011
Market Orientatiora:
Development and empirical valiti;~tiot~ of tn.0 syrnrr~ctric c o n ~ p o r ~ e mcasut-cs nt of rnat.ltct oricr~tntion
Exterided a b s t r a c t The main contributions o f this stutly arc
;I
rcfinctl iiial-kct oricntntion construct, two symmetric
component measur-es of'111:lrkct olicntation
--
c ~ ~ s t o r n 01-icntatiori cr anti competitor orientation, anti a
three-step respecification procedure for establisliiiig ~~niciimcnsionaiityand n po.s/cr.iori content vaiitlity in multi-indicator nicasurcs. I ~ ~ i r - i I i c ~ - mc on ~i ~~ ~c ,i ~ i ccvitlcr~cc ;ll r-c~~cals flint \vliile cornpctitor orientation is positively related to firms' iiiarkct sllar-c, n cusioliicr orientation is detrirncntal to ~ co~npctitivcc ~ ~ \ / i r o n r n c ~ i t s . firms' return on assets for manufacturing firms i r less
Market orientation is positioned as marketing's corilrib~itionto b;isiiiess strategy (I-Iunt & Lanibe,
2000) and is considered an important strntcgic or-icntatioi~ ( e . ~Gatignon
S(
Xucreb, 1997).
Stoelhorst and van Raaij (2004) positiorl market orientation as ~narketing's explanation of performa~iccdiffcrcntials b c t ~ v c c : i~
i
.
I l ~ c s catlv;~~lt;lgcs ol' iiinrkct o~.icntation arc generally
aguetl to be a conscqilcnce o f iiiipr-o\zet! 1nn1-kct-scnsirig cnllabil~ticsand t l u ~ si~nprovctlmarket rcsponsive~icss,particulnrly in I ~ C I l~ostilc -c anti ~ ~ ~ l p r c i l i c t ocn\~ironnieiits ble (Day, 1999; Jnworski & Kollli, 1993). Kohli
nilti
Ja\vorski (I 990) criiy>Iiasi~,c[hat markct orientation and otl~cr.t ~ r i c i ~ f n t i o ~ ~ s
come at a cost. For this reason, i t is csscnti;\l rlint tlic hottom-liilc consequences o f firms' market orientation arc critically assessed and cval~~atccl (Day, 1994). But what is market orientation?
011the
basis of a review o f tlic market oricnt;ition 1itcratu1-c,i t hccoiiies cvitlcnt that a multitutle of
dcti~iitionsof tile market oricntation construct co-csi\t. Moreover, the 1itcrat~11-c rcvicw reveals that the empirical research investigating market oricntnticiii is bnseil on different measures o f riiarket orientation, both in terms o f the measures' hctori;ll striictiirc as ~ v e l las the distribution ofintiicators across the factors. For these reasons, this sttitly is tlesigi~edto determine tile salient cli~iiensionsof tlle market oricntatio~lconstnict ariil to tlcvcloi> a~iclc~rni~ir-ic;~I;y tcst lnc;rstlrcs !lint corrcsl~ontlto tllesc dimensions. Furthcrn~orc,the study is tlcsigrlctl to i~ivcstigntctlic influcncc o f an iiiiprovctl Incasurc o f rnarkct oricnt;ltion
011
111c c ~ i i l i i ~ i c ; i~sls c s s i r ~ c i01' ~ ~ 111c rcI;i!iu~isi~ipI)ct\vcc~i~li;i~.kct
orientation and firm performancc
Market orieiitation is an organizational
~ L I ~ ~ L Itlctlicnted I-C
to ticlivcrirlg supcrior custorner valile
(Narver 81 Slater, 1990; I-iornburg "2 Pflesscr, 2000; Day, 1999). A market-oriented culture is manifested in tlic activities ant1 processes of tlic iii-m (Slatcr ~k Narvcr, 1998, see also Slatcr 6( Narver, 1995). ?'he market-or-icntcti activities
o r firms are organizationwide
;111il I ~ ~ O C C S S C S
generation and dissemination o f i~itclligcncepertaining to customers and cornl)etitors, and action taken on the basis of tlic iritclligencc (Kohli 8 Jaworski, 1990; Narvcr & Slater, 1990). Subsequently, thc working definition of markct orientation co~isistso f six tlicorctically distinct components. T h c six tl~corcticalcomponents forin t\\,o syni~nctricand Inore general components, customer oricntation and coml~clitoro r i c ~ i t ; i l i o ~?‘lit ~ . workirlg dcfi~iitiori o f market orientation provides the basis for tile opcrationalizatioii of incasi~rcsprcscritcd in lnorc detail below.
'l'hc rclinctl m:~rkcto r i c ~ ~ t a l i oc ~o i~ ~ s ~ ~cci~ul>i.isi~ig .t~ct \ i u tl~coiclic:illytlistii~ctco~nl,o~lcrits provitlctl the basis for a theoretical assessment ol'existilig IiicasLtres of ~ n a r k c toricntation (Narver & Slatcr, 1990; Kohli et al. 1993; 1)cslipandC LC: I:arlcy, 199s; Matsi~noSr Mcntzcr, 2000) in tcrrns o f the degree to vvhicli thcy acliie\,c n pt.ior.i contciit validity (Nunnally & I3crnstein, 1994). Tlie existing measures of markct oricntation d o not acliievc
(1
p1.iol.i content validity as they arc construct
deficient - partici~larly wit11 respect to ~ a p p i ~ icoilipctitoi.-01-ie~itctl g ;rcti\iities. I'lie necessary indicators rccluirctl to achieve
v;ilitlity ;ire cjl>inincd Sroii~ I'roScssor Slatcr
( 1 / I I . ~ ( J I . ~~ O I I S I I . \ I ~ I
(personal corrcspondcnce, 2003).
Tlie distinction bctwcen n priori conterit valitlity (before data collection) and n postet.iori content validity (after n ~ e a s u r erespecification basctl on data) is cinpl~asizctlin this study. T h e logic for this
distinction is: it is equally irilportant to have sufficient intlicators in one's questionnaire prior to the data collection as it is to have sufficient indicators in one's rcsl~ecificclmeasures. T h e sufficient amount o f indicators is determined b y two things: the definition and theoretical dimensionality o f the underlying construct and the minimum number of inilic;~torsreq~liredto tap a given theoretical component. Traditional respecification procctlures basctl on the establishment o f unidirnensionality by eliminating indic:~tors with low indicator-lo-total corl-elation tend to irivoivc atheoretical elirllination of indicators. .l'lic possible conseclilcncc of i~tlicorcticalelimination o f indicaiors is ~tnidimensionalbut construct ilclicicnt i111d tI~crcSorc(I ~ i o . s / c ~ ~colitc~it ~ i o ~ ~invalid i measures.
This ot~scr-vationgives rise to tlic tlcvclol~rncntof a ~ i o v c lthrec-slcp respecification procedure for establisl~ingu r i i t l i m c n s i o ~ i a l in~i l t i
rl
j~ii.vfeiici~.i collierit \~;iliiIity iri ~ii\rlti-intlicatorn1casilrcs. In
relation to this stuciy, tile novel tlircc-stel? procccli~rcnvoiils illc cli~iiinntioriof' two indicators critical to
cr poster.iori
content v:~litlityoil tlic ~ric:~surcs US cusiomcr 01-icli[;rtionand competitor orientation.
?'he thrcc-step procedure :~lr;oc:ipli~rcsI I I : I I I ~potcriti;~liy~problc~ii;~[ic soirrccs o f incnsuremcrit er-ror as well as procedural sources of contciit v;tlitlity
tI1:1t
otlicr\vise woi~ltl liave been neglected.
Unidimensionality is estnblishcd by mcnns o f the ~iicasllrcs' composite reliability and average variance extracted (Forncll and I-arckcr, 198 1 ; 13iigc~ziCC Y i , 1988). Otlicr aspects assessing ~ncasurcs'construct validity al~plictiin tlic slutly arc c o l ~ v c r ~ v;~liility, c ~ ~ t discl-iri~iriarit~(alidity,a r ~ d nornological validity (Forr~ellant1 L,arckcr, 198 I ; Ariilc~sonC ! Cicrbiiig, 1958, scc also Niriinally & Bernstein, 1994).
The empirical foundation of the st~liiyis a survey o f ilal~islimanlifr~cttrringand R&D-bascd finns.
308 ( X O s have provided iisefui rcspoiiscs to a qlicstionnairc assessing films' market oricritation, market share as well as tlie stantlartl coritl.oI vnriztblcs
011
firms' pcrSorninncc. ?'iiis dain is siipportetl
by census data containing fil-~ns'~ c l u r ron ~ assets. Gi\,cn the six tl~corclicalconiponcnts of tlic refined niarltet orientation constrirct, ninetee11 tlicorctical menningS~rlfictorial str~ictl~ses (sctup as measurement models in AMOS 5.0) arc testeil w i t l ~ conlirrnatory I'i~ctor i~llolysis in o r ~ l c r to establish a valid measure o f markct orientation. Tliesc measurcmcnt rriodcls include thc fnctorial structures suggested by Narver and Slatcr (1990) nntl Kolili ct nl. (1 993). As indicated above, the best fitting nlensurernent model to the onderiying data is cornposcd by two symmetric component measures of market orientation - a rneasrlrc of ctlstoriicr oricntntion and a measure of competitor orientation.
The two improved component lncasurcs o f mnrkct oricr~lntionarc then investigated, togetlier with the original Narver and Slatcr (1990) global nlcaslirc o f ~ n a r k c to r i c n t n t i o ~ ~with , respect to thcir i i ~ f l u e ~ l con e aspects of fir-ms' performance in diffcrcnt cnvir-onmc~~tal conditions. On the basis of the sample data, en~piricalcvidcnce rcvcals tlic n c g a t i ~ crclatiousliip bct\recn custorner orientation and return on asscts for niant11:lcturing firnis in less conipctitivc ciivironmcnts. F~irthcrn~orc, thc ~.csultsilltlicntc no rcl:ilion
cl\vccii 1 - 1 1 sco~iilictitor orictit:~iionant1 rcturil on asscts and customer orientation has
110 relatio~isl~ip \villi
rcturn on asscts i n lliglily compctitivc cnviro~inicnts.
Fii-111s' markct sllarc is csl)l~!incti by co~npclitororicnt;ition, 0111 not by custorncr oricnlntioil. 7'11~ stucly's rcs~iltsalso intlicatc that tlic irnl~r.o\~otI c o ~ l i i ? o r ~ lncnsurcs c~~t of custoincr orientatioli and coinpetitor oricntation providc iiiiicll nor-c nunnccd
;111tl aj>j~lic:iblcinformation
aspects o f firms' mnskct oricntntion i n rciatio~i
10
about t l ~ cilnportant
pcri'orrn;l~icc in diffcrcnt coinlxtitivc
e~lviroumcnts.
Thc influence of competitor oricntation and partic\ilal.ly cilstomcr orientation on firms' rctur-rl of assets in different ciivironmerital contiitions is provocntivc. Whilc thc present study cannot rlcvcr can be a negative (Slater and disconfirm the general argument that being rn~~rkct-oriciitctI er aj>parcntly can be a negative. Narver, 1994), it can rcfine i t by ar-guiilg tl~ata c u s l o ~ ~ i oricntntion 'The apl)arcnt conclusion is that firin' nctivitics pertaining to ~~ntlcrstanding and anticipating changes in tilcir rnarkcts d o not generate silllcrior custonicr- valnc. A 11uzzling rcsult is tlic detrimental effect o f custonlcr oricntation in less co~npclitivc c~~vironlncnts.Itvidcncc from the majority of
international studies on inarket orieritatioii i~itiicatetliat ~narketingactivities and capabilities are indeed beneficial, but that marketing activities rlccti focus ;!ntl nir~stbc implemented by a profitable purpose and not just blindly executed.
The prcserit data d o not provide iliforinntioli about tllc possible i~ntlerlyiiigreasons for these results. I~lowcvcr,thc findings give risc to sonic l:cncr;~l ~licc111;rlic~ns o f 11i;lrinpcrial relevance. Sincc marketing and market-oriented ac(ivities require allocation ol' resources, thc costlbcnclit ratio of' these activities must be consitlerctl on n colitinuoils basis to ensure their high quality and effectiveness. The findings indicate, howcvcr, tlint the quality and effectiveness o f market-oriented activities in Danish n~anufacturingi11tli1strics may iicctl ilnprovemc~lt.T h e rcst~ltsof tlic present study therefore call for a stronger managerial cnil~llrisison cfkctive impiernentation and control o f ~narketingand market-oricnted activitics.
As n concluding rcn-iark, mucil illll>rovc~l~cr~l is n l ~ i ~ ; ~ r - c ~still l t l yr,cctlc(l for Danish ~nnnul'acturing
alld R&D-based firms to acliicve the positive crf'ccis o f markct 01-ic~~tation o n firm perforinance as is obscrvcd abroad. T h c gcncral rccl~~irerrlci~ls to r n c c ~ t l ~ i s ol>jcctive are a Inore efficient organization of market-oriented nctivitics in p n r ~ l i c l with an eSficicnt execi~tion o f busillcss stratcyies based on the intciligcncc provitlctl Ily lirllts' 111arkctoricntntion.
Anderson, J. C.
C '
Gerbing, D. W . (l9SS), "Sti-uctur;\I Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review
Bi~ilclii~, 103(3), 4 1 1-423. and Recoillrnended Two-Stcp Approach", Ps,~choiog'ic~n/
Dagazzi, Ii.1'.
c '
Yi, Y. (1988), "Oil tlic Evillu:ltion ol' Slructl~rnlI:cjt~nliorl Motleis." .Joitr~r7nl?f tile
Acacir:t,7)~q/Mcrrltetit~gScience, 10, pp. 74-94,
Day, George S. (1994), "The Caj~abi!itiesof Market-Driven Organizations". Jo~trnalof Marketiilg, SS(October), pp. 37-52.
Day, George S. (1 999), Tile A.lnt,kel Drii~etlOrgor~iioiiori- lJritioaiot~ciit7g,alirocting, and keeping valzrable customers, The Free Press.
Deslipande, R.
S(
Farley, J . U . (1998). Measu~-ingMarket Oricrilutioii: Generalization and Synthesis.
Jo~rrr~ol ofMorkel-i"oczsced Manogenicr~/,2(3), 2 13-232.
Fornell, C. & Larcker, D.F. (198 I), "Eva!uatiiig Stl-nctural fxquation Modeis with Ur~observable Variables ant1 Measi~rc~r~ent Error," Jolo.rm/ o/'Aliii.kctilrg /r'e.sc~o~~cir, I ti(Fcbnlary), pp. 39-50.
Gatignon, Hubert & Xuereb, Jean-Marc (1997), "Strategic Orientation of the Finn and New I'roduct Performance", Joztrnal ofA4flrltelirlg Rcsenr.cl7, 34 (February), pp. 77-90.
I-ionib~irg,C. & Pflesser, C. (2000), "A Multiple-Layer- Modci of Marltet-Oriented Organizational Culture: Measurement Issues and Performance Outcomc~",./ori~~rinl of ,\4~1/.keiir7gReseorcll, 37(1 I),
pp. 449-462.
Hunt, S. D. & Lambc, C. J . (2000). "Markcrini;'~ co~itribution to business strategy: market orientation, relationship marketing and resource-ailvantage tlieory". in/er-notior7a/ Jo~rrnal of Mar~agerneritRevieila, 2(1), pp. 17-43.
Jaworski, 13. J .
&L
Kollli, A. K. (1993). "Market O ~ i c ~ ~ t a t i oAntecedents n ant1 Consequences".
Jo~tr.nalofMorkcting, 57(July), pp. 53-70.
Kohli, A. K. Sc Jaworski, 13. J . (1990). Market Orientation: Tlle Const~x~ct, Research Propositions, arid Managerial Implications. Jolirriol of A , l ~ ~ i . I i c t54(Al>ril), i~~~, pp, I - I S. Kollli, A. K., Jaworski, B. J., C" K u ~ n a ~A., (19'93). "MAl1K011.
I\
Measi~rcn~cnt of Market
of hfarkelirig Reseorcl~,XXX(Novcmbcr), pp. 467-477. Orientation". Jo1irt1~11
Matsuno, K. 61 Mentzer, J. T. (2000), "The Effects of Stratcgy 7'yl)c on the Market OrientationPerformance Relationship", Jozrr.rio/ i!f',t~ior.kctir~g, 04 (October). pp. 1 - 16.
Narver, J. C. & Slatcr, S. F. (1 990). ''Tile Effect of a Miirkct Orientation on Business Profitability". J07lrt1iilofhfor~lcetit~g, 54(4), pp. 20-35.
Nunnally, J.C. 61 Bcrnstein, 1.1-1. (1994) P . ~ j ' ~ ~ I i o r ~7'lrcory ~ c t r - i ~(3rd ed.) McGi-aw I l i l l , Inc. Slater, Stanley F. & Narvcr, John. C. (1994). "Does Com~~ctitivc Environnient Moderate the Market
Orientation-Perfo1211ance Relationship?" .Jozir~rinlofh~kir~ketir~g, 5Y(I), pp. 46-55. Slatcr, Stanley F. & Narver, .loI~n.C, (1995). "Mnrhct Oricntntion and the 1,earning Organization".
Jo~cr~ial of l2.iar~kefirig, 59(3), pp. 63-74, Slater, Stanley F. R: Narver, John. C. (1998). "Customer-led and market-oriented: let's not confuse the two". Strolegic Mat~ogenlenf.Joio-,701, 19(1O), 11p 100 1 - 1006.
A&.LQne ntati0 n_
--
-
-- -- - ---- --
or-Product innovation*
-
Ljiljana B O ~ I C * '
Abstract In the literature, inarket oriantalio~lis dciincd as n busirlcss cultiire o r beliaviour that I C ~ , I ~ Sto b ~ ~ s i n e sS sL I C C C S S , fts infl~~cricc on ~r-ociuctinnovation is o n e rvay to enhance business perforrliance. Tlie goal oi tilis paper is :o a ; ~ ; l l ~ stile e impacr of bchavioural coinponents of markct orielitntion on tile introduction o f product innovation regarding its novelty. Research of this type was tile subject o f the Lukas and Ferell (2000) study. Followiilg tllcir :~ppro;~cli, but liyl~otl~esising different relat~onsllips,rcscarctl on tile Impact oi' tlic bcIi,~viour.~l coiliponcnts of rnarket orientation o n product inilovation in Croati,ln conipnnies n.;ls conducted. Tlie intensity of [he market orien ltion cc .1>poiieiirs is mensuret! using tile MKTOll scale dcvclopeti by Narvcr
ailti
Si:iter (I~IOO),wl~oscn l r l ~ i o , i i10 l ~ m.lrkct orientation
is accepted in this paper.
Keywords:
customer
orientation,
conipetitor
orientation,
interfunctional
coordination, product innovation, MKTOR
JEL classification: M31
' 7liirpnpr uur o~i,iai!,puiiii~iirdr!r Privrcdln k r c i r n j a i ckol,i~il~rk.a yollrika (Eroirornic T ~ u r drind ~ Eronomir P o i i d A'o. 107, 2W6, pp. 46-65. ''
Ljihnnd fioif( R?~ J ! ! Iq/~ Il<: t ~ o n o ~ A!,c~
---
--
Cornpallies make great elfolti in tllclr ,!rtc~lil,t to bc iiiorc sircccssl~~l in niccting the nccds o f tlieir consurncr5
tlinri
tlirir riin!pctltors, c o ~ ~ s c ~ u e n ttol yachieve a
t 1>c1;c1I ) I J ~ ! I I C $ S better p o s i ~ i o n in tile ~ : ~ n r k c.111cl cor;sumers
p c r I o r ! ~ i , ~ r ~ c' 1c' 1. 1 ~ n c c ~ l s o f
and tlie activitics o f competitors of'tcn srimuiate companies t o
introduce t o tile 1n.3rkct eitlicr quite rnoclliic~l o r 11c:v p r o ~ i ~ i c t os ,r t o supplement tlieir product l ~ n eby ncw products, it
15
hy iririovatioii tilac conipanies fry t o
improve their business perfor~nanceantl rlic~umarket share. M;~rketorientation in a conip,ln!. c o ~ l t r ~ b u l ct os
211
11111)ro\,edi ~ ~ i ~ i c r s t a n d ioi'tllc rlg
~ n a r k c t .Tile philosol~hical b.icligro~incl o l market o r i c n t a t i o ~ i I S the concept o f marketing, the bnsic assi~rnption11por1n , l i ~ c iI I~ is iouriclcd, 1.11~ systcr~inticstudy o f market orientation bcgan at tlie beginning ol'tlie 1990s. In this respect important are the viorks o f Koliii and Jnworski (1990) and Narver a n d Slater (1990) w h o began t o s t u d y niarket orient;~tiontlirougll a rlumber o f octivi:ies related t o the marketing concept in busincss, Tlie ;iutliori vicw 1113rkc1oriei~!ation from different angles. I < o h l ~ and Jarvorski (199I)) clctiile ir:arkct .
oi~cr:ta!ion in terms o f
.
organisationai beliaviour, o r actlrrlt:es rcI.itirig to b~islncis,nciordrng to markctirig pr~nciplcs, wl~ercasNnrvcr
Si.iter (I'i'IOj \ ~ u ~ lI Iy i r i rcrilis o l orgn~iir.itional
311~1
culture. i n line with this, I
departments
responsiveness.
w ~ t l i i n the
Narver
and
o r g a ~ i i s a ~ i o nantl
(3) the
Siater (1090) v ~ c w markct
organisationai
orientation
as a
unidirnensional construct macle u p or rllrce beliavio~iral components: customer orientation, competitor orientatior~ ai~cl i n t c r l t ~ ~ i c t i o i i nclo o r d i n a t i o n and two decision making criteria: long-term Sociis 2nd profit Socus. In addition t o tile above mcntroricd ;lutllr,rt llic coi~ccpt[JIr l ~ . t r k coricn!atior~ ~ has been addressed by a n u m b e r o f othcrs (Ihy, 1993; DcslipandC a n d Fariey, 1998; Deshpandi. a n d Webster, 1989) who in their studies, ro a varying extent, advocated the basic assumptions o f thc above mentloncd approaches. Lafferty a n d 1-Iult (1999) singled o u t four cliaractcristics often citctl in liter;~ture which are all
independent of approach. They are
fo1lon.s: custorner orientation, the
;IS
iniportance of iritclligencc d~sscmin.ition,interfunctional coorclination of market activities, and responsiveness to market activitier by unclcrtaking appropriate actions. 1r is wort11 r i i c ~ i t i ! )11131 ~ ~ ~t11v ~ ~ I~I
, I ~ ~ ~ I > , I ( I I V \ , ~ r c1101 q t ~ i t copposite or
I ~ I ~ ~ I O I I C ~
contradictory. As construed hy Kolili a n ~ iJa\vorsk~, niarkct orientation as an element o f organisational bcliaviour (1990) means tile tlioroilgli ol>erationaiisation of tile marketing conccpt. This concrpt
IS
grourldcd on the key activities of a
company which opcratcs according ro tile ~iiarketco~iceptp r i ~ i c ~ p l eOs .n the other hand, Nnwer and Slarcr (1990) intcgrntc tlic csscncc of illasker concept in a better way by including under rile niarkct oricntation concept all the attributes of tile marketing concept and by poi~itingour I I I C long-term pcsspective of profit making. Accortling t o thcni, rn.irkcring orlciitdtion co~istirllrcs nn clclncnt oi' business culture, the acceptance of wliicli lends to positive resulis In business. Viewed from this perspective, Nal-vcr arid Slater's appronth may be consitlered more coherent. This approacli has been adopted in this p , ~ p c ras tlie tlieorctical basis for studying the impact o f components of rnarkcr orlentation o n product innovation. The two main npproaclies provide two ~i~etliotls ~oi' mcxuririg market orientation:
MK'I'OR (Narvcr and Slater, 1990) .ind h~IARI
ii1.11krt
r > r i r ~ l i . l ~ i(Rurkrlt, i~~l 1992; Dciig and
Dart, 1994; Narver, Slarer nncl MacLacli.in, 2004). In the studies addressing the influcrice of market orientation o n business performance, the view prevails that the rel~tionsliipbctmcen these two variables is positive (Greenley, 1995; Hooley et ai., 2000; Langerak, 2001; I
Croot~anEronsmlc 501vt.y 2006
..
. , .
109
o f n i a ~ k e toricnt;it~onby lisnis
III
t i ~ ccou:~tricsin tr.~nsitionhas shown positive
impact. Further, tlie authors point .oiit t11;1t rriasket orientation in transition econornies seems p a r t ~ c u l : ~ r liiselul y for . ~ c I i i c v ~ ngooil g b ~ ~ s i n e sperformance s in view o f the n ~ n r k c tt t i r b ~ ~ l c i i cI nc tl~cscc i i i i ~ i ~ r i c < . 111
rcTlw~[I < > 111;11krtC
> I ~ C I ~ I , I 1I1 ~) ~( : II , I> . ~ I I . I I I
I ~ I I I I , , , [ I t ? I ~ ~ I I I I , . II.I\,c ~ c v c ~ ~ll1.11 lr~l
the higliest level o f market oric~itation I S prcsent in srn,iIl a n d m c d i u m size enterprises (SMEs) in the rn.~nuf.~cturingsector (R.lj11 a n d BoiiC, 2005). In addition, i t was notecl that ccinipanics \vIiicli arc Inorc market oriented derive a higher p r o p o r t i o n o f their income from exports alid also a higher proportion o f income frorii i n n o v a t ~ o n . As product innovation is considered to be
;I
prlnie tietcrn~inant o f company
growtli a n d a factor that e n l ~ a n c e sits I!erformancc, a question arises as t o how market orientation i ~ n p ~ l c new t s product dc\~clopnic~it. A l ~ t c r a t u r ereview shows a difference o f o p ~ n i o nas to 1111sI1rih2gc. Q , I I I C
n
n u ~ l i b c rol'scudies rcve.il a positive
influence o f market orient,ltion o n new p~ociuctintrocluct~on(Kolili anti Jaworsky, 1990; Ruckert, 1992; D c s h p ; i n d ~ ,F.~rlcy anti Webstcr, 1993; Slater a n d Narver, 1991; Atunhene-Girna, 1996; G ; i t ~ g n o n. ~ i i c I Xuercb, I??:).
On [lie otlier h a n d ,
there are studies that reveal a n opposite cficct o f mnrkct orientation, o n the basis that noticeable rnarket orientation lend5 t o iinitatior~a n d makes discontinuous innovation d e v e l o p ~ n e n tmore difficult (Dcnnett and C o o p e r 1979; Lawton a n d Parasur;1111;111,1980), o r tl1,11
111,1l(r< ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ co fr Iiew c i a l i ~ ~ ~ i o : ~
C ~ I I S ~ I I I OI C I I ~~ I I I , I I ~ O I I
products m o r e difficult (C11ris:ensen anti Bowcr, 1996; Leonard-Barton a n d Doyle, 1996). I n order t o establish the impact o f market o r ~ e ~ i t d t i o roi n product innovation Lukas and Ferell (2000) break down tlie overill concept i n t o beliavio~iral c o m p o n e n t s (as specified by Nnrocr and Si.~ter,1990) and analyse their impact o n the introduction o f indivi(!u;~lprocltic~ ~ n ~ ~ o v n wi:li ~ i o nrcgnrtl to the dcgrcc o f novelty. 'The results o f tlicir study suggcir n u m b e r o f disco:!tini~ous Innovatlotis
tI1.1t
.1ricl
ccnsunicr orlentation increases the
decscases tlie n u m b e r o f continuous
innovations, 111us coiltcstlng collsulnei oricii:.ition
.IS
incremental inrlovations. C o n i r n ~ y l o s c c t ~ t i o ~ ~I s ,
b e ~ n g t i ~ c cause o f ; i ~ l ~ 1:creiI l
(2000)
revealed that interfunctional coordiiiatiori does not lead to the creation o f radical
in~iovation. Strongly c~n~ihasiscili n ~ c r F ~ ~ n c t i o coordi~iation n~l favours tile introduction of nc\v j)rodl~cts.is csrclislons to j,icscrit product lines antl decreases tlie imitation of compctitors' pro~luctc; lio:vcver, ~t ilocs not enhance radical in~~ovations. Tliis study also addresses tlic i~iilucriccoi' cornponcnrs of rnnrkct orientation o n tile introduction of innovati011 of a tiiiiercnt dcsrce of novelty in Croatian companies. Bearing in mind t11;it dii'fcrc~it kintis of ~ r o d i ~ cinnovation t may contribute to businrss performance in d~ilcrerltw.iys, tlic importance o f market y cspln~ncdby tile influence orientation on busiiiess peri'orniarice may ~ n d ~ r e c t lbe of ~iiarkctorie111:1tioric c , n i p o ~ ~ c ~or1 i t
of
lirotluct of a s13ccific
~ I I I ~ ( > ~ ~ ~ I C I I,I C I I ~
degree of novelty. Ilovvever, tile iocus o i tliis s t l ~ ~ l isy esclutivcly on tlie rclationsliil~ betvjeen nlaiket orieri~atioii .inti ~n;:ov,ition.inti u'c (lo not want to suggest that any type of product
Innovation
superior in respect to its
IS
contribution to the overall busiliess perforr~i,irice.\We bcl~cvethat giving preference t o any type o f product innovation cloes not nccessarily lead to supcrior business performance. Just introduc~ngan i r n ~ t n t ~ oof~ i a conipcting product with some slight modifications can hardly le:id to an estrnordinary advantage over competitors arid
I11fil1
prolit.
011
tlic ~ ! l i c r Il~rid, S O C U S I Ionly I~ on the
tlcvclopmcnt of exclus~velydiscontinuous ~ n ~ i o v s t i o n\ ~s o ~ i iIi,irtlly d lead to a high profit. Such a focus a.oultI actually Ic,~il l o rlic creation of 1)roducts that competitors will inlitate 2nd with minirii.il invcstrncnt rcalise the higlicst benefits at the moment when accepted by corisunicrs. l i e relatioris aniorlg \,a~i~iblcs:is sug!:cttrtl emphasised in tile literature. The reasori
IS
in tile stutly differ from those
that the dim is to polnt out that market
orientation does not necessarily lend to the sarrie pcrforniance regardless of company specificit~es antl tlie ni.lrket n.licle tliey opcr,ite, and in this way to cmphasisc its coniplcx~tyancl tlic
\\,,iy
I I I I ~ O ~ I . I I I L 0C 1 ' 1 1 1 ~
111
wliicli i t is construed
and applied. The coniplex~ryof innovat~onactivi~ies,tlie outcome which is often quite uncertain, sliould ;ilso bc i~orccl. The study is structured as follows: the cnipirical study is explained in Chapter 2, the results of the analysis are specified in Chapter 3, nliile in Chapter 4 basic c o n c l u s i o ~ lare ~ presented.
T h e approach o f Nanscr and Slates o n market orlentation has been adopted. Conseqoeiitly, rnarket orrent:itiorr 1s dclir1ccl
111
tcrnls ~ ( b u s i l r c c sculture consisting
of three behavioural components: corisuiiicr oricnt:ition, cornpetitor orientation and interfilnctional coordination. C o n s i ~ n i r rorlentation ;is delir~cdby Narver and Slater (1990) includes current 2nd Suture customer need5
iri
tlic target market so
that a !ism is nblc lo c o n t i n l i o ~ i ~ l ticl~vrr y ~>roc!ircic . l i i ~ l scrviccs o r superior customer value. Conipetitor oricni.itloli rcl.iicc to iiionitorii;g :ind uriclcrst.~iiding of colnpetitors'
siiort-tcrii~ slrcrlgi~is .i:ici ~vcaltr~csscs. i ~ i t i tlieir long-term
cnp.tbilitics a n d stratrgirr. InicrS~inrti~~ri:il < i ~ o r c i i i ~ . 1cSci9 ~ ~ ~ i ;to ~ i ~ I I C coordinated use o f all available rcsourccs of a firin In tljc yrorey5 ol'rrc.itiiig rl~periorvalues for target customers (Narvcr anti Slntcr, 1990). In line with the accepted approach, rnarkct orientation h:~sbccn measured by the M K T O R scale developed by Nanrer and S1.1rer (1990). Aiioti~erreason for its use here is t!iat its appI~cabilityfor rneasirring niarkct or~eiit;itionhas bcen proved in very different and heterogeneous markcts (l~looley, 2000), making it also approprinte Tor nieasilrlng market oricnr.itiori
111
tile mnrkets o f transition
countries such as Cronti;~.The intciisity o!. ninrkcr oricntatiori componerlts has bccn inensiirccl ori
;I
fivc i ~ o i r ~1.ikcl-i t xi-.iic.
Firm innovat~orihas been rnencured hy thc 1111nlbcro f new products ir>troiiucetl by Croatian firms tli~riiig the period from 2001 to 2003. Both continuous and s discontinuous innovarioris are ir~cludcd in this an?dpsis. C o i ~ r ~ n u o uirinovatioiis are new procli~cts with only slight or n o tccl:nolo:ic.il
iiiodiiicntions, which are
rninor improvements, imitations or sopplcincrits to a curlent product line (de Brentani, 2001).
011the
other Iland, c i i c r i ~ ~ i t i i i iOr~ ~rntiical ~i~ modifications
represent rcal ~io\,clties nncl unique ~ccI~riolr>gic.ilsoltrtions, rnvolving the
de\~elopment and application of new tcclinoiogies and state o f the art in technology and product categories. T o bcttcr ciarrfy tlie typcs of innovations tlie questionnaire included cluestions reidtine; to the number o f line extensions, products new to the coriipany (boll1 ale coi~tinuons ~rinovations), and t o discontinuous innovations.
2.3.
Research Hypotheses Consii11:er oiicr::atio~: a: n r o i i i ; ~ o i i c ~ oi i t 1ii.irkct oric:it.ition mc.iiis continuousi)' i ( I r t : t i i y ~ i ~Wp, I I , I S . J I I O I I C C C I ,
< ) I '
C I I ~ I ~ , I .IA III C(I , I~ \r ~ ; i iI ~C ~I I~I C, < , I f l : r ~ ii i~i o t d r s tc
:~tliicvcgout! b i ~ s i n r s sj i c : ! ~ ~ i ~ i l . : i(:ti\toi~:!.r ic~. I:C~LIS f'or c I ~ ~ I ' c ~ c I Ibr11:q I~
(71'
~IOCIII
,IIISC. (:OIII~~,II:ICT,
C ! I . I I ~ ~ : Co\,cr I I I ~ : C .iii(! I I C C ~ S
I,?
~ o I I I ~ I ~ ~ ~ II co t c, r ~r ~~ i i~t i~i i ~ g
needs, cornc to Ihcrtcr kno\\, c:~itoiiicis .iricI :licir iicccls, tlius ~ ~ ! c n t i l ynew ~ r i ~fhriiis o f products wiiich are missirig in clirreiit 1i1:cs. In Iilic t!:cren,itii, iiypotiiesis 1 o f t h e rcscarc!~is as follows:
Market orieritcd iirnls nrr ron~iclcrccl to iilii~ntc C O ~ I I ~ ~ C I I cx;ictly IO~S because o f competitor orientation wiiicli locuscs or1 discovering tile nctivities o f c i ~ r r e n ta n d poteiitial competitors a n d comparison o i one's own p o s i t ~ o r iwit!> tile competitor's position. H e n c e conilietitor orientation is o!'tcn nccusetl o f fostering t h e imitation o f coriipetitors a n d coiisequentiy of Iian~pcr:i:g c~c.i!i\;;tyniiti Irinovation in a firm. T h i s is tile situation if a firm is a f o l l o n ~ ia n d is relurlnnt
10
change such
~i
position. However, seektrig to ~le(!uccn cor:~lictitor't ,ic~iviticsdoes not need t o be (!one o n l y t o ;;nilate tiierri. 11 rii,iy .I!SI> IIC iiccc! l o iclcntily competitive y rile Inuncliing o f a opportunities which lielp [lie firin to ; ~ d c q u ; ~ t c l prcp;irc product i n t o a riiarket, as nell ns a s t i r n i ~ l i it ~o c a p t i ~ r ea le;it!ing position. It is n o t r~ccessarily uscfiil to usc coiripctitor ~iii;~siiia~iori oiily to untiestake exactly tile same activities as t h e compctition: rntlicr, i t m.ly be bcttcr to (lo jiist tile opposite pursue different strategies a n d activities. 'I'!il:s liypothesis 2:
Interfunctional c o o r d i n a t ~ o icnlia~iccr ~ ~ ~ i : ~ ~ i i p c cini;,rui;~t~oii ictl circulation within a lirii:, rt>n1nll111ic.11ii>ii I>r~\\,cril~I(.p.:tI I I I C I : I T .IIICI c ~ i ~ j i l o y e. Ic I~: ~ making conirnon
efforts in achieving tlie firlii's go.ils. 11:
1111:
respcc:
it
crcdtcs s n ctivironinent
which Icnds itself to tlic crcntion 'ind excl:,ii:ge o f idc.1~firm\vic!e wliicl: may result in new products. Such a situatioii
iii
tlic firm c.111 contribiite t o innovative
2.2
Methodology Ilata collcction \rcls c o n d u c ~ c d iri t l ~ c l i . ~ ~ i ~ c \ v oor !k t h e project "Stnti5t1ci o r i n n o v ~ t i o r in ~ tlic II!I>IIC o f Crn,11i,1 ; I \ teii~riologicnl ~)oiicics ;IIILI
I
(?I
I
,i
~
i n < : \ for rIcL~>itigscictitific a n d I
I
L LI ) : I ~ ~ J IC IO) 'I
~ I ~ C ~ ~ ~ I V C I ~ ~ S S ~ '
( C o n i m u n i t y Illnovation S u w e y - CIS3). T h e rcsc:lrcli ~ n c l u d e sp r o d u c t i o n a n d scrvicc scctor colli;>anics I~,iviiig10 o r 111orccriiploj.ccs. T h e se!cct~ono f snniple iinlts was r . ~ ~ i i l o m ~ sacsdl n s ti:c C r a a t i , ~business database. Tile data collection wns concll~ctcdby
R
1:ialI \us\.cy .iccompnnicd by telephone
pronipts. Tile sarnplc corisists of 567 C r o a ! ~ . i nc o i ~ i p a i i ~ cfsoni s the production a n d service sectors crni~loyir~ji 10 o r Inore cliij~lriycc~. ' I l ~ cs.irnplc ~ritlutledbotli sectors because of the fact tliat m . ~ r k c to r i c n r . i t ~ o ~isl appllc.lblc In all firms rcgardlcss o f wlictl1cr llicy nrc cngn;cci
oi t.~~ip,iblc I I ~ O L I U C ! ~ o r in tlie provisioli o f
111 l ~ ~ ~ x I ~ ~ t i ( ~ ~ i
services. I n t h e saniplc s c r v ~ c e conil:nriies
prcv.i~l t o
n
slight degree. Service
companies account for 55 percent wliilc productioli sector companies being 45 percent. \Vith regard to the sample structure relntcd to conipany size, small a n d m e d i u m size entcipriscs prcvatl. Slnali cntcrliriscs colistlriitc 75.6 perccnt, m e d i u m ones 18.8 percent, aiid 5.7 pcl.ccnt of cntcrl)lisci In t l ~ csanil>lc .ire large entcrpriscs. T h e hypotheses were tested using tile rcyrcss\on a r ~ ~ l y s i Ts .h e regression analysis results are presented in tile text
tlint
ibllo\rs.
Table 1 presents t h e regression analys~s rcsults rel.il~ng to t h e inipact o f market orientalion cornporients o n !lie ~ntrociucticiri o f p r o d i ~ c tinnovations o f a certain tlcgrcc o f riovclty.
,111 t l l ~ ~~ c~ ~ t ~ 01t ! cI IlI \! I I I I ~ ~ I Cr ~ ~ : r c v i osI~o\v r ~ :I
111 pcr~cr,ll,
Iiifili
level o f statistical srgnificaricc,
i~iiI~r.itirig tIi:11 ~ l l crel;ltionsliips obtained as
measured for t h e sariiplc poj~t11.111o~1 .irC Iill:lily ~ ) r i i b , ~ l ) ! c . 'The coefficient value o f multiple dctcrniit1a:ior:
a n d adjusted coefficients o f
multiple determination in all rlirce rcgrrssion rnotlels dcrnonstrate that tile regression rriotlels !lave exp!;lincti o n l y
;I
Sc\v oi' !lie v2riatioris. T h e first model
relating to the Irnpi'var~atror~r; t t h e secontl model lhas explained 3.83 percent, w l i ~ l ctlic last o n c
I1.1r
e s p l n ~ ~ i c c9.07 l percent o f variations.
Since t l ~ e coefi;,c!cnt o f mtiltiplc c o r r c l a t ~ o n 1s
,I
rnono:oric
non-decreasing
function o f tlie n u m b t r o f ~ n d e p c n d e n tvariahlcs, 11s value can b e increased b y atlding m o r e \~arrab!es,t11i1s niakrng a rnodcl more rei2rescntative (Sozit, 2004, p. 452). I n this study t h e repre~cnl~itiveness o f tile rnodel has not been increased by adding new independent variablrs becai!
To estabiisli War .lrl:ilysci!
tile c;li;ility of' tile rcgrcs
lllc llltr
existence o f a n y narrow linear c o r r e i o t ~ o n o i independent v ~ r i a b l e s o r their approsirnate linear c o r n b i n a t ~ o n(Soiii, 2004, p. 517). T o establisli whether t h e insignificance o f intiivitlual var~ab!cs is a coriseqiicnce o f tile fact that several variables explain the sariie part o f tile clcl\endent variable, analysis o f tile existence o f n i u l t i c o l l i ~ i e a r i t ybetwecn indcpen~leritvariables was cor,ilucted. T o establish i n a m o r e precrse mnnricr tile cs~irei!cc oi' rii~rlticoliiric,~rity rri niodci varranccs, iriflation factors, an
P
a ,
,
Table 1 Regression Analysis Results Relating t o the Impact of Market Orientation Components on the Introductior; of Product lnnovatlons -
I
Line extensions {
i
I
e coemclenr i
0.139
Consumerorientation Competitororientation
--
.-
-
Correlation coelficienl iiil
-
0.063
/
i ~ g n ~ f i r m r ei Beta Ssndard level (pl coeflctent I error 0.028695 0.000420
'
0.000GOi
i
O.Oi1
I
0.C55
0.00aYI
!
-.
market
-. 1
0.253
-'
Model significance
/
enm
-0.295
1
lnterfunctionalcoardinatlon'
stamin
Pmduct new to a firm hut not to the
1
0.087
0.225
1
0.053
j
-0.270
,
0.062
!
0.C0002
0.054
/ j
I
/
i
rgn~fiiance I sla level (p) j cceFc:sni j
j
:
0.C;S
0.264 ~
-. .
1
!
1
Standard eiicr i
005i
i~gnffiarxe level (21
:
0.000025
i
0.412
0000018
:
-0.223
i
CCCCCO
1
0.073
:
C.OOCCCO
0.075
:
0OCCC13
?--
~
0.196
:
0;::
a ~-
-~
~
! !
!
0.175694
. A
~
+
i
Di~continuousinnovation
I 0.104254
i
1
-:
\YcII
Vari.ince i l i f l . i t i o l l t;ictor
\~,rlucen s
all
c l c . i ~ ! yI~CII~~II~,I:.IIC !1i.11! l l r l c
~nrlcpcnclc~it v,lri.iI,lc;
bctwcen the indcpendciit v.~ri,~l,lcs.S inflation factor exceed
5
or 10, nor
l e l ~ c ~ l li n,
o r ~ c ~ > t , i ~ ~i oI !~: Ii I"~ I ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ . Il:iI ~ I I> ~ , (l !cI ~!I,,(, j !~.;CI( , I . 5 I
I
1
~ I ~ I I O V ~ ~ Ii sOrIi ~ c >,t
IIIK
I
, I
I
tile
rla case docs
vnrinnce
it
I
IIO: cuI>l,iincd b y tn.0 or
15
tl>rcc ~ r ~ c l c ~ ~ c vnri,iI)lc<, ~ i ~ l c : i ~r i ~{ ~ I I I ~ I' . v , ~ ~ ~ ~IIC l c IhLt
t
I I ~ ~ I ~ ~ I ~ O ~ ~ I I I C . I I ~ ~ ~
IIO
IS
nioriclr and for
111ctolcr.inic !o:\,c: tIi:ln 0.2 or 0.1. This
15
rne.lrls t h a t t i l e sanic part o i the cici~cri~!i.i~t varl.ihlc
r
nil
.is toler.lricc v.~lucsi n
.ill
II~,III!IC
v , i r ~ , i I ~ l"c~i11st1111cr c
I\~I~CIII)
111cI : I I I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ! C I I01I I ~ ~
1101
1 1 I : ~ I ~ ~ ,( I~Li ~~c~ o1ltil1ii(~lls
I I I I I I I I ~ ~ ~ I I III II C~ ,.I I
~ C > I I > C ~ I I ~ c,I I ~
............... ................. Inl)l(! 2 V a r i n n c c lriflatiori n n t l Tolcr;l~icc F a c t o r s ill R c g r c s s i o r l M o t l c l s.-...... .......... cxten510n5 Product ncw lo fl firin DIscontInuou~ ! , but not to tho mn!ket i !~n~ovntlon - - . . -. ! Var;iice Vnr~ance \'ar~ancc 1 \nnjt~t~n ~o~erance ~nat~on ! T Y ~ ~ ~ C ~C! a i $ o n lolrranrc la~tor 1 .. !actor . . , I !actoi.................. Cons~:mer 1030 0.5-l'i 1P 6 6 0 536 1 1.334 ....... .orlcntallon ...... Conipctllor 0.462 2.313 i 0.437 ; I 799 0.556 ;'.I64
'
;
I 1
i
j
""?'"'"'"".
I1
,
.......
'i
Interfunct~onal coord~natton - .-
.-
'The
I
!
.
j
0.51.8
1.9291
I ...- ........
I
tile
tile
Ic11it1s c,l'
IIII~~IY.I~I~III i \
0.029) cr consumer orientation
I i ~ Ii
,
I
ltc
irlflucnce o n the
' 1 1 1 1 \ 1;11c11:1g;ujq)r>rls tlic
I ~ O IO!:I~I/;L.II~I.
liypotiicsis that concumer o r ~ c i i t n t ~ cnio.aragcs o~i ~XISI~III I
orientation
~ i i r l o ~ ~ a i iiiidicatc on a
introclucr~onoi n c x proclhctr i : o~: ~ s ! c i ; t ; > ~ o t l l l c11r:cs. t
r c i n n ~ n i l i gtwo
I
0.440 2.272 . . . . . - ............ .-
kllicI\ oi'
significant and posit~vc~ntluericc((1 = 0 139, p = on
o ~ O C;I )
~ ~ i i l i ~ co~f ~innrkct cc
tlic 1 n t r o c 1 1 1 oof ccrtalli
011
..............
I
2 . , i c i ~j I
rcsulis o f ~ n u l t i p i c rcg!csslori
co1iiporicrits
~
tile I
I
i ~ ~ t r o d u c t i oof ri I:I
IICW
orie1lt.itio11 also jpos~ti\.cly ~ ~ l l i u c ! i c c stlic ~ ~ i t r i r t t : o :oi / :he sarrie irinovatioll and p = 0.0004).
It
tliat Its
iriipirt
IS
protlucts
: i t i l i ~ l!II,II r i i ~ r i ~ ~ c ! i t ~ ~ r
kiriii
of
strollper tl1n11tlic coiisolilcr o r i c n t a t ~ o :(13 ~ = 0.253,
fo1lon.s !lint conconic1 c ~ i i c ~ ~ t . i tiico not n tlic sole
arid
only principal
t s c x ~ i t c l i t IIIICS.C o ~ i r p , ~ ~ i i~clsi ' i t precursor o r tlic i n t r o ~ l t ~ c t ~oof nl i c a I ~ r < ~ d i r cto demonstrate a sironge: interisi!y oi'con;uriier to introduce
this
o r ~ c n t ~ t i c slrnply ili are rriorr 11icIinc:1
s ~ e c i f i ck l n t l o f irir!o;-.~t~on.
c o m p e t i t o r orientation positively imp;icts thc i ~ i t r o d u c t i o n o f all kinds o f innovation; however, t h e inrensl!). discontinuolls innovat1011 ((3
=-
0.412;
o f this ~ r ~ i p ' i c t is t h e strongest with 13
< 0.001). 'L'llc ,il>c)vc o b s c n a t i o n supports
hypothesis 1-12, that d ~ s c o n t i n u o u s innovation orie1>ta1ic11>, As
e n c o u r , ~ g e d by competitor
i5
C O I I ~ ~ C I I ~ << >~ I I C I I I , I I ~ O~ I >I O , I I I V V \ I~I I I ~ > . I < I \ I I I C
types o f continuoils innoi'.~lion, olic siic~ultl be.rr competitor activities, their strciigtlis
ill
i ~ ~ i r o c I i ~ I<> (~I >i Oo I~I I ~
~ r l i n d that m o n i t o r i n g o f
id ~vcakncises lends t o competition
imitation. I-lowcver, t h e bcttcr conipnrilcc know tiicir coiiipctitors, t h e better t h e li slprl~iir.,nrlyotlier protlucts olfered o p p o r t u n i t y t o tievelop prod[;cts ~ v l ~ i ccsccctl in tlie market e i t l ~ e rby competitors o r hy tlie c o m p a n y itsclf. T h e ~ l i i r t l mnrkct o r i c n t a ~ i , ~ irin n i p n i l c ~ i ~ ii,~ > ~ c i i \ i n c t i o ncoortiination, ,~l has a significantly negative impact o n the irirroiltrct~ono f all tlirec types o f innovation. I n other words, tlie higher tlie intensity of ~ritcrfunctionalcoordination, t h e lower t h e introduction o f any type o f protitrct iniiovatiori by tile conipnny. This is t h e o n l y market orientation compoiieiit wtiose beta coci'licicnt shows a negative relntionship. Tlic bct.1 coeflic~cnt valiic dcrcs not sllon, sijiiiificnnr oscillations in the intensity o f i n i p ; ~ c t in: c l ~ ~ ~ c r c :i yi r~ i c ?OF ~ i n o v ; ~ t i o([i n cstcnsions,
p = -0.270
-
=
4.295 for liric
for protluct ncw to a firm n r i c l [i 0 . 3 2 3 for tiiscontinuous
innovation). l'iiis finding
I S 111
roiiii.~ct to tlic
ii:it1.11
assumption o f a positive
impact h o r n i n t e r f u n c t i o ~ i . ~ lcoortIi:i,ition o n tlic intrniluction o f product innovatioli. Hence i;yp~,tiicsis113
15
c n l i ~ c i yrr!citcci.
T h e research in this study focuteti o n cs:nblicli~ng tllc impact o f cacti a n d every individual rr.arkct orientation corriporicii~o n tlic dcvclop~ncrito f a specific type o f r > r n c l ~ ~ c~t I I I ~ I > I , ~ A I IcIwI ~I ~i r.< l i ~1 ~0 g 111r ~ ~ I I I < I I I ~ ~ ~t ,lS~, r liit:!ir~ tlic colisurner orientation ~litcnsity, tlie lriorc n coiiil),il~yis i ~ i c l i ~ ~ c111i i \ o p p l c ~ i ~ c l iCt ~ I S ~ I I I & product lines with new prodiicts. 'i'li~c f i n t l ~ nis~ in contrast t o t h e rescarch findings obtained by Lukas a n d Ferrcll (2000), according t o which consumer orientation encourages irllroduction of ciiscontiiiuour iri~iovationa n d reduces t h e n u m b e r o l i n r l o v a t i o n s \r.liicli nic riot ~ i c wto ilic ni;irkct.
Rcgarcllers o f tllc f:lct
1 1 1 ~ rrsc.lr~ll li1ici11ri:5
tll.ii
orieritnt~on does not Il!il?ncr
c l e ~ ~ o i s ~ ar ~ t c co1isur:lcr
tllc I . I ~ I I O ~ I ~ I01'L I I~ O I I ~~ LI ~ I I I I I ~ ~ I O 1111!o~:ilioii, IIS
corisulner orierlt;!tior~ need riot neccssnr~ly bc tile r:la~ri a n d tlie orily factor to bl,lme for m n k ~ n si n n o v a t ~ o n,in(! cre.itl1;t;y in [tic devcioprilent o f new prodtlcrs rnorc dif'ficult, as . ~ s s c ~ t cind tlic I ~ : c r . ~ t ~I~t r1c8 , rnore tiinn l o ~ i c a lthat a ronsurner oricntecl conipany, to bcrtcr nnil iniorc ct,rnl?lcrcly incct Its nccdq, will keep
I I I ~ ~ I I [ ~ ) I II! ~\ : l
) ~ ~ ~ , 1~ 1 1l t i lh,:i, t ~ c , ,~ I I~~ , ~ , ! c I! I I, ,: I : !~ : ; . ! , ~ I I : II II !I C: ,
~, . L J ~ I I~IIC W
l>~c,(!t~(t5.
/i coefficient
'I'liis 1s siil?portcd by tl:c s i ~ n. ~ r i c l i I ~ elc\.cl o! s~g::~:itnricc oi tlic
for
t!.,c "tor15~111ier o s i ~ t ~ ~ , i\ ,t; ~I I cI ; ~I ~~Ji t!~]~ t"1 1 ~ . ~ r ~ r e q s r~~oi o: ~~i c l .
I t is o f p,1ral!iou:lt
i ~ n l ~ o r t ; ~to~ ~kr~ci\v c e \VII;II
~ii:'rLc,t is
111
c ~ t ~ c s ~ iiti(l i o t ~ \vlxit
c o ~ l ~ ~ i i i i arc c r s l o be t;irgctc~l1.y i n t i o v , ~ r ~ ~activit~ct ):i .1:111 k o m \vlinrn information will be collectetl, Ibcc,i:isc t l i ~ c \ r i l l rlc~crlllilie tiic ~ ~ l f o s n l n t i o nwe will get. Information
collected froni consumers o r l'u!.crs
w~tli ~vliom a company
cooperates successfully prob.ibiy is not v c ~ yIihcly to stir:luIntc complex innovatior)
departing to a large erterit i'ri~r11cslstins products In tiic ~:iarket. Contr,iry to t h e prcv.i~lingv:~:~!5l l i n t C O I ~ I [ : C ! I !0ric11t;il1011 OI le.lcis to i n n o ~ a t ~ o n activities bclrig re(!!iccii
I!)
I
I
I
O I I I ~ II ~ . ,
~
I
I . I ~ I ! II tllc
asstimptlon that 1111sis ex:ictly thc n:asket orlcntation corl:?oncnt that encourages
development anti in:roduc:iori o f ~ i i r c o ~ , t i n u c ui sn ~ i u ~ n t i o Tile n , results obtained supported t h e starting hypottiesis. C o n ~ p c t i c o s orlent,ition nlso encourages t h e s liowe\.er, its intensity is introduction o f b o t h types o f c o r ~ t ~ r l i i o uinnovation; higher Tor tile introduction o f d ~ s c o n t i n u o u in11ov.111on. ~ This fincling clea:iy indic;ites t!ie iriiportarlce oSti:c ~i!tcr~):ct~rion ,ind 115c oi rliSorrnation obtainerl by m o n i t o r i n g competitors. F111rIln~o a t , i h i ~ a tconipc~:to:s' bcl>nv~ouranti nLout tile activities they perrorm may be used lor tlieir inlniccl~atci r n i t a t ~ o n ,which is a very simple " r r s p ~ t ! ~ c "to lllrir ; ~ c t i \ ~ i ~If.i c 1~1 , 1s follo\ver in tlic market, tlieli clcc~s~oris oli 111cI
I I I I ~ I CI I I I ~ I C \ o~ f
a fir111 1 0 \be
I ~ I I ( ~ ~ ~ ~ I u! C I Ii Oi Ic~ ~ proclucts, ~
.i
\\,li~cli
are o n l y a n imitatiori o f \vIl,~r ionipclllrrrr alic,~iIy offer In tlic market, will be
made or1 tlie basis o f infor;il,ition rcI.itil~g to c o n l p c i ~ t o r s ' activitics. l~lowever, based o n t h e s a m e inforniatiorl, a lirni c,in decidc to ~iridcrtakeactivities quite different f r o m those undertaken by cornpctitors. maintain t h e positiorl of a r~i::.ket leac'er.
111 strtli
a way it will achieve o r
C o n s u m e r orient.itton niay filrlctrori
,i \-cry sii~iil.ir way, Tlic study findings
11,
dernonstratc tl-int tile grc.i:cr tile i r ~ t ? n v t yof c ( ~ ~ i \ t : : i l ~i .r~i c i i ~ : ~ ~ i!lie n t i ~, , ~ C ; I isI C I the introtluction o r new proclucts it may le.icl t o i l ~ f i c r c ~ ciiccts,
iri
e!:istlns Irr:c\, so
rllnt
consumer orientation
c l c r n c , i i ~ ~ ~1)).. ~ ~1.~1h.15 c ~ I .i:!cI I:crrcIl (2000). If tliis
rnarket orientation con-iponcrit is ioc!:irci o n tllc iiicntification a n d rnecting o f laterit needs, tile11 i t rilay he a rtiggcr !or tlic ir1trocl~1ctiorio f discontinuous i n n o v a t ~ o n .Tlic effccts clcl)cri~ion r i l ~ , ~rlic ! iir;li o r
itt
rn.ir:.igcr~ arrtl ernploycct
coiisidcr n constinicr orlciit.itioil o r n ioiilpctrror o r ~ c i i t . i t ~ r ~Inn . tilts case, tlie vicv:s o f mnriai:crs o r c1i1~-rlo;;cc;, rc5llcct1vcly, .il)r,tr: ti!!, $itir.i~iani:i tlic ninrkct ;ire also iniportarit as tlicy n re o l ~ e i it:otisrclc~c~li l l
111 contrast to tlie
riiitinl
l~ypotl!csrs i l l
.i
I ) ~ I ~ ~ I !~ I C~ L~~ YS I SL J I II I I , I ~ I I I ) ; .
j ~ i > \ l t i \ ~I cI I ~ ~ U C I I C oC f r~-iterhrictioriai
coordination o n rile introduction o f proiluct inriovatioii o l ' ; ~ n ydegree o f novclty, t h e regression analysis tintlings tiemoristrate a signrficant negative influence. Interfirnctional oricntation refers t o tllc cIissei:~iriatro:i o f inlciligence across a conipaiiy fostering coniinon cl'for!s
11y ,111
io!iipnny tiej~,irtr:ietits arid ail employees
to acliieve objectives. TIiesc activitrcs sl:oii!tl ccrt,l~r!ly coritribuie t o c o m p a n y innovation. Ilowcvcr, tlie l i ~ $ l ~ ctlic r ticsrec o l ~r~tcrfur!ctiorinlcoortlination, tlie lolver 11)c dcgrcc
Such
3
01.3
coriip~riy'ii~!tioviitiori.
fincling niny intlicate
tllnt
n cornp.iny i ? l-i.iving scrlous problcnis reldting to
tile deveiopnient o f new products. Disscliitriarion o f irihrrnntion 2nd knowledge is very often definitely not tlircctcd to\vartis iriiiovation activities. Interfunctional coordination may contribute t o tlie iniplovei-iicnt o f business performance, b u t in Croatian companies this is not acl~ievcd by iniiov;ition activities. I n the specific case o f interfunctional coorci~natiori,i t
it
csseiirial to .isscss liow tile intelligence is
used within t h e conip.iny. In Croar~oricotnl);inrct intcll~gcnccdisscniination a n d cornrnon efforts o f all dcp,irtrnenis ~ l ~ r o u j ; h o u tthe r o m p a n y obviously are not JOcus~cIo n tlie ~ l c v c l o j ~ r n ei>i ~ i rr ~ c w111t11111ct1.
Tile cause o f tile problem niny be eitllcr tlic clo~nirlation o f inclrviduals w h o h a m p e r innovation o r tile res:staricc of cert;iin riianagcrs t o accept m;irket orientation o r to develop iii11ov,1tion, n o t h bcliaviours in line with niarket oricntation principles a n d innova~ivericis are values
10
hc introduced at tile
conipaiiy level. This in oilier mords riie.ins that tlicsc valucs ncetl to be accepted
uniformly across all tlcpartments aritl by all criiployccs.
I
actual business
operation this is not always the case ticcausc o f t h e qoitc frequent resistance o f certain individuals. IVIicn si~cliindividu,ils arc in n p o s i t ~ o nt o impose their o w n values a n d patterns o f behaviour, tlie cf'fccts rnny be far f i o n i tile desired ones. T h e research i n this study is basctl o n cornpanics fro111I I ~ C S C ~ V I I C.in(l
;I
lictcrogerrcous sanrple wliicli inclutlcs (:o1111).1111r~ crifi:~gccIin vnrinlis
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~~ C~ I II O C I ' ~I. I ~ I I I
activities have been incluclcd as niarkct orientarton
IS
tlcernetl to b e a concept
applicable i n cornpnnics h o r n all scctors a n d all ;ictivitics. I-lo\vcver, such a n approach may t o a ccrt;iin cxrcnt mnkc conclusioris rcl
ior
tiit
coritli!~ons required for certain
t l ~ csuccessiirl aclricvcrncnr tliercof.
f < e ~ a r ~ l l cof' ~ s rlic cxtcnt 01. 111c . ~ p j ~ l r ~ , ~ I b ~ l r:i,i~Iict ity oricrit,i~inrl,c o r ~ ~ i ~ r s i o ~ i s about tile primary rnanncr in wiiicli i t opcratcs arc liarJ to gcnernlisc. Tliere is always a question ns t o \r.liat cffccts \ r . ~ l i bc .icl~icvcd, bc;~ririg in m i n d other business factors a n d :vliy just tlicsc cffccts have bccri ,icl~icvcci.On t h e o n e hand, there are t h e corisuniers, iirarkct partlclp.lnrs \\,liosc h c l ~ ; l \ ~ i o udepends r on a n u m b e r o f social, psycliologicnl a n d cirlt~rral factors. Identifying t h e wants a n d needs o f such market participants is carried o u t in a c o n t i n u o u s fashion, along with m o n i t o r i n g n l r o i i i p c t ~ ~ onc1ivrtic5. r For rile r11.1rkc1 ~ n l o r n r a t i o nt o be usable a n d able t o contribute to business p c r i r ~ n a n c c ,cmployccs s h o u l d bc encouraged t o work together in ortlcr to acliicvc c o m p a n y objcc~rvcs.All this evidence sliows tile complexity o f introducing and npj,iy~rig a ni.irkc~o r ~ c n t . i t i o nI I I I V a company's operation. I-Iowcvcr, benclirs arising f r o m rts application are wortli t h e effort.
Atuahcnc-Gi~nn, I , 9 "Market O r ~ c n t n t i r ? n nncl i;ii:ovationn, Jollr-nnl Biisiness / < E S P N ~ ' C / I ,35, PI). 93-103.
r~f
licnnett, R. C. 2nd R . C;. C o o p e r , 1979, " l i c y o r ~ ~tile l h'larkctir~pConcept", 1irtiiif.i~ //0?;/l~its, .?'I, I)[>. 76-83. Bcnnett, I<. C , a n ~ lI<. C;. Conpcr, 1981, "llie M l i i ~ s eoi Marketing: / i n Anicricnn 'l'rngccly", ljii.5111r~i/ / o , i / t , i ~ ~2 ,/ ! ( 1 , ) , pl). 5 I 1 Iiliui:in, S, N, li, h l c i ~ g u caiid S 1. I:cll, 200.5. "I;I;I I ~ . ~ ~ t r c p i c r i c u rEnough: ~nl llie Motlrrntirlg EKcct o f I ~ ~ i t r e ~ ~ ~ c iO~I I c urilei s lRcl.~~iarlsIiip ~~~~ bccwcen Markct Orieritntion a n d i'erhrrn,incc", /ir;lr-~i~ilo/ li~iiiiirisIii~r~iirih, 58, p p 9-17, C a n o , C . I<., I.'. A. CarriI1.11, anti I:. j;ir.irn~llo, 20011, "A Mct;i-analysis o f the I<elationsiiip bct~vceii Markc: Ortcn!.~t~i!n arid I3l1sir:css I'crforniancc: Evidence f r o m Five Continents", In/ruin/ioni~l/o:iir;ti/ ![i /. 197-218. Day, G. S., 1991, " T l ~ cCnji.ihilit~cs of. ~.Laikct-l3r:vcti Org;in~z:i~ions", Ji>rinrirl oj' il~lnrk~/ir;g,5. 8,pp. 37-52, d e B ~ e n t a n i , U., 2001, "liiiio\~,~tivcYerius i r i c r c ~ ~ ~ c new i i ~ l husincss services: Diffcrerir kcys for acli~evirigsurccs~",/ir:iir:~:lr!/~/'ro~/iii-/~11;107:i;!ioi1ii,Iii?ri~,~~-vrri~!, IS, p p , 169-187. Deng, S. anti J. Dart, i994, " h I c . ~ s u r ~ r iM.iriirt ; C):iei:t.itinn: a Multi-fnctor, Mvlultiitem approach", jorcr-irtrl o/;l'li~ikt./i,:~p lIl~cn~r,yr.~rrrri!, 10(S), pp. 725-742. DcslipandC, R , a n d J. U , l:,iiic;., i'NS, "Mc.iiiiriiii: M.i!kct Oiici~!n:iori: Generalization a n d S y n t l ~ c s i s " , / ! ~ ~ i r ii !~/i'~i l\ l i ; r f i r ~ ~ - ~ o i ~ ~ i . r ~ i / ; I2,l i ~pp. ~ i i213-232. ~~~i~~ii/, Deshpande, R. a n d 1:. E.\Vebstcr, 1989, " O l - g ~ n i z a t i o n a lculture a n d marketing: Defining t h e research ngcndn", Jc~~intiilo/',llnrkr/it
Gainer, B. and P. Pao'anyi, 2005, "Tlic rclatronship bctwccn market-oriented activities arid market-orientcti c u l t ~ ~ r e : ~ r n ~ ~ l r c , ifor t i o tile r i s dcvclopment o f rnarket orientation i r i non-profit service org,iniz.~:ioiis",Jo~iri!oi i!/ i,'i~~i~i~.r.r Rcirnri-h, 58,pp. 654-862.
Gor!z,i!cz-Ber~ito, d,rid 1.~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ , ~ I c 200.5, L ~ ~ (~;ti!~trr,il I c : I I ! ~L,T,J ,O p c r , ~ ! ~ ~ M ~ r, ~ r, kt lc f Orienta!ion anti O b ~ c s t i v cvs. Sui~lccti\.c l'criorninncc: I'crspcctive o f I'rotiuction a n d Operatioils, In~ii!iiiinlilt~irkciii~p,1liiii,~yi~nii.ii/, 23, pp. 797-829. Grecnlcy G. E., 1995, " M . ~ r k c toricrit.icir~ri . i l l t i cc~:iip.ii~yp c r i h r r ~ i , i ~ i r Ernl>zricn1 e: evitjci1ce fro111Lii< c ~ r i i ~ ~ , ~ i ! i /c ~s "I,~ / ~ ~ / I , /i!/~ 111,1~1,1,q,~i~i~~iii, J I I ~ ~ I ~ I / 0, ]pi>. 1-13, I-iooley, G., T. C o s , J , i:nliy, I>. Sliii)lcy, I , llcrats, I(, 1:oiif;ira a n d R. Snoj, 2000, "Market Oricntaflori in t l ~ cTrar~sitionJlcoriorriics oiCeiitrC7l Europe: Test o f the Narvcr :IIILISlatcr M,irkct ( I ~ ~ C I I [ , I SLIICT", : I ~ I I I JOII!!I,I/ , I / I ~ I I T ~/ I< I, ~, r~r ~, i ~SO, ~ , / ~I>!>. ,
273-285. FIult, G. T., D.1. I<etcIieri, nnd S. 1:. Slatcr-, 2005, "Mar-kct Orientation and Pcrforniarice: A n 1ntegratri)n o f Uisl~.lr.i~e~\~!p:o.itl:cs", Siniiqyic hlnnng~111rrif Joiirrinl, 26, pp. 1173-1 181.
Knra, A., J. E. S p ~ i l ~ i na n, d 0.W. I)cSIlic!cls Jr., 2005, " ' ! ! ! c 1:ifcct o f a Mdrkc: Orieiitation o n Buirricss 1'cr;i~rrn.irice: .A St[lcJj. o f S!!1.ill-Si7cd Scmice Rcta~lers Using h,lARKOR Scale",/o~iriiiilc ~ ~ S ~ i iIlr~titirrr o/I ,\lirr~r~yr~~!i~~ii, 43(2), pp. 105-118. Kohli, A. a n d R. J. Jaworsky, 1790, "hlarkc: Oric:i[attori: Tile Construct, Rcsearch I'ropositior~s, n r l t l M:~riagcrrnl! i ~ i p l i c n ~ r i i r r ~ " , / i ~ i i , i ~i!/./ilii!fir/,N~, ,i/ 54, pp. 1-8 Kohli, A. K., D. J. Jaworski and A. Kuninr, 1990, "!.IAl
L?wton, I,. a n d A. Parastrr.lrnan, 19S0, "'l'lic l;lip.lct oi'tilc blaskcting Concept o n New Product Plannir!:", /oii~~!n! q/'i.liirtr~/irq,'14, p;,. 19-25, Lconaid~Barton, D. ,in.i 1. L. Doylc, i9W, " C o r : ? : ~ ~ c s c i a l i r i qTcchnolo~::: lrnapinativc U n d c s s : ~ i i ~ i i i oi ~f , I!wr Nccclc" In I(. 5. Rorcnbloonl i \V.J. Spcnccr (,.~I >~. 20.35, IIJ N r c J. . S 1 . S i r I I . I. M.,, I . i r i i . 1 1 1 . ?On/l. "lic~;miic!vc and r:onctivc 11iarket orlci!tation ai!d I I C ~ . V - J I ~ ~ I ~ I L I Lsut
Rajii, E. a n d I.;. llniii, 2005 "hl.;ikc* 0 1 i c 1 i : ~ i ; o io: i E:l!eipt~sesin Crontin", in I 'Teodorovii, I., P.. Grinhers, S . (;iink~n? .lnc! %, l.ovriilievii fc:l.) ilron.rdiqpe
/~i~eirr,itiu;r~~/ 1i'ori;iri %:6le (.',~;i/ii(.~,i: (.~IN:;,~;?,I!::~, ,~li:,:!j~rii? j /:io~ioniir fii7n~irion R:i.r.ri/in /;rd~rirtioii,C!o~/iii/ii;iI : / r i (,'PI: (;iiirt/~ici,'l'l~c liicti!:itc of F.coi~omics, Zagreb, pp. i75-1Sb. Ruckcr!, R. \;I., I l s ? , " L l c v c i i ~ l ~ ~.I i ~I ~ : : ' I I Aii Organiz:~tinnai Strategy I'erspcctive", /i:crni,i;ioi~ii/Ji~wrii~i i ~ / ' I ~ ~ i ~ ~it1i ri ~ l lr~i ,i i c / i t !9~, ,pp. 225-245
Zliou, K.Z., C. I<. Y ~ r na n d D.I(. 'I'ic. 200.5,"Iiic criccts oT str,itcgic orientations on teri;nology- arid n>arkct~bascdi:rcnk:li1ol:;l1 ~r~?ov.itlor!s",/o;rm~ilq,fMiirkc/ii;j,
69, pp. 42-60.
-
1 I
ini adalah versi HTML dari berkas h ! ! p ; ! ~ ~ w . p ~ s ~ u n h a s . . n e j l j u ! n a l - p d f i m f . I I e menibual versi HTML dari dokumen telsehul secara otonlalis pada saat menelusuri web. nenaulkan atau menandai situs ini, gunakar~I I R L berikul: I,. I ; : I I ; . ~ ~I . ... , I - . ~ , V I--~vcI,? l a ; - , : , : +!,-ijlrl3,1a1 s ~ l - ~ l r . c t . - c l n k r . c d - 2 s g i - r d :i-onpgi.tSTIJ::i.rd.pascniinhnl.ns~/;I;rnal l,.?r/,.r: .. .: .6 , : ~ ~ 1 r i - . . ; ~ . :I i ~ ; ~~~rr,;lii.pz,iihi!nr ilnI,u,l.r,ii i i i
(;rnRIr ilik iii!"
hnirrnlr!wi g!<.r8psl
c L , , i jrt,y,>
r , i i hl.n.ir8;y,erg ! , > u o h
OI'LT Po,ii!ruip,rrr
I!
nu~rerl)rurR irrdopopni 4 riiianv:!n.
nci yang dipakai untuk peneiusuran sudah distabilo pembelajann pelanggan
--..
-.
~
-.
A --
-
-
11
-- -
2
.__---
Paae 1 -
10 ~ ~ I I ~ I ?ir11r111 ~ I s I . 71~TT,;trri~r ~, 6, t,ittr.v~200.i
-
-~
---.. ~
-
. ..
--
.-.
.
. . . -
hI!ZIII
(1099, 1). I ) , pndn illtinyo tncriui~jilhknrlbnilsvn
r-.
--.
.-
-.-
-- -
.-
terdapat iima tetna inti yang nietnbentuk konsep pcmasaran yaitu fokus pada pasar, orientasi Pcngcrtian pern:isnrnrr dapat tirp.u~tl;lti~; pelanggan, peniasaran terkoordinasi, hubungan sebagai falsafdi, disiplir~,d'm Lcnhl~an.Ssbago~ falsafdi, esensi pema:;aran berirujild cita-cita, jangka panjang, d m profitabilitas. Konsep pemasaran sebagai falsafah pemyataan kebijaksmaan, visi, or-ictitasi, atnil nlemiliki mini praktis terbatas. Agnr dapat pedom;~npcnggcrak tindakan orgnnrwsi hark bermanfaat dala~npraktek, niaka konscp Iaba mailpun rrirlaba. Scbagai keaiilixti, . -... penlasaran b e r ~ utiti ~j proscs ~ n n ~. l a j c i ~ ~ c~r pcrnasaran perlu dijernbatxi~oieii suatl; peniasnran yalig bertt~jiinnmct1yl1b;rl1iwnl:\snr;ill pct~gcrliatiopernsiond (D:~rksdale& Dardetr. dari tingkat falsafal~nicnjadl terapari (T'au~~trn, I971 qf Kohli & Jaworski, l990b). Pcngertian 1993). Sebagiari hcsar ;)engajaran (Inn litcrntt~i opcrasional yang merupakan irnplenientasi dnri I)ernasarnn yang digilnaka~ipada pergilru;irl falsafali peniasaran adalah pelaksanaan orieritasi tinggi di Makassar mencurahkan peri1ntinn ~padn pasa: oleh manajemen perusahaan (Mc. Cartliy & konsep pemasarm sebagai fondasi dari tlisipiin Perreault. 1990) Implementasi dari sebuah pernasaran, tetapi s,mg;it yedikit perhatiall ynrig filosofi tercernlin pada perilaku d a i aktivitas diberikan pada irnplemi:n~asinya perusahaan. Oleh karena orientasi pasar Pengkajian teriiiid-lp sejunildi llterarilr rnerilpakan implementasi dari konsep peniasaran pemasaran lnenunjukkan variasi deiinisi yalig maka dapat disimpulkan bahwa perusahaan yang berbeda lnengenai konsep pernasararl. Dari berorientasi pasar a d d d l perusahaan yang berbagai konsep yang dikcmukaknn para g~iril t~ndakan-tindakannyakonsisten dcngan konsep pemasaran seperti Felton (1959, p.S5), hic. peniasaran. Namara (1972, p.51) qt Koi111Rr Ja\vor;k~ Konsisten dengan pemikirati t e r s e b ~ ~ t (i990b), dan beberapa varian dari gagnsarl kediia mcngimplikasikan bahwa tujuan orientasi pasar guru tersebut seperti y a l g didefinisikrul oleli sama dengan tujuan pemasaran. Tujuan Lavidge (1966), Levitt 1,1969),Korropa S: penlasaran adaiah menghasilkat~shnreliolo'er Calabro (I 971), Bell B Ernory (1 971), Starlipf 1,airie n~elaluipenyajian nilai unggul bagi (1978) qf Kohli & Jaworski (1990b, p.5) saiiipai pelaliggan (Pawitra, 2001). Penalarannya adalah kepada pandangan yanj: rt:latif baru seperti sel~againianadisajikan pada skcrlln berikut. Kotler (1994, p. 6, 2001,11 8,) dan Gtrtn~~resoli
( ; I I S ~ ( I I I~'<:!I~C I I < ~ ~(.Yt~i~ct.rr)r C'i~:,fr)~~icr P'OIIIC - SCV)
,S~iri.!fit~~Iioti (CS) , S ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ r(r' ot ir ~ ~r i/ ~ c/ cl i A(li'(it~/fl,qc Ii~,e (SCA) ('I,.*II~III(,~
I'enalarai l~irarkitiijuui gcnerik pcriins:irnri d~perkiln!ole11 scjurnlati bcsnr pei~clttiany m g niernbuktikan aduiya hi~biingmipositif alir:ira orientasi pasar dengan I. inerja ( ~ n t n r alain Narieu LC. Slntcr, 1990; Greenley, 1995, Kolili 'C. Ja\vouski, 1990a; Rhuian & Snliitl, IriC>7. Matsuno LP: h,lentzer, 2000).
hleniirut Kolili & Jaworski (1990q p. 6) oricntas pasar adnlah : Orgi~i?iraliotnvidcgrtlcrnrioii ojfti
I ' E N G E : l ~ I ' I ~ \ NKONSl'llLiI<. , I)INAhlIli~i, darl B E R B A C A I PERSI'EhTIF l
Dctiiiist dari Kolili 'C. Jaworski (1990a) diti~sj~irasikari dari konsep pcmasarati Felton (1959, p. 5 5 ) . Konscp tersehut rnerupakan pmtlangan operasional tcrhadap dua diiri lirna tcnia \{]ti penvisaran yang dijelakan di atas yaitu tbkus pada pelanggan dm pen). terkoordinasi. Baritsdale 6:Draden (1 971), Mc. h'amara (1972) qf Grelval & Tansuhaj (2001), d m Pawitra (1993) rnenegaskan bahwa orientasi 1mar merup'lkan itnplementasi dari korisep
Mcskijiltii terdapat berbaj;ai 1:ellgcrtian )'RIig dtkembangkrul rnengerlai oricri!;ist pnsar, tetapi empat orang yang rnetnbcrikrui kotllribusi pcn!ing bagi pcngembmgrui konscp tcrscbit! adalah Kohli 6: Jawor:;ki :inn Narver k Slnter
12 analisis. Ilhhun IV, Nonlor G, bfaret 2003
Y
pemasaran. Derdasarkan pcngcrtinr~tcrscbut, rnak:~ Kohli et al. (1993) mengembangkan pengukuran . . terhadap orientasi pasar yang dikenal dengan MAKKVIC (nlarket orientalion). Kornponen utama MARKOR -sesuai definisi yang ir~telligence mendasarinya-terdiri dari generation, intefligerlce dissenrirlatior~,d m i17lelligence res/~ot~sivet~ess. Ketiga komponcn tersebut diukur ole11 32 iten1 pengukuran. MARKOR dikernbangkan secara terus menerlis. hingga pada tahun 2000 Matsuno ct al. mengembmgkan pengukuran tersebut menjadi 44 item pengukuran. Adapun Narvcr Rc Slatcr (I 990, p. 2 1 ) menpatakan bahwa orientasi pasar terdiri atas tiga komponen perilaku -- orientasi pelanggnn, orientasi pesaing, dan koordinasi interfungsional - dan dua kriteria pengambilan keputusan --fokus jangka panjang dan kemampulabaan. Pengertian Narver fl: Slater (1990) konsisten dengan pengertian dari Kohli Rc Jaworski ( 1 9 9 0 ~ )Orientasi . pclnnggnn dar~ pesaing meliputi seluruh aktivitas dalam upaya perolehan informasi mengenai pelnnggitn d m pesaing pada pasar sasaran. Selanjutnya infonnasi tersebut disosialisasikan ke seluruh organisasi. Koordinasi interfungsionai berbasis pada inforlnasi yang diperoleh dari pesaing dar~ pelnnggnn rnencerminkan upaya terkoordinir dari seluruh organisasi untuk menyajikan nilai unggul bagi pelnnggnn. Dcngan dernikian dapat disimpulkan bahwa komponen perilaku pada ~
pengertian Narver & Slater (1990) konsisten dcngan pengertian orientasi pasar dari Kollli & Jaworski (1990a). Mavondo & Farell (2000) juga rnenyrmpulkan bahwa terdapat kesarnaan antara definisi orientasi pasar dari Kohli & Jaworski (1990a) dengan Narver & Slater (1990) yaitu : (z keduanya rnenitik beratkan pada pelnnggan pad; fokus pada peran pelunggnlr dalam manifcstnsi orientasi pasar, (b) keduanya mengandung orientai eksternal. (c) keduanya mer~yadari pcntir~gnyarespon pnda tingknt orgnnisas~,(1:111 (d) disadari bahwa kepentingan stakeholder tliui atnu kekuatan lainnya menibentuk kcinginan dnn ekspekrnsi pelnnggnri Pengukuran terhadap pengertian orientasi pasar berdasarkan definisi dari Narver & Slater (1990) adalah MKTOR (rtlarket orieritation). Dirnensi MKTOR terdiri atas 21 item pengukuran. Menurut Pelharn (1993) qf Farrell 9. Oczkowski (1997), memiliki struktur yang lebih sederhma disbanding MARKOR.
-
2. Dinamikn Perkembarigurl Konsep Orientnsi Pasnr Penelitian mengenai orientasi pasar dilakukan secara terns menerus dari tahun ke tahun untuk mengembangkan elemenlelemen yang mernbentuknya, agar lebih bajk dalarn menjabarkan konsep pemasaran. Tabel berikut menyajikan berbagai penelitian yang relevan dengan ha1 tersebut.
Tnbel 1. ~ e n e l i d n r01,ientnsi ~ Pasnr dari 'l'nli~rnlie T n l ~ u n
Peneliti
Contoh & Negnrn
l'ipe Irrdustti
Elemen MARKOR
Narver & Slater, 1990
113 SBU, USA
Industri produk-produk
Orientasi konsumcn, orientasi pesaing, koordinasi
kellutanan, dist. kornoditas khusus, eksportir Lintas Industri
interfugsional, fokus pada profit jangka pmjang
Industri berteknologi tinggi
Menggunakan sub skala informasi, pengembangan strategi orientasi pasar, implementasi strategi berorientasi pasar
FIooley et.al, 1010 Cbief blarkctrng 1990 executives, UK Ruekert, 1992 5 SBU p'ada satu penrsaliaan (400 data : manajer dan tenaga penjual)
Peran dan funsi pemasaran
Elemen MARKOR Doyle & Hooley, 1992
1380 l~crusah:lan,Ill< (Ciiief' Marke-tirig Executives)
Kohli et. al. , 1993
229 SBU, USA
Lintas Industri (I~ifornlanpenlasaran dnrl non pernasaran)
Jaworski and Kohli, 1993
222 SBU, USA
Lintas Jndustri
Diamantopoul os and Hart. 1993
87 perusahaan, UK
Selnes et. d . , 1996 nhiiian and tiader, 1997
198 SBU di USAdai 237 SLiU di Scandinavia 23;' ruriinli s:lkir di I ! S A
Lintas industri
483 ~~erusalinari in-tlustri, Nederluid
Cadogan et. a]., 1997
1911 pcrusnha,ui d n r ~l i t i dark 103 perusahaan dari Belanda
It~telligencegeneration, it~telligencedissenri-tlation, it~telligenceres-pensiveness, response inrj~lenletllolion Persepsi konsep pemasaran (4 dirnensi) : tujuan pernasaran, fokus pemasaran, sentralisasi pernasaran, orientasi pasar (versi Kohli and Jaworski). Replikasi dari Kollli and Jaworski
I<1111i:iIi snk~l inrelligence responsiveness Orientasi pernaharnan pelanggan, orientasi kepuasan pelanggan, onentasi pesaing Orientasi pelanggan, orientasi pesaing, orientasi pemasok, koordinasi interfungsional R.r~,ot.~ it~tclligoicc~cttcrn~iori. export itrtelligetlce
Peltham, 1997 160 perusahaan, LISA
Larigerak el. ai., 1997
Pendekatan terhndap pemasaran, sikap CEO terhadap pemasaran. peran pemasaran dalarn perusahaan, hubungnn kcrja antar bagian fungsiond It~telligetrcegeneration, itrtelligence dissetnit~aliot~. irltelligence res]~onsivetlcss
intelligence rcspott.ri~~erfcss. Gounaris and Avlonitis, 1997 Liu and Davies, 1997
44.1 perusdiann dari Yunani
Carualia et.al., 1998 Kulnar et. a].,
84 p1:rgilruan tinggi tli New Zenland 159 rumah sakit di USA
194R
L~ntasIndustri ( IO%jasa)
1 15 perusallaan
I'crguriia~i Tinggi Rur~ldiSakit
Orientasi pasar scbagai sikap dan sebagai perilaku )versi Kollii and Jaworski) A4urket intelligence, respotlssrvencss, conrpetitor orientution, coordinnfion of brrssirless operntiorr Diadaptasi dari s k d a Kohli and Jaworski Diadaptasi dari skala Narver and Sllt~~
14 nnnlisi.~.Tnlrrrn IV, Nonror 6,,\4o,r8/200.7
Peneliti
Contoll & Negarn
Tipc I~ltlustri
E l e n ~ e nMAKKOR
Lado et. al., 1998
34 perushaan di Belgia, dan 32 perusahnnn di Spanyol
Industri Asuransi
Van Egreen and O'Connor, 1998 Chang 'and Chen, 1998
67 pemsahaan (Ian 289 L~ntasIndustri Jasa tim manajemen puncak secara individu, USA IS0 perusaha,ul di tatwail Droker Sahan~
Gray et. Al, 1998
374 Senior Executives dl
Analisa klien, analisa dis-tributor, analisa pesaing. analisa lingkungan, koordi-nasi interfi~ngsional,tindakan strntegik pndn pclnnggnn, tindakan strategik pada pesaing, tindakan stiategik pada lingkungan makro Orientasi pelnnggnn, orientasi pesaing, koordinasi ir~terfi~ngsional Orientasi pelanggan, orientasi pesaing, koordinasi interfungsional, dan oricntnsi profit Orientasi pelnnggnn, orientasi pesaing, koordit~asi interfungsionai, respon, dan penekanan pada profit Orientasi pclnnggan, orielitasi pesaing, koordinasi interfungsional lntelligetrce generatiott, it~/elligencedisserrrir7n-tioti, in/clligerice respon-sivet~ess Oricnlnsi ~ ) r l n l ~ g g noricl11:lsi t~, pesaing, koordinasi interfungsional
Vorhies et.al., 1999
Lintas Iritiuslri
New Zealand
134 perusal~amdl USA
Da~k
87 perusal~aar~ di Australia
Lintas Industri
Grewal and Tansul~aj, 200 1
Lintas industri
Sebagaimana ditunjukkan pnda tabel, dari berbagai penelitian yang dilakuka~untuk mengembangkan konsep orientasi pnsar, kesemuanya berakar pada satu ha1 yang harus diperhatikan perusahaan yaitu mengidentifkasi dan menyajikan nilai unggttl bagi pelanggan. 3. Rerbngai Perspektif TerhntInp Konscp Orientasi Pasar
Berbagai studi telah dilakukan itntuk nlerumuskan orientasi pasar. Studi-studi tersebut
rrsporise design, response in~~)len~~t~tolioti
telali menghasilkan berbagi definisi, cara pandang, dan elemen-elemen untuk mernbalgun konstruk orientasi pasar. Dan hasil studi tersebut definisi orientasi pasar dapat disimpulkan sebagat benkut (Soehadi, 2001) : a. Sebagai filosofi bisnis (Cespedes, 1990; Lichtental and Wilson. 1992; Hooley et. a)., 1998). b. Sebagai bentuk budaya dan sikap (Gounaris and Avlonitis, 1997; Day and Wensley, 1981 Verhees, 1998; Narver and Slater, 1990). c. Sebagai keyakinan dan nilai dalarn organisasi
Indrinnfy Sridirnran, S~ratrrI'endekafarr Bani . . . . . . . 15
-.
I
(Payne, 1988; Wcbster, 1988; D..sphmd< et al., 1993). d. Sebagai perilaku (Avlonitis and Gournaris, 1997; Langerak and Commandeur, 1998; Narver and Slater, 1990). e. Sebagai aktivitas atau proses (Sapliiro, 1988; Day, 1994; Hunt and Morgan, 1995; Cadognn et al.,1997; Kohli and Jaworski, 1990; Ruekert, 1992) StuJi S C ~ ~ I I I ~ L II II I C~ I~I CI OI ~ I ~I II I C I I ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I L ~ I I I beberapa konsep ynrig berhubungnri dianti~ra konstmk-konstruk orientnsi pasar, ~liisnlr~y;~ : a. Pengolahan inforrnasi pasar (Jaworski and Kohli, 1996; Tuominen and hloller. 1996). b. Pembelajaran organisasi (Slater arid Narver. 1995; Tuominen and Moller, 1996). c. Kriteria pengambilan keputusan (Narver and Slater, 1990; Deng a i d Dart, 1994; Gray, Matear and Matheson, 1998). d. Integrasi interfungsional (Shapiro, 1988; Narver and Slnter. 1990; Cndogan and Diarnontopoulos, 1995). e. Orientasi Peniasok (Langgerak et a], 1997; Parkinson and Chambers, 1998) atau . . KwAiiab ~ I I ~: $L? 6, , % k - - - . and Chambers, 1998). Dari berbagai definisi yang ada, patla intinya orientasi pasar dapat didekati dari dua sudut pandang yaitu sebagai nilni bersania darl budaya, dan sebagai perilaku ynng diejawantahkan dari konsep peniasar,m. Sebagai suatu budaya, orientasi pasar merigandung pedoman yang mengarahkan perilaku individu dalam organisasi. Day (1999) menyatakarl budaya dan kapabilitas rnemiliki hubungan yang simbiotik. Kapabilitas nlerupakan sekumpulan keternnipilan yang tcrintegrnsi, tcknologi, (Inn akumulasi pernbelajaran yang dilatili nielalui proses keorganisasian.
PERICEMRANGAN d a ~ CUSTOMEN i DRIVEN, MARKET DRIVEN, dnn DRIVING M A R K E T Pada era 1960 sarnpai 1990, perusahaan berusaha untuk memuaskan kebutuhan d m keinginan konsumen rnelalui pemahaman yang mendalam mengenai konsumen (Keegan,. . . .). Karenanya perushaan diharapkan untuk nienjadi crrstonler oriented atau crlstotner dri~,ctr.Namun, berorientasi hanya kepada konsumen saja belum cukup. Perushaan seyogyanya memuaskan
--
kebutuh,ul dan keinginan konsun~ensecara lebih bai k daripada pesaingnya. E dimasukkannya unsur pesaing mengimplikasikm perlunya orientasi pasar karena mencakup konsurnen dan pesaing (Day, 1998; Cravens, 2000). Jaworski et al. (2000) menyntakan bal~w: ada dua pendekatan yang dapat dilakukan u n h k herorientnsi pnsnr, yaitu pendekatnn rtrnr~ker ~/III,<.II ili111 I I C I I ~ O ~ I I I(/r.i~,/i~fi ~~II trrti~.h<.f. At~irh(./ 1/,?1~etrrncrujuk pnda orientasi bisnis yang l,crdasarkiui padn pclnnharnan dnn rerlksi terhadap pilihan-pilihan dan perilaku pernain tii struktur pasar yang ada. Strategi tradisional berfokus pada konsumen dirnana diasumsikan baliwa konsumen mengetahui apa yang mereka inginkan. Inlplikasi dari hal tersebut adalah /he niles ojtheconrpetitive gome dibentuk oleh pernbeli (Carpenters et al., 2001 qf Iacobucci, 2001). Sedangkan pendekatan dtiving nrarkel rncngi~npliknsikanpengaruh tcrhndap struktur pnsar dan atau perilaku pasw dengan tujuan ~iieningkatkanposisi persaingan. Marker driving daoat dilakukan dengan .];go peuuwalarl y u ~ uII d a ~ niodifikasi fungsional. Pendr dckonstruksi dilakukan deng'an mengeli~ninirpemain pada pasar. Sebdiknya pendekatan konstmksi ben~payamernbangun atall nlemodifikasi pernnin baru pada pasar. I'endekatan modifikasi fungsiond meliputi perubahan fungsi yang diunjukkan para pernain di pasar yang ada. Baik pendekatan trlarket dril'en dan driving ~trarkrt,sarna-sama berfokus pada konsumen, pesaing, dan kondisi pasar secara umurn.
FEMBELAJARAN PELANGGAN SEBAGAI KOhlPONEN SINERGIS YANG MEMBENTUK MARKOR PLUS Meskipun diyakini bahwaorientasi pasar dapat meningkatkan kinerja, namun orientasi pasar masih memiliki beberapa kelemallan dalan: prakteknya. Beberapa penelitian menunjukkan bahawa orientasi kepada pelar~ggrnsecara berlebihan dapat merusak organisasi (Bemet & Cooper, 1979; Frosch, 1996; Mac Donald, 1995; qf Grewal & Tansuhaj, 2001). Sebutlah misalnya Christensen & Bower (1996, nienyimpulkan dari analisisnya pada industri hard disk drive bal~wa"perusahaan tersebut kehilangan posisinya sebagai Pem
indnstri.. . karcna mcrc!<:i tcrlnlu 111cridcngn1k;ln pelanggannya. Selain itu, inasi? terdapat beberapa kclemahan orientasi pasar untuk pencapaian tujuan orgulisasi melalui penyajian nilai unggul bagi pelanggn~r (SCV) d a i penciptnnn keunggulan berdaya s:iing berkelanjutui (SCA). Kelemahan-kelernahan teisebut antara Inin :
yang akan datang sehingga perusaliaan per111 mengaral~kannya,:;ebclurn pcrusallaa~ilain meiakukruinya. t i ~ l ~ s o(199 r i 1 ) nienyataka~l bahwa perusahaan yang akan meiijadi pemeriang adalah mereka Sang berada tli depan k u ~ v aperubidian. b. Meskipun kebutulia~~ tersebut dapat diidentifikasi oleh ~~elnriggiiri, nicrcka sendlr~ tidak niampu menent~lkancara terbaik ur~tuk tnemenuhinya (Kaldor, 1971 qf Gabel, 1935) Dun kondisi diatns menginlplikasikan bali\va orientasi pelanggan tidak akari mengliasilka~~ ssuatu inovasi yang niampu rnembedakan suatu perusahaan dcnj:an perusaliaan lainnya. sehingga mengurangi SCA. c. Pandangan tersebut diperkuat oleh Nammel & Prahalad (1994) yang menganggap pelanggan sebagai ol.ang yang kurar: wawasan, oleh karena itu orientasi pelanggnn merupakan tirani b~igikonscp oricntnsi pasnr Berdasarkan beberapa pertiniba~iyan tersebut, penulis mengajukan pcmbelajnrnn pelanggan sebagai komponen suplernen terhadap konsep orientasi pasar agar rnanipu rnenghasilkan efek sinergis yang menjadikan operasionalisasi konsep tersebut lebih efektif. Penambahan komponen pcn~belnJarnripc1nrigg:iri sebagai suplemen konsep orientasi pas= tcrinspirasi dari (Ian sekaligus n~crupakanhasil sintesa dari dua pendekatan terhadap orientasi pasar yaitu rtrarkc~d~i;jendan drit,ir~gniarkct, teori pembelajnrnn, dan persepsi sebagai penggernk perilnku. Nanlun demikian, konteks cfrrving nrarkel yang dimaksudkan penulis, berbeda dengan konteks dari Jaworski, I
implikasi dari kata "pengnruh" deng'an pembelajaran kepada peiar~gganagar manipu menilai jenis, kualitas, dan diferensiasi dari suatu produk. Pada artikel in;, komponen orientasi pasa yang disintesakan bersumber dari pengertiati dan pengukurai dari Kohli & Jaworski (1 990a, l990b). Konsep tersebut dipcrkaya dengan k n t l l l ~ u 1 m ll ~ ~ ~ l ~ l ) ~ l ~ n wj nl n~~. ~ng~grnOrllr l ~s r I l : ~ l itu penulis menamakainyn MAIIKOR Plus. Selanjutnya, pengertian orientasi tlikcmballpkan mcnjndi upnyn pcnggalinri ~ntorrnas~ pasar, mend~sem~nas~kannya ke seluruh organisasi, berespon berdz iritelije~ipasar tersebut, dan niemberikan 1)ernbelnjnran kepada pelnr~gganagar pelanggn nianipu memahami dan menilai diferensiasi pellawaran organisasi. Konsekwensi logis dari pcngenqbangan konsep orientasi pasar tersebut adalah perlunya menyertakan pengukuran ~)cnibclnJnl~nn pelnnggnn pad8 pengukuran orientasi pasar (skala MARKOR) sehingga rne~ijadiMARKOR Plus. Pembelnjnrnn pelnrlggarl rnembentuk pemahaman, persepsi, logika, dan preferensi terhadap produk dan merk. Dalanl situasi persaingan yang tajam. I keuriggulan merk dapat dikembangkan melalui pembelajaran pelangan. Strategi keunggulan rncrk nkan mcnciptnkan keungguirn berdnya saing berkelanjutan bagi perusaliaan. Situasi ini s q g a t nyata ketika konsulnen diperkenalkan kepada produk yang sama sekali ban! seperti penyaji jasa internet atau kulkas yang mampu mengorganisir persediaan bdian rnakanan. Konsumen sama sekali tidak nieniiliki pengetahurn nnlengeriai produk, konsep nilni tent'ang produk tersebut, dan pengalaman u n h ~ k rnarnpu memilili diantara tawaran yarig tersedia. Produklmerk yang sukses biasanya adalah milik para pionir. Pekejaan utama pionir adalah (Carpenter, 2001 qf Iacobucci, 2001) : a. Mcriy~jarikonsu~ncnrnengenoi nspek-wpek penting dari produk tersebut (membentuk persepsi) h. Menciptakan konsep nilai terhadap produk (membentuk preferensi konsumen untuk menyukai produk) c. Membantu konsurnen menciptakan logika untuk memilih diantara merk para pionir (mengembangkan strategi merk). Nilai yang manipu diha
P
_C
---.
pembelajaran pelanggan tidak terbatas pada inovasi teknologi. Pcmbelnjnrat~p e l n l ~ g g n ~ ~ mampu rnengliasilkilli inovasi riilai baik r11cla1111 inovasi teknoiogi maupun terobosan strategi. Terobosan strategi dapat dilakukan ~nelalui pemahaman yang baik clan respon yang sesuai dengan karakterisitk pasar. Contoh kas~rsadalali kopi, yang mcrupakan salall satu komoditas tertua di dunia. Ritual niinum kopi telnh membcntuk persepsi dan preferclisl konsunlcrl tentang kopi. Di Indonesia, kopi umulilriya diminum ole11 pria atau riinsyorakat sctcngdl baya. Bebcrapa dekatlc lali~kopr atlniall minuman yang dipcrsepsikan niurall clan kiirarig bergengsi bagi remaja, pemudi, dan wanita profesional. Di sisi lain, perkembangan sosial menempatkan kafe sebagai ternpat yang representatlf untuk mengckspresik~mgaya Illdill) Mclalui konsep kafe, Excelso menyajika~k o p ~ dengan gaya Itali kernudian berliasil menlbentirk citra yang berbeda mengenai ritual nirnurn kopr. Saat ini setiap sore dengan n~lrdalidijuriipa~, remaja baik pria rnaupun wanita berkunip~rldr kafe rnenikmati kopi sebayai tnan~fcstas~ gaya hidup rnodeni. Mereka menggugurkiui konscp lama niengenai kopi sebagai minuntan mural1 yang lebih tepat untuk pria. Melalui pembelajaran dapat drlakt~karl reposisi ataupun penguatal terhadap kultur lama, yang selanjutnya marnpu rnenghasilkan inovasi nilai. Konsisten dengan panduigan terscbut, Carpenter et a1 (2001) qf lacobucci (2001) nienyntnknn bnliwa mclnlur ~ ~ l r l l ) r l r ~ j n ~ . i r r ~ pelanggan perusallaan akan mcnc~ptakan keunggulan by sha1)ing thc t~riesr,jrhc g(rt,rc to tlte adtjnntage of otre j ~ l n ~ over ~ e r ntro~her:Oleh karena itu, pensintesaan pembelajaran pelanggan terhadap konsep orientasi pasar, akan rnenghasilkan peryaduan sinergis yang nlarnpu rnenjadikan operasionalisasi konsep orientai pasar rnerljadi lebih efektif. Bebernpa pendapat, antara lain Slatcr (2000) menyatakari bahwa oricntasi pasar menipakan pembelrjarnn organisasi. Sebagai pembclnja~.nn,rnnka orientasi pasar riiorupoknrl faktor pendahulu (a~ltccetictl/)terhadap inovasi (Hurley & Hult, 1998). Dalam huburigai~antara pengamh orientasi pnsar terhadap kinerja, Han et al. (1998) menyatakan bahwa inovasi adalah mata rantai yang nienghubungkan a;.tara orientasi pasar dengan kinerja. Dari berbagai studi yang dilakukan misalnya Danlaripour R:
--
.- - - -
-. ..-
Evan (1984), Damanpour et al. (1989), I
I'ElrilJ'TCP Aksclerasi pembdlan perusahaan untuk lebih mernperhituiigkan
-.
.
inc
fdtor-faktor ekstemal disnl mempersiapkan faktor internal agar dapat bergerak proaktif dan memposisikan diri secara lebih efektif di tengah-tengnh arena yang kompetitif (Hunt & Morgan, 1995). Analisis yang cermat terhadap faktor ekstemal tercerniin pntln pcrlcrnpnn oricnlni pnsnr ~~crusnlinnrl. Melalui or~cntasipasar atau dengan nienjadi ttrrrrket (r'til'e~i,perusaham akan niernperolel~ informasi pasar yang aktual, akurat, drul berorientasi tindakan sebagai upay a untuk menghasilkan SCA melalui penyajian SCV ( MC Daniel (G Kolari, 1987; Day, 1990; Swartz, 1990 Kumar et al., 1997; Loubeau et al., 1997; 1998; Woodruff, 1998; Day, 1999; Pulendrarl et al., 2000; Carpenter et al, 2001 qf Iacobucci. 2001). Konstruk yang membmlgun orientasi pasar dari Kohli & Jaworski (1990) belum cukup kuat untuk mcnccrminknn suatu gernkan proaktif yang dibutulikan dalam lingkungan yang senlakin dinamis. Penulis mengs pembelajaran pelanggm sebagai kornbinasi illltara pendekatan nlarker driven dan driidng t1rnrkef. P e m b e l a j a r m pelanggan disintesakan dari kedua pendekatan tersebut, te pcrnbelnjnrrn, dan persepsi sebagai penggerak perilaku. Dengan demikian diharapkan terjalin
-
hubrrngan yang sinergis antara perusal~:inn dengan pelangg:ln. fli~burlgan tlctllikiarl berpotensi bertahan dalarn jangka waktu panjarly sebab berdasarkan asas salirig rnanfaat dan.saling percaya. Olch knrcna I I L I . hlAl
Baker, William E. & James M. Slnkula (I 999). "The Synerg~sticEffect of hlarket Orientation and Learning Orient~t' ' lon on [I/ Organizational Performance", .lor~nt~rl /he Aca(icnr)~ojMarke/ing Scietrce, Vol 27, No. 4, p. 41 1-427. Bhuiax, Shahid N. & Mohsin Habib (2000). "Enterpreneurship and Market Orientation : Direct Relationship and Their Impact on Performance", Atmkcri17g ill a (;loha1 Econon~)~ Procccclirt~s. & Abdallali Abdul-Gadcr (1997). "Market Orientation in the I-Iospital Industry", Mnrkefirlg I~eeolflt.Sen~ices, Winter, p. 37-45.
Cadogan, J.W. , A. Diamantopoulos, cPC C P , de Mortanges (1997). "Developing a Measure of Export Market Orientatiorl : Scale Construction md Cross-Cultural Validation", Wanvick Business Scliool. Cravens, David W. (2000). ,Sfr.nlch.il.Alcrt.k~rirr,~. 6'' ed., McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.. Doston.
-
Dawes, John (1999). "The Relationship between Subjective 'and Objective Conipany Performance Measures irl h?:irkct Orientation Research : Further Empirical Evidence", A4arke1irtg Biilleiirr, Vol. 10, p. ,
--
" J - , 2.
. .
Day & Prakasl~Medurigadi (1994), "Marlaserial Representations o1 Conlpctttive Advantage", Jorrurai ofMor.kcir~rg,Vol 58, p. 3 1-44.
-
(1990). Mclrhct Dril~errStrtrtegy : Procesres F o r Crealirtg I/olrre, The Free
I'ress, A Division of S i n ~ o nRc S c h ~ ~ s t c r Inc., New York. (1999). Tlre Market driver^ Org(rrtizotiotr : U~rrlersfnrlditig, Attructirrg, ontl Kecpirrg I'rrlrci~ble (.ir.rtor,rrrs, Tlle I'1.c~ Press, A I)ivisiorr of Simon Rc Schuster, Inc., Kew York. , George & Liarn Fnhey (1 988),
"Valuing Market Strategies". .lorinto/ i!/ Marketing. Vol. 52, p. 45-57. I:arrell, Mark A , & Edward Oczkowsk~(199'7) "An Analysis of the MKTOR and MARKOR Measures of ? Orieritation : An Austra1i;ul Perspective", Marketing B111Ietit1,Vol. 8, p. 30-40 Gabel, Terrance G. (1 995). "Market Orientation Theoretical and Methodolc Concerns", American blur Associotiorr, Summer, p. 368-375. Greenley, G.E (1995), "Market Orientation and Cotnpany Perfom~ance: Empirical Evidence from UK Companies, ",Brirish Joi1171a1ofh4anngenrenf, No. 6, p. 1 - 13. Grewal, Rajdeep & Patriya Tansuhaj (2001). "Building Organizational Capabilities for Managing Economic Crisis : The Role of Market Orientation and Strategic Flexibility", J o ~ r n i aofMarketing, l Vol. t p. 67-80. Gummesson, Evert (1 999). Total Relationshri, Markeri~tg:Rellrinking Marketing Management, Fronr 4Ps to 30Rs, Dutterwortll-Heir1emanti. Oxfortl.
ITarnel G. & C.K. Prahdad (1994). C o n r ~ e t i r ~ ~ , J fItc J.'trttrrc. Harvard Business School 1'1-c: Boston. Han, Jin K., Nam\roon Kim, & Rajendra K. Srivastava (1998). "Market Orientation and Organizational Performance : Is -Innovation a Mis~inn.Ljnk ?", JorinrabL Adarketing, Vol. 62, p, 30-45. 1-Iurley,Robert F.& G. Thomas M. H ~ 1 (1998). t "Innovation, h4arket Orientation, and Organizational Learning : An Integration and Empirical Examination", Jozilnal q/ Markefhrg, Vol. 62, p. 42-54.
111~11.i~rrr0, .Sr~drr?rmrr..Tllo/ir Pcrtilcka/atr Nnnr
Iacobucci, Dawn (2001). Kellogg on h~li,~.krti~ifi, John Wiley w d Sons, USA Jaworski, Bernard, Ajay K Kolili S: Arvirid Sal~ay(2000). "Market - Drrveri V e r s u ~ Driving Markets", .ior~t?inlc!//i~c ,4c~adi,111~, qfMarkeling Sciorce, Vol 28. No I , p. 45-54. Keegm" \Wnrrcri J (1 09 5 ) . I!krrr~rjc~rior 1'~lf~~l.varlir~ (;lilI1~~/, 1:c\1s1 lj~dl:ls~1 Intloriesia, Jilid 2, Prerihnlliritlo, Jnknrtn Kohli, Ajay K. & Bernard J. laworski (1090a) "Market Oricr~tation: The Construct. Research Proposi lions, allti Maringerin1 Implications", Jorr17rol o,fA4arkctitrg, Vol 54, p. 1-18.
. . . . .. . 1 9
Lukas, Blyan A. & 0. C. Ferrell (2000). "The Effect of Market Orientation on Product Innovation", J o l ~ m aojtlre l Acoclenty ?J A-lnrke~ing.Tcierrce, Vol. 28, No. 2, p. 239-247.
hlatsi~no,Ken, Jolin T. Mentzer, & Joseph 0. Rentz (2000). "A Refiriement and Validation of the MARKOR Scale". ,JOIII~ICZ/
-9
cc (1993). "AlARtiOR ,I k4easure of h4arket Orientation", .loi~!.~rii/ o,fiMa,ieti~rg Xescorcir, Vol S X X , p.467-477.
Kotler, l'liilip (I 994). A,iarhc/~~r,y I\~(III~I,L~III~IJI A~raly.~i.s, l ~ l ~ r ~ ~ ~Ir i: r~rrg~, ~ I e ~ i r c ~11itl ~~~~~tior~, Control, F.UI ed Prcnt~ce-I-Itti1 Irilcrrialionnl. I!.tc., Ncw Jcrscy
.
(2000). Mar-ketitrr: h i a n n i . ~ i n o l ~'Tile . -~ -
Millenriium ed., Prent~ce-1~Iall International, Inc., New Jersey.
Kurnar, Kamalesh & llam Subramaiian (2000). "Navigating r!ie Estcrna! Enviionii>cn: Through a h4arket Or~cnt:it~ori". .S/lAf A~linr~cccl'Mat~ojicnror/./orr~rnl. W~ntcr. p. 16-30. Loubeau, Patricia S: Robert Jantzcn (1998). "Marketing Research Acti\,ities 111 I-Iospitals", A.lorkc/i~lgHcoltii Sc2~.~,iccs. Spring, p. 13-17 (199s). -.rl~cE ~ ~ C CofI Managed Care on Hospital Marketitig Orientation", .lorrnrol ?/tIelenl~I~cii~~e Martagenrent. Vol. 43, p. 230-241
hIcDaniel, Steplien W . & James W. Kolari (1987 "Marketing Strategy Implications of the Miles ,and Snow Strategic Typology". Jorinlal o/Markc/!rlg, Vol. 51, p. 19-30. Narver, John C. CQ Stanley F. Slatcr (1990). "Thc Effect of Market Orientation on Busincss I'rofitability", ./orr17ml r;/Ahrkc~i~r,y, October, p. 20-35. r1:i\vilrn, TccI(ly (I9Q3).I ' c I ~ ~ , ~ . v:I II);III(~IIT; I.~~I 17nlsafal~,Disiplirt, d m Kealilion, Sekola -.I ~ n g g Manajemeii i Prasetia Mulya. Jakarta. (2001). Hirarki Trrjlrar~Golcrik Penlosoran, Bahmi Kuliah Pcninsnran S3 hlannjcmet~Program Pascasarjana Universitas In(lc Jakarta Puleridran, Sue, Richard Speed & Robert E. Widing (2000). "The Antecedents and Consequences of hfarket Orientation in Australia", Aus~ralian.lour-r~alo j Managenrerrt, Vol 25, No. 2, p. 119-143. Slater, Stanley F. & John C. Narver (2000). "Intelligence Generation 'md Superior Custorner Value", J o ~ r n l aoffhe l Acndcnl ojMorketitlg Scier?ce,Vol. 28, No. I , p. 120-127.
20 analisis, Talrritl II'. Nonror 6, Adarct 2003
Soehndi, Agus W . (2001). 771c I~rI~~tio~r.slri~~ her~t'ecrlAdorkc, Orie~r~ntiotr, S~~l~l~lirr. Pnrl~rershil~. Drr'irot~rrretrtolFaclors, orrd Fin)] Perfon)ronce i~r11)dottesinnI<eloil. Fimrs, University of Stratllclydc Glmgow, UK. Swartz, Gordon S. (1990). "Organ~zingto Become Market-Driven".
Sc~erlce Inshtute, Camb Mnssncl~usetts,Report No. 90- 123. \Yoodruff, Robert B. (1997). "Customer Valuc : The Next Source for Cornpetitive Advantage", .lorrrnal flfllre Acadenr), c?f Marketirig Science, Vol. 25, No. 2, 139-153.
Marketing
