1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0148-2963(97)00068-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Marketing’s Integration with Other Departments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

12
315
0
13

Year Published

2002
2002
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 295 publications
(360 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
12
315
0
13
Order By: Relevance
“…The basic argument is that a higher degree of dispersion of influence on marketing activities across different functional groups increases performance. That proposition is consistent with prior empirical findings which at a more general level found positive performance implications of activities related to cross-functional interaction and different constructs related to performance (e.g., Griffin and Hauser, 1992;Kahn and Mentzer, 1998;Maltz and Kohli, 1996;Powell, 1995). More specifically, we hypothesize positive effects of the degree of cross-functional dispersion of influence on marketing activities on each of our three performance components.…”
Section: Construct Definitions and Hypothesessupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The basic argument is that a higher degree of dispersion of influence on marketing activities across different functional groups increases performance. That proposition is consistent with prior empirical findings which at a more general level found positive performance implications of activities related to cross-functional interaction and different constructs related to performance (e.g., Griffin and Hauser, 1992;Kahn and Mentzer, 1998;Maltz and Kohli, 1996;Powell, 1995). More specifically, we hypothesize positive effects of the degree of cross-functional dispersion of influence on marketing activities on each of our three performance components.…”
Section: Construct Definitions and Hypothesessupporting
confidence: 92%
“…They have tended to show that when there is more interaction between the groups, this tends to lead to more success. Recently, Kahn (1996) and Kahn and Mentzer (1998) considered the specific construct of integration between marketing and other units and made a distinction between interdepartmental interaction (which is related to information dissemination) and interdepartmental collaboration (which is defined as mutual understanding between departments having a common vision and shared resources to achieve common goals). They found that interdepartmental collaboration showed stronger performance implications than the cross-functional interaction aspect.…”
Section: Cross-functional Interaction In New Product Developmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gupta et al, 1986;Ruekert & Walker, 1987), marketing academics in particular have been concerned with the interaction between the marketing function and other organizational units. They have investigated, among other things, the nature of marketing's integration with other departments (Kahn & Mentzer, 1998), and its relationship with areas such as a broad technical function (e.g. , manufacturing (Griffin & Hauser, 1992), R&D (Gupta et al, 1986); and Human Resources (e.g.…”
Section: Interfunctional Relationships: the Importance Of Qualitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A partir de então, diversos outros estudos foram desenvolvidos considerando diferentes aspectos da integração interfuncional. Enquanto alguns trabalhos se propuseram a conceituar a integração interfuncional (KAHN, 1996;KAHN;MENTZER, 1996;MURPHY;POIST, 1996), outros focaram aspectos aprofundados sobre o funcionamento da integração (ELLINGER; KELLER; HANSEN, 2006;PIMENTA, 2011), sua influência no desempenho (KAHN;MENTZER, 1998;ELLINGER, 2000;HAUSMAN;MONTGOMERY;ROTH, 2002;O'LEARY-KELLY;FLORES, 2002;GIMENEZ;VENTURA, 2005) e os pontos de contato (ST. JOHN;RUE, 1991;LYNCH;WICKER, 2008;PAIVA, 2010;TURKULAINEN;KETOKIVI, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionunclassified