Key Account Selection and Strategic Account Planning

Introduction

In many business markets, a small number of customers account for a disproportionate share of revenue, profit, innovation opportunity, market legitimacy, and reputational risk. These customers cannot be managed effectively through ordinary transactional selling. They require coordinated decisions about resource allocation, relationship governance, value creation, risk, and long-term growth. Key account management (KAM) is the systematic process through which a supplier selects strategically important customers and develops, coordinates, and reviews differentiated plans for them.

KAM is not simply “selling more” to large customers. A large customer may generate substantial revenue while destroying margin, imposing excessive service costs, or creating dependency risk. Conversely, a smaller account may be strategically important because it provides access to a growing market, valuable data, technological learning, or influence over an ecosystem. Therefore, account selection must be transparent and multidimensional.

This chapter develops a framework for identifying key, strategic, and global accounts; evaluating account economics and strategic fit; mapping stakeholders and competitive positions; assessing relationship maturity; and constructing measurable, multi-year account plans.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, the reader should be able to:

1. Distinguish transactional, key, strategic, and global accounts.
2. Select accounts using explicit economic, strategic, relational, and risk criteria.
3. Analyze customer profitability and customer lifetime value while recognizing their limitations.
4. Map stakeholder power, influence, interests, and decision roles.
5. Evaluate relationship maturity and competitive position.
6. Construct a multi-year strategic account plan with objectives, initiatives, governance, resources, and metrics.
7. Critically assess ethical, technological, and organizational risks in KAM.

1. The Meaning and Scope of Key Account Management

A key account is a customer judged sufficiently important to warrant a differentiated management approach, dedicated coordination, or additional organizational resources. “Important” may refer to current revenue, profitability, future growth, market influence, innovation potential, strategic learning, or risk exposure.

A useful hierarchy is shown below.

These categories are not determined solely by annual sales. A customer can be a key account for one supplier and an ordinary account for another. Account status is therefore a managerial judgment supported by evidence, not a universal property of the customer.

KAM has three connected dimensions:

• Commercial dimension: revenue, margin, share of wallet, retention, and growth.
• Strategic dimension: market access, innovation, capability development, reputation, and competitive advantage.
• Relational and organizational dimension: trust, access to decision makers, cross-functional coordination, governance, and mutual adaptation.

The central managerial challenge is balancing these dimensions. An account with high revenue but poor profitability may require renegotiation rather than increased investment. An account with modest current revenue but exceptional future potential may merit selective investment, but not unlimited resources.

2. Account Selection as a Portfolio Decision

Account selection is fundamentally a resource-allocation problem. Sales engineers, executives, technical specialists, service teams, data analysts, and innovation resources are scarce. If every customer is treated as strategic, no customer receives genuinely strategic attention.

A robust selection process normally includes five stages:

1. Define the strategic purpose of KAM. The organization clarifies whether it seeks profitable growth, retention, innovation, market access, risk reduction, or a combination.
2. Create an account universe. Potential accounts are identified from current customers, prospects, channel partners, ecosystem participants, and market intelligence.
3. Apply transparent screening criteria. Financial, strategic, relational, and risk measures are evaluated consistently.
4. Segment and prioritize. Accounts are assigned to management tiers, with explicit service and resource implications.
5. Validate and review. Senior managers test assumptions, identify bias, and establish review dates.

2.1 Selection criteria

Important criteria include:

• Current and expected revenue.
• Contribution margin and cost to serve.
• Growth of the customer’s market and business.
• Fit with the supplier’s capabilities and strategy.
• Potential share of wallet.
• Access to influential networks or reference markets.
• Innovation and co-development potential.
• Switching barriers and retention risk.
• Competitive intensity and incumbent strength.
• Payment, legal, geopolitical, cybersecurity, and concentration risks.
• Relationship access and willingness to collaborate.

Criteria should be defined operationally. For example, “growth potential” might mean an estimated compound annual growth rate above a specified threshold, while “executive access” might mean regular access to at least one decision maker and one senior sponsor. Vague criteria create inconsistent selection and political bargaining.

2.2 Weighted scoring

A weighted scoring model can make prioritization more transparent. The general score is:

where:

• S_i is the total score for account i;
• w_j is the weight assigned to criterion j, with all weights summing to 1;
• r_ij is the normalized rating of account i on criterion j, commonly on a 1–5 or 1–10 scale;
• m is the number of criteria.

The model assumes that criteria can be represented on a sufficiently comparable scale and that the weights reflect managerial priorities. It does not prove that a high-scoring account will be profitable. It is a decision aid, not a substitute for judgment.

For example, suppose an account receives the following ratings:

The rating scale must be interpreted carefully. If a high rating means “high risk,” the risk criterion should be reverse-coded or treated as a penalty. Otherwise, the model may accidentally reward risk.

2.3 Financial screening

Account economics should distinguish sales revenue from economic contribution. A simplified contribution calculation is:

where:

• C is account contribution for the period;
• R is revenue;
• V is variable product or delivery cost;
• S is account-specific service and selling cost;
• A is allocated or attributable account-management cost.

All terms must refer to the same period and accounting basis. Allocation of shared costs can distort results; managers should therefore examine both fully allocated contribution and contribution before discretionary strategic investment.

A customer may be revenue-rich but contribution-poor because of customization, emergency delivery, returns, payment delays, or extensive technical support. Activity-based costing, where feasible, helps identify the activities that generate account cost.

Customer lifetime value can support longer-term analysis. A simplified constant-margin model is:

where M is annual contribution margin before retention investment, r is the annual retention probability, and d is the discount rate. This formula assumes constant annual contribution, constant retention probability, no acquisition cost, and an indefinite horizon. It is inappropriate when margins, retention, or service costs change materially over time. In practice, a year-by-year discounted cash-flow model is often more defensible:

Here CF_t is net cash flow in period t, d is the discount rate, T is the planning horizon, and I₀ is initial investment. The model is only as reliable as its assumptions. Forecasts should be presented as ranges or scenarios rather than as precise facts.

3. Strategic Account Analysis

Selection identifies priority; strategic analysis explains how value can be created and protected.

3.1 Account economics and value pools

The account team should develop an account economic map covering:

• The customer’s sources of revenue and cost.
• The customer’s strategic priorities and performance constraints.
• The supplier’s current revenue, margin, and cost to serve.
• The customer’s total expenditure in the relevant category.
• Unmet needs and potential value pools.
• The economic value of the supplier’s proposed solution.

Value should be expressed in the customer’s language. For example, a solution may reduce downtime, increase yield, reduce compliance exposure, accelerate product launches, or improve working-capital efficiency. A supplier that merely presents product features is less likely to gain strategic access than one that quantifies business outcomes.

A useful distinction is between value created, value captured, and value shared. Value created is the economic benefit generated for the customer and other stakeholders. Value captured is the portion retained by the supplier through price, volume, recurring revenue, or strategic access. Value shared is the portion transferred to the customer to make adoption attractive. A sustainable relationship requires that both parties perceive the exchange as worthwhile.

3.2 Stakeholder and power analysis

Business purchases are usually collective decisions. The account map should identify:

• Economic buyers who control budgets.
• Technical evaluators who assess feasibility.
• Users who experience operational consequences.
• Procurement professionals who negotiate terms.
• Legal, risk, compliance, and cybersecurity gatekeepers.
• Executive sponsors who authorize strategic commitments.
• Champions who actively support the supplier.
• Blockers who can delay or prevent adoption.

Power is multidimensional. Formal authority, control of information, expertise, network centrality, budget ownership, and ability to mobilize resistance may all matter. A stakeholder with no formal title may possess substantial informal influence.

Stakeholder maps should record each person’s role, interests, concerns, influence, current attitude, desired action, and relationship owner. They should be updated when the customer restructures or when a buying initiative changes.

A power–interest matrix is useful, but it should not become a mechanical substitute for judgment. High-power, high-interest stakeholders require close engagement. High-power, low-interest stakeholders require confidence and low-friction communication. Low-power, high-interest stakeholders may become internal advocates. Low-power, low-interest stakeholders should be monitored without consuming disproportionate resources.

3.3 Competitive position

Competitive analysis must extend beyond product comparison. The team should assess:

• Incumbent supplier relationships and switching costs.
• Relative technical and service performance.
• Price and total cost of ownership.
• Contractual, data, and integration barriers.
• Customer perceptions and proof of performance.
• Competitor access to senior stakeholders.
• The supplier’s ability to deliver consistently across locations.

A competitor may be weaker on product performance but stronger in trust, responsiveness, implementation capacity, or executive relationships. Competitive position should therefore be assessed at the account level rather than inferred from general market share.

3.4 Relationship maturity

Relationship maturity describes the depth and quality of interaction between supplier and customer. A practical continuum is:

1. Transactional: communication is episodic and primarily price-based.
2. Responsive: the supplier solves defined problems reliably.
3. Coordinated: functions exchange information and manage service systematically.
4. Collaborative: both parties share plans, data, and improvement activities.
5. Strategic partnership: both parties invest in joint capabilities, governance, innovation, and long-term outcomes.

Maturity is not automatically desirable in every account. Collaboration creates benefits but also requires investment, transparency, coordination, and mutual trust. It may be inappropriate where needs are standardized, switching costs are low, or the customer is unwilling to share information.

Relationship maturity can be assessed through evidence: breadth of stakeholder access, frequency and quality of joint planning, executive sponsorship, integration of systems, joint innovation, conflict-resolution capability, and the extent to which both organizations commit resources.

4. Constructing the Strategic Account Plan

A strategic account plan converts analysis into coordinated action. It should be a management instrument, not a document prepared once a year for administrative compliance.

4.1 Account ambition and strategic thesis

The plan begins with a concise account ambition: what relationship and business position should exist in three to five years? The ambition should be supported by a strategic thesis explaining why the supplier can win and why the customer should care.

A strong thesis links:

• Customer priorities.
• Supplier capabilities.
• A specific value proposition.
• Evidence of competitive advantage.
• A credible path to adoption and expansion.

For example: “By combining predictive maintenance analytics with local service capability, the supplier will help the customer reduce unplanned downtime across three plants, beginning with a validated pilot and expanding through a joint operations program.”

4.2 Objectives and metrics

Objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, while also reflecting strategic quality. Typical objectives include:

• Increase profitable share of wallet.
• Retain or expand a contract.
• Reduce cost to serve.
• Secure executive sponsorship.
• Complete a jointly governed pilot.
• Develop a reference site.
• Achieve specified customer outcomes.
• Reduce concentration or delivery risk.

Metrics should include both lagging and leading indicators.

Targets should have owners, dates, baselines, and data sources. “Improve the relationship” is not a measurable objective; “hold quarterly executive reviews with documented actions and achieve renewal sponsor coverage in two business units by Q4” is more actionable.

4.3 Initiatives, resources, and sequencing

Each initiative should specify the customer problem, proposed action, expected value, responsible owner, required resources, dependencies, timing, and success measure. Multi-year plans should distinguish:

• Foundation activities: stakeholder mapping, data validation, service stabilization, and governance.
• Value demonstration: pilot projects, business cases, and proof of outcomes.
• Scale activities: rollout, integration, training, and commercial expansion.
• Renewal and institutionalization: contract design, joint road maps, and continuous improvement.

The sequence matters. A supplier should not request a strategic partnership before demonstrating operational reliability. Similarly, a pilot without an agreed scale-up criterion can become an isolated experiment.

4.4 Governance and operating model

Governance defines how the account is managed across organizational boundaries. Common mechanisms include:

• An executive steering committee for strategic direction.
• A joint operating committee for delivery and issue resolution.
• Workstream teams for technology, procurement, operations, and innovation.
• A shared issue and decision log.
• Quarterly business reviews and annual strategic reviews.
• Escalation rules and service-level commitments.

The supplier’s account manager is a coordinator and strategist, not the owner of every activity. Finance, operations, legal, product, service, marketing, and senior leadership must understand their roles. Without internal alignment, the customer receives conflicting promises and inconsistent experiences.

4.5 Review and adaptation

Plans should be reviewed using a disciplined cycle: assess performance, test assumptions, identify changes, decide corrective actions, assign owners, and document learning. A plan should be revised when customer strategy, buying authority, competitor behavior, regulation, technology, or economics changes.

A useful distinction is between plan variance and assumption failure. If an initiative is late but the underlying logic remains valid, execution may need correction. If the customer’s market has changed or the proposed value is no longer relevant, the account thesis itself must be reconsidered.

5. Worked Application: Meridian Components and Northstar Mobility

The following is a fictional illustrative case.

Background

Meridian Components manufactures electronic power-management modules. Northstar Mobility, a multinational electric-vehicle manufacturer, currently purchases €18 million per year from Meridian. The account produces strong revenue but has experienced expedited deliveries, engineering changes, and high technical-support costs. Northstar is expanding into two new regions and intends to reduce its supplier base.

Meridian’s leadership is divided. The sales team argues that Northstar should become a global strategic account. Finance reports that the account’s fully allocated contribution is only 7%, compared with a company target of 14%. Operations is concerned about production volatility. The chief executive believes Northstar could become a reference customer and a source of joint innovation.

Problem

Meridian must decide whether to invest in strategic account management and, if so, under what conditions. The decision cannot be based on revenue alone.

Analysis

The account team evaluates five criteria on a 1–5 scale. The weights are profitability potential 0.30, strategic fit 0.25, growth potential 0.20, relationship access 0.15, and risk profile 0.10. Northstar receives ratings of 3, 5, 5, 3, and 2 respectively, where a higher risk rating means lower risk after reverse-coding. Its score is:

The score is attractive but not decisive. A profitability review identifies €18 million revenue, €13.2 million product and delivery costs, €2.4 million account-specific service and engineering costs, and €0.8 million attributable account-management cost. Contribution is therefore:

The contribution margin is:

This is below the company target. However, the customer’s expansion creates a potential growth pool, and joint design could reduce engineering rework. Stakeholder mapping reveals that procurement has strong formal power, plant operations has high operational influence, engineering is a potential champion, and the chief technology officer is an executive sponsor who has not yet engaged Meridian’s senior team.

The competitive analysis shows that a larger competitor has a stronger global service footprint, while Meridian has faster engineering response and superior performance in a specific high-temperature application. The relationship is between responsive and coordinated: Meridian solves problems effectively but lacks shared planning and executive governance.

Approach and solution

Meridian does not immediately grant unlimited strategic resources. Instead, it establishes a conditional three-year account plan:

Year 1—Stabilize and prove value

• Create a joint demand and engineering forecast.
• Reduce expedited shipments by 30%.
• Run a pilot in one plant using the high-temperature module.
• Establish quarterly operational reviews and two executive reviews.
• Agree on a cost-to-serve baseline and change-control process.

Year 2—Scale validated outcomes

• Expand the pilot to three plants if agreed performance thresholds are met.
• Integrate technical data systems.
• Negotiate a volume and forecast agreement that reduces production volatility.
• Develop a joint business case showing customer savings and Meridian’s required investment.

Year 3—Institutionalize the relationship

• Establish a global-local governance model.
• Secure a multi-region contract with service and innovation commitments.
• Co-develop the next-generation module.
• Target contribution margin of at least 14%, subject to verified cost and pricing assumptions.

The plan assigns account leadership to a global account director, while regional teams retain responsibility for local delivery. A steering committee includes executives from both organizations. A “no-go” condition is included: Meridian will not expand technical customization unless Northstar agrees to forecast discipline, change-control rules, and commercial terms that protect economic viability.

Outcome

After twelve months, expedited shipments fall by 35%, engineering rework falls by 20%, and the pilot demonstrates a measurable reduction in Northstar’s equipment downtime. Meridian’s contribution margin rises to 11.8%, still below target but on a credible improvement path. Northstar grants Meridian preferred status for the relevant module category in two plants and invites it into a co-development program.

The account is retained as strategic, but with staged investment and explicit economic gates. The case illustrates that strategic status should be earned through mutual value, not granted merely because an account is large.

Learning points

1. Revenue is an incomplete measure of account attractiveness.
2. Strategic potential does not eliminate the need for profitability discipline.
3. Relationship investment should be sequenced from reliability to collaboration.
4. Executive sponsorship must be connected to operational governance.
5. Conditional commitments protect both parties from uncontrolled customization.

6. Challenges, Ethics, and Governance

6.1 Common analytical errors

Account selection can fail through anchoring on historical revenue, confusing customer size with attractiveness, overstating forecast growth, ignoring service costs, and allowing senior personalities to override evidence. Weighted scoring can create false precision when ratings are subjective or criteria overlap. Teams should document assumptions, conduct sensitivity analysis, and use independent review.

6.2 Concentration and dependency risk

A strategic account may become dangerously dominant. Revenue concentration can weaken bargaining power, expose the supplier to sudden demand loss, and encourage excessive concessions. Plans should include concentration thresholds, contingency scenarios, alternative markets, and explicit approval for nonstandard terms.

6.3 Ethical issues

KAM involves access to sensitive information and influential decision makers. Ethical practice requires accurate representation of capabilities, respect for confidentiality, lawful procurement behavior, avoidance of conflicts of interest, and clear separation between relationship development and improper inducement. Customer data should be collected and used according to applicable privacy, competition, cybersecurity, and contractual requirements.

Account teams should not exploit internal stakeholder divisions through deception or manipulate vulnerable employees. Transparency is especially important when artificial intelligence is used to infer stakeholder attitudes or recommend pricing and resource allocation.

6.4 Technology and artificial intelligence

Customer relationship management systems can consolidate contacts, opportunities, service events, contract data, and account-plan actions. Analytics can identify declining usage, renewal risk, margin leakage, or unusual service demands. AI may support summarization, next-best-action suggestions, scenario analysis, and early-warning signals.

However, AI outputs may reproduce biased historical decisions, infer sensitive attributes, expose confidential information, or generate unjustified confidence. Human review is essential. Organizations should establish data ownership, access controls, audit trails, model validation, explainability standards, and rules against entering confidential customer information into unauthorized systems. AI can augment account judgment but cannot replace stakeholder dialogue, commercial accountability, or ethical responsibility.

7. Best-Practice Principles

Effective strategic account planning follows several principles:

• Select accounts through explicit criteria linked to corporate strategy.
• Combine current economics with future strategic potential.
• Separate customer value from supplier value and examine both.
• Map the customer organization, not just the primary contact.
• Build relationships at multiple levels and across relevant functions.
• Use customer outcomes rather than product features as the basis of value propositions.
• Stage investment and use measurable decision gates.
• Align global consistency with local market and operational realities.
• Make plans cross-functional, owned, and time-bound.
• Review assumptions as well as outcomes.
• Protect trust, confidentiality, compliance, and customer autonomy.
• Treat account plans as living strategic hypotheses rather than fixed administrative documents.

Chapter Summary

Key account management is a differentiated approach to managing customers whose current or potential value justifies coordinated organizational attention. Key, strategic, and global accounts differ in degree of economic importance, mutual interdependence, and geographic or organizational complexity. Selection should combine profitability, growth, strategic fit, relationship access, innovation potential, competitive position, and risk.

Weighted scoring improves transparency, but it does not replace managerial judgment or financial analysis. Account economics should distinguish revenue, variable cost, service cost, and strategic investment. Customer lifetime value and contribution analysis are useful only when their assumptions and data limitations are made explicit.

Strategic account analysis requires understanding value pools, stakeholder power, competitive position, and relationship maturity. A strategic account plan should express a multi-year ambition, measurable objectives, sequenced initiatives, resource commitments, governance mechanisms, risk controls, and review routines. The most effective plans connect customer outcomes with supplier economics and use staged investment to manage uncertainty.

Ethical KAM requires lawful procurement, responsible data use, confidentiality, honest capability claims, and oversight of technology and AI. Ultimately, strategic account status is not a reward for size; it is a disciplined decision to invest where mutual value, strategic fit, and sustainable economics can be demonstrated.

Key Terms

Key account: A customer receiving differentiated management because of significant current or potential value.

Strategic account: A customer characterized by high mutual importance, interdependence, and long-term value-creation potential.

Global account: An account whose buying, operations, or influence spans multiple countries or regions.

Key account management: The coordinated process of selecting, developing, governing, and reviewing strategically important customers.

Account portfolio: The set of customers managed and prioritized by an organization.

Account contribution: Revenue less relevant product, delivery, service, and account-management costs.

Customer lifetime value: The discounted economic value expected from a customer over the relationship horizon.

Share of wallet: The proportion of a customer’s relevant category spending captured by a supplier.

Value pool: A source of economic or strategic benefit available to the customer, supplier, or both.

Stakeholder map: A structured representation of people, roles, interests, influence, and attitudes in an account.

Economic buyer: A stakeholder who controls or authorizes financial investment.

Champion: An internal customer advocate who supports the supplier and helps advance adoption.

Relationship maturity: The degree of depth, coordination, collaboration, and mutual commitment in a customer relationship.

Strategic thesis: A reasoned explanation of how the supplier will create and capture value in an account.

Account governance: Structures, forums, roles, decision rights, and escalation processes used to manage an account.

Leading indicator: A measure that signals future performance or progress toward an objective.

Cost to serve: The resources and costs required to acquire, deliver to, support, and manage an account.

Concentration risk: Exposure created by excessive dependence on a small number of customers.

Joint value creation: Collaborative activity through which supplier and customer produce benefits that neither could achieve as effectively alone.

Review Questions

Short Answer Questions

1. How does a strategic account differ from a merely large account?
2. What is the purpose of a weighted account-selection score?
3. Identify four stakeholder roles commonly found in a complex business purchase.
4. Why should account plans include both leading and lagging indicators?
5. State two ethical risks associated with using AI in key account management.

Long Answer Questions

1. Explain the economic, strategic, and relational dimensions of key account management.
2. Discuss the assumptions and limitations of customer lifetime value analysis in account selection.
3. Describe a process for moving a customer relationship from responsive management to strategic partnership.
4. Explain how global account governance can combine standardization with local adaptation.
5. Evaluate the argument that revenue should be the primary criterion for selecting strategic accounts.

Analytical / Application Questions

1. Design a weighted account-selection model for a technology supplier. Select at least five criteria, justify their weights, and explain how you would test the model for bias and sensitivity.
2. A customer generates high revenue but has low contribution, frequent custom requests, and strong future growth. Develop a conditional three-year account plan that protects profitability while testing strategic potential.
3. Construct a stakeholder and competitive analysis for a complex procurement involving procurement, operations, engineering, finance, and executive leadership. Recommend governance mechanisms and measurable relationship objectives.

Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which characteristic most clearly distinguishes a strategic account from a merely large account?

A. It purchases the highest annual volume.

B. It has high mutual importance and long-term interdependence.

C. It always receives the lowest available price.

D. It is located in more than one country.

Correct Answer: B. It has high mutual importance and long-term interdependence.

Question 2

In the weighted scoring model, what must the criterion weights normally sum to?

A. 0

B. 0.5

C. 1

D. 1000

Correct Answer: C. 1

Question 3

An account has revenue of €10 million, variable costs of €6 million, service costs of €1.5 million, and attributable account-management costs of €0.5 million. What is its contribution?

A. €1 million

B. €2 million

C. €3 million

D. €4 million

Correct Answer: B. €2 million

Question 4

Which stakeholder usually controls or authorizes financial investment?

A. User

B. Technical evaluator

C. Economic buyer

D. External observer

Correct Answer: C. Economic buyer

Question 5

What is a major limitation of a constant-margin customer lifetime value formula?

A. It cannot use monetary values.

B. It assumes that margins and retention remain constant.

C. It always excludes discounting.

D. It measures only product quality.

Correct Answer: B. It assumes that margins and retention remain constant.

Question 6

Which is the best example of a leading indicator in a strategic account plan?

A. Revenue realized last year

B. Historical gross margin

C. Number of completed executive review actions

D. Prior-year customer lifetime value

Correct Answer: C. Number of completed executive review actions

Question 7

A relationship in which supplier and customer share plans, data, and improvement activities is best described as:

A. Transactional

B. Responsive

C. Collaborative

D. Unrelated

Correct Answer: C. Collaborative

Question 8

Why should strategic account investment often be staged?

A. To eliminate the need for customer involvement.

B. To test assumptions and control uncertainty.

C. To avoid measuring outcomes.

D. To guarantee that every account becomes global.

Correct Answer: B. To test assumptions and control uncertainty.

Question 9

Which practice best addresses customer concentration risk?

A. Increasing dependence on the largest customer.

B. Ignoring alternative markets.

C. Setting concentration thresholds and contingency scenarios.

D. Removing all account profitability measures.

Correct Answer: C. Setting concentration thresholds and contingency scenarios.

Question 10

What is the most appropriate role of AI in strategic account management?

A. Replace all human judgment about customers.

B. Make unreviewed decisions about confidential pricing.

C. Augment analysis subject to human review and governance.

D. Remove the need for stakeholder conversations.

Correct Answer: C. Augment analysis subject to human review and governance.