Key Account Management (KAM) in Professional Service Firms: Challenges and Answers

This article is based on a piece authored by Hayk Petrosyan, Praxyma’s founder and principal consultant, and Dr Rodrigo Guesalaga, and originally published in the International Journal of Sales Transformation, Issue 3.1 (February 2017).

Professional Service Firms (PSFs) such as law firms, consultancies, architecture and accounting practices are characterised by their knowledge intensity, low capital intensity (in fixed assets), and professionalised workforce.

Due to the nature of their business - based on intangible resources and capabilities (mostly specialised knowledge), PSFs are generally solution-oriented as they need to adapt their value offerings to the specific needs of a particular client. Both relational and consultative approaches to customer management are commonly required, and usually a significant portion of a PSF’s business is concentrated in a few important accounts. Therefore, effective key account management (KAM) seems an imperative priority for professional service firms.

Yet despite its strategic value, implementing KAM in PSFs, in our experience, often proves difficult. Sometimes there is a lack of teamwork in managing a key customer due to an individualistic attitude of the expert professional. This was the case at LawCorp*; as one of its executives said: “some experts are used to working with their clients, want to do individual relationships, and don’t want to share them with other partners”. Another common problem that PSFs face has to do with the “ownership” of a client: how can PSFs make sure it is the company that owns the customer relationship and not the expert professional?

*LawCorp is a pseudonym, to disguise the identity of a real law firm.

Challenges in KAM implementation for PSFs

To better understand the major challenges that PSFs face in KAM implementation, we reviewed the academic and practitioner literature on the topic, and conducted in-depth interviews with a group of executives involved in KAM implementation at large UK-based PSFs in the following sectors: legal, accounting, engineering, and business consulting. Figure 1 shows the three challenges that appeared to be the most relevant and common to PSFs. As we argue in the next section, these challenges are interrelated and, thus, represented in the figure by overlapping circles.

Figure 1: Challenges in KAM implementation for PSFs.

1. Creating a customer-centric culture

One of the most consistent challenges PSFs face is transitioning from an expert-centric to a customer-centric mindset. Ryals (2008) argues that PSFs remain too focused on their "product"—the expert knowledge they offer—often at the expense of understanding their clients' evolving needs. It is common to see a tendency to offer clients what the experts know well and have done for years, rather than adequately diagnosing the clients’ needs and developing a proper solution.

This mindset creates barriers to internal knowledge-sharing. Professional partners may hesitate to share customer insights with KAM team members, leading to fragmented communication and reactive, rather than proactive, client management (Chen, 2014; Natti and Palo, 2012; Natti et al., 2006).

Another signal of the lack of customer centricity in PSFs, which we learned from the interviews to senior managers, is companies being unresponsive and reactive rather than alert and proactive when dealing with clients. As one senior executive from an accounting firm said: “We have lost some of the skills around basic customer practice: getting back to your customer ahead of when you said you would get back to them, the language that you use, making sure that one department does not say ‘it’s the blokes upstairs’, those types of things.” Another executive, from a consulting firm, indicated that “key account management is still too reactive. We don’t necessarily know in advance…we are not doing enough proactively with our customers. I think there is a need to be more proactive and to plan with our customers”.

2. Securing ownership of client relationships

A second challenge lies in defining and maintaining ownership of client relationships. In many PSFs, professional partners regard client relationships as personal assets, making it difficult to transition “ownership” to the firm. This individualism can result in knowledge being retained in silos, creating organisational risk if professionals depart (Ryals, 2008).

“Historically partners see themselves as owners of the relationship... they protect the relationship so that as few people as possible contact the client and ideally that partner knows everything that is attached to them and is about them.” – Executive, legal firm

Even with supporting IT systems in place, many experts are unwilling to share client-specific insights. As a result, crucial knowledge remains tacit and is not embedded institutionally (Natti et al., 2006).

In addition, it is quite common that in PSFs partners become so powerful that decision-making is driven by the partners’ desires rather than by an objective analysis of the convenience of such decisions for the organisation. For example, a partner may decide to fund certain project even if it is not justified financially, simply because he or she likes it or could potentially benefit his/her personal reputation. Along these lines, one of the interviewees indicated: “the natural structure of the law firm helps this individualism and sometimes a weak cross-practice-group collaboration to occur.”

3. Developing cross-functional collaboration

KAM thrives on collaboration, yet many PSFs operate as loosely coupled systems—"groups of groups"—which impedes coordination (Natti and Palo 2012; Natti, Halinen and Hanttu 2006). Poor communication between departments and practice groups, especially in large organisations, limits the sharing of customer intelligence and cross-selling opportunities.

“ People don’t cross-sell across practices primarily because they don’t know the people who work in those practices.” – Executive, accounting firm

In addition, the relationship between expert partners and supporting KAM units is often fragile, as experts may be reluctant to accept the inputs from these units, or to request their help when needed. When client knowledge isn’t institutionalised, it remains tacit—held by individuals—leaving KAM teams without the insights needed for strategic, long-term relationship management. One accounting firm executive noted: “What I value and miss the most is the one-to-one with the partners… not a formal meeting, just ‘let’s catch up over coffee, chuck a few ideas around.’” Another added: “We need to build a culture which allows key account managers to feel they can go and ask for help.”

The Answers: How to support KAM implementation in PSFs

To tackle the challenges of implementing KAM in PSFs, we suggest a three-stage framework (see Figure 2), referred to as the “3 Is”: involve senior management, influence through supportive experts, and integrate cross-functional teams.

Figure 2: The “3 Is” framework for KAM Implementation in PSFs

1. Involve senior management

Senior leadership must actively support and communicate the importance of KAM. Their involvement helps shift organisational culture and reinforces accountability.

“Having senior management directly doing the talking about the programme for me and referencing the work that we were doing and the importance of it, not just CEO, but other Board members have always been very important” – Executive, law firm

Senior management should also take an active role in reviewing the progress of KAM programmes, particularly in the context of expert-centric cultures. As one executive noted, “it is crucial that the senior management is practically involved… to help change the culture.” This involvement includes mentoring expert professionals, ensuring accountability in key client management, and recognising strong performance.

2. Influence through supportive experts

One approach to overcoming the challenges of KAM in PSFs is to identify and empower expert professionals who are naturally customer-centric and can help build internal momentum. These individuals can act as informal KAM champions, influencing their peers and fostering trust across functional boundaries.

To implement this supportive experts approach, PSFs can encourage supportive experts to share KAM success stories that highlight cross-functional collaboration. This helps persuade reluctant partners and strengthen the internal case for KAM. When a key account role is given to a professional expert in an influencer role, they effectively become a “lead client partner.” As one interviewee noted: “Over time they realised that it’s not a prize, it’s a job with responsibility.”

3. Integrate cross-functional teams

Establishing structured cross-functional teams dedicated to key accounts promotes knowledge sharing and organisational alignment. These teams should hold regular meetings, track progress through transparent reporting, and leverage collaborative IT platforms. One interviewee highlighted the use of dedicated client-related live platforms, where team members can share and access customer information in real time. This practice supports a more customer-centric approach to KAM while also strengthening internal communication across functional areas and roles.

In globally operating PSFs, one law firm executive described an interesting technique known as the “magic-four,” based on the hypothesis that client retention improves when multiple practice groups—and for international clients, partners from different offices—work with a single client. Over a three-year period, they observed that when four distinct practice groups worked on the same client, the likelihood of retaining that client the following year was nearly 100%. This approach also fostered stronger motivation and collaboration within the team, as everyone rallied around a shared objective: to develop the client both across practice areas and internationally.

Conclusion

KAM is not a plug-and-play process, particularly within professional service environments. The challenges of expert-centric culture, fragmented relationship ownership, and limited cross-functional collaboration are significant but not insurmountable. Our proposed "3 Is" framework offers a practical path forward—one rooted in leadership, internal influence, and team integration. For PSFs seeking to sustain long-term client relationships, KAM must evolve from an initiative to a strategic capability.

REFERENCES

Chen, W. (2014). The Challenges of Applying Key Account Management in Professional Services Firms. MSc Thesis. Cranfield University.

Guesalaga, R. (2014). Top management involvement with key accounts: The concept, its dimensions, and strategic outcomes. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(7), 1146-1156.

Natti, S. and Palo, T. (2012). Key account management in business-to-business expert organisations: An exploratory study on the implementation process. The Service Industries Journal, 32(11), 1837-1852.

Natti, S., Halinen, A. and Hanttu, N. (2006). Customer knowledge transfer and key account management in professional service organizations. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 17(4), 304-319.

Petrosyan, H. (2015). Strategies for overcoming challenges in Key Account Management Implementation in Professional Services Firms. MSc Thesis. Cranfield University.

Ryals, L. (2008). What are Professional Service Firms? Cranfield Executive Briefing # 3. Cranfield KAM Best Practice Club.