Market Orientation in Pakistani Companies

Research
Research Market Orientationi in Pakistani Companies
MARKET ORIENTATION IN PAKISTANI COMPANIES

Samin Ahmad Department of Marketing College of Business Management, Karachi Introduction Marketing simply defined is a value exchange process. The firms aim to delight the customers and the shareholders at the same time. In this context the concept of Market Orientation (MO) was developed in the 1990s, which has led to substantial research and is a theory which states that the sole objective of an organization is to be totally focused on the market, and all other activities like corporate culture, internal distinctive capabilities etc. automatically follow in line. Kohli and Jaworski (1990) have done pioneering work in this area. They define MO as: the organization wide generation of market intelligence pertaining to current and future customer needs, dissemination of intelligence across departments, and organization wide responsiveness to it. MO is an essential construct of healthy business firms competing in highly demanding and sophisticated modern economies. The meaning and importance of MO has been studied extensively in the for-profit sector (e.g., Kohli & Jaworski, 1990; Narver & Slater, 1990). Market-oriented firms follow specific and identifiable routines and processes, such as generating information about customers through monitoring and assessing their changing needs and wants, disseminating that information throughout the firm, and revising business strategies to enhance customer value (Kohli and Jaworski 1990; Narver and Slater 1990). By definition, market orientation describes such actions as listening to customers and delivering solutions on the basis of the interests and wants of the customers ( Desphand, Farley, and Webster 1993; Slater and Narver 1995). PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW APRIL 2011 106
Market Orientation in Pakistani Companies
Research
The essence of market orientation is the successful management of a relationship between suppliers and customers. For an organization to attain super normal performance consistently, it must create a Sustainable Competitive Advantage (SCA). This SCA comes from creating superior value for customers, and the desire to create this superior value in turn drives the business to be market oriented. We start with a review of selected contemporary literature review that helps us develop our hypothesis for this research. Literature review As the academic field of marketing developed in the first half of the 20th century, the marketing concept became a unifying description of a preferred company culture. The marketing concept suggests that marketing is a general management responsibility, not just a responsibility of the marketing department and, consequently, meeting customer needs profitably should be an overriding priority for the entire organization (Webster, 1988). Organizations that have embraced the concept seek to understand consumers and in turn develop products and services that meet consumer needs and wants better than competitors. The evolution and development of the marketing concept eventually caused researchers to begin investigating what is today known as Market Orientation. Initial efforts by Kohli and Jaworski (1990) and Narver and Slater (1990) began a concentrated effort in the marketing field to better measure and understand the market orientation phenomenon. Much of these and other early efforts concentrated on determining the impact of market orientation on various measures of a firms performance. As the understanding of market orientation has increased, researchers have attempted to better discern the complex relationships among market orientation, firm performance, and a range of other constructs, such as innovation (Han, Kim, & Srivastava, 1998), entrepreneurship (Hurley &Hult, 1998; Matsuno,Mentzer, & Rentz, 2000), and the learning organization (Hurley & Hult, 1998; Slater & Narver 1995). Studies
107
PAKISTAN BUSINESS REVIEW APRIL 2011
Research
Market Orientationi in Pakistani Companies
have shown that marketing orientation is also related to organizational performance in a variety of industries (Han,Kim, and Srivastava 1998; Kumar, Subramanian, and Yauger 1997; Narver and Slater 1990; Raju, Lonial, and Gupta 1995; Raju et al. 2000). Researchers have recognized that there are many marketing/customer related variables, such as customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and customer retention that mediate the quality performance relationship. Many of these variables are either encompassed within or closely aligned with the MO of an organization. Marketing Orientation, therefore, offers us a more parsimonious way to incorporate many of the market/customer related variables that are part of the qualityperformance framework. (P. S. Raju and Subhash C. Lonial.2001). An overview of the available literature indicates the presence of a robust MO-performance relationship that generalizes across diverse global markets/countries. Yet, the strength of its impact depends on the country setting. MO may have its greatest effect in nations where high standards of consumer service and expectations are still evolving (Aviv Shoham, Ayalla Ruvio, Eran Vigoda-Gadot and Nitza Schwabsky,.2006). The impact of MO on organizational performance and outcomes has been studied mainly in the for-profit sector in many countries and across contexts. Two theoretical approaches to MO have been used widely. The first approach generally accepted as the behavioral-based scale, was presented by Kohli and Jaworski (1990) and later developed by Kohli, Jaworski, and Kumar (1993). It suggests that MO includes generation of market information, cross-departmental dissemination of information, and responsiveness to disseminated information. According to the second scale, which is more of a cultural based approach market orientation approach (Narver & Slater, 1990; Slater & Narver, 1996), MO includes customer orientation, competitor orientation, and inter-functional coordination.
108
Research
Taking a holistic view one sees across the globe a major development of a shift toward customer-focused organizational structures which have been investigated in great detail by Christian Homburg, John P. Workman, Jr. & Ove Jensen. Voices have been raised to suggest that a firms competitive advantage is a function of not only the firms operating environment but also of its internal dynamic capabilities (Porter 1991). Some researchers have described MO as largely the result of company culture (Hurley & Hult, 1998; Kohli & Jaworski, 1990; Narver & Slater, 1990; Slater & Narver, 1998, 1999). These researchers see MO as : 1. A focus on customers through understanding their interests and needs, providing value to customers (financial and other), and consistently striving for high levels of customer satisfaction; 2. A focus on competitors that includes continually evaluating the competitive landscape for developing and presenting competitive threats and opportunities and routinely discussing competitor strengths and weaknesses 3. Inter-functional coordination that integrates and directs all members of the firm in addressing the aforementioned while meeting customer needs better than competitors. A customer-focused culture is a prerequisite for marketoriented organizations. In essence, market orientation may be described as a link between an organizations culture and its business strategy (Hunt & Lambe, 2000). A recent definition of market orientation as the set of cross-functional processes and activities directed at creating and satisfying customers through continuous needs assessment (Deshpand and Farley 1998) establishes a general pattern between market orientation and various measures of business performance. Within it there is an implicit acknowledgment that becoming market oriented involves real
109
Research
investment in a set of capital-intensive processes and activities. In addition, the key to success for a business firm is seen as determining the needs and wants of customers and satisfying these needs more effectively than the competition. Market orientation also takes into account competitors moves by sharing information about competitive forces to deter market positional erosion (Day and Wensley 1988; Peteraf and Bergen 2003). Market-oriented firms follow specific and identifiable routines and processes, such as generating information about customers through monitoring and assessing their changing needs and wants. Disseminating that information throughout the firm, and revising business strategies to enhance customer value (Kohli and Jaworski 1990; Narver and Slater 1990). Peters (1984) summed up this approach by asserting that a firm needs only three truly distinctive skill packages to succeed: 1. 2. 3. a focus on total customer satisfaction (a component of market orientation), a focus on continuous innovation (i.e., innovativeness), and a common denominator whereby employees of the firm are well trained to share the importance of the first two capabilities.
Market orientation has traditionally been perceived as a static dimension. It is perceived as yet another differentiating competency, another function that all organizations must adopt. Companies are focused on increasing their understanding the customers, consumers and the environment among other marketing dimensions like research, media habits etc. In a complex and intensely competitive market environment as it currently exists, stand-alone MO is insufficient and more value can be delivered to the customers and the goal of achieving sustainable competitive advantage SCA can be pursued by a more dynamic approach.
110
Research
One such theory that aims at making MO a more dynamic concept aims at complementing the process of being market driven with the approach of driving the market i.e. influencing all the players to the advantage of the business. Market behavior can be modified directly or, alternatively, indirectly by changing the mind-set of market players. The best examples of the latter are AMAZON that attempts to drive the market by offering a large array of items on the web thus transforming the industry, or DELL that has driven the market by eliminating the retailer from the computer business. Jaworski, Kohli and Sahay(1990), opine that there are two complimentary approaches to market orientationa marketdriven and a driving-markets approach. Although both approaches represent a market orientation that entails a focus on customers, competitors, and broader market conditions. They further argue that the literature has an unbalanced focus on keeping the status quo (e.g., existing customer preferences, current market structure) as compared to proactively shaping customers and/or the market. Their conceptual framework is illustrated in the following diagram (Figure 1). It provides an overview of the conceptual framework. The framework is composed of two dimensions: market structure and market behavior. Market (or industry) structure refers to a set of players and the roles played by them in what Porter (1985) calls the value chain. Market behavior refers to the behavior of all players in the industry value chain.
111
Research
Figure 1
Kohli et al. term market driven as learning, understanding, and responding to stakeholder perceptions and behaviors within a given market structure. In contrast, the term driving markets refers to changing the composition and/or roles of players in a market and/or the behavior(s) of players in the market (Jaworski, Kohli and Sahay, 2000). They conclude that well-performing companies although able to manage the present through short-term, market driven actions , should, also simultaneously, consider how to reshape markets by driving them into new competitive spaces. A different approach to making MO a dynamic concept has been suggested by other researchers (Bulent and,Seigyoung 2006). They argue that the effect of market orientation on a firms performance is strengthened when market orientation is bundled together with internal complementary resources, such as innovativeness. This approach is based on the assumptions stated by both Day (1994) and Hunt and Morgan(1995), that not
112
Research
all firms are able to generate and sustain competitive advantages by implementing market orientations only. For the purpose of their study, Bulent et al. considered market orientation as a higher order construct of customer orientation, competitor orientation, and inter-functional coordination (Narver and Slater 1990). After defining a dynamic capability as the integration of two focal constructs (or firmlevel resources): market orientation and innovativeness, they hypothesized that when a high level of market orientation is bundled together with high innovativeness, it creates a dynamic capability that enables firms to enhance firm performance. Taking Australian business as their target, they selected CEOs and senior managers of 750 firms representing the sectors of food, mining, automotive, construction materials, and chemicals, receiving 242 completed forms that formed the basis of the research. They operationalized market orientation as a multidimensional construct that comprised customer orientation :(6 items), competitor orientation (4 items),, and interfunctional coordination (5 items), measured with 5-point, Likert-type scales (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) taken from Narver and Slater (1990). Firm-level innovativeness (5 items) and firm performance (8 item) was measured with 5- point, Likert-type formative scale (1 = much worse, 5 = much better) taken from Li and Atuahene-Gima (2001). Managers were asked to assess their perceptions of firm performance on each indicator relative to their principal competitors over the past 3 years (i.e., return on investment, return on sales, return on assets, sales growth, market-share growth, profit growth, cash flow from market operations, and profitability). Earlier research had demonstrated statistically significant correlations between perceptual measures and their corresponding objective measures of performance (e.g., Pearce, Robbins, and Robinson 1987), indicating that perceptual ratings of performance can be considered as reliable indicators.
113
Research
The following chart (Figure2) summarizes the findings of their (Bulent ,Seigyoung, 2003) hypothesis testing. The hypothesis posits that at a high level of firm innovativeness, the market orientationfirm performance relationship will be stronger. They found interaction between market orientation and innovativeness to be related significantly and positively to firm performance, supporting the hypothesis. Figure 2 (bundling together of market orientation with high innovativeness leads to higher performance.)
They conclude that innovativeness as a critical complementary capability that, when coupled with market orientation, will enhance the impact of market orientation on the organizations performance. This research was limited to the manufacturing sector only and did not cover non-profit organizations and the services sector. For a company to become market oriented it must develop a set of capabilities and processes that require investment thus raising the issue of what is the appropriate
114
Research
level of market orientation that it should acquire? Bteinman, Deshpande and Farley(2000) propose that the appropriate level of market orientation is what the customer thinks it should be. They further opine that the essence of market orientation is the successful management of a relationship between suppliers and customers. (Christine, Rohit and Farley.2000). They have examined the overlap of market orientation and relationship marketing by employing the socialpsychological framework of social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner 1979). The method used by this study involved a matched set of buyer-seller pairs as illustrated in Figure 3. below. The method used by this study involved a matched set of buyer-seller pairs as illustrated in Figure 3. below.
115
Research
They called their sampling unit as a quadrad, i.e. a combination of two buyer-seller dyads. Each quadrad is constructed from a set of four interviews, two from a supplier and two from a customer firm of that supplier. The method allowed comparisons of supplier and customer perspectives that were crucial to the researchers concept of market orientation gaps. The researchers used two classes of measures for market orientation: (1) Actual (what the supplier says about his or her own market orientation, and what the customer says about it) (2) The normative market orientation gap (which correspondingly deals with what suppliers and what customers think norms should be). They used nine items that comprise each of the scales from Deshpand et al. (1993 They have tested 3 sets of hypotheses in this context which are as follows: Hypothesis 1a: The longer the relationship, the smaller the actual market orientation gap. Hypothesis 1b: The longer the relationship, the smaller the normative market orientation gap. Hypothesis 2a: The more important the relationship, the smaller the actual market orientation gap. Hypothesis 2b: The more important the relationship, the smaller the normative market orientation gap. Hypothesis 3a: The actual market orientation gap will be smaller in collectivist cultures (e.g., Japan) than in individualist cultures (e.g., the United States). Hypothesis 3b: The normative market orientation gap will be smaller in collectivist cultures than in individualist cultures. They also propose the concept of the market orientation gap, which is the difference in measured perceptions between customers and suppliers on how market oriented the suppliers are.
116
Research
The U.S. and Japanese samples of firms selected for personal interviews were a random sample of firms listed on the New York and the Nikkei stock exchanges. Two marketing executives of each supplier firm were interviewed. Each supplier respondent was asked to name up to three important customers form which one customer firm was chosen at random. The research concluded that: 1.Suppliers and customers do disagree about the suppliers market orientation, i.e. a market orientation gap does exist. 2.Suppliers think significantly better of themselves than their customers do for both the actual and normative measures. 3.The normative gap decreases significantly as relationship length increases (hypothesis 1b). 4.The normative gap decreases significantly as relationship importance increases, i.e. as the supplier becomes more important to the customer (hypothesis 2b). 5.The correlation between actual market orientation gap and relationship length (hypothesis 1a) and relationship importance (hypothesis 2a), while not significant, is directionally correct. 6. In the relatively collectivist culture of Japan, where there is more of a we and less of an us versus them culture, both the actual and normative market orientation gaps are smaller than in the united states(hypothesis 3),
117
Research
In summary this very interesting study concluded: 1.That a market orientation gap exists, as suppliers evaluate their own market orientation as being at higher level than do their important customers in ab2b environment. 2. This gap is proportional to the length and importance of the relationship. 3.The gap is smaller in a collectivist culture (Japan) than in an individualist culture (USA). Quality of products and services has a direct effect on the market performance and profitability of a firm. Quality gurus like Crosby (1979) have asserted that a companys performance could be improved by focusing on product quality. Firms across the globe have embraced the TQM concept as a pathway to deliver superior performance. The development of the concept of quality context (Benson, Saraph, and Schroeder). 1991; Saraph, Benson, and Schroeder (1989) relate to procedures and practices in a firm that encourage it to produce a better quality product or service. Market orientation is the process of effectively collecting, disseminating, and responding to information that will enhance the marketing function and hence the firms performance within the organization. P. S. Raju and Subhash C. Lonial(2001) examine the relationships of these constructs to a firms performance. Raju et al. opine that MO offers a parsimonious framework for understanding the relationship of the quality context and performance. They propose a conceptual framework for the relationships between quality context, market orientation, and organizational performance. This is shown in figure 4, which is similar to the Johnson and Gustafsson (2000) framework. In this proposed framework, both quality context and market orientation have independent direct effects on a firms performance.
118
Research
Figure 4
A total of 293 questionnaires were received from the service sector in the USA filed in by CEOs. Market orientation was measured with the modified MARKOR scale developed by Kohli, Jaworski, and Kumar (1993). Responses to the items were measured using a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Their quality context was measured using the instrument designed by Benson, Saraph, and Schroeder (1991) using only 19 out of the original 26 items to measure the five dimensions of quality context. Following Benson, Saraph, and Schroeder (1991), the responses to these items were measured on a 5-point scales, ranging from 1 very low) to 5 (very high). The firms performance was measured using judgmental measures since there is considerable evidence of the use of such measures of organizational performance ; Jaworski and Kohli, 1993; ; Narver and Slater 1990). In earlier MO studies the research findings and interpretation of results persuaded the researchers to modify their conceptual construct as given in the Figure 5.
119
Research
Figure 5
A major implication of this research (P. S. Raju and Subhash C. Lonial.2001) is the realization that as quality context influences performance through its effect on market orientation managers in the service sector should aim towards following a more holistic marketing concept by improving the coordination between the quality and marketing functions within their firms. This hypothesis needs to be validated in the FMCG area as the intrinsic nature of a manufacturing firm is different from the service company in respect of the quality context. Although market orientation has been very widely studied since its introduction as a concept in the 1990s, its role in driving strategy (and subsequently performance). Jaworski and Kohli (1993) have not been properly explored. Based on this assumption Brooke Dobni and George Luffman(2003) theorized that the scope of a market orientation needs to be considered within a holistic manifestation for it to have managerial implications. Their view was based on the conclusion reached by the researchers that a market orientation facilitates strategy implementation in an organization. As a result they hypothesized that There is a palpable relationship between behaviors, actions, and outcomes in respect to the competitive context; specifically the degree of
120
Research
adherence to the specific requirements of the environment in market orientation and strategy profiles will be significantly related to performance. (Brooke Dobni and George Luffman 2003). The researchers developed 61 underlying measurement constructs of behavior and 15 differential statements to measure competitive context. These constructs were derived from studying American corporations over the past 20 years which are believed to be the ones most representative of the factors that they are trying to measure. Based on these constructs the researchers developed a theoretical model given below that considers the relationships between behavior (market orientation), action (marketing strategy), and outcome (return on investment).
Figure 6.
121
Research
Research was conducted amongst the 7 regional Bell operating companies of USA that were created out of the antitrust suit against the giant AT&T. This is a dynamic hightechnology industry, characterized by rapid product and service introduction rates, intense competition and high technological obsolescence. 210 completed questionnaires were obtained from the SBUs. The questionnaire covered 61 MO behaviors (representing 7 MO factors), 22 marketing strategy practices of the SBU (representing four strategy orientations), and 15 situational context statements (relating to three competitive context factors). Likert-type scales and semantic differentials were used to measure MO and strategy profiles. Actual and relative levels of ROI were also probed. The research findings validate the theoretical model and support the proposition that there are ideal market orientation and strategy profiles. The researchers have concluded that the scope and impact of a market orientation on strategy implementation and performance may be more far reaching than they originally thought and market orientation can play a more directed role in strategy implementation. The primary challenge of this research was to determine strategy profile patterns in a holistic environment and this has been achieved as shown in Figure 6. However there is a limitation of testing in one industry however complex and competitive, and it needs to be validated in a multiple business segment both for the services and FMCG sectors. This research has provided some preliminary insight into the domain of human behavior that has played a role in achieving superior performance and can lead to exploration of relationship between HR practices, Leadership profiles and MO. Market Orientation in Pakistan As a preliminary measure of the application of market orientation theory to the Pakistani environment we decided to take a dipstick measure of the local marketing companies. Based on the assumption, which is substantiated by our review of
122
Research
available researches, that marketing orientation is a necessary condition for a successful business we developed the following Hypothesis: The Practice of marketing orientation has a positive impact on the performance of successful companies in Pakistan . Methodology From amongst the population of companies marketing goods and services in Pakistan our basis of sample selection were two: a) companies that are selling products and services that are widely accepted by the consumers/customers and b) financial success as evidence of their marketing success, for all commercial business exist to make profits only. Our target sample was Pakistani companies both in the services and FMCG areas. Our criteria of success was continued profitability for the previous 3 years. Since it is not always possible to obtain actual profit figures for some companies we approached the companies with opening questions as to their continued profitability for the previous three years and only companies that answered in the affirmative were included. The answers were obtained from marketing personnel in senior positions. The 27 item questionnaire was pretested amongst a few (10) companies picked at random, to check for the appropriateness of the responses and some questions were modified for clarity. The survey was conducted in the form of a personal interview which enabled the respondents to feel comfortable and answer all the 27 questions as objectively as possible. The questionnaire designed by Dobni et al. to measure the relationship between MO , marketing strategy and ROI included 61questions regarding market-oriented behaviors (representing seven market-oriented factors), 22 questions on marketing strategy practices of the SBU (representing four strategy orientations), and 15 questions on situational context
123
Research
statements (relating to three competitive context factors). This is a very elaborate model based on their complex model design as discussed above. The (Bulent ,Seigyoung(2003) conclusion that high level of innovativeness is a factor of high market orientation was achieved by a simpler method containing fewer questions, that operationalized market orientation as a multidimensional construct that comprised only15 items: Customer orientation (six items), competitor orientation (four items), and interfunctional coordination (five items). We decided not to use Dobni et al.s complex structure as our investigation into Pakistans market orientation is of a preliminary nature and the profitability of the companies surveyed was checked upfront whilst choosing them. Also taking a cue from early research on market orientation (Kohli and Jaworski (1990) that used a simple construct and adoption of a similar simple construct by Bulent et al. we also decided to keep our method simple. Based on our experience with the Pakistani market we defined market orientation as a construct of Competitor orientation (5 items), Customer orientation (7 items), Market analytical orientation (10 items) and Company culture (3 items). We also added the factor of Innovation to our questionnaire construct (2 items). These 27 items were measured which are listed in Figure 7. The answers were a simple yes or no option. A total of 120 usable respondents were gathered out of 130 interviews.
124
Research
Figure 7:
Q1 Q2. Q3. Q4. Q5. Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27 The company has a Customer Service department Does the company maintain a database of its Suppliers? Customer feedback forms are placed in products sometimes Is the Marketing Mgr involved in the research process? The company improves its products regularly each year Do you do a SW analysis for your competitors? OT Company maintains a database about its markets Do your customers contact the company frequently? The company has a separate market research department Do you undertake a formal brand audit each year? Marketing managers visit customers premises regularly Company purchases market research information from surveys etc. Company holds seminars where innovations are discussed Does the company maintain a database of its competitors? The company managers visit markets each month Company managers visit market shops etc. regularly Information about customers/markets is available to all employees Does the company maintain a database of its consumers? Is the health of your brand measured against competitors? Customers are encouraged to visit company facilities Employees from areas other than marketing also visit markets Company encourages formal customer feedback regularly Is your brand equity stronger than your competition? Do you do a SW analysis for each brand each year? OT The company undertakes market research regularly Company managers visit consumer homes sometimes Do you measure your product quality against competition?
125
Research
Results Our results do not support the hypothesis that The Practice of marketing orientation has a positive impact on the performance of successful companies in Pakistan. We had set the standard, based on our experience of Pakistans marketing environment, that if 80% of the respondents, within each of the 5 categories of market orientation behaviors, answer in the affirmative to the questions asked, then it would be considered that the market is following that behavior. Thus we find that the behavior of market orientation is not linked to the profitability of companies in Pakistan. The composition of 120 companies that participated in the study covers a fair cross-section of Pakistani and multinational companies as given in (Figure 8) below :
Both the services sector and consumer goods industry were adequately represented in our study shown in (Figure 9) below.
126
Research
The composition of industries covered in our study is given in Figure 10. The composition of participants given in Figures 8-10 reflects the willingness of companies to participate in this study and was not part of the research design.
Based on this study it can be concluded that successful Pakistani business are best at keeping track of what their competitors are doing in the category. Because competitors essentially target the same segments that interests a company Pakistani business are always benchmarking their performance against that of its competitors and 85% of the respondents in this category evidenced this Market Orientation behavior. None of the other 4 categories of market orientation behavior could meet the standard set by researcher, that each of the 5 categories should achieve a positive answer of 80%, which leads us to conclude that market orientation does not play a big role in the success and profitability of Pakistani companies. This leads the researcher to opine that perhaps other factors such as monopolistic tendencies, protectionism, lack of consumer awareness etc. may be contributing more to the profitability of successful companies in Pakistan and can form a basis of further research in this area.
127
Research
Customer orientation comes out as the second best behavior of Pakistani firms in our research as 77% of the respondents evidenced this behavior. This is more pronounced in the goods category and the services and industrial sectors performed relatively poor here. The third ranking behavior was of innovativeness and 75% of the companies affirmed their commitment to this trait of market orientation. Bringing new products and services to the market is not lacking but there is an absence of awareness of a need to inculcate a culture of innovation in the companies that can improve their performance in the marketplace. Only 66% of the companies responded positively to the category of having an employee culture to enable the companies deliver better value to their customers. This according to our research shows a lack of holistic marketing approach in Pakistan that holds back the coming into play of all employees other than marketing personnel and it can be said that companies in Pakistan are still myopic in their marketing behavior. Market analysis which was once considered the sole criterion of being market oriented comes out as an inadequate behavior of Pakistani companies as only 64% of the companies answered positively to this category of market orientation behaviors. This reflects a belief in inside-out approach rather than the contemporary outside-in approach to marketing that can lead to success.
128
Research
A summary of the answers obtained in each category is given in Figure 11 below.

Construct COMPETITORS ANALYSIS Questions Q6 Q14 Q19 Q23 Q27 CUSTOMER SERVICE Q1 Q3. Q8 Q18 Q20 Q22 Q2. EMPLOYEE CULTURE Q4. Q17 Q21 INNOVATION Q5. Q13 MARKET ANALYSIS Q7 Q10 Q9 Q11 Q12 Q15 Q16 Q24 Q25 Q26 Do you do a SWOT analysis for your competitors? Does the company maintain a database of its Competitors? Is the health of your brand measured against competitors? Is your brand equity stronger than your competition? Do you measure your product/service quality against competition? The company has a Customer Service department Customer feedback forms are placed in products sometimes Do your customers contact the company frequently? Does the company maintain a database of its consumers? Customers are encouraged to visit company facilities Company encourages formal customer feedback regularly Does the company maintain a database of its Suppliers? Is the Marketing Manager involved in the research process? Information about customers/markets is available to all employees Employees fromareas other than marketing also visit markets The company improves its products regularly each year Company holds seminars where innovations are discussed The company maintains a database about its markets The company conducts a formal brand audit each year The company has a separate market research department Marketing managers visit customers premises regularly Company purchases market research information fromsurveys etc. The company's managers visit markets each month The companys managers visit market shops etc. regularly Do you do a SWOT analysis for each brand each year? The company undertakes market research regularly The company's managers visit consumer homes sometimes yes no 107 13 95 25 103 17 92 28 112 8
102 18 60 60 94 26 94 26 75 45 106 14 116 4 102 18 60 60 74 46 106 14 75 45 110 10 70 50 37 83 83 37 78 42 95 25 81 39 89 31 95 25 34 86
129
Research
Discussion This research raises some interesting questions in the area of marketing in Pakistan. The main question is what are the success factors for marketing companies if they are not so strong on their market orientation behavior ? Is this lack of marketing orientation holding up the expansion of companies to larger success within the country and through global expansion? And most importantly it raises the issue of what kind of marketing culture exists in Pakistani companies and how does it compare with global marketing cultures ? All these interesting issues can form the basis of further research. A serious limitation of this study was the simple construct of the questionnaire. Future studies need to use a more robust methodology that would enable statistical analysis which would explain the marketing orientation of Pakistani companies in yet better perspective. Follow up research is needed to develop an MO scale for Pakistani business on the pattern of similar efforts made for other markets globally. This would also enable a comparative analysis of the state of marketing practices in Pakistan . Acknowledgement The researcher wishes to record the patient support of Dr. Javed Akbar Ansari whose supportive comments and critical contributions were of great help in the preparation of this paper. References 1. Bernard Jaworski, Ajay K. Kohli and Arvind Sahay.2000. Market-Driven Versus Driving Markets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science ; 28; 45. Bulent Menguc and Seigyoung Auh.2006. Creating a FirmLevel Dynamic Capability through Capitalizing on Market Orientation and innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science ; 34; 63.
2.
130
Research
3.
Christine Steinman, Rohit Deshpande and John U. Farley.2000. Beyond Market Orientation: When Customers and Suppliers Disagree. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science ; 28; 109. P. S. Raju and Subhash C. Lonial.2001. The Impact of Quality Context and Market Orientation on Organizational Performance in a Service environment. Journal of Service Research ; 4; 140. C. Brooke Dobni and George Luffman.2003. Determining the scope and impact of market orientation profiles on strategy implementation and performance. strategic management journal : 24: 577-585 . Christian Homburg, John P. Workman, Jr. and Ove Jensen .2000.Fundamental Changes in Marketing Organization: The Movement Toward a Customer-Focused Organizational Structure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science ; 28; 459. William E. Baker and James M. Sinkula. 1999. The Synergistic Effect of Market Orientation and Learning Orientation on Organizational Performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27; 411.
4.
5.
6.
7.
About the author Samin Ahmad is an Associate Professor in Marketing department at the Institute of Business Management. He has over 30 years of industry experience in the field of Marketing and Supplychain and has adopted teaching marketing as a second profession.
131

Market Orientation in Pakistani Companies

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Market Orientation in Pakistani Companies

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Research

Research Market Orientationi in Pakistani Companies