Organizational learning and market orientation: interface and effects on performance

This paper discusses the relationship between market orientation and organizational learning and, in particular, the former's contribution to the generation of double-loop learning. Although prior contributions on this topic have been controversial, the authors, departing from the principles of RBV, consider market orientation a resource capable of generating higher order organizational learning and, in this way, capable of additionally reinforcing firms' sustainable competitive advantage. The empirical study provides evidence on the existing relationship between a firm's learning and market orientation degree and the organization's economic and non-economic results. Findings indicate that learning orientation stimulates the market-oriented behavior and that it also positively affects the establishment of long-term relationships with strategic clients. Contrary to prior research a significant and positive effect on business performance is only contrasted in the case of market orientation.     

Intraorganizational influences on business-to-business pricing strategies: A political economy perspective

Historically, researchers have addressed pricing issues from many different perspectives, including the firm's business model (cost structure, experience curve), stakeholders (customers and channel partners), competition (market structure and intensity), and macroeconomic issues (interest rates, economic growth). An important dimension of organizational price setting that has been neglected is the impact that the firm's internal political system, reflected in interdepartmental coordination and rivalry, has upon price setting. A study of managers who are influential in shaping the firm's pricing strategy was conducted to identify intraorganizational issues and their relative impact on the firm's pricing strategy. The results of the study provide important implications for the development and execution of a firm's pricing strategy.     

Sales technology within the salesperson's relationships: A research agenda

The average cost of a sales call has declined approximately 15% over the past decade, while average salesperson compensation has doubled. These statistics illustrate an important benefit of technology: salespeople are more productive. To better understand the impact technology has played on sales and sales management, this paper examines the impact of sales technology from four perspectives: the salesperson, the field sales manager, the sales executive, and the customer. Noting that the needs and evaluations of technology vary, depending upon the functional position and viewpoint, a research agenda is offered that reflects these various perspectives.     

Cultural vs. operational market orientation and objective vs. subjective performance: Perspective of production and operations

The relationship between market orientation and organizational performance has been the focus of many studies for the last few years. The conclusions reported are very diverse and even contradictory. This ambiguity is reinforced to some extent by the high degree of methodological heterogeneity in the definition and measure of market orientation and organizational performance and the empirical formalization of the relationship between both concepts. This study tackles this question by comparing different methodological approaches. Three key aspects are considered: (1) cultural and operational approaches for measuring market orientation; (2) objective and subjective measures of performance; and (3) the source of information in the organization, specifically the perspective of production and operations. The results obtained from a sample of Spanish industrial firms show a stronger positive relationship for operational market orientation and subjective performance. Moreover, the adoption of ‘operational recipes’ of market orientation by the production and operations function seems to improve organizational performance regardless of the existence of any cultural support for market orientation.     

Barriers to the “key supplierization” of the firm

The phenomenon of key supply management (KSM) in business companies is far less investigated than the phenomenon of key account management (KAM) which beneficiates, both in practice and in an academic context, from a growing interest. This article is based on the empirical analysis of a sample of 10 international companies which have recently launched KSM programmes or are currently working on launching such programs. It examines the difficulties these companies come up against when implementing such programmes and proposes to organize these difficulties around three dimensions: 1) the difficulties in implementing real supplier portfolio approaches; 2) the narrow view of value co-creation with suppliers, and 3) the persistent lack of integration of the purchasing function with other internal functions within the company. The conclusion of the article is that KSM is far from being a mere symmetric phenomenon of KAM. Several implications are then discussed in relation to the implementation of KSM programmes within companies.     

Readability of accountants’ communications with small business—Some Australian evidence

This paper explores the readability of a new and non-corporate narrative area, accountants’ communications with small business. The distinctive motivations, agendas and interests of small business managers are considered. The findings are informed by rationales from Shearer's (2002) thesis on the influence of neoclassical economics on accounting discourse. The study finds low readability accentuated by potentially low reader interest with accounting documents composed according to conventional accounting's rules and statutory requirements. Higher readability and document content which informs small business managers’ interests is evident when accountants are not compelled to author documents with reference to these professional rules and legislation.     

Healthcare costs of stroke and major bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants

Objective: To assess long-term healthcare costs related to ischemic stroke and systemic embolism (stroke/SE) and major bleeding (MB) events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) treated with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs).

Materials and methods: Optum’s Clinformatics Data Mart database from 1/2009–12/2016 was analyzed. Adult patients with ≥1 stroke/SE hospitalization (index date) were matched 1:1 to patients without stroke/SE (random index date), based on propensity scores. Patients with an MB event were matched to patients without MB. All patients had an NOAC dispensing overlapping index date, ≥12?months of eligibility pre-index date, and ≥1 NVAF diagnosis. The observation period spanned from the index date until the earliest date of death, switch to warfarin, end of insurance coverage, or end of data availability. Mean costs were evaluated: (1) per-patient-per-year (PPPY) and (2) at 1, 2, 3, and 4?years using Lin's method.

Results: The cost differences were, respectively, $48,807 and $28,298 PPPY for NOAC users with stroke/SE (n?=?1,340) and those with MB (n?=?3,774) events compared to controls. Cost differences of patients with vs without stroke/SE were $49,876, $51,627, $57,822, and $60,691 at 1, 2, 3, and 4?years post-index, respectively (p?p?Limitations: Limitations include unobserved confounders, coding and/or billing inaccuracies, limited sample sizes over longer follow-up, and the under-reporting of mortality for deaths occurring after 2011.

Conclusions: The incremental healthcare costs incurred by patients with vs without stroke/SE was nearly twice as high as those of patients with vs without MB. Moreover, each additional year up to 4?years after the first event was associated with an incremental cost for patients with a stroke/SE or MB event compared to those without an event.     

Firm heterogeneity, productivity and spatially bounded knowledge externalities

In this paper, we argue that conceptually disentangling the ‘context versus composition’ aspects of regional growth is a multilevel issue. By applying multilevel models (also called random-effects models), we show (1) the importance of considering firm-specific characteristics simultaneously with region-specific characteristics, as we find that a large part of what is traditionally assigned to the impact of the region should be assigned to firm-specific characteristics and (2) that existing single-level methodologies can be problematic, as they are vulnerable to the charge of estimating significance levels that are too liberally assigned and promote exaggerations. This is illustrated empirically by showing that single-level approaches would lead to the conclusion that innovation spillovers are highly significant in a setting of Dutch urban growth differentials, while multilevel analyses shows less liberally assigned significance levels. We conclude that multilevel-effect models better fit research questions that combine firm and spatial characteristics simultaneously, especially because they allow firm-specific characteristics to be differently linked to their regional contexts.