IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joamsc/v50y2022i5d10.1007_s11747-022-00848-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The performance impact of marketing dualities: a response surface approach to resolving empirical challenges

Author

Listed:
  • Youngtak M. Kim

    (University of Georgia)

  • John R. Busenbark

    (University of Notre Dame)

  • Seung-Hwan Jeong

    (University of Georgia)

  • Son K. Lam

    (University of Georgia)

Abstract

We examine issues associated with various operational measures and model specifications in marketing-duality research that focuses on either a balancing or a combining perspective. In Study 1, we use archival data to demonstrate various operationalizations and models that subscribe to either perspective to test the impact of the exploration::exploitation duality, which produce mixed results. We then show that the multidimensional response surface approach constitutes a superior omnibus test that coalesces the two perspectives. Study 2, a simulation-based study, affirms the severity of biases in the existing approaches and the comprehensiveness and precision of the response surface approach. The cumulative evidence shows that the existing perspectives employ transformed measures that fail to distinguish firms with different approaches to the two activities underlying a duality. Thus, they suffer from many conceptual blind spots, produce mixed statistical conclusions, and are sensitive to changes in mean values. Our findings provide guidelines for the study of marketing dualities.

Suggested Citation

  • Youngtak M. Kim & John R. Busenbark & Seung-Hwan Jeong & Son K. Lam, 2022. "The performance impact of marketing dualities: a response surface approach to resolving empirical challenges," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(5), pages 915-940, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joamsc:v:50:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11747-022-00848-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11747-022-00848-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11747-022-00848-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11747-022-00848-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michel Borgh & Jeroen Schepers, 2018. "Are conservative approaches to new product selling a blessing in disguise?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 857-878, September.
    2. Mick, David Glen & Fournier, Susan, 1998. "Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(2), pages 123-143, September.
    3. William T. Ross, Jr. & Erin Anderson & Barton Weitz, 1997. "Performance in Principal-Agent Dyads: The Causes and Consequences of Perceived Asymmetry of Commitment to the Relationship," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(5), pages 680-704, May.
    4. Christopher F Baum & Arthur Lewbel, 2019. "Advice on using heteroskedasticity-based identification," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 19(4), pages 757-767, December.
    5. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    6. Girish Mallapragada & Rajdeep Grewal & Gary Lilien, 2012. "User-Generated Open Source Products: Founder's Social Capital and Time to Product Release," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 474-492, May.
    7. Jingoo Kang & Ribuga Kang & Sang‐Joon Kim, 2017. "An empirical examination of vacillation theory," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1356-1370, June.
    8. Oliver J. Rutz & George F. Watson, 2019. "Endogeneity and marketing strategy research: an overview," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 479-498, May.
    9. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    10. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    11. Son K. Lam & Thomas E. DeCarlo & Ashish Sharma, 2019. "Salesperson ambidexterity in customer engagement: do customer base characteristics matter?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 659-680, July.
    12. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    13. Jingoo Kang & Sang‐Joon Kim, 2020. "Performance implications of incremental transition and discontinuous jump between exploration and exploitation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1083-1111, June.
    14. Sam Ransbotham & Gerald C. Kane & Nicholas H. Lurie, 2012. "Network Characteristics and the Value of Collaborative User-Generated Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 387-405, May.
    15. John Hulland & Hans Baumgartner & Keith Marion Smith, 2018. "Marketing survey research best practices: evidence and recommendations from a review of JAMS articles," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 92-108, January.
    16. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    17. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    18. Brett W. Josephson & Jean L. Johnson & Babu John Mariadoss, 2016. "Strategic marketing ambidexterity: antecedents and financial consequences," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 539-554, July.
    19. Thomas E. DeCarlo & Son K. Lam, 2016. "Identifying effective hunters and farmers in the salesforce: a dispositional–situational framework," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 415-439, July.
    20. Tom J. M. Mom & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Understanding Variation in Managers' Ambidexterity: Investigating Direct and Interaction Effects of Formal Structural and Personal Coordination Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 812-828, August.
    21. S. Trevis Certo & John R. Busenbark & Hyun‐soo Woo & Matthew Semadeni, 2016. "Sample selection bias and Heckman models in strategic management research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(13), pages 2639-2657, December.
    22. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    23. Christopher F Baum, 2006. "An Introduction to Modern Econometrics using Stata," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number imeus, March.
    24. John Hulland, 2020. "Conceptual review papers: revisiting existing research to develop and refine theory," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(1), pages 27-35, June.
    25. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    26. Boris Groysberg & Linda-Eling Lee, 2009. "Hiring Stars and Their Colleagues: Exploration and Exploitation in Professional Service Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 740-758, August.
    27. Peter E. Rossi, 2014. "Invited Paper —Even the Rich Can Make Themselves Poor: A Critical Examination of IV Methods in Marketing Applications," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(5), pages 655-672, September.
    28. Rust, Roland T. & Moorman, Christine & van Beuningen, Jacqueline, 2016. "Quality mental model convergence and business performance," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 155-171.
    29. Arturs Kalnins, 2018. "Multicollinearity: How common factors cause Type 1 errors in multivariate regression," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 2362-2385, August.
    30. Edwards, Jeffrey R., 1995. "Alternatives to Difference Scores as Dependent Variables in the Study of Congruence in Organizational Research," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 307-324, December.
    31. Kraus, Florian & Haumann, Till & Ahearne, Michael & Wieseke, Jan, 2015. "When Sales Managers and Salespeople Disagree in the Appreciation for Their Firm: The Phenomenon of Organizational Identification Tension," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 486-515.
    32. Herhausen, Dennis, 2016. "Unfolding the ambidextrous effects of proactive and responsive market orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2585-2593.
    33. Alok R. Saboo & Anindita Chakravarty & Rajdeep Grewal, 2016. "Organizational Debut on the Public Stage: Marketing Myopia and Initial Public Offerings," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(4), pages 656-675, July.
    34. Augustine A. Lado & Rajiv R. Dant & Amanuel G. Tekleab, 2008. "Trust‐opportunism paradox, relationalism, and performance in interfirm relationships: evidence from the retail industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 401-423, April.
    35. Michelle Rogan & Marie Louise Mors, 2014. "A Network Perspective on Individual-Level Ambidexterity in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1860-1877, December.
    36. Emilie R. Feldman & Cynthia A. Montgomery, 2015. "Are incentives without expertise sufficient? Evidence from fortune 500 firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 113-122, January.
    37. Peter Boumgarden & Jackson Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2012. "Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 587-610, June.
    38. Brian K. Boyd, 1995. "CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 301-312.
    39. Johannes Luger & Sebastian Raisch & Markus Schimmer, 2018. "Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 449-470, June.
    40. Peter, J Paul & Churchill, Gilbert A, Jr & Brown, Tom J, 1993. "Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(4), pages 655-662, March.
    41. Vikas Mittal & Eugene W. Anderson & Akin Sayrak & Pandu Tadikamalla, 2005. "Dual Emphasis and the Long-Term Financial Impact of Customer Satisfaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 544-555, August.
    42. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    43. William P. Wan & Daphne W. Yiu, 2009. "From crisis to opportunity: environmental jolt, corporate acquisitions, and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 791-801, July.
    44. Tat Y. Chan & Jia Li & Lamar Pierce, 2014. "Learning from Peers: Knowledge Transfer and Sales Force Productivity Growth," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 463-484, July.
    45. Qing Cao & Eric Gedajlovic & Hongping Zhang, 2009. "Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingencies, and Synergistic Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 781-796, August.
    46. Juha Uotila & Markku Maula & Thomas Keil & Shaker A. Zahra, 2009. "Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: analysis of S&P 500 corporations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 221-231, February.
    47. Jeanine Miklós-Thal & Michael Raith & Matthew Selove, 2018. "What Are We Really Good At? Product Strategy with Uncertain Capabilities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 294-309, March.
    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. Olga Kassotaki, 2022. "Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440221, March.
    2. François Constant & Richard Calvi & Thomas Johnsen, 2020. "Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing function ambidexterity Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing functio," Post-Print hal-02891790, HAL.
    3. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    4. Wenke, Kathrin & Zapkau, Florian B. & Schwens, Christian, 2021. "Too small to do it all? A meta-analysis on the relative relationships of exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity with SME performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 653-665.
    5. Shuwaikh, Fatima & Brintte, Souad & Khemiri, Sabrina, 2022. "The impact of dynamic ambidexterity on the performance of organizations: Evidence from corporate venture capital investing in North America," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 991-1009.
    6. Jingoo Kang & Sang‐Joon Kim, 2020. "Performance implications of incremental transition and discontinuous jump between exploration and exploitation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1083-1111, June.
    7. Johannes Luger & Sebastian Raisch & Markus Schimmer, 2018. "Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 449-470, June.
    8. Alexander Zimmermann & Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw, 2015. "How Is Ambidexterity Initiated? The Emergent Charter Definition Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(4), pages 1119-1139, August.
    9. Fourné, Sebastian P.L. & Rosenbusch, Nina & Heyden, Mariano L.M. & Jansen, Justin J.P., 2019. "Structural and contextual approaches to ambidexterity: A meta-analysis of organizational and environmental contingencies," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 564-576.
    10. Guktae Kim & Moon-Goo Huh, 2015. "Exploration and organizational longevity: The moderating role of strategy and environment," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 389-414, June.
    11. Matthews, Lane & Heyden, Mariano L.M. & Zhou, Dan, 2022. "Paradoxical transparency? Capital market responses to exploration and exploitation disclosure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    12. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    13. Veider, Viktoria & Matzler, Kurt, 2016. "The ability and willingness of family-controlled firms to arrive at organizational ambidexterity," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 105-116.
    14. Martin Owusu Ansah & Nicholas Addai-Boamah & Abeeku Bylon Bamfo & Lucy Afeafa Ry-Kottoh, 2022. "Organizational ambidexterity and financial performance in the banking industry: evidence from a developing economy," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(3), pages 250-263, September.
    15. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2020. "Shifting back and forth: How does the temporal cycling between exploratory and exploitative R&D influence firm performance?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 386-396.
    16. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    17. David B. Audretsch & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "Is ambidexterity the missing link between entrepreneurship, management, and innovation?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 1891-1918, December.
    18. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    19. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    20. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2023. "Effects of ambidextrous and specialized R&D strategies on firm performance: The contingent role of industry orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    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:spr:joamsc:v:50:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s11747-022-00848-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.