The Contingent Value of Responsive and Proactive Market Orientations for New Product Program Performance

While the benefits of being market oriented are largely accepted, a group of scholars and managers remain skeptical. Marketing scholars have sought to counter the criticisms leveled against market orientation (MO) by arguing that it has both responsive and proactive dimensions. However, few studies have empirically examined the complexity of the effects of these dimensions on firm performance. Drawing on theories of resource-based advantage and organizational search behavior, this article advances understanding by arguing that responsive and proactive market orientations have curvilinear effects on product development performance, that their interaction may be positively related to product development performance, and that their effects on new product program performance are moderated differentially by the organizational implementation conditions and marketing function power. Survey results of 175 U.S. firms indicate support for most of the hypotheses. Specifically, whereas responsive MO has a U-shaped relationship with new product program performance, proactive MO has an inverted U-shaped relationship with new product program performance. Contrary to the arguments presented here, the interaction of both orientations is negatively related to new product program performance. This study finds that both orientations are needed; however, new product program performance is enhanced when one is at higher level and the other is at lower level. Finally, responsive MO is only positively related to new product program performance under specific conditions such as when strategic consensus among managers is high. On the other hand, the positive effect of proactive MO on new product program performance is further strengthened when learning orientation and marketing power are high. Overall, this study suggests that the effects of responsive and proactive MO on new product program performance are more complex than previously theoretically argued and empirically examined.

[1]  R. Gulati.  Is Slack Good or Bad for Innovation ? , 2007 .

[2]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited , 2003 .

[3]  J. Mentzer,et al.  The Effects of Entrepreneurial Proclivity and Market Orientation on Business Performance , 2002 .

[4]  Anthony W. Ulwick.  Turn customer input into innovation. , 2002, Harvard business review.

[5]  G. Hult,et al.  Does market orientation matter?: a test of the relationship between positional advantage and performance , 2001 .

[6]  K. Atuahene–Gima,et al.  An Empirical Investigation of the Effect of Market Orientation and Entrepreneurship Orientation Alignment on Product Innovation , 2001 .

[7]  J. Mentzer,et al.  The Effects of Strategy Type on the Market Orientation–Performance Relationship , 2000 .

[8]  Kwaku Atuahene-Gima,et al.  Cross-Functional Influence in New Product Development: An Exploratory Study of Marketing and R&D Perspectives , 2000 .

[9]  O. Ferrell,et al.  The effect of market orientation on product innovation , 2000 .

[10]  Shelby D. Hunt,et al.  Marketing’s contribution to business strategy: market orientation, relationship marketing and resource‐advantage theory , 2000 .

[11]  Bernard J. Jaworski,et al.  Market-driven versus driving markets , 2000 .

[12]  John C. Narver,et al.  Total market orientation, business performance, and innovation , 2000 .

[13]  James M. Sinkula,et al.  Learning Orientation, Market Orientation, and Innovation: Integrating and Extending Models of Organizational Performance , 1999 .

[14]  James M. Sinkula,et al.  The synergistic effect of market orientation and learning orientation on organizational performance , 1999 .

[15]  James M. Hulbert,et al.  To Serve or Create? Strategic Orientations toward Customers and Innovation , 1999 .

[16]  John Hulland,et al.  Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: a review of four recent studies , 1999 .

[17]  Jin K. Han,et al.  Market Orientation and Organizational Performance: Is Innovation a Missing Link? , 1998 .

[18]  John C. Narver,et al.  RESEARCH NOTES AND COMMUNICATIONS CUSTOMER-LED AND MARKET-ORIENTED : LET ’ S NOT CONFUSE THE TWO , 2008 .

[19]  Rohit Deshpandé,et al.  Measuring Market Orientation: Generalization and Synthesis , 1998 .

[20]  G. Hult,et al.  Innovation, Market Orientation, and Organizational Learning: An Integration and Empirical Examination , 1998 .

[21]  Mark A. Mone,et al.  Organizational Decline and Innovation: A Contingency Framework , 1998 .

[22]  J. Fredrickson,et al.  TOP MANAGEMENT TEAM AGREEMENT ABOUT THE STRATEGIC DECISION PROCESS: A TEST OF SOME OF ITS DETERMINANTS AND CONSEQUENCES , 1997 .

[23]  Clayton M. Christensen,et al.  CUSTOMER POWER, STRATEGIC INVESTMENT, AND THE FAILURE OF LEADING FIRMS , 1996 .

[24]  Ajay K. Kohli,et al.  Market Intelligence Dissemination across Functional Boundaries , 1996 .

[25]  K. Atuahene–Gima,et al.  Market Orientation and Innovation , 1996 .

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

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

[28]  John C. Narver,et al.  Market Orientation and the Learning Organization , 1995 .

[29]  C. Prahalad,et al.  Competing for the Future , 1994 .

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

[31]  Barton A. Weitz,et al.  Learning Orientation, Working Smart, and Effective Selling , 1994 .

[32]  John C. Narver,et al.  Does Competitive Environment Moderate the Market Orientation-Performance Relationship?: , 1994 .

[33]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  The myopia of learning , 1993 .

[34]  J. Workman.  Marketing's Limited Role in New Product Development in One Computer Systems Firm , 1993 .

[35]  A. Griffin,et al.  An Interim Report on Measuring Product Development Success and Failure , 1993 .

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

[37]  Frances J. Milliken,et al.  The role of managerial learning and interpretation in strategic persistence and reorientation: An empirical exploration , 1992 .

[38]  S. Floyd,et al.  Managing strategic consensus: the foundation of effective implementation , 1992 .

[39]  Charlotte H. Mason,et al.  Collinearity, power, and interpretation of multiple regression analysis. , 1991 .

[40]  J. March.  Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning , 1991, STUDI ORGANIZZATIVI.

[41]  S. West,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions , 1991 .

[42]  Bernard J. Jaworski,et al.  Market orientation: The construct, research propositions, and managerial implications. , 1990 .

[43]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[44]  Vijay Mahajan,et al.  New Product Diffusion Models in Marketing: A Review and Directions for Research: , 1990 .

[45]  John C. Narver,et al.  The Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability , 1990 .

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

[47]  C. B. Schoonhoven.  Problems with contingency theory: testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency "theory.". , 1981, Administrative science quarterly.

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

[49]  Robert N. Stern,et al.  The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. , 1979 .