The adoption of information technology in the sales force

The purpose of this article is to explain why salespeople adopt information technology. The results from a cross-sectional study of 229 salespeople indicate that putting sales technology to use strongly depends on salespeople's perceptions about the technology enhancing their performance, their personal innovativeness and organizational efforts in terms of user training. Throughout the adoption process companies also need to target sales line managers-next to end users-because salespeople clearly comply with the expectations of their supervisors. Finally, the threat from competing sales professionals or peers who use similar sales technology seems to be of secondary importance for individual sales technology adoption.     

The influence of business strategy on new product activity: The role of market orientation

In this paper, we propose that business strategy influences new product activity both directly and indirectly via its influence on market orientation. Accordingly, we develop a framework linking firms' relative emphasis on cost leadership, product differentiation and focus strategies to firms' customer and competitor orientation as well as their new product development and introduction activity. We use this framework to develop a simultaneous equations model that is tested on survey data from 175 Dutch firms of varying size and across different industries in the manufacturing sector. The surprising findings are that a greater emphasis on a focus strategy results in a decreased emphasis on customer orientation and that competitor orientation has a negative direct influence on new product activity and an indirect positive effect via customer orientation. We discuss the implications of these findings for theory and practice.     

Using Product Bundling to Facilitate the Adoption Process of Radical Innovations*

Generally, radical innovations are not easily adopted in the market. Potential adopters experience difficulties to comprehend and evaluate radical innovations due to their newness in terms of technology and benefits offered. Consequently, adoption intentions may remain low. This paper proposes bundling as an instrument to address these problems. More specifically, this paper examines how consumer comprehension, evaluation, and adoption intention of radical innovations may be enhanced by bundling such products with existing products. In addition, it is argued that the proposed effects are contingent upon the level of fit perceived to exist between the radical innovation and the product that accompanies it in the bundle. Furthermore, consumers' prior knowledge may affect the influence of bundling on the innovation adoption process as the interpretation of the meaning of new products may be strongly related to prior knowledge. This study therefore investigates whether consumer prior knowledge has such a moderating effect. Hypotheses are tested by means of an experimental study with three different radical innovations and distinguishing among offering the radical innovation separately, offering the radical innovation in a bundle with moderate perceived fit between the products, and offering the radical innovation in a bundle with high perceived fit between the products. Results show that product bundling enhances the new product's evaluation and adoption intention, although it does not increase comprehension of the radical innovation. Moreover, the results show that comprehension, evaluation and adoption intention of the innovation significantly decrease when consumers perceive a moderate fit between the products in a bundle. Taken together, these findings contribute to the bundling literature by showing not only that product bundling may indeed be an effective instrument to introduce a radical innovation but also that product bundling may be counterproductive when ignoring the critical role of perceived product fit as core characteristic of a product bundle. In addition, the notion that product bundling helps to enhance the evaluation and purchase intention of new and relatively complex products suggests a suitable strategy for new product managers to enhance benefits and reduce learning costs for radical innovations. Moreover, the effects of bundling on consumer appraisals of radical innovations are also shown to depend on the level of knowledge respondents possess regarding the product category of the radical innovation. More specifically, if bundled with a familiar product, novices tend to evaluate the innovative product more positively, but for experts no such effect can be detected. As such, these results provide additional specific implications for managers when introducing radical innovations in the market. Offering a radical innovation in a product bundle could be a fruitful strategy for companies that target customers with little or no prior knowledge in the product domain.     

Generalizations on consumer innovation adoption: A meta-analysis on drivers of intention and behavior

Previous research has shown that consumer intentions to adopt innovations are often poor predictors of adoption behavior. An important reason for this may be that the evaluative criteria consumers use in both stages of the adoption process weigh differently. Using construal level theory, we develop expectations on the influence of innovation characteristics across the intention and behavior stages of the adoption process. Using meta-analysis, we derive generalizations on drivers of intentions and actual innovation adoption behavior. The results show important differences across both stages. Consumers show higher levels of adoption intention for innovations that are more complex, better match their needs, and involve lower uncertainty. However, consumers are found to actually adopt innovations with less complexity and higher relative advantages. Adopter demographics are found to explain little variance in adoption intention and behavior, whereas adopter psychographics are found to be influential in both stages. These findings have implications for innovation adoption theory, for managers involved in new product and service marketing, and for future research on innovation adoption.     

Exploratory Results on the Importance of R&D Knowledge Domains in Businesses with Different Strategies

A number of studies have described the consequences of the changing patterns in the business environment for R&D departments. Fewer studies have addressed the specific implications of the changing business environment for the agenda of R&D managers. Gupta and Wilemon (1996) have provided R&D managers with a priority list for action designed to be applicable to R&D departments independent of business strategy. However, a substantial body of literature suggests that the priority listing may be different for R&D departments in businesses with different strategies. Against this background this study sets out to determine whether the priority listing is different for Miles and Snow's (1978) strategic archetypes of prospectors, analyzers, defenders and reactors. A total of 72 R&D managers of businesses competing in industrial markets in the Netherlands provided the data to test for the existence of these differences. The results indicate that the priority listings are indeed different for R&D departments in businesses with different strategies. This finding has important practical implications. The priority listings can be used by R&D managers to assess which R&D capabilities have to be developed in order to match R&D strategy with business strategy and meet the criteria for getting more commercial payback from R&D in a changing business environment.     

A Stakeholder Perspective on Buyer–Supplier Conflict

This study seeks to investigate how stakeholder power and an organization's pursuit of legitimacy influence its reaction to conflict with a supplier. We conducted an empirical study among travel agents and tour operators to test the relationship between conflict and stakeholder power and legitimacy derived from three different stakeholders. Our findings imply that power has a dual role. Whereas supplier power reduces buyer–supplier conflict, stakeholder power increases it. Moreover, this study shows that the quest to achieve greater legitimacy from the firm's competitive arena increases conflict. This study is one of the few that test stakeholder theory empirically. We demonstrate that stakeholder theory provides additional explanations above the hitherto taken dyadic approach toward understanding conflict. This study also shows that power can simultaneously reduce and increase conflict depending on which party possesses power. Greater supplier power decreases conflict, while greater stakeholder power and stakeholder-derived legitimacy increases it. Therefore, organizations have to balance their stakeholder and supplier interests.     

Best Practices for New Product Pricing: Impact on Market Performance and Price Level under Different Conditions

To date, research on new product pricing has predominantly been approached as a choice between market skimming and penetration pricing. Despite calls for research that addresses other complexities in new product pricing, empirical research responding to these calls remains scarce. This paper examines three managerial price‐setting practices for new products, i.e., value‐informed, competition‐informed, and cost‐informed pricing. By engaging in these practices, managers can develop and compare quantifications in order to attain an introduction price for the product. The authors draw on consumer price perception literature, Monroe's pricing discretion model, and numerical cognition literature to develop hypotheses about the impact of price‐setting practices on new product market performance and price level. By studying the effects on market performance and price level, the paper provides insights that may help explain the growth of new products and address the problems of underpricing. The hypotheses are tested in a management survey of 144 production and service companies. The results indicate which pricing practices are superior for the achievement of either higher market performance or higher prices in specific product and market conditions. Whereas value‐informed pricing has an unambiguous positive impact on relative price level and market performance, the results also suggest that in many cases engaging in value‐informed pricing is not enough. The effects of cost‐informed and competition‐informed pricing may differ depending upon the objective (market performance or higher prices), product conditions (product advantage and relative product costs), and market condition (competitive intensity). Engaging in inappropriate pricing practices leads to a decline in new product performance. Moreover, bad pricing practices make the positive effect of product advantage on the outcome variables disappear. The latter finding suggests that companies can jeopardize their efforts and investments in the new product development process if they engage in the wrong price‐setting practices. The findings imply that managers should consider different factors in new product pricing. First, when launching a new product, they should determine their explicit pricing objective, either stressing market performance or a higher price level. To determine the most appropriate pricing practices, however, they should next assess their situation in terms of product advantage, relative product costs, and competitive intensity. Together with the pricing objective, these conditions determine the best pricing practice. On a higher level, the findings imply that companies should invest in knowledge development in order to engage in the appropriate pricing practices for each product launch.     

Successful New Product Pricing Practices: A Contingency Approach

The purpose of this study is to examine the success of new product pricing practices and the conditions upon which success is contingent. We distinguish three different pricing practices that refer to the use of information on customer value, competition, and costs respectively. Following Monroe's (1990) price discretion, we argue that the success of these practices is contingent on relative product advantage and competitive intensity. The hypotheses are tested on pricing decisions for new industrial products. Our results show that there are no general best or bad practices, but that a contingency approach is appropriate. These results may help reduce the complexity that managers experience in pricing new products.     

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.     

Innovations in Retail Business Models

A retail business model articulates how a retailer creates value for its customers and appropriates value from the markets. Innovations in business models are increasingly critical for building sustainable advantage in a marketplace defined by unrelenting change, escalating customer expectations, and intense competition. Drawing from extant strategy and retailing research, we propose that innovations in retail business models are best viewed as changes in three design components: (1) the way in which the activities are organized, (2) the type of activities that are executed, and (3) the level of participation of the actors engaged in performing those activities. We propose six major ways in which retailers could innovate their business models to enhance value creation and appropriation beyond the levels afforded by traditional approaches to retailing. We also describe the drivers of business model innovations, the potential consequences of such innovations, and numerous examples from retail practice that highlight our concepts and arguments. In doing so, we provide a starting point for academic research in a domain that is deficient in theoretical and empirical research, and offer retailing managers a framework to guide retail business model innovations for sustainable competitive advantage.