The curvilinear relationships between responsive and proactive market orientations and new product performance: A contingent link

Recent research has defined market orientation as two dimensions, responsive and proactive market orientations, and further argued that an inverted U-shaped relationship exists between each of these two market orientation dimensions and new product performance. However, empirical evidence has not confirmed such a nonlinear relationship. This study argues that the curvilinear relationship between the two dimensions of market orientation and new product performance may depend on external environmental characteristics. A total of 107 new product development programs in five high tech industries constitute the analytical sample. Hierarchical regression analysis reveals that under a high level of technological turbulence, responsive market orientation becomes detrimental to new product performance beyond a certain level; the relationship between proactive market orientation and new product performance is an inverted U-shaped under a low level of technological turbulence or competitive intensity. Results also indicate that responsive and proactive market orientations are important determinants of new product performance. These findings sharpen the understanding of the relationship between market orientation and new product performance.     

Understanding a Two‐Sided Coin: Antecedents and Consequences of a Decomposed Product Advantage*

This paper investigates the antecedents and consequences of two product advantage components: product meaningfulness and product superiority. Product meaningfulness concerns the benefits that users receive from buying and using a new product, whereas product superiority concerns the extent to which a new product outperforms competing products. The present paper argues that scholars and managers should make a deliberate distinction between the two components because they are theoretically distinct and also have different antecedents and consequences. Data were collected through an online survey on 141 new products from high‐tech companies located in The Netherlands. The results reveal that new products need to be meaningful as well as superior to competing products to be successful. This finding is consistent with the prevailing aggregate view on product advantage in the literature. However, the results also show that the effects of the two components on new product performance are moderated by market turbulence. Although each component is important in that it forms a necessary precondition for the other to affect new product performance under circumstances of moderate market turbulence, meaningfulness is most important for new product performance in turbulent markets where preferences have not yet taken shape. In contrast, when markets become more stable, the uniqueness of meaningful attributes decreases, and new products that provide advantage by fulfilling their functions in a way that is superior to competing products are more likely to perform well. In addition, the study shows that the firm's customer and competitor knowledge processes independently lead to product meaningfulness and superiority, respectively. The findings also reveal that under conditions of high technological turbulence the customer and competitor knowledge processes complement each other in creating product meaningfulness and superiority. This implies that the level of technological turbulence puts requirements on the breadth of firms' market knowledge processes to create a new product with sufficient advantage to become successful. The paper concludes that neglecting the distinction between product meaningfulness and superiority when assessing a new product's advantage may lead to an incomplete insight on how firms can improve the performance of their new products.     

Speed to Market for Innovative Products: Blessing or Curse?

The relationships among speed to market, quality, and costs are important to managers as they attempt to best establish incentives and set goals for new product development teams, allocate resources for new product development, or create positional advantage in the market. The existing literature suggests that the economic consequences of being late to the market are significant, including higher development and manufacturing costs, lower profit margins, and lessening of the firm's market value. Therefore, traditional logic has held that new product development managers need to manage the trade‐offs among speed to market, quality, and costs. While both scholars and managers have often acquiesced to performance trade‐offs among “faster, better, and cheaper,” this research attempts to improve understanding of the interrelationships between these objectives, and ultimately profit. Based on a survey of 197 managers, faster speed to market is shown to be related to better quality and lower costs; it is not necessary to sacrifice one of these outcomes. Further, the moderating roles of two dimensions of innovativeness (innovativeness to the firm and to the market) are examined on the relationships between speed and quality, as well as speed and profit. Both dimensions of innovativeness positively moderate the relationship between speed to market and quality. For more innovative products (both to the firm and the market), there is a stronger positive relationship between speed and quality than for less innovative products. Further, innovativeness to the firm negatively moderates the relationship between speed and profit. Thus, speed has a less positive impact on profit for highly innovative‐to‐the‐firm products compared with less innovative‐to‐the‐firm products. By being conscious of the projects’ levels of innovativeness (along with prioritizing various performance measures), managers can more rationally decide when to emphasize speed to market based on this study's findings.     

New Product Development Speed: Too Much of a Good Thing?

New product development (NPD) speed has become increasingly important for managing innovation in fast‐changing business environments due to continuous reduction in the product life cycle time and increase in competition from technological advancements and globalization. While the existing literature has not produced consistent results regarding the relationship between speed and success for NPD projects, many scholars and practitioners assert that increasing NPD speed is virtually always important to NPD success. The purpose of this paper is to examine the implicit assumption that faster is better as it relates to new product success (NPS). From the perspectives of time‐compression diseconomies and absorptive capacity, the authors question the assumption that speed has a linear relationship with success. The authors further argue that time‐compression diseconomies depend on levels of uncertainty involved in NPD projects. Using survey data of 471 NPD projects, the hypotheses were tested by hierarchical regression analysis and subgroup polynomial regression. The results of this study indicate that NPD speed has a curvilinear relationship with NPS, and the nature of the speed–success relationship varies, depending on type and level of uncertainty. When turbulence or technological newness is high, the relationship is curvilinear, but when uncertainties are low, the relationship is linear. In contrast, the results of this study suggest a curvilinear relationship under conditions of low market newness but not when market newness is high. The present paper asserts that time‐compression diseconomies and absorptive capacity are important theoretical constructs in understanding speed in NPD. The different impact of market newness and market turbulence on NPD speed supports the distinction of newness and turbulence as two different sources of uncertainty. Discussion focuses on the implications of NPD speed under the different conditions of uncertainty. NPD teams need to pursue NPD speed as a critical strategy, but it is necessary to analyze the source and degree of uncertainty about projects before a time‐based strategy is selected. In order to address the challenges of high uncertainty, a firm needs to probe, learn, and iterate fast. In particular, NPD teams need to distinguish between the different requirements for new products in emerging and new markets, and those in fast‐changing markets. Moreover, NPD teams need to balance how fast they need to go with how fast they can go by considering team absorptive capacity and customer absorptive capacity.     

Does the use of knowledge integration mechanisms enhance product innovativeness?

This study draws upon the perspectives of organizational learning and environmental contingency to investigate how the use of knowledge integration mechanisms affects product innovativeness under different levels of technological turbulence, market turbulence, and competitive intensity. Based on a sample of 102 high-tech product projects, hierarchical moderated regression analyses reveal that product innovativeness is related to knowledge integration mechanisms in a curvilinear manner under different levels of competitive intensity, market turbulence, and technological turbulence. Specifically, under a low level of competitive intensity, market turbulence and technological turbulence, the relationship between knowledge integration mechanisms and product innovativeness is an inverted U-shape. By contrast, under a high level of competitive intensity, market turbulence, and technological turbulence, product innovativeness is related to knowledge integration mechanisms in a U-shaped manner.     

Synergy,environmental context,and new product performance: A review based on manufacturing firms

This study adopts a meta-analytic approach to review the effects of technology synergy, marketing synergy and environmental context on new product performance by aggregating the empirical evidence documented in studies published from 1979 to 2011. Based on this aggregation, the results from a structural equation analysis show that (a) increasing technology and marketing synergies improves new product performance and the performance effect of marketing synergy is stronger than that of technology synergy; (b) increasing technology synergy enhances product advantage, which increases new product performance, whereas increasing marketing synergy does not; (c) increasing technology and marketing synergies may hinder product innovativeness; and (d) improving product innovativeness increases new product performance through product advantage. These findings suggest that ignoring the intermediary roles of product advantage and innovativeness may lead to an incomplete understanding of the relationships among technology and marketing synergies, environmental context, and new product performance. The results also demonstrate that technological turbulence affects new product performance through product innovativeness and advantage; in contrast, market intensity has a direct effect on new product performance. Future studies can examine the relationships among synergy, product effectiveness, and new product performance by constructing a mediated moderation or moderated mediation framework based on the environmental context.     

Analyzing the Effects of Market and Resource Orientations on Innovative Outcomes in Times of Turbulence*

Innovation and new product success are often a core precursor to superior performance. Although research has examined the resource‐based view (RBV) and market orientation (MO) individually, limited research has evaluated and compared their effect on innovation and new product success in one study. Furthermore, relative to MO, comparatively less research has been conducted to evaluate the relationship between organizational learning (OL) and the RBV to examine their effects on a firm's ability to innovate and succeed. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of environmental variables (i.e., market turbulence and technological turbulence) on the relationship between two strategic orientations and performance and to extend a previous study. Specifically, it aims to evaluate whether a focus on the customer or the firm will impact innovation, product quality, new product success, financial performance, and customer value in settings of varying environmental turbulence. Data were collected from more than 200 senior executives. LISREL was applied to evaluate the relationships under examination. Interaction effects were assessed using a nested goodness‐of‐fit strategy using a multiple‐group solution. Results depicted significant relationships between organizational learning and both resource and market orientations. Significant relationships also emerged between each strategic orientation and various performance indicators. Interaction effects were observed for market turbulence on customer value and market orientation as well as for resource orientation (RO) on innovation in times of high technological turbulence. The paper concludes with a review of theoretical and managerial implications to stimulate further debate. These results suggest that managers seeking innovation and new product success cannot afford to ignore the environment and do so at their peril. The provision of customer value is essential for positive financial performance. Thus, management needs to monitor environmental contexts so that they are able to adjust their investment in market orientation and the requisite processes that enable its implementation. Conversely, the effects of RO on performance are more robust across industry conditions, presenting an alternative avenue for management to achieve market superiority. The paper concludes with a review of theoretical and managerial implications to stimulate further debate.     

Strategic Suppliers' Technical Contributions to New Product Advantage: Substitution and Configuration Options

Current theory lacks clarity on how different kinds of resources contribute to new product advantage, or how firms can combine different resources to achieve a new product advantage. While several studies have identified different firm‐specific resources that influence new product advantage, comparatively little research has explored the contribution of strategic supplier resources. Combining resource‐based and relational perspectives, this study develops a theoretical model investigating how a strategic supplier's technical capabilities impact focal firm new product advantage and how firms combine different resources to gain this advantage. The model is tested using detailed survey data collected from 153 interorganizational new product development projects in the United Kingdom within which a strategic supplier had been extensively involved. Empirical results support our research hypotheses. First, supplier technical performance is shown to have a significant positive impact on new product advantage. Next, we show that while supplier technical capabilities have a positive influence on supplier technical performance, the a priori nature of the supplier's task moderates the relationship. Finally, our data support our hypotheses related to the positive relationship between relationship‐specific absorptive capacity and new product advantage, and the proposed negative moderation of supplier technical capabilities on this relationship. Based upon these findings, we encourage managers to recognize that strategic suppliers' with greater technical capabilities perform better regardless of the degree of creativity required by their task; but that strategic suppliers with lower technical capabilities may partially compensate (substitute) for their lack of technical capabilities, if they are able to respond to high problem‐solving task requirements. Furthermore, we suggest that the firm's development of relationship‐specific absorptive capacity is much more important when a strategic supplier is less technically capable. A buying firm's relationship‐specific absorptive capacity can, according to our data, substitute for low supplier technical capabilities. On the other hand, where the supplier has strong technical capabilities, investments in relationship‐specific absorptive capacity have no effect on new product advantage. Our findings reinforce recent calls for research on how firms can combine different resources and capabilities to achieve superior performance.     

Using Exploratory and Exploitative Market Learning for New Product Development*

While the need for research on the market‐learning efforts of a firm in relation to its new product development is continuously emphasized, the empirical results on this issue reported so far have been mixed. The current study contends that the inconclusive nature of the empirical evidence is mostly due to the existence of different dimensions of organizational market learning—exploratory and exploitative—and to possible different routes by which these learning dimensions are linked to new product performance. More specifically, this study argues that exploratory market learning contributes to the differentiation of the new product because it involves the firm's learning about uncertain and new opportunities through the acquisition of knowledge distant from existing organizational skills and experiences. By contrast, this study posits that exploitative market learning enhances cost efficiency in developing new products as it aims to best use the currently available market information that is closely related to existing organizational experience. This study provides empirical support for this two‐dimensional scheme of organizational market learning and its consequent effects on two components of new product advantage: new product differentiation and cost efficiency. Further, given that the effectiveness of firms' strategic efforts is contingent upon the nature of the market environment, the current study examines the moderating effects of environmental dynamism and market competitiveness for this market learning—new product advantage relationship. This study is based on survey data from 157 manufacturing firms in China that encompass various industries. The empirical findings support the two‐dimensional market learning efforts that increase new product differentiation and cost efficiency, respectively. The study confirms that exploratory market learning becomes more effective under a turbulent market environment and that exploitative market learning is more contributive when competitive intensity is high. It also suggests that because of their differential direct and moderating effects on new product advantage either exploratory or exploitative market learning may not be used exclusively, but the two should be implemented in parallel. Such learning implementations will help to secure both the feature and cost‐based new product advantage components and will consequently lead to the new product success. The current study attempts to contribute to greater clarity and better understanding of how market learning influences new product success as it theoretically identifies and empirically validates the two forms of new product advantage as the conceptual mediator between market learning and new product performance.     

An Exploratory Analysis of the Impact of Market Orientation on New Product Performance

For many firms, emphasizing the importance of market orientation has taken on a mantra-like quality. Mission statements and memos, policies, and procedures all highlight the importance of staying in touch with the customer. It is also widely assumed that the relationship between market orientation and new product performance depends on environmental conditions and product characteristics. To date, however, little empirical evidence has been presented to support the assumption that market orientation influences new product performance. Kwaku Atuahene-Gima addresses this research need in a study of 275 Australian firms. In addition to exploring the relationship between market orientation and new product development activities and performance, his study examines the effects of environmental conditions and product characteristics. Specifically, the study investigates whether the relationship between market orientation and new product performance depends on the degree of product newness to customers and the firm; the intensity of market competition and the hostility of the industry environment; and the stage of the product life cycle at which the new product was introduced. The survey results provide strong support for the basic proposition that market orientation influences new product performance and development activities. The results show a strong positive relationship between market orientation and a new product's market performance. Market orientation is also shown to have a strong positive effect on proficiency of predevelopment activity, proficiency of launch activity, service quality, product advantage, marketing synergy, and teamwork. Although market orientation is generally found to be an important factor in the success of new products, its influence varies depending on the type of new product—that is, radical versus incremental. Market orientation appears to have greater influence on new product performance when the product represents an incremental change to both the customers and the firm. However, this does not mean that a market-oriented approach is unnecessary in the development of radically hew products. Market orientation also has a greater effect when the perceived intensity of market competition and industry hostility are high, and during the early stage of the product life cycle. Because market competition and industry hostility typically intensify as the product life cycle progresses, these findings suggest that the effects of market orientation are pervasive. In other words, managers should not limit their expectations of market orientation to specific projects or specific stages of the development process and product life cycle.     

Inconclusive Innovation “Returns”: A Meta‐Analysis of Research on Innovation in New Product Development*

This research on studies that have empirically examined the construct innovation provides a meta‐analysis of the marketing, management, and new product literatures. The study extends previous meta‐analytic works by drawing on 70 independent samples from 64 studies (published from 1970 to 2006) with a total sample size of 12,921. The overall objective is to propose a synthesized model that includes technological turbulence, market turbulence, customer orientation, competitor orientation, organizational structure, innovation, and new product performance. Six baseline hypotheses were developed and tested. The goal is not only to derive empirical generalizations from these literatures but also to investigate sources of inconsistencies in the findings. Four substantive and two methodological artifacts were tested to determine whether they moderate model relationships (i.e., whether the effect sizes differ for any of the six baseline hypotheses). The potential moderators were project versus program level of analysis, the nature of change required by the innovation, service versus product, country of the data's origin, continuous versus categorical measurement, and the number of scales used. From a theoretical perspective, the results corroborated the resource‐based view framework regarding the determinants and the performance outcome of innovation. New product performance (the performance outcome) is a direct consequence of innovation, and this effect is stronger when the data are collected from Western countries. This relationship holds regardless of whether the level of analysis is the new product program versus project or whether the innovation is a product or a service, a robust result relevant to researchers and managers alike. As for the determinants of innovation, the results were as follows. While market turbulence is overall not a direct antecedent to innovation, technological turbulence is overall positively related (especially when market discontinuities are considered or when the data are collected from Asian countries). Customer orientation encourages new product innovation overall, but especially at the program (as opposed to project) level in Western countries. The effect of competitor orientation is also positive. The results for either orientation construct or either turbulence construct held whether the level of analysis was project versus program or whether services versus products were examined. However, the relationship of mechanistic organizational structures to innovation, although positive in the overall sample, did vary by product (positive) versus service (negative).     

Launch decisions and competitive reactions: an exploratory market signaling study

When firms launch a new product into the marketplace they often aim to find a balance between building scale and provoking extensive and quick competitive reactions. Competitors react to new products when they perceive the product introduction as hostile, committed or when they feel that the product entry will have a large impact on their profitability. The present study develops a framework that shows how strong and fast incumbents react to perceived market signals resulting from a new product's launch decisions (broad targeting, penetration pricing, advertising intensity and product advantage). The strength of the relationships between the launch decisions and the perceived market signals was expected to depend on one industry characteristic (i.e., market growth) and on one entrant characteristic (i.e., aggressive reputation). We distinguished three market signals in our framework: hostility, commitment and consequences. Signal hostility refers to the extent to which the approach used by an acting firm to introduce the new product is perceived hostile whereas the commitment signal refers to the extent to which incumbents perceive the entrant firm to be committed to the new product introduction. The consequence signal is defined as the incumbents' perception of the impact of a new product entry on their profitability. We tested our framework using cross‐sectional data provided by 73 managers in The Netherlands who recently reacted to a new product entry. The results clearly reveal which launch decisions create which market signals. For example, incumbents consider high advantage new products hostile and consequential. Penetration pricing and an intense advertising campaign are also considered hostile, especially in fast growing markets. Broad targeting is not perceived hostile, especially not when used by entrants with an aggressive reputation. In addition, this study explored the impact of three perceived market signals on the strength and speed of competitive reaction. The results reveal that perceived signals of hostility and commitment positively impact the strength of reaction, whereas the perceived consequence signal positively impacts the speed of reaction. The article concludes with the implications of our study for managers and academics. The relevance to managers was assessed from both the perspective of the incumbent firm that must defend, and that of the rival firm that is introducing the new product.     

The Role of Value‐Informed Pricing in Market‐Oriented Product Innovation Management*

Although the positive effect of a market orientation on new product success is widely accepted and the market orientation literature has increased its understanding of how a market orientation leads to performance, the extant literature has overlooked the role of value‐informed pricing in the relationship. Value‐informed pricing is a pricing practice in which the decision makers base the price of the new product on the customers' perceptions of the benefits that the product offers and how these benefits are traded by customers against the price (that has yet to be determined). Considering that pricing mistakes may hit hard on the profitability of product innovations, it is important to firms to have a good understanding of its role. This study develops a framework in which value‐informed pricing is integrated in the relationship between market orientation and new product performance. A distinction is made between customer and competitor orientations, and relative product advantage is also included in the conceptual model. The model is tested on data obtained from managers based on a cross sectional sample of 144 firms. The respondents were involved in a decision‐making process of the pricing of a new product. The model is tested using structural equations modeling. The results show that value‐informed pricing has a strong effect on new product performance. It also reveals that each component of a market orientation fulfills a specific role in a market‐oriented organization. Value‐informed pricing is found to have important mediating effects in the market orientation–new product performance relationship. Results show that firms with a strong customer orientation engage in value‐informed pricing and develop superior benefits to customers in an advantageous product. In turn, both value‐informed pricing and relative product advantage positively affect new product market performance. However, no significant effect of competitor orientation on value‐informed pricing is found. Combined with the finding that competitor orientation negatively affects relative product advantage, this suggests that competitor orientation may hurt new product performance when this orientation is not balanced with a strong customer orientation. The results also portray that value‐informed pricing leads to higher product advantage. Interestingly, this relation is contingent on the degree of interfunctional coordination within the firm. This suggests that the relationship between market orientation and new product performance is strongest if firms integrate value‐informed pricing in the new product development process. In this sense, a market‐oriented firm mirrors the customer value perception that makes a trade‐off between benefits and price.     

The relationship between marketing agility and financial performance under different levels of market turbulence

Marketing agility is an example of dynamic capability that has significant influence on ordinary capabilities leading to superior financial performance. This makes it of interest to marketing managers. Yet the way in which this capability aligns with turbulent market environments to simultaneously influence ordinary capabilities and performance has not been adequately examined and empirically tested. This study seeks to close this gap by positing that marketing agility has both direct and indirect (through innovation capability which is an ordinary capability) impacts on financial performance. However, these relationships are moderated by market turbulence to yield both mediated moderation and moderated mediation effects. The study was undertaken in the Chinese food-processing industry where a sample of 518 companies participated. This provides an opportunity to validate theory developed in the western economies and to generalize some previous findings. Contrary to received literature we found that the impact of innovation capability on financial performance is stronger under low market turbulence; and that market turbulence moderates the indirect relationship between marketing agility and financial performance. The indirect effect is stronger when market turbulence is low than when it is high. Implications for managers and academia are discussed and limitations of the study are pointed out.     

Entrepreneurial firms’ network competence,technological capability,and new product development performance

Successfully developing new products is critical to an entrepreneurial firm’s continued success. Based on the resource management model, this study aims to answer the key research question: how entrepreneurial firms leverage network competence and technological capability to enhance their new product development (NPD) performance in a turbulent environment. Using data collected from 134 entrepreneurial firms in China, we investigate the performance effects of network competence and technological capability, and the moderating effects of technological turbulence and market turbulence. Our findings show that network competence has a positive impact on NPD performance and technological capability plays a mediating role between network competence and NPD performance. Technological turbulence enhances the performance effects of network competence and technological capability; market turbulence advances the performance effect of network competence, but fails to exert significant negative impact on that of technological capability. We discuss managerial implications of our findings and offer directions for future research.     

An International Investigation of Problem‐Solving Performance in the Semiconductor Industry*

Using a unique survey of engineers in major semiconductor companies located in Japan, South Korea, and the United States, this article analyzes how a firm's human resource (HR) system (i.e., practices that structure work, develop skills, and reward performance) and knowledge system (i.e., information access, sharing and control) are related to the problem‐solving performance of engineers. Because of the short product market life cycles in the semiconductor industry, expeditious problem solving is an important performance goal. Therefore, this article examines the performance of engineers in terms of the time it takes them to solve problems in the context of their firms' HR and knowledge systems. It was anticipated during this study that externally oriented organizational systems, which support individual career performance and mobility (an externally oriented HR system) and the use of private knowledge sources (an externally oriented knowledge system), would be associated with superior performance in terms of problem‐solving speed. The findings support this hypothesis and demonstrate the importance of externally oriented HR systems and at the same time suggest the surprising insignificance of the orientation of the knowledge systems. These findings are applicable to engineers in the sample from the United States, whereas the findings for the Korean and Japanese engineers are inconclusive. International variation is found where the U.S. engineers work under the most externally oriented and the Japanese engineers under the least externally oriented systems, and the Korean engineers fall in between. The findings of this article suggest that when constructing a work environment for new product development, managers should take into account how the underlying components of their organizational systems contribute to an internal or external focus, and how this orientation may influence performance.     

Impact of Knowledge Type and Strategic Orientation on New Product Creativity and Advantage in High‐Technology Firms

As different types of knowledge may have different effects on new product positional advantage, knowledge portfolio management in concert with the firm's strategic orientation is indispensable for new product success. However, previous research has not dealt with the knowledge resources and strategic implementations that affect new product development (NPD). To fill in this gap, the current study focuses on two dimensions of knowledge type (knowledge complexity and knowledge tacitness) and two forms of strategic orientation (technological orientation and market orientation), which influence the positional advantages as determinants of NPD outcomes. Drawing on the resource‐based view, this study explains how these knowledge and strategic orientation variables influence new product creativity, which comprised the novel and meaningful characteristics of new products. Finally, it demonstrates how these two dimensions of new product creativity differentially provide product advantages in terms of customer satisfaction and product differentiation, which lead to superior new product performance. A conceptual framework is developed and the related hypotheses provided to incorporate the study variables and to test their relationships in a sample based on data collected from both marketing and project managers from 100 U.S. high‐technology firms. The model estimation results from path analysis demonstrate that reliance on knowledge of high tacitness harms meaningfulness, while reliance on knowledge of high complexity increases both novelty and meaningfulness of new product. As expected, market orientation and technological orientation improve the meaningfulness and novelty dimensions of the new product, respectively. New product novelty and meaningfulness are shown to enhance new product advantage in terms of product differentiation and customer satisfaction, both of which contribute to new product performance. It is also found that the combinative use of market orientation and knowledge complexity, and technological orientation and knowledge tacitness positively influence both the novelty and meaningfulness of new products. This study, using the product‐level analysis, contributes to the literature by clarifying how the firm's different knowledge properties and strategic orientations both play a role as a source of new product creativity, and how new product creativity, as a valuable and rare resource, enhances new product advantage. The study results suggest that project/product managers should increase the transferability and codifiability of unstructured knowledge by stimulating intraorganizational knowledge sharing among NPD team members, and that they should promote both technology and market‐orientated practices to fully develop creativity of new products.     

Toward Further Understanding the Market‐sensing Capability–Value Creation Relationship

Earlier writings have speculated that the components of customer focus may have differential effects on customer value. This research is responsive to this call as it identifies the behavioral and cultural components that underlie a market‐sensing capability (i.e., customer focus), and undertakes a finer‐grained examination of the impact of the routines through which customer focus is manifested. Specifically, this research investigates the market learning activities (ML) that can affect the depth of the understanding achieved regarding the buyer's requirements and usage context, and the customer‐oriented practices (CO) that can affect the breadth of potential solutions generated to address those requirements. Given the possibility that some buyers may have more sophisticated needs, the role of a customer's performance standards is also considered as a moderating variable. Based on data collected from computer and electronics manufacturers via two separate surveys, the results support that a supplier's ML and CO, respectively, affect perceived customer value. The results also show that a customer's performance standards do not moderate the ML–customer value relationship. Regardless of whether the customer's performance standards (along the lines of product quality, defect rates, and on‐time delivery) are high or low, the seller must be adept at discerning changes in the buying firm's requirements and operational realities. Thus, market learning practices are needed across all customers in order for the supplier to remain synchronized with market changes and deliver superior value to them. Additionally, the results support that the positive association between a seller's CO and perceived customer value is stronger when buyers have more demanding performance standards. The generation of a broader array of potential solutions that is commensurate with a more outward focus is likely to be needed to satisfy customers with more stringent requirements. The disaggregated approach taken in this research contributes to theory by (1) providing greater insight into the domain of the customer focus construct, (2) tracing the mechanisms through which customer focus is reified, and (3) evaluating the possibility that the components of customer focus may have differential effects on customer value. The main practical implication stems from the proposal that market sensing can serve as a core competence and thereby provide the foundation for differential advantage.     

The Form of Relationship between Firm‐Level Product Innovativeness and New Product Performance in Developed and Emerging Markets

This study compares the new product performance outcomes of firm‐level product innovativeness across a developed and emerging market context. In so doing, a model is constructed in which the relationship between firm‐level product innovativeness and new product performance is anticipated to be curvilinear, and in which the nature of this relationship is argued to be dependent on organizational and environmental factors. The model is tested using primary data obtained from chief executive officers and finance managers in 319 firms operating in the United Kingdom, an advanced Western market, and 221 firms from Ghana, an emerging Sub‐Saharan African market. The model is assessed using a structural equation model multigroup analysis approach with LISREL 8.5. In the United Kingdom and Ghana, the basic form of the relationship between firm‐level product innovativeness and business success is inverted U‐shaped, but the strength and/or form of this relationship changes under differing levels of market orientation, access to financial resources, and environmental dynamism. While commonalities are identified across the two countries (market orientation helps firms leverage their product innovativeness), differences are also observed across the samples. In Ghana, access to financial resources enhances the relationship between product innovativeness and new product performance, unlike in the United Kingdom where no moderation is observed. Furthermore, while U.K. firms leverage product innovativeness to their advantage in more dynamic environments, Ghanaian firms do not benefit in this way: here, high levels of innovation activity are less useful when markets are more dynamic. If the study's findings generalize, there are a number of implications for managers of both emerging and developed market businesses. First, managers in both developed and developing market firms should focus on determining and managing an optimal balance of novel and intensive product innovativeness within the context of their unique institutional environments. Second, for emerging market firms, a market orientation capability helps businesses leverage local market intelligence, enabling them to compete with multinational giants flocking to emerging markets, but typical developed market learning approaches may be insufficient for multinational firms when seeking to compete in emerging markets. Third, for emerging market firms, access to finances helps deliver product innovation success (although this is not the case for developed market firms, possibly due to strong financial institutions). Finally, unlike developed market firms, burdened by institutional voids at home, emerging market firms appear to be less capable of competing on an innovation front in more dynamic market conditions. Accordingly, policymakers in emerging markets should consider identifying ways to help businesses raise market orientation levels, and seek to create conditions that enhance access to financial capital (e.g., direct financing, matching grants, tax rebates, or rewarding firms that innovate creatively and intensely). Likewise, since environmental dynamism is likely to be a growing issue for emerging markets, efforts to help firms become more adept at keeping up with more agile developed market counterparts are needed.     

Encroachment Patterns of the “Best Products” from the Last Decade*

Based on the examination of 239 “best products” (all those on Business Week's annual lists from the past decade), this article tests and validates a conceptual framework identifying six ways in which new products open new markets and/or encroach on original products. Three of these six scenarios involve high‐end encroachment (the new product first opens a new high‐end market, or enters at the high end of an existing market, and then diffuses down‐market), and three scenarios involve low‐end encroachment (encroachment starts at the low end, followed by diffusion up‐market). As illustrated in a 2 × 3 matrix, high‐end encroachment ensues when the new product enhances performance with regard to the market's core attribute (low‐end encroachment ensues when this performance is diminished). The three high‐end sub‐types and three low‐end sub‐types are determined by the strength of performance along an ancillary attribute dimension. If the ancillary attribute performance is week, then the encroachment of the new product on the old market is immediate (corresponding to immediate high‐end encroachment and immediate low‐end encroachment, respectively). If the ancillary performance is moderate, then the new product expands the market at the high or low end (corresponding to new‐attribute high‐end encroachment and fringe‐market low‐end encroachment, respectively). If the ancillary performance is strong, then the new product first opens an entirely new market at the high or low end (corresponding to new‐market high‐end encroachment and detached‐market low‐end encroachment, respectively). The reliability and comprehensiveness of the encroachment framework is tested by asking a panel of eight judges to categorize each of the 239 products. Results show inter‐judge reliability of 98%, with all products falling within one of the six encroachment categories. Each of the encroachment types has unique implications on product positioning and pricing, as further discussed in the paper. Thus the model helps firms identify and analyze the various possible strategies that they might choose from when introducing new products.