## 3 Results and Findings
### Comparison of SLR and Empirical Study  
This section compares the SLR and empirical study of the current research. This comparison focuses on checking the similarity and variations between the two data sets. Figure 6 shows the comparison of factors from SLR and empirical study in graphical form.  
The factors extracted from the SLR and the survey are shown in Table 9 along with their rankings. For identifying the factors affecting CRM in GSD, a closed-ended questionnaire process was used in this research study. The data collected from the questionnaire and the appearance of positive responses, such as strongly agree and agree, were selected.  
Figure 5: A conceptual framework with hypothesis testing.  
Figure 6: Comparison of SLR and empirical studies.  
Furthermore, Figure 7 presents a comparative analysis of SLR and empirical studies based on the extracted factors. For example, it is found that empirical studies based on language differences have a high percentage of 82.2% compared to other extracted factors. Similarly, it is found that the percentage ratio of the lack of communication in SLR studies is higher compared to that of other factors.  
To check the significant difference between the rankings of CRM factors identified in the SLR and the empirical study, [PERSON]'s rank-order correlation was applied using SPSS [86]. The correlation value of [PERSON]'s coefficient was 0.636, which shows the data collected from the SLR and survey were correlated. The \(P\)-value was found to be 0.004; it demonstrates that the correlation obtained by the rankings was statistically significant as suggested in [89]. Finally, Table 10 shows the correlation between SLR and empirical study.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Factors** & **Survey\%** & **Survey Rank** & **SLR\%** & **SLR Rank** \\ \hline Lack of communication & 74.7 & 2 & 75.5 & 1 \\ \hline Language difference & 82.2 & 1 & 73.3 & 2 \\ \hline Culture difference & 51.2 & 8 & 71.1 & 3 \\ \hline Delay in services & 74.4 & 3 & 33.3 & 7 \\ \hline Lack of experience and domain knowledge & 53.4 & 7 & 31.1 & 8 \\ \hline Technical issues & 47.4 & 10 & 15.5 & 10 \\ \hline Lack of coordination and coordination & 59.7 & 4 & 55.5 & 5 \\ \hline Policies, rules, and regulations & 45.7 & 11 & 11.1 & 11 \\ \hline Time difference & 57.5 & 5 & 53.3 & 6 \\ \hline Lack of mutual understandings & 58.4 & 6 & 24.4 & 9 \\ \hline Geographical difference & 47.8 & 9 & 68.8 & 4 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 9: Comparison of SLR and empirical study factors.  
Figure 7: Comparative analysis of SLR and empirical studies factors.  
The current research study compared SLR and empirical analysis to analyze the factors negatively affecting CRM in GSD. These factors may vary from organization to organization and be different due to geographical distance across various boundaries. To determine the critical elements, if the frequency of that factor is 50%, then it is believed as a crucial factor in both SLR and empirical study.  
The outcomes of this study analyzed that three factors are extremely critical in both SLR and empirical studies, such as LD and LC. Furthermore, these findings help decide the most critical factors while working in GSD-based organizations. Therefore, these results are helpful to be aware of the practitioners performing GSD-based projects. Furthermore, these discoveries help to decide which influencing factor has the supreme influence and which factor does not much affect the CRM in GSD.