Marketing's Influence within the Firm

Homburg, Christian; Workman, John P.; Krohmer, Harley

doi:10.2307/1251942

Cited by 296 publications

(372 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

356

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the one hand, many researchers have viewed cross-functional interactions from a cooperation aspect, focusing on the value of interfunctional coordination and communication (e.g., Griffin and Hauser 1992;Moorman and Rust 1999;Narver and Slater 1990). On the other hand, others have viewed cross-functional interactions from a competition aspect, focusing on interdepartmental rivalry (e.g., Homburg, Workman, and Krohmer 1999;Levitt 1969). However, although functional areas compete with one another in the pursuit of divergent individual goals and strategic priorities (e.g., Houston et al 2001), they must also cooperate so that they work toward the firm's common interests (Narver and Slater 1990).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-Functional “Coopetition”: The Simultaneous Role of Cooperation and Competition Within Firms

Luo

Slotegraaf

Pan

2006

Journal of Marketing

287

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extant marketing literature tends to view cross-functional relationships as primarily cooperative or competitive in nature, but not both. In contrast, this research focuses on cross-functional "coopetition" (i.e., the joint occurrence of cooperation and competition across functional areas within a firm). Using responses from midlevel managers and top executives, the authors find that cross-functional coopetition enhances a firm's customer and financial performance. The authors further show that this influence is mediated by market learning, indicating that performance returns to cross-functional coopetition occurs through an underlying learning mechanism.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-Functional “Coopetition”: The Simultaneous Role of Cooperation and Competition Within Firms

Luo

Slotegraaf

Pan

2006

Journal of Marketing

287

246

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One is study of the influence of the marketing department (Homburg, et al 1999;Moorman and Rust 1999;Verhoef and Leeflang 2009) and another is market orientation research, of which research that views market orientation as a set of processes is the most relevant.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our empirical research on Japanese firms provides a case from one such environment, where the power of the marketing department is considered to be weaker than that of their Western counterparts. It is argued that the marketing department is very strong in the US, while relatively weak in Germany and Japan (Homburg, Workman, Jr., and Krohmer 1999). Japanese firms generally are, however, not at all market-disoriented.…”

Section: Credibility Of Market Information and The Marketing Departmementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamism Inside the MO Box: the Credibility of Market Information as A Key Factor in Market Orientation

Yamashita

Uehara

Sasaki

et al. 2014

Proceedings of the 2010 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our research contributes mainly to two fields: one concerns the influence of the marketing department, and the other is the study of market orientation, especially research that views market orientation as an information process. Motivated by discussion of marketingʼs declining influence within the company, we investigated the marketing departmentʼs credibility and influence in Japanese firms, where it has traditionally wielded weaker power than in Western firms. From intensive interviews with marketing professionals, we find that the lack of credibility of market information is a crucial factor that undercuts the influence of the marketing department. The results of our questionnaire survey indicate that the credibility of market information has a more positively significant effect on market orientation than does marketing influence.

show abstract

“…Organizational behaviorist researchers (Cyert and March, 1963;March and Simon, 1958) have also emphasized that firms are composed of managers who have conflicting goals. Following this coalitional view of the firm, Thompson (1967) introduces the concept of 'dominant coalition' to account for variations in the power of various units to define situations, propose solutions, and influence the strategic direction of the firm (Anderson, 1982;Day and Wensley, 1983;Homburg, Workman and Krohmer, 1999). 3.…”

Section: The Choice Of Objective Of Focusmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of resource‐strategy correspondence on marketing performance—financial performance tradeoffs

Furrer

Alexandre

Sudharshan

2007

Journal of Strategic Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We suggest that the relationships between strategy and financial performance and between strategy and marketing performance depend on the resource bundle and strategy of a firm. The better the correspondence between strategy and resource bundle, the better the performance. We empirically test and find support for this explanation. By building empirically calibrated models of the marketing and financial performance, we are able to show that, indeed, the optimum strategies for the two are not the same and more importantly that the difference varies depending on the resource bundle of a firm.KEYWORDS: Resource-based theory; strategy; coherence; performance; tradeoffs INTRODUCTIONAs one considers a firm's success, it is tempting to assume that marketing success is highly correlated to financial success. Further consideration would lead to the question of what is the relationship between the success of a brand or a product in the market place and that of firm's shareholder returns. In more general terms the question may be posed as one of providing a parsimonious explanation for the differences between the two: Traditionally, marketing activities focus on success in the product marketplace. Increasingly, however, top management requires that marketing view its ultimate purpose as contributing to the enhancement of shareholder returns (Day and Fahey, 1988). This change has led to the recognition that the relationship between marketing and finance must be managed systematically; no longer can marketers afford to rely on the traditional assumption that positive product-market results will translate automatically into the best financial results. (Srivastava, Shervani and Fahey, 1998, p. 2) The above quotation and the extant literature suggest that the traditional assumption that positive product-market results will translate automatically into the best financial results is not true. We propose a resource-strategy correspondence explanation to understand the differences in discrepancy between the two performance measures across firms in an industry.Our paper is set in the literature streams in marketing strategy and strategic management that examine the relationships between resources, strategies, competitive advantage and performance. If early studies have investigated the relationships between market share and profitability (e.g., Buzzell and Gale, 1987), over the last decade, the identification of the relationship between strategy, resources, and competitive advantage has become particularly important in the development of marketing strategy thought and practice (e.g., Bharadwaj, Varadarajan and Fahy, 1993;Capron and Hulland, 1999;Day and Van den Bulte, 2002;Day and Wensley, 1988;Dickson, 1996; Morgan, 1995, 1996;Srivastava, Fahey and Christensen, 2001;Srivastava et al., 1998). Indeed, the primary focus of this stream of the marketing strategy literature has been on identifying sources of competitive advantage, debating over the merits of various performance objectives for assessing competitive strength, and address...

show abstract

Marketing's Influence within the Firm

Cited by 296 publications

References 82 publications

Cross-Functional “Coopetition”: The Simultaneous Role of Cooperation and Competition Within Firms

Cross-Functional “Coopetition”: The Simultaneous Role of Cooperation and Competition Within Firms

Dynamism Inside the MO Box: the Credibility of Market Information as A Key Factor in Market Orientation

The impact of resource‐strategy correspondence on marketing performance—financial performance tradeoffs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About