There is growing recognition that firms in the contemporary business environment derive substantial and sustained competitive advantage from a bundle of intangible assets such as knowledge, networks and innovative capability. Measuring the return on such intangible assets has now become imperative for managers. The present manuscript focuses on the measurement of the return on marketing. We first discuss the conditions that make this task a high managerial priority. We then discuss measurement efforts to date, both in general management and marketing. We then offer a conceptual framework that places measurement efforts in a historical perspective. We conclude with a discussion on where the future of marketing metrics lies.

No abstract

This article examines how firms in interorganizational relationships respond differently to active and passive opportunism and observes how these opportunism forms erode satisfaction with the performance of these relationships. The multimethod approach of two experiments and one longitudinal field study demonstrate that firms tolerate more passive opportunism than active opportunism (Study 1) and that transaction costs play a mediating role between opportunism form and satisfaction with performance of the relationship (Study 2). Finally, the field study reveals that, over time, passive opportunism has a more corrosive impact on satisfaction with performance than active opportunism (Study 3). Together, the findings underscore the importance of distinguishing passive and active opportunism and the need to develop a better understanding of its management and consequences.

Institutional competition to retain and recruit marketing scholars capable of publishing in the leading marketing journals has intensified. Although increased emphasis has been placed on publication productivity in the leading marketing journals, little is known about questions such as (1) What level of publication productivity in the leading marketing journals does it take to get promoted in marketing academia? (2) What level of publication productivity in the leading marketing journals warrants exception? and (3) What drives research productivity in the leading marketing journals? The authors draw on the economic concept of imperfect substitution to address these questions using two data sets: (1) The authors also present findings related to promotion to full professor both from PhD conferral and from promotion to associate professor, as well as scholars identified as warranting exceptional publication productivity. The findings provide substantive implications for marketing academics, for those involved with the recruitment and retention of marketing academics, and for the field of marketing thought in general.

No abstract