A Cross-National Investigation into the Marketing Department's Influence Within the Firm: Toward Initial Empirical Generalizations

Abstract

This study of the influence of the marketing department (MD), as well as its relationship with firm performance, includes seven industrialized countries and aims to generalize the conceptual model presented by Verhoef and Leeflang (2009). This investigation considers the antecedents of perceived MD influence, top management respect for the MD, and MD decision influence, as well as the relationships of these three influence variables with market orientation (MO) and business performance (BP). Meta-analytic procedures reveal initial empirical generalizations: Accountability, MD innovativeness, and the customer connection capabilities of the MD relate consistently to all three studied MD influence measures. The generalization also shows that MD influence contributes to BP indirectly through its positive relationship with MO and directly through its positive direct relationship with BP.

Paving the way for “distinguished marketing”

“…Verhoef et al (2009b) conclude that only about 20% of all firms perform statistical analyses using the data they collect.…”

Revisiting the relationship between marketing capabilities and firm performance: The moderating role of market orientation, marketing strategy and organisational power

“…Fundamentally, the research on marketing capabilities can be classified into two types: A) the ability to engage with advertising, pricing, product characteristics, distribution, communication, selling, planning and implement plans (Fahy et al, 2000;Morgan et al, 2009;Murray et al, 2011;Smirnova et al, 2011;Ngo & O'Cass, 2012); and B) accountability, the ability to connect with customer, innovativeness, collaboration and organisational power (Moorman & Rust, 1999;Rust et al, 2004;Verhoef et al, 2011).…”

“…Hence, market orientation becomes a fundamental characteristic of the learning organisation. While MO is considered as an antecedent of performance (Moorman & Rust, 1999;Verhoef et al, 2011), MO may play a moderating role in the use of marketing capabilities, as market oriented firms tend to develop more effective capabilities (Zhou & Li, 2010;Smirnova et al, 2011). MO is also conceptualised as an antecedent to some capabilities (Nasution et al, 2011), although there is no conclusive evidence to suggest whether MO moderates the relationship between capabilities and performance, or rather capabilities play a mediating role between MO and performance.…”

“…The first contribution lies in explaining the conditions under which marketing and the marketing department contribute to competitive advantage. While the research on dynamic marketing capabilities are fostered by the advancement of relationship marketing and service-dominant logic, paradoxically practitioners are experiencing a loss of relevance and influence of the marketing department within the firm (Verhoef & Leeflang, 2009;Verhoef et al, 2011), with marketing departments being in jeopardy (Webster, 1992;Homburg et al, 1999;Webster et al, 2005;O'Sullivan & Abela, 2007) and chief marketing officers (CMOs) fearing for job loss (Lee, 2012). Therefore, the research on marketing capabilities and performance shows an apparent tension between a paradigm shift towards a service-dominant logic and the loss of importance of the marketing department with the firm.…”

Getting in with the “In” crowd: how to put marketing back on the CEO's agenda

“…Third, the lack of empirical evidence linking marketing activities to an increase in firm performance (e.g., Verhoef et al, 2011).…”