Nonmarket and market strategies, strategic uncertainty and strategic capabilities

Abstract

Purpose Amidst rapid development in emerging economies, greater emphasis on public–private partnerships and a more complex regulatory environment, nonmarket strategy (NMS) is now widely viewed as a key component of a firm’s overall strategy. This paper aims to investigate how nonmarket and market strategies are influenced by strategic uncertainties and capabilities and ultimately drive firm performance. Design/methodology/approach A survey addressing strategic uncertainties, capabilities, NMS and market strategy and firm performance was administered online to 193 practicing managers in the USA. Measures for competitive strategy (i.e. cost leadership and differentiation), NMS, management and marketing capabilities, competitive and technology uncertainties and firm performance were adopted from or based on previous work. Hypotheses were tested via SmartPLS. Findings Emphasis on NMS was linked to high marketing capability, high competitive uncertainty and high technology uncertainty. Cost leaders were more likely than differentiators to emphasize on NMS, although all three strategies were positive drivers of performance. NMS appears to be viewed as a part of an integrated strategic approach by managers in many organizations. Research limitations/implications The sample included mangers in multiple industries. Self-typing scales were used to assess strategic emphasis and firm performance. Practical implications Emphasis on NMS can promote firm performance, but the relationship is complex. Strategic managers should align the NMS with organizational capabilities and a market-oriented strategy appropriate for the firm. Originality/value This paper provides empirical support for a model linking select strategic uncertainties, capabilities, market strategy and NMS and firm performance. It supports NMS as a key performance driver, but with links to uncertainties and capabilities that differ from those of market strategies.

Do political connections matter for firm innovation? Evidence from emerging markets in Central Asia and Eastern Europe

“…More specifically, we show that the effects of political connections are not necessarily uniform across different types of innovations. Furthermore, we show that there are potential tradeoffs for innovation when firms engage in multiple non-market strategies (i.e., bribery), thus adding to recent research on the interplay between non-market and market strategies (Liedong et al 2017;Parnell, 2018). Finally, from an empirical standpoint, we focus our attention on a less-researched context (i.e., Eastern Europe and Central Asia) that provides an auspicious ground for examining non-market strategies at work in emerging and lessdeveloped economies (Ge et al 2017;Wang et al 2018).…”

Dynamic Capabilities Revisited: Lessons from Logistics

“…A growing stream of literature provides empirical support for the connection between strategic capabilities and performance (Agyapong, Ellis and Domeher, 2016;Cacciolatti and Lee, 2016;Parnell, 2018). While it is clear from the literature that strategic capabilities are important for the successful performance of firms, they do not inform us as to how firms can reconfigure their resources in times of rapid change.…”

The primacy of the student in the age of consumer driven higher education

“…Here we would argue for any university to thrive it would need to both borrow from the clear positioning of the market environment but also aspects of the non-market environment such as regulatory oversight. Such a hybrid model for organisational practice is not without precedence and has great utility in other sectors (Nee, 1992;Parnell, 2018). However, it is within the HE sector that the embrace of the hybrid model of consumerism can both benefit from the competitive power of the key performance metrics as well as maintain the primacy of the student position.…”