Export segmentation effectiveness: index construction and link to export performance

Foedermayr, Eva K.; Diamantopoulos, Adamantios; Sichtmann, Christina

doi:10.1080/09652540802619277

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Having said that, pragmatic considerations may "force" researchers to use PLS also in measure development studies. For example, Foedermayr et al (2009) employ PLS rather than CSA to develop a formative scale of export segmentation effectiveness and justify their choice largely on the basis of 45 CSA requires relatively large sample sizes (N = 200 is an often-mentioned minimum) and can be quite sensitive to violations of distributional assumptions (i.e., departures from multivariate normality). Moreover, as was often discussed in this paper, model (under)identification can pose a very real problem in CSA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating Formative Measures into Covariance-Based Structural Equation Models

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formatively measured constructs have been increasingly used in information systems research. With few exceptions, however, extant studies have been relying on the partial least squares (PLS) approach to specify and estimate structural models involving constructs measured with formative indicators. This paper highlights the benefits of employing covariance structure analysis (CSA) when investigating such models and illustrates its application with the LISREL program. The aim is to provide practicing IS researchers with an understanding of key issues and potential problems associated with formatively measured constructs within a covariance-based modeling framework and encourage them to consider using CSA in their future research endeavors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating Formative Measures into Covariance-Based Structural Equation Models

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is largely because existing syndicated media data include demographic information thus providing a common link between virtually every data bank available (Cannon and Rashid 1991;Ephron 1998;Walker 1998;Kemplay and Davis 2008). True single source data are also expensive and time consuming to collect making indirect matching of demographic data a low cost option for general practitioners, and demographics are the currency by which media are traded (Kemplay and Davis 2008;Foedermayr, Diamantopoulos, and Sichtmann 2009). In this study, we therefore consider the composition of the media audience considering both demographics and product usage.…”

Section: Enter the Direct Versus Indirect Matching Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of media fragmentation on audience targeting: An empirical generalisation approach

Nelson-Field

Riebe

2011

Journal of Marketing Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With increasing fragmentation, advertisers are choosing media based upon their ability to deliver specific target markets to maximise return on media expenditure. In doing so, they rely upon the claims of media providers (whether in part or in full) about how their audiences differ from those of competing offerings. In this paper we consider just how successful media have been at attracting specialist audiences. We seek empirical generalisation by including a very broad range of audience member characteristics, multiple media types, two countries and three years of data in our analysis. We find that while there are some differences in the audiences that competing media deliver, these differences are largely inconsequential when (a) considered in light of the audience differentiation claims made by the media themselves and (b) that implicit in the audience targeting concept is the notion that media audiences are highly segmented. This research will challenge advertisers' entrenched assumptions about audience targeting and provide useful benchmarks for advertisers who place any credence on media selling propositions.

show abstract

“…Since classical criteria for analyzing internal consistency are not appropriate for evaluating formative models (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer 2001;Jarvis et al 2003; Mac-Kenzie et al 2011), we followed the suggestion to associate two reflective indicators, OUI1 and OUI2, with the principal construct to test the model's external validity via a MIMIC model (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer 2001;Foedermayr et al 2009) and to assess the contribution and significance of the dimensions through weights analysis. Validation of the model was carried out in two stages: 1) via EQS 6.2, and using robust maximum likelihood estimation, a confirmatory factorial analysis (CFA) was performed on the indicators of the dimensions, analyzing reliability and convergent and discriminant validity; 2) the measurement instrument was validated for the society collective following the recommendations of Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer (2001).…”

Section: Issn: 1131 -6837mentioning

confidence: 99%

The university image: a model of overall image and stakeholder perspectives

Sabando¹,

Forcada²,

Calvo³

2019

cuadernosgestion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to further knowledge regarding the factors that have most influence on the university image, a measurement model was established in this research from the perspective of society and validated using covariance structure analysis. In addition, to ascertain whether such factors and/or their degree of influence differ among stakeholders, an evaluation of measurement invariance was conducted to find out what implications there are for image formation when the perspectives of the different stakeholders are considered. Five samples of stakeholders were used (society, prospective students, current students, graduates, and companies), totaling 1760 respondents. The results showed that affective image, perception of teaching resources, and perception of graduate training significantly influence the formation of overall university image from the perspective of society and that the image structure identified from this perspective is shared by companies, although some differences are observed. However, the model needs adapting to consider the perspectives of prospective students, current students, and graduates. The results also suggested that affective issues have a major importance in image formation from the perspective of all the stakeholders considered and that it is in the cognitive aspects where differences between them become more patent. These findings constitute a valuable contribution for marketing literature as so few works have addressed the study of the university image adopting the standpoint of society or the comparison of different stakeholders. Further, they provide guidance to university managers when determining which aspects are recommendable to act upon for the projection of a favorable image to various audiences.

show abstract

Export segmentation effectiveness: index construction and link to export performance

Cited by 11 publications

References 47 publications

Incorporating Formative Measures into Covariance-Based Structural Equation Models

Incorporating Formative Measures into Covariance-Based Structural Equation Models

The impact of media fragmentation on audience targeting: An empirical generalisation approach

The university image: a model of overall image and stakeholder perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About