IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rom/merase/v10y2025i2p306-323.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Marketing and Innovation Process in Agri-Food Companies: Analysis via the Stage-Gate Model

Author

Listed:
  • Hakima SOUKI

    (Mouloud Mammeri University, Tizi Ouzou, Algeria)

  • Sabrina BOUKELLAL

    (Abderrahmane Mira University, Bejaia, Algeria)

  • Mohand CHITI

    (Abderrahmane Mira University, Bejaia, Algeria)

Abstract

The uncertainty that characterises the development of new products has become one of the major concerns of management professionals and researchers. A new marketing approach focusing on the synergy between creativity, innovation, and marketing skills has underlined the importance of marketing efforts in the success of new products throughout the innovation process. In this article, we highlight the innovation process adopted by agri-food companies by examining the deployment of marketing activities in their innovation process. For this purpose, we adopted the „Stage-Gate System†(SGS) model developed by Cooper et al. (2016), a proven method for managing product development projects in the manufacturing sector. In addition, by mobilising dependency and influence matrices, we situate the place given to marketing in the new product development process while emphasising the importance of cross-functional collaboration. To carry out this research, we opted for a qualitative exploratory method at six companies, and we used a triangulation of analysis methods: content analysis, cognitive content analysis, and processual analysis. For the modelling of process mapping, we drew inspiration from the Stage-Gate System innovation process model. The stages of the innovation process and the theoretical links identified in the SGS model are confirmed by the findings of the empirical study, except that economic profitability and cost optimisation take precedence over the needs of target customers, which may restrict the success of the new product launch.

Suggested Citation

  • Hakima SOUKI & Sabrina BOUKELLAL & Mohand CHITI, 2025. "Marketing and Innovation Process in Agri-Food Companies: Analysis via the Stage-Gate Model," Management and Economics Review, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 10(2), pages 306-323, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:rom:merase:v:10:y:2025:i:2:p:306-323
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mer.ase.ro/files/2025-2/10-2-2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Comparing Productivity Growth: An Exploration of French and U.S. Industrial and Firm Data," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 157-186, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alhassan Abdul-Wakeel Karakara & Evans Osabuohien, 2020. "ICT adoption, competition and innovation of informal firms in West Africa: a comparative study of Ghana and Nigeria," Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 14(3), pages 397-414, June.
    2. Lorenz, Steffi, 2015. "Diversität und Verbundenheit der unternehmerischen Wissensbasis: Ein neuartiger Messansatz mit Indikatoren aus Innovationsprojekten," Discussion Papers on Strategy and Innovation 15-01, Philipps-University Marburg, Department of Technology and Innovation Management (TIM).
    3. Kancs, d’Artis & Siliverstovs, Boriss, 2016. "R&D and non-linear productivity growth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 634-646.
    4. Ortega-Argilés, Raquel & Piva, Mariacristina & Vivarelli, Marco, 2011. "Productivity Gains from R&D Investment: Are High-Tech Sectors Still Ahead?," IZA Discussion Papers 5975, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Jacques Mairesse & Mohamed Sassenou, 1989. "Les facteurs qualitatifs de la productivité : un essai d'évaluation," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 91(5), pages 35-42.
    6. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 82-99, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. G Cameron, 1996. "Innovation and Economic Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0277, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    8. repec:lic:licosd:20308 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref & Solomon, Edna & Guidi, Francesco, 2016. "R&D and productivity in OECD firms and industries: A hierarchical meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2069-2086.
    10. Wakelin, Katharine, 2001. "Productivity growth and R&D expenditure in UK manufacturing firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1079-1090, August.
    11. Tybout, James R., 1991. "Researching the trade - productivity link : new directions," Policy Research Working Paper Series 638, The World Bank.
    12. Nesta, Lionel, 2008. "Knowledge and productivity in the world's largest manufacturing corporations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 886-902, September.
    13. Pentti J.K. Kouri & Jorge Braga de Macedo & Albert J. Viscio, 1982. "Profitability, Employment and Structural Adjustment in France," NBER Working Papers 1005, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Brandt, Loren & Van Biesebroeck, Johannes & Zhang, Yifan, 2012. "Creative accounting or creative destruction? Firm-level productivity growth in Chinese manufacturing," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 339-351.
    15. Raquel Ortega‐Argilés & Mariacristina Piva & Marco Vivarelli, 2014. "The transatlantic productivity gap: Is R&D the main culprit?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(4), pages 1342-1371, November.
    16. Dai, Lu & Zhang, Jiajun & Luo, Shougui, 2022. "Effective R&D capital and total factor productivity: Evidence using spatial panel data models," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    17. Bellone, Flora & Kiyota, Kozo & Matsuura, Toshiyuki & Musso, Patrick & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "International productivity gaps and the export status of firms: Evidence from France and Japan," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 56-74.
    18. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jaques & Branstetter, Lee & Crepon, Bruno, 1998. "Does Cash Flow Cause Investment and R&D: An Exploration Using Panel Data for French, Japanese, and United States Scientific Firms," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt11v204tz, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    19. Davide Castellani & Mariacristina Piva & Torben Schubert & Marco Vivarelli, 2018. "The source of the US /EU Productivity Gap:Less and less effective R&D," LEM Papers Series 2018/16, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Robert Gibbons, 2010. "Inside Organizations: Pricing, Politics, and Path Dependence," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 337-365, September.
    21. Hans Lööf & Almas Heshmati, 2003. "The link between firm-level innovation and aggregate productivity growth: a cross-country examination," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 131-147, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rom:merase:v:10:y:2025:i:2:p:306-323. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ciocoiu Nadia Carmen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mnasero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.