The level of integration between the marketing and research and development (R&D) functions may be gauged by degree of communication, information sharing, and collaboration between the functions during the new product development process. This article examines how a firm's strategic choice regarding market orientation may influence the relationship between marketing and R&D personnel, and how this relationship may affect organizational success. Under examination are both the responsive form of market orientation, in which a firm focuses on immediate customer needs and tends to be market driven, and the proactive form, in which the firm focuses on future market needs and tends to be invention driven. It is theorized that responsive market orientation will be more positively related to marketing‐R&D integration due to the market‐driven nature of the orientation. Conversely, it is theorized proactive market orientation will be more positively related to organizational success than responsive market orientation due to the innovation‐driven nature of the orientation. The study was implemented via a Web‐based survey and data analysis was performed using structural equation modeling techniques. The results of this study provide empirical evidence that both proactive and responsive market orientation exhibit a positive relationship with marketing–R&D integration, indicating that both forms of market orientation may lead to closer collaboration between the marketing and R&D functions. Despite the assumption that a proactive orientation is driven by innovation and technology in which R&D may play a more significant role, there is evidence that a high degree of synergy is developed between the groups when the focus is on future market needs. A market‐driven responsive orientation by necessity requires high integration between departments to commercialize products in a timely manner to meet current market needs. Proactive market orientation exhibits a positive relationship with market performance, whereas responsive market orientation does not. The result may show evidence of the “new product paradox," whereby developing products to address immediate market needs may result in lower market performance because the new products may be replacements for obsolete offerings or are actually cannibalizing sales of existing products.

Abstract:Since the introduction of the proactive and responsive market orientation constructs into the market orientation literature, there has been limited empirical research regarding the antecedents of each type of market orientation and the relationship each may have on the market performance of new products. This research investigates the influence of organisational culture, competitive intensity and organisational age and size on the development of a firm's market orientation, and how these two distinct forms of market orientation may influence organisational success. The results of this study indicate empirical evidence that cultures classified as adhocracy and market exhibit positive relationships with both responsive and proactive market orientation, whereas cultures classified as clan and hierarchy do not. Competitive intensity does not exhibit a significant relationship with either market orientation classification. Proactive market orientation exhibits a significant positive relationship with market performance, whereas responsive market orientation does not. The results may guide managers in developing the appropriate organisational environment to support successful innovation efforts.

No abstract