Brian D Smith

Maybe I will, maybe I won't: what the connected perspectives of motivation theory and organisational commitment may contribute to our understanding of strategy implementation

This paper reviews the management problem of marketing strategy implementation and proposes some new perspectives on the subject. It begins by criticising Nobles much cited definition of the problem and improves upon it by incorporating Mintzbergs views of the strategy process. It then identifies commitment as an important consideration that emerges from the strategic management literature and notes that this area has been little explored. The bulk of the paper attempts to fill this gap by incorporating concepts from the domain of organisational psychology, particularly Lockes goal-setting theory, Vrooms expectancy theory and Meyers explanations of organisational commitment. In doing so, it finds that these mature and well-developed areas of work offer useful perspectives on strategy implementation. The paper concludes by suggesting five postulates developed from these theories and five accompanying hypotheses for future empirical work.

Turf wars: what the intraorganisational conflict literature may contribute to our understanding of marketing strategy implementation

The problem of strategy non-implementation, defined here as variance between intended and enacted strategy, is important and complex but poorly understood. This paper explores the explanatory value of theories regarding intraorganisational conflict. It concludes that certain concepts from this area, notably Walton and Duttons model of interdepartmental conflict, when augmented with ideas from the social psychology literature and empirical observations of marketings interface with other functions, help our understanding of marketing strategy implementation. These conclusions are expressed in terms of six postulates and concomitant hypotheses that may form the basis of future work towards improving the understanding and management of strategy implementation.

The role of product life cycle in medical technology innovation

The purpose of this work is to review and synthesise prior research concerning the product life cycle concept in the specific context of medical technology innovation. Based on a review of both general and context specific literature in this field, it finds that medical technology innovation is strongly influenced by life cycle effects, particularly with respect to price erosion. It also finds that our general understanding of product life cycle indicates that individual curves are strongly influenced by supply side constraints, such as patent protection and barriers to entry, and demand side factors, such as market heterogeneity and diffusion mechanisms. Importantly, these two complementary domains have not been previously synthesised. This has important social and economic implications for access to improved therapies, healthcare spending and investment in innovation. This article represents a first attempt to bring together valuable work in strategic management and health economics and, by developing s...

Capturing an elusive phenomenon: developing and testing a multiple perspective model of marketing strategy implementation

This paper contributes to the definition and understanding of marketing strategy implementation (MSI). We use Suddabys (2010) suggestions for construct clarity to propose an improved definition of the construct of MSI. Characterising MSI as a phenomenon with interdepartmental and individual level components, we draw together prior work from the intraorganisational conflict, social psychology, marketing interaction, motivation and organisational commitment literatures to propose a multiple-perspective model of MSI. Finally, we present some results of a small scale (N = 138) survey to examine the relationships suggested by the model. These preliminary findings suggest that the model has prima facie validity and may form the basis for useful future work.

Excellence in market access strategy: A research-based definition and diagnostic tool:

Market access strategy is a pressing and important issue for almost all pharmaceutical and medical technology companies. Yet the content of market access strategy is poorly defined and is often con...

Between saying and doing is the ocean: an empirical exploration of the gap between strategic marketing plans and their implementation in the life sciences industry

Abstract The difference between what firms’ strategic marketing plans say and what those firms do in practice is a long-standing issue. This paper describes work to empirically test Smith’s 2013 model of marketing strategy implementation, itself a synthesis of several concepts from the organisational behaviour and organisational psychology literatures. Using a sample of 391 respondents from 53 medium and large firms in the life sciences sector, it was found that there is only a 50% overlap between plans and execution. Further, as Smith’s model suggested, intraorganisational conflict was found to be the most important cause of this phenomenon, whilst individual commitment is an important secondary cause. Attempts to demonstrate moderating factors suggested by Smith’s model were unsuccessful. This work contributes to theory by providing the first robust explanation of why firms do not fully execute their strategic marketing plans. It also contributes to practice by measuring the gap between plan and practice in marketing strategy and suggesting ways that gap might be reduced.

A double portion of new knowledge

For the first time, we have decided to issue a double edition of the Journal of Medical Marketing. As a result, our paper selection is even broader and more varied than usual. Our first paper, by Vinita Srivastava and co-authors, explores marketing to pharmacists in India. In many developed and emerging markets, this channel is vital to the promotion of both medicines and some medical devices. This work uncovers a surprisingly traditional set of preferences in Indian pharmacists, with online promotion seemingly less important. This is a useful paper for anyone who uses the pharmacist channel to market, especially in emerging markets. Our second paper, by Fereshteh Barei and Claude Le Pen, explores the development of the generic pharma sector. Interestingly, it reveals how some generics companies, partly prompted by lower innovation in ‘‘big pharma’’, are now redirecting their efforts towards their own, low-risk, R&D programmes. It is a fascinating paper, relevant to those who work in generics and those who have to compete against them. Our third paper, by Meike Wenzel and co-authors, look at how pharma companies are attempting to create value ‘‘beyond the pill’’ with added value services. They find that such developments are mostly in their early stages as firms struggle with legal, cultural and other barriers. This paper will interest those who work in mature markets, either medtech or pharma. Our fourth paper, by RK Srivastava and Sanjiwani Jayant Kumar, is an empirical study of consumer brand awareness. It reveals an interesting vertical market segmentation, with attitudes related to wealth and education. Not enough work has been published in this area and this work is a useful contribution. Our fifth paper, by Manisha Saini and co-authors, looks at regulatory issues around generic drugs. The paper discusses the challenges and the long term benefits of the FDAs developments in this area. It is a useful paper for those interested in the regulatory environment for generics, both in the US and elsewhere. Our sixth paper, by Tan Ching Siang and co-authors, is a novel examination of price variation in Malaysia. This is often attributed, simplistically to high margins set by pharmacists but this paper reveals a more nuanced picture with costs being added all along the supply chain. This is a very informative paper for those who need to understand pharmaceutical distribution in emerging markets. Our seventh paper, by the same lead author, takes a slightly different perspective on the same topic. Looking at General Practitioners’ perceptions, it finds that medicine affordability may threaten the viability of local health services. The two papers complement each other well. Our eight paper, by Satyanarayana Rentala and coauthors, examines technological capabilities and export competitiveness. Unsurprisingly, it finds export competitiveness has multiple components but it provides some useful insights into the relative importance of factors such as firm size and choice of technology. This paper will be of interest to anyone concerned with export competitiveness, whatever their sector. Our ninth paper, by James A Muncy and coauthors, looks at the content of You-Tube pharmaceutical advertising. This is a contentious topic and the authors suggest that, rather than having broadcast advertisements cross-over to YouTube, the medical community may be better served by developing longer, more content base advertisements for the medium of video-on-demand. This is a valuable paper on an emerging, important topic. Our tenth paper, by Wesley Portegies and Frank Waaga, moves us to medical devices and orthopaedics in particular. The authors look at the impact of customer understanding and market orientation and find, unsurprisingly, that both these factors contribute to competitive advantage. Although non-contentious, this paper should be read in the many productoriented firms that still exist in medical devices and other markets. And our final paper, by Juan Meng and co-authors, looks at the relatively little researched topic of cosmeceuticals. Going beyond prior work, it suggests that marketing in this area is influenced by body esteem and then draws out some practical implications of its findings. This is a fascinating paper for any reader. I hope you enjoy the papers of this double edition.

Achieving a Market-Led Culture: A Case Study

This paper describes a challenge common to many medical device companies; that of developing a market-led corporate culture in order to create sustainable competitive advantage. It describes the constraints encountered, the methods employed and the results and lessons that were the outcomes of the process. Its principal lesson is that organisational culture change is possible and rewarding, but that it is slow and difficult. Moreover, it requires much more than a cursory knowledge of both culture and marketing. Without a deep knowledge of both these topics, cultural change should not be attempted.