Robert W. Ruekert

Developing a market orientation: An organizational strategy perspective☆

Abstract This paper examines the relationships between the degree of market orientation from an organizational strategy perspective and organizational processes, individual attitudes and long run financial performance at the business unit level of analysis. Arguments are made that the degree of market orientation: (1) varies across business units within large scale organizations; (2) is positively related to broader organizational processes including recruiting, training, and compensation; (3) is positively associated with individual attitudes toward their jobs; and (4) is positively related to business unit long run performance. The results of a study of managers from a large, high technology firm indicate support for these hypotheses. These findings have implications for managers attempting to develop and maintain a market orientation within the firm.

Marketing's Interaction with Other Functional Units: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Evidence

The authors develop a framework for examining how and why marketing personnel interact with personnel in other functional areas in planning, implementing, and evaluating marketing activities. Build...

Organizing for effective new product development: The moderating role of product innovativeness

Marketing and sales personnel are frequently called on to work with—and sometimes to lead—specialists from other functional areas in the development of new products and services. Such cross-functio...

Signaling unobservable product quality through a brand ally

In this article, the authors examine the circumstances in which brand names convey information about unobservable quality. They argue that a brand name can convey unobservable quality credibly when...

Patterns of cooperation during new product development among marketing, operations and R&D: Implications for project performance

Successful new product development is fundamentally a multidisciplinary process. While this view has helped lead management to the wide-spread adoption of cross-functional new product development teams, in this study we question whether simply increasing the level of functional integration is truly a guarantee for enhancing the performance of new products. To assess this we examined patterns of cooperation between marketing, R&D, and operations at both early and late stages of the new product development process for 34 recently developed products whose level of innovativeness ranged from high to low. A unique feature of this study is that data were collected from four sources for each project. This included personal interviews with a project leader and written surveys from marketing, operations, and R&D personnel on each project. Findings from this study reveal that: (1) functional cooperation typically increases as the process moves from early to late stages; (2) cooperation between marketing and RD (3) higher project performance — irrespective of the level of project innovation — is demonstrated when cooperation between marketing and RD (4) late stage cooperation between marketing and operations, and RD (5) that early stage cooperation between marketing and operations is associated with superior performance for low innovation projects but is also associated with poor performance for innovative projects. Findings from this study demonstrate that the importance of cooperation between specific functional dyads (i.e., marketing — RD RD operations - marketing) indeed varies by time (i.e., early vs. late stages), and by the level of innovativeness (i.e., new-to-the-world vs. modifications) associated with the new product being developed.

Upper management control of new product development projects and project performance

Abstract While some degree of freedom and flexibility is an essential ingredient to productive cross-functional NPD teams, upper-managers are faced with the challenge of instituting effective control mechanisms which head projects in the right strategic direction, monitor progress toward organizational and project goals, and allow for adjustments in the project if necessary. But too much or the wrong type of control may constrain the team’s creativity, impede their progress, and injure their ultimate performance. Therefore, this study examines formal and interactive control mechanisms available to upper-managers in controlling new product development (NPD) projects, and the relationship between these mechanisms and NPD project performance. Formal output and process controls are examined which consist of the setting and monitoring of outcomes, such as goals, schedule and budgets, and of processes and procedures, respectively. This study also looks at how the effectiveness of these control mechanisms may be contingent upon the degree of innovativeness in the project and the degree to which the project is part of a broad product program. In addition, the use of formal rewards for achieving team performance as opposed to rewards for individual achievement is investigated. Lastly, interactive controls are examined which consist of upper-managers interacting directly with project members in the development of strategy and operational goals and procedures prior to the start of the project, and upper-managers intervening in project decision-making. Questionnaire data are collected on 95 projects across a variety of industries. The findings suggest that while NPD projects teams need some level of strategic direction concerning the objectives to be accomplished and the procedures to be followed, upper-level managers can exert too much control. In particular, the findings showed a negative association between the use of upper manager-imposed process controls and project performance. The findings also indicated that the degree to which upper-managers intervened in project-level decisions during the project was negatively related to project performance. However, the results showed support for the notion that early and interactive decision-making on control mechanisms is important for effective projects. In particular, early team member and upper-management involvement in the setting of operational controls, such as goals and procedures for monitoring and evaluating the project, was positively associated with project performance. This study provides additional insight into our understanding of upper-management support in new product development. The study suggests that upper-managers can over control with the wrong type of controls, and suggests effective ways of implementing participative and interactive control mechanisms.