The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Configuration Theory Assessment of Marketing Organization Fit with Business Strategy and Its Relationship with Marketing Performance
Abstract
Theory posits that organizing marketing activities in ways that fit the implementation requirements of a business's strategy enhances performance. However, conceptual and methodological problems make it difficult to empirically assess this proposition in the holistic way that it is theoretically framed. Drawing on configuration theory approaches in management, the authors address these problems by assessing marketing organization fit with business strategy as the degree to which a business's marketing organization differs from that of an empirically derived ideal profile that achieves superior performance by arranging marketing activities in a way that enables the implementation of a given strategy type. The authors suggest that marketing organization fit with strategic type is associated with marketing effectiveness in prospector, defender, and analyzer strategic types and with marketing efficiency in prospector and defender strategic types. The study demonstrates the utility of profile deviation approaches for strategic marketing theory development and testing.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411 · Cited by 41,941
Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150783 · Cited by 12,222
Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377701400320 · Cited by 10,390
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477
Practical issues in structural modeling
BENTLER, P. M., & CHOU, C.-P. (1987) · Sociological Methods & Research · doi:10.1177/0049124187016001004 · Cited by 5,804
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.4.375 · Cited by 5,649
Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process
Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J. (1978) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305755 · Cited by 4,527
Determinants of Coordination Modes within Organizations
Ven, A. H. V. D., Delbecq, A. L., & Koenig, R. (1976) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2094477 · Cited by 1,979
Cited by
The Value of Different Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Metrics in Predicting Business Performance
Morgan, N. A., & Rego, L. L. (2006) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.1050.0180 · Cited by 505
Self-citationDe Clercq, D., Dimov, D., & Thongpapanl, N. (. (2010) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.01.004 · Cited by 359
Frambach, R. T., Fiss, P. C., & Ingenbleek, P. T. M. (2016) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.120 · Cited by 230
Kashan, A. J., & Mohannak, K. (2019) · Journal of Management & Organization · doi:10.1017/jmo.2017.28 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Vorhies, D. W., & Morgan, N. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 100-115
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W2131143493
- Cited by
- 720
- References
- 9
- FWCI
- 61.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
