The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Market Knowledge Dimensions and Cross-Functional Collaboration: Examining the Different Routes to Product Innovation Performance
Abstract
There is consensus in the marketing literature that market knowledge and cross-functional collaboration are two fundamental resources for successful product innovation. However, few studies examine the dimensions or characteristics of market knowledge and how and why these resources influence product innovation performance. Drawing on contingency theory and the knowledge-based view of the firm, the authors argue that knowledge integration mechanisms may account for the effects of market knowledge dimensions (i.e., breadth, depth, tacitness, and specificity) and cross-functional collaboration on product innovation performance. They find that market knowledge specificity and cross-functional collaboration affect product innovation performance through knowledge integration mechanisms. In contrast, whereas the effect of market knowledge depth is partially mediated, market knowledge breadth has a direct, unmediated effect on product innovation performance. A test of an alternative moderating perspective shows that the effects of market knowledge depth and cross-functional collaboration on product innovation are negatively moderated by knowledge integration mechanisms. By showing the differential effects of market knowledge dimensions on product innovation performance, the authors provide a more refined understanding of the interplay among market knowledge, its integration, and the firm's performance in product innovation. The authors also conclude that by overlooking the role of knowledge integration mechanisms, previous research may have provided an overly optimistic view of the value of cross-functional collaboration in product innovation.
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
Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151312 · Cited by 109,314
Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378101800104 · Cited by 109,190
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
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
(1993) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(93)91697-o · Cited by 18,154
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809
SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004) · Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers · doi:10.3758/bf03206553 · Cited by 17,383
Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171110 · Cited by 16,157
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939
Asymptotic Confidence Intervals for Indirect Effects in Structural Equation Models
Sobel, M. E. (1982) · Sociological Methodology · doi:10.2307/270723 · Cited by 12,810
Cited by
Zhou, K. Z., & Li, C. B. (2012) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.1959 · Cited by 1,122
Ordanini, A., & Parasuraman, A. (2011) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670510385332 · Cited by 676
Managing Co-creation Design: A Strategic Approach to Innovation
Frow, P., Nenonen, S., Payne, A., & Storbacka, K. (2015) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12087 · Cited by 518
The Effectiveness of Customer Participation in New Product Development: A Meta-Analysis
Chang, W., & Taylor, S. A. (2016) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jm.14.0057 · Cited by 507
The Impact of Acquisitions on Innovation: Poison Pill, Placebo, or Tonic?
Prabhu, J. C., Chandy, R. K., & Ellis, M. E. (2005) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.69.1.114.55514 · Cited by 391
Metadata
- Authors
- De Luca, L. M., & Atuahene-Gima, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 95-112
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W4255074830
- Cited by
- 445
- References
- 78
- FWCI
- 21.03
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Market Knowledge Dimensions and Cross-Functional Collaboration: Examining the Different Routes to Product Innovation Performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1509/jmkg.71.1.095
- The paper
- De Luca, L. M., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2007). Market Knowledge Dimensions and Cross-Functional Collaboration: Examining the Different Routes to Product Innovation Performance. Journal of Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.1.095
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.