Antecedents and Outcomes of Marketing Strategy Comprehensiveness

Comprehensiveness has long been recognized as a key feature of marketing strategy decision making. However, few studies have examined its antecedents and the conditions under which it influences performance. This study attempts to contribute to a better understanding of marketing strategy by investigating project-level antecedents and outcomes of marketing strategy comprehensiveness (MSC). Drawing on contingency and institutional theories perspectives, the authors develop and test the effects of output and process rewards, task conflict, and project members’ intra- and extraindustry relationships on MSC. They find that whereas process reward and extraindustry relationships are positively related to MSC, task conflict (when combined with conflict avoidance) hinders its development. Furthermore, the results indicate that MSC has a more positive effect on performance when implementation speed is higher. Finally, the authors discover that technology and market uncertainties differentially moderate the relationship between MSC and performance; the former has a positive effect, and the latter has a negative effect. The authors also discuss the theoretical and practical implications of their findings.

[1]  Haiyang Li,et al.  When Does Trust Matter? Antecedents and Contingent Effects of Supervisee Trust on Performance in Selling New Products in China and the United States , 2002 .

[2]  Larry E. Toothaker,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions , 1991 .

[3]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Strategic decision processes in high velocity environments: four cases in the microcomputer industry , 1988 .

[4]  M. Burke.  Strategic Choice and Marketing Managers: An Examination of Business-Level Marketing Objectives , 1984 .

[5]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance , 1999 .

[6]  P. M. Podsakoff,et al.  Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects , 1986 .

[7]  Robert W. Ruekert,et al.  Marketing's Interaction with Other Functional Units: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Evidence , 1987 .

[8]  Mahmood Bahaee,et al.  Strategy-Comprehensiveness Fit and Perfor Mance , 1993 .

[9]  M. Sarkar,et al.  Alliance entrepreneurship and firm market performance , 2001 .

[10]  J. Fredrickson.  The Comprehensiveness of Strategic Decision Processes: Extension, Observations, Future Directions , 1984 .

[11]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[12]  Bernard J. Jaworski,et al.  Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences , 1993 .

[13]  Charles H. Noble,et al.  Implementing Marketing Strategies: Developing and Testing a Managerial Theory , 1999 .

[14]  D. Hambrick,et al.  The external ties of top executives: Implications for strategic choice and performance. , 1997 .

[15]  Allen M. Weiss,et al.  Marketing in Turbulent Environments: Decision Processes and the Time-Sensitivity of Information , 1993 .

[16]  R. Daft,et al.  A Tentative Exploration into the Amount and Equivocality of Information Processing in Organizational Work Units. , 1981 .

[17]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[18]  George S. Day,et al.  Assessing Advantage: A Framework for Diagnosing Competitive Superiority , 1988 .

[19]  E. Johnsen.  Richard M. Cyert & James G. March, A Behavioral Theory of The Firm, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1963, 332 s. , 1964 .

[20]  Andrew G. Kotulic,et al.  Rationality in Strategic Decision Processes, Environmental Dynamism and Firm Performance , 1995 .

[21]  Allen M. Weiss,et al.  The Nature of Organizational Search in High Technology Markets , 1993 .

[22]  C. Fornell,et al.  Customer Satisfaction, Market Share, and Profitability: Findings from Sweden , 1994 .

[23]  Charles W. Hofer.  Toward a Contingency Theory of Business Strategy , 1975 .

[24]  Margaret A. White,et al.  Environmental dynamism and strategic decision‐making rationality: an examination at the decision level , 2003 .

[25]  A. Rasheed,et al.  Rational decision‐making and firm performance: the moderating role of the environment , 1997 .

[26]  Sundar G. Bharadwaj,et al.  The quality and effectiveness of marketing strategy: Effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict in intraorganizational relationships , 1996 .

[27]  XieJinhong,et al.  Interfunctional Conflict, Conflict Resolution Styles, and New Product Success , 1998 .

[28]  R. Calantone,et al.  The Impact of Market Knowledge Competence on New Product Advantage: Conceptualization and Empirical Examination , 1998 .

[29]  P. Varadarajan,et al.  Strategic types, distinctive marketing competencies and organizational performance: A multiple measures‐based study , 1990 .

[30]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[31]  Kathleen M. Eisenhardt,et al.  Making Fast Strategic Decisions In High-Velocity Environments , 1989 .

[32]  T. Mitchell,et al.  Strategic Decision Processes: Comprehensiveness and Performance in an Industry with an Unstable Environment , 1984 .

[33]  J. Fredrickson.  The Strategic Decision Process and Organizational Structure , 1986 .

[34]  K. Jehn.  A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Intragroup Conflict , 1995 .

[35]  Michael Song,et al.  Manuscript #: RRR97-0379 THE EFFECT OF PERCEIVED TECHNOLOGICAL UNCERTAINTY ON JAPANESE NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT , 1999 .

[36]  Jinhong Xie,et al.  Antecedents and Consequences of Marketing Managers’ Conflict-Handling Behaviors , 2000 .

[37]  M. Shubik,et al.  A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. , 1964 .

[38]  V. Zeithaml,et al.  The Contingency Approach: Its Foundations and Relevance to Theory Building and Research in Marketing , 1988 .

[39]  M. Chao,et al.  A Cross-Team Framework of International Knowledge Acquisition on New Product Development Capabilities and New Product Market Performance , 2005 .

[40]  K. Pavitt.  Technologies, Products and Organization in the Innovating Firm: What Adam Smith Tells Us and Joseph Schumpeter Doesn't , 1998 .

[41]  M. Evans.  A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis , 1985 .

[42]  Daniel C. Smith,et al.  In Search of the Marketing Imagination: Factors Affecting the Creativity of Marketing Programs for Mature Products: , 1996 .

[43]  G. Day.  The Capabilities of Market-Driven Organizations , 1994 .

[44]  Jinhong Xie,et al.  Interfunctional conflict, conflict resolution styles, and new product success: a four-culture comparison , 1998 .

[45]  R. Oliver,et al.  An Empirical Test of the Consequences of Behavior-and Outcome-Based Sales Control Systems , 1994 .

[46]  Phani Tej Adidam,et al.  Antecedents and Consequences of Marketing Strategy Making: A Model and a Test , 1999 .

[47]  K. Atuahene–Gima,et al.  An exploratory analysis of the impact of market orientation on new product performance a contingency approach , 1995 .

[48]  Kwaku Atuahene-Gima,et al.  An Exploratory Analysis of the Impact of Market Orientation on New Product Performance , 1995 .