Marketing canon: principles for organizational decision-making consistency

¶ … Marketing Canon: Approaches Based on Principles for Influencing Decision Making in Firms

Operating in several geographical locations, quite a number of firms have many product lines, which many marketing scholars believe are ever confronted by myriad dilemmas. To facilitate consistent decision-making processes, it is vital for the firms to come up with overall but common marketing strategies while at the same time, it is very essential for firms to permit their employees the ease to make their specific circumstances suit marketing decisions. However, allowing such flexible measures always leads to challenges in making marketing decisions because everyone, including managers often project dissimilar mental pictures and models of marketing.

Existing literature suggest two approaches for formulating a common means to making decisions that provides different levels of flexibility. The first approach is that firms could depend on mechanical approaches that influence decisions made by stipulating standard modes of operations (Homburg and Furst, 2005). The second perspective provides that firms ought to nurture shared norms and values in employees such as information sharing and teamwork in order to arrive at correct decisions (Homburg and Furst, 2005).

Statement of the Problem

Although the suggested approaches are more flexible, they fall short of the influence they are supposed to give firm managers in the process of making marketing decisions (Homburg and Pflesser, 2000). This research suggests a third approach for formulating a common ground for tackling the apparent conflicting importance of flexibility and consistency. In this research this third approach is referred to as Marketing Canon which can be defined as: an organization's peculiar principles synthesized from its practices in order to provide guidance throughout the organization in making choices in market decisions.

Purpose of the Study

The study intends to evaluate the concept of Marketing Canon in detail by adding four contributions to the existing literature.

1.

Establish a formal definition of the construct deduced from an examination of the general idea of Canon from different literature sources where it is majorly used.

2.

Help firms with guidance on developing their own marketing canon

3.

Establish a conceptual framework that encompasses consequences and the antecedents of using the marketing canon

4.

Find out how using marketing canon and its performance relationship can influence the impact of three unsteady environments namely: structural flux, market turbulence and competitive intensity.

Research Question

How to apply peculiar principles of an organization accumulated from experiences and the related impacts?

H0: Why using marketing canon has uniform effects on broad contexts while in other contexts they are more valuable and have different gradations?

Ha: Can the use of market canon be applied across similar contexts and why they are more important in some contexts but vary in others?

Methodology

This chapter on methodology will mainly focus on 1) Explaining the rationale behind choosing the methodology that has been used and 2) aptness of the method for the overall accomplishment of the topic of this work. This chapter has been divided into relevant chapters to justify the means and methods of the methodology employed along with variations thereof. It hence establishes the method as being useful to reach the desired outcomes. (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007). The research onion, a process described by Saunders et al., (2012, p.83) best explains the way to follow a research work and has hence been used here as the basic premise for this work.

Research Philosophy

According to Trochim (2006), the academia views the work of researches to get a better grasp of the subject in question. Research work also puts forth the diverse views prevalent on the topic across many regions. There are two ways of looking at it Positivism and Post-positivism. These are two constructs that aid the research work. Positivism is the approach that precludes metaphysics and makes demands on observational explanations. The other viewpoint lays stress on the perceptions that can be enlarged to development of the larger construct. They, in tandem, guide any research work of consequence.

Positivism is the experimental determination and assertion of observation in nature. It helps logical deductions and can be tested for authenticity to known means and measures. A positivist is he, who follows the rigors of controlled examination for deriving logical outcomes, and the work carried out by him depicts the testing tenets minutely. The main thrust of positivists is on objectivity rather than subjectivity. At the other spectrum is the post-positivist who emphasizes that no research could ever be entirely objective in content and result. Presumptions, they believe, are inherent in any endeavor, scientific or not. They are of the view that anticipation is a given in any pursuit.(Trochim, 2006).This study would be best served in its purposes through Post-Positivism.

Research Approach

Trochim (2006),has also proposed two processes that may be followed to arrive at results conclusively: inductive and deductive methods. In deductive techniques one starts by taking a perspective view of the larger influence. The parameters are then eliminated systematically sequentially to arrive at the aim of the research work. It is alternatively known as Top-down approach. Inductive technique works in exactly the reverse fashion. The basic object of research is first approached in its minutest form and is then gradually built up to accomplish the larger construct of the work under consideration. It is thus a bottoms-up approach. This approach used in this work is of inductive type.

Research Methods

This research employs theories-in-use and discovery-oriented approaches which incorporates detailed interviews with the existing literature as a way of developing conceptual themes (Malshe and Sohi 2009). And so it uses the questionnaire interviews gleaned from managerial insights with different perspectives from a multidisciplinary study of military tactics, religion and legal doctrines. Furthermore, it uses archival data from marketing doctrines of a professional services firm to complement the archival data. The research employs the survey drawn from three sets of questionnaires. Existing literature suggests the application of purposeful sampling in order to get authentic samples that can give wealthy insights into an upcoming construct (Patton 1990).

For that reason, this study heavily draws from the expertise of professional service firms knowledgeable in formulating marketing philosophies for fortune 500 customers because similar concepts may not mean the same thing to different parties (Tuli, Kohli, and Bharadwaj 2007).

The second sample employed in the study brought together 100 customers of professional services organizations from various industries. For the purposes of obtaining a wide spectrum of perspectives, the research carried out surveys with a third category of respondents different from the first two who could provide authentic information from the previous interviews. After exhausting informants for the quantitative survey, the research made use of 10 expert participants representing firms of various sizes covering many industries, their product categories and their positions. These included executive VP, CEOs, and marketing managers boasting experiences ranging between 10-20 years in both global and regional industries. Amongst the chosen participants were both women and men in different enterprises such as healthcare/life sciences, professional services, consumer-packaged goods and technology.

Quantitative interviews are important for examining programs that target specific outcomes, evaluating those that are believed to be dynamic or are evolving, those that explore particular differences between participants' outcomes and experiences, describing and capturing program processes, and those that qualify what a program means to the participants by documenting changes in the implementation of the program at different stages. However, quantitative interviews are not very useful for interpreting programs with emphasis on similar outcomes for all participants, gauging the predetermined impact of a program on participants and their effects on evaluation, and in determining whether an intervention occasioned effects or changes in participants. This is because establishing casualties needs better controlled conditions (Sewell, n.d).

One challenge to the research design is that the methodology seems rather intrusive than in the qualitative approach. Apart from that participants may reveal more than they want to, leading to delayed regrets. This method may lead to mood swings and friction of personalities or lack of interpersonal dynamics between the interviewees and the interrogator more than in survey methods. And since quantitative interviews need a lot of experience and skills, it will be time consuming and expensive to train the respondents and conduct the interview. Besides, analyzing and interpreting qualitative data is much easier than doing the same for quantitative interviews. And again, it is more subjective than in the former method because the researcher or evaluator has to decide which specific quotes or instances to include in the report. Even though the importance of quantitative interviewing rests in its openness and flexible nature, it is still very essential for the planner of evaluation to look keenly into the process in order to provide the primary framework and structure which will enable the study to be worthwhile and useful. In order to overcome these shortcomings, the research will progress in seven stages of designing and implementing a research interview. The seven stages cover designing, themes, interviews, analysis, transcription, verification and reporting (Sewell, n.d).

The appropriateness of the chosen method lies in its use of a five-tiered approach to gaining insight into marketing. The first stage is to define the program in terms of selected industry insiders. This is followed by an accountability step since a few conversational and informal interviews with respondents might immediately prove that the research is reaching its target audience or that the main services are present. The third step involves refining and understanding and in this stage, interviewing is quite essential. Quantitative interviews with respondents are appropriate to data gathering, processing and drawing conclusions that are necessary for modifying and refining the research further. The fourth stage monitors advancement toward possible results because this method works best in relation to objective quantitative procedures and indicators.

Whereas the quantitative processes in a literal sense show whether the objective results are being met, quantitative measures answer more to the ways participants react to what is taking place and what this means to their lives. The last stage deals with the impact of the design which involves selective application of quotations from respondents through publications, news releases and reports as effective means of spreading the word out about any happening. It is to be expected that even if the feedback is neither significant nor positive, challenges will still be met, and so the insights gathered from the research/recorded interviews can be beneficial to those intending to replicate the research/model in different settings. This method is also important in establishing why the research has overwhelming effects on some participants more than the rest (Sewell, n.d).

Using this method with executives from different organizations and the review of speculative literature in decision making gives three key reasons for applying this approach based on principles (Gigerenzer and Gaissmaier 2011). To begin with, principles are high-level laws or the "rule of thumb" usually drawn from experiences (Locke 2002). And secondly, principles assist in addressing the age-old flexibility-consistency dilemma that many organizations confront. Thirdly, these principles are fairly simple to remember and transmit to the rest (Oliver and Jacobs 2007).

Quantitative Validity

Validity of the results is the defining factor of the study itself. All the tests and procedures need to be legit, verifiable and consistent. Slightest amount of indiscipline in maintain the rigors can render the entire work void and inconsequential. The validity of data gathered can be evaluated in terms of its vastness (parametric measure), quantity and the quality. An unbiased view of the researcher is expected. In the present work impartiality has been attended to by employing the same method for assessing response from different subjects. That ensures the consistent approach and the methodology can't be discounted for lack of conformity to impartiality.(Trochim, 2006).

Saunders et al. (2012) have warned the researchers of ascertaining the feasibility of the outcome whenever a particular methodology is adapted to pursue a subject. That, according to tem, assures getting the most anticipated and accurate end-results.

Reliability is the achievement of arriving at same results even if different ways and means are employed to ascertain the same topic. The fact, however, is that, every method has in-built variations leading to certain amount of confusion in the achieved outcome (Bouma, 2010).

The bias as referred to by Saunders et al. (2012)make an impact on reliability by: the general disposition and behavioral attributes of the researcher while in the fieldwork may cause different reactions; care has been taken to assimilate questions in way so as to not be suggestive in its approach. The utmost integrity can only be achieved by means of faith of the interviewee in the researcher that has been followed in this work religiously.

The role played by the respondent is as crucial as that of the interviewer. He must not be, in any way be prejudiced, about the researcher or the work (Saunders et al., 2012). The possibility of respondents not giving unbiased view and opinion to questions and queries cannot be ruled out even if the researcher takes all the measures to win wholehearted support. That is specially so because of the fact that the questionnaire may contain sensitive and personal questions to which one may refrain from giving honest answers, despite the fact that the researcher will make efforts to build trust prior to giving questionnaire, and it is but natural that the subjects will be aware about the delicate nature of certain questions and may decide not to reveal and answer certain questions.

On the other hand validity can be classified as the precision and accuracy of a variable's fits in a concept. Issues related to validity are generally heightened in survey designs as they assess subject's values and beliefs (Bouma, 2010). Considering, the aims and results of this research study, Yin (2013) offers that it is practicable to simplify case studies to hypothetical propositions. However, this should not extend to include populations and the aims of any study ought to be to relate and