R., Epler, R. T., Pappas, A., Butler, T. D., Rouziou, M., Bolander, W., & relationship management skills. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(7), 1110–1123.
Lussier, B. (2024). Charting the course: A framework for networking across the Guenzi, P., Georges, L., & Pardo, C. (2009). The impact of strategic account managers’
selling ecosystem. European Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 733–755. behaviors on relational outcomes: An empirical study. Industrial Marketing
Chandler, J. D., & Vargo, S. L. (2011). Contextualization and value-in-context: How Management, 38(3), 300–311.
context frames exchange. Marketing Theory, 11(1), 35–49. Guenzi, P., Pardo, C., & Georges, L. (2007). Relational selling strategy and key account
Cisco Systems. (2024). Cisco live accessed on 01.05.2024, available at: https://www. managers’ relational behaviors: An exploratory study. Industrial Marketing
ciscolive.com/. Management, 36(1), 121–133.
Dessaigne, E., & Pardo, C. (2020). The network orchestrator as steward: Strengthening Gupta, A., Kumar, A., Grewal, R., & Lilien, G. L. (2019). Within-Seller and Buyer–Seller
norms as an orchestration practice. Industrial Marketing Management, 91, 223–233. Network Structures and Key Account Profitability. Journal of Marketing, 83(1),
Duncan, T., & Moriarty, S. (2014). How integrated marketing Communication’s 108–132.
“touchpoints” can operationalize the service-dominant logic. In The service-dominant Hakanen, T. (2014). Co-creating integrated solutions within business networks: The KAM
logic of marketing (pp. 236–243). Routledge. team as knowledge integrator. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(7), 1195–1203.
Eggert, A., Kleinaltenkamp, M., & Kashyap, V. (2019). Mapping value in business Hartmann, N. N., Wieland, H., & Vargo, S. L. (2018). Converging on a new theoretical
markets: An integrative framework. Industrial Marketing Management, 79, 13–20. foundation for selling. Journal of Marketing, 82(2), 1–18.
Epler, R. T., & Leach, M. P. (2021). An examination of salesperson bricolage during a Hartmann, N. N., Wieland, H., Vargo, S. L., & Ahearne, M. (2020). Advancing sales
critical sales disruption: Selling during the COVID-19 pandemic. Industrial Marketing theory through a holistic view: How social structures frame selling. Journal of
Management, 95, 114–127. Personal Selling and Sales Management, 40(4), 221–226.
Epler, R. T., Schmitt, L., Mathis, D., Leach, M., & Hochstein, B. (2023). Do salesforce Hengstebeck, B. B., Kassemeier, R., & Wieseke, J. (2022). What comprises a successful
management systems actually drive salesperson intentions? Industrial Marketing key account manager? Differences in the drivers of sales performance between key
Management, 113, 42–57. account managers and regular salespeople. Industrial Marketing Management, 106,
Forbes. (2023). Customer experience stats for 2023 accessed on 29.08.2023, available at: 392–404.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/blakemorgan/2023/06/26/100-customer-experie Hochstein, B., Voorhees, C. M., Pratt, A. B., Rangarajan, D., Nagel, D. M., & Mehrotra, V.
nce-stats-for-2023/. (2023). Customer success management, customer health, and retention in B2B
industries. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 40(4), 912–932.

129
L. Schmitt et al. Industrial Marketing Management 126 (2025) 118–130

Homburg, C., Jozić, D., & Kuehnl, C. (2017). Customer experience management: Toward McClure, C. E., Epler, R. T., Schmitt, L., & Rangarajan, D. (2024). AI in sales: Laying the
implementing an evolving marketing concept. Journal of the Academy of Marketing foundations for future research. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 44
Science, 45(3), 377–401. (2), 108–127.
Homburg, C., & Tischer, M. (2023). Customer journey management capability in McDonald, M., Millman, T., & Rogers, B. (1997). Key account management: Theory,
business-to-business markets: Its bright and dark sides and overall impact on firm practice and challenges. Journal of Marketing Management, 13(8), 737–757.
performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 51(5), 1046–1074. Nag, R., Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2007). The intersection of organizational identity,
Homburg, C., Workman, J. P., Jr., & Jensen, O. (2002). A configurational perspective on knowledge, and practice: Attempting strategic change via knowledge grafting.
key account management. Journal of Marketing, 66(2), 38–60. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 821–847.
Ivens, B. S. (2023). Gender issues in key account management research: A systematic Pardo, C. (1997). Key account management in the business to business field: The key
literature review and avenues for future research. Industrial Marketing Management, account’s point of view. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 17(4),
111, 81–96. 17–26.
Ivens, B. S., Leischnig, A., Pardo, C., & Niersbach, B. (2018). Key account management as Pardo, C., Ivens, B. S., & Niersbach, B. (2020). An identity perspective of key account
a firm capability. Industrial Marketing Management, 74, 39–49. managers as paradoxical relationship managers. Industrial Marketing Management,
Ivens, B. S., & Pardo, C. (2007). Are key account relationships different? Empirical results 89, 355–372.
on supplier strategies and customer reactions. Industrial Marketing Management, 36 Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th edition). Sage.
(4), 470–482. Plouffe, C. R., DeCarlo, T. E., Fergurson, J. R., Kumar, B., Moreno, G., Schmitt, L., …
Ivens, B. S., Pardo, C., Niersbach, B., & Leischnig, A. (2016). Firm-internal key account Wang, H. (2024). Salespeople and teams as stakeholder and knowledge managers: A
management networks: Framework, case study, avenues for future research. service-ecosystem, co-creation, crossing-points perspective on key outcomes.
Industrial Marketing Management, 58, 102–113. European Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 704–732.
Johnson, D., & Grayson, K. (2005). Cognitive and affective trust in service relationships. Plouffe, C. R., Hartmann, N., & Hochstein, B. W. (2024). “Converging on a new
Journal of Business Research, 58(4), 500–507. theoretical foundation for selling” five years later: Emerging priorities, new
Kranzbühler, A. M., Kleijnen, M. H. P., Morgan, R. E., & Teerling, M. (2018). The applications, & directions for ongoing research. European Journal of Marketing, 58(3),
multilevel nature of customer experience research: An integrative review and 685–703.
research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 433–456. Sandesh, S. P., Sreejesh, S., & Paul, J. (2023). Key account management in B2B
Kumar, P., Sharma, A., & Salo, J. (2019). A bibliometric analysis of extended key account marketing: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Journal of Business
management literature. Industrial Marketing Management, 82, 276–292. Research, 156.
La Rocca, A., Moscatelli, P., Perna, A., & Snehota, I. (2016). Customer involvement in Schmitt, L., Casenave, E., & Pallud, J. (2021). Salespeople’s work toward the
new product development in B2B: The role of sales. Industrial Marketing Management, institutionalization of social selling practices. Industrial Marketing Management, 96,
58, 45–57. 183–196.
Lacoste, S. (2016). Perspectives on social media and its use by key account managers. Schmitt, L., Epler, R., Casenave, E., & Pallud, J. (2024). An inquiry into effective
Industrial Marketing Management, 54, 33–43. salesperson social media use in multinational versus local firms. Journal of
Lai, C. J., & Yang, Y. (2017). The role of formal information sharing in key account team International Marketing, 32(1), 72–91.
effectiveness: Does informal control matter and when. Journal of Personal Selling and Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques.
Sales Management, 37(4), 313–331. Terpoorten, C., Klein, J. F., & Merfeld, K. (2024). Understanding B2B customer journeys
Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). 1.6 institutions and institutional work (Vol. 2, pp. for complex digital services: The case of cloud computing. Industrial Marketing
215-254). The sage handbook of organization studies. Management, 119, 178–192.
Lemke, F., Clark, M., & Wilson, H. (2011). Customer experience quality: An exploration Tzempelikos, N., & Gounaris, S. (2013). Approaching key account management from a
in business and consumer contexts using repertory grid technique. Journal of the long-term perspective. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 21(2), 179–198.
Academy of Marketing Science, 39(6), 846–869. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2011). It’s all B2B… and beyond: Toward a systems
Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016). Understanding customer experience throughout perspective of the market. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 181–187.
the customer journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69–96. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of
Leone, D., Schiavone, F., & Simoni, M. (2021). Key account management and value co- service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44, 5–23.
creation in multi-stakeholder ecosystems. A “market access” mix. Journal of Business Verhoef, P. C., Lemon, K. N., Parasuraman, A., Roggeveen, A., Tsiros, M., &
and Industrial Marketing, 36(13), 199–209. Schlesinger, L. A. (2009). Customer experience creation: Determinants, dynamics
Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2014). Service-dominant logic: Premises, perspectives, and management strategies. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 31–41.
possibilities. Cambridge University Press. Wieland, D. A., Ivens, B. S., Kutschma, E., & Rauschnabel, P. A. (2024). Augmented and
Lussier, B., Grégoire, Y., & Vachon, M.-A. (2017). The role of humor usage on creativity, virtual reality in managing B2B customer experiences. Industrial Marketing
trust and performance in business relationships: An analysis of the salesperson- Management, 119, 193–205.
customer dyad. Industrial Marketing Management, 65, 168–181. Witell, L., Kowalkowski, C., Perks, H., Raddats, C., Schwabe, M., Benedettini, O., &
Lussier, B., & Hall, Z. R. (2018). Cooperation in B2B relationships: Factors that influence Burton, J. (2020). Characterizing customer experience management in business
customers’ perceptions of salesperson cooperation. Industrial Marketing Management, markets. Journal of Business Research, 116, 420–430.
69, 209–220. Zeithaml, V. A., Jaworski, B. J., Kohli, A. K., Tuli, K. R., Ulaga, W., & Zaltman, G. (2020).
A theories-in-use approach to building marketing theory. Journal of Marketing, 84(1),
32–51.

130