PurposeThe purpose of the paper is to identify the elements of professional key account management programs, to understand the success factors and to create an integrated framework.Design/methodology/approachThe article is based on an analysis of the existing literature as well as on several qualitative research projects. Existing content from around 30 years of KAM research and practice was reviewed. A total of 18 companies were analyzed using case study methods and action research approaches. A total of 27 interviews with practitioners and 18 workshops were conducted to conceptualize the integrated KAM framework.FindingsKey account management is more complex than the existing literature suggests and companies believe. A professional KAM framework addresses two different target groups: key account managers (and teams) and the company's management (or someone the responsibility of the entire program is delegated to). Both groups have to pay attention to five dimensions of KAM (named strategy, solution, people, management, screening) and several aspects that are different for each group.Practical implicationsA full overview about all the necessary elements of a professional KAM program can be used to assess a company's ways of working with strategic customers and to conceptualize or optimize an entire KAM program.Originality/valueThe presented framework is the first that integrates the different views of the two most important target groups of KAM. It offers a unique overview of all important elements.

No abstract

Today, success represents sustainability in introducing new standards and orientation toward the customer, to the quality and price of products, to flexibility, agility and promptness, to economising in resources and protection of the environment. This is not easy to achieve, especially in an environment, where it is natural desire to keep resources busy, in particular the critical resources. This usually results in unfavourable outcomes, usually experiencing significant degradation in performance of company and a lot of firefighting inside the company. This paper outlines three approaches for manufacturing scheduling, starting with traditional push approach (MRP) and continuing with Kanban (pull) and Theory of Constraints (pull/push), regarding performance and throughput improvement. It determines how resources should be scheduled within a system in order to enhance performance, provide stability and predictability of products. Simulations demonstrate that 200 % to 600 % of improvement is possible at inventory level (work in progress) and the same at lead time, based on the number of completed tasks over a given period of time.

No abstract

No abstract