Nội dung

Sensemaking Sensemaking About About Business-to-Business Business-to-Business Strategies and Relationships Strategies and Relationships: A Commentary on Reid and Plank’s Review Arch G. Woodside Retrospection is one of the properties of sensemaking. Retrospection happens implicitly, as unintended thinking, or explicitly, in the form of active thinking. Focusing active thinking to retrospect about what we really know and do not know about business-to-business marketing helps to identify small, subtle features and relationships that can have surprisingly large effects (as noted by Weick 1995, p. 52, and found by Hall and Menzies 1983, and Hall 1984, 1999). Reid and Plank’s review serves well in forcing active thinking about what we really know and do not know about business-to-business strategies and relationships. While not deep, their coverage of relevant literature from 1978 through 1997 is broad and useful for developing a sensemaking perspective. This commentary focuses on two issues. First, what are the main contributions of Reid and Plank’s review? Second, what needs more emphasis in the review or is left out of the review that needs our attention? THE MAIN CONTRIBUTIONS OF REID AND PLANK’S REVIEW Reid and Plank’s (hereafter R&P) review is valuable reading particularly for (1) identifying and indexing twenty years on literature on business-to-business marketing and (2) describing research shortages and surpluses in business-to-business marketing topics. Agreeing with Schank’s (1990) proposal that data finding, data manipulation, and comprehension are three principal dimensions of intelligence, R&P’s review helps to improve our search techniques and ability to label and mentally index while reading business-to-business marketing scientific reports. Regarding finding data stored in our memories, Schank (1990, p. 224) advocates, “Higher intelligence depends upon complex perception and labeling.” R&P’s review helps to increase the reader’s ability to see the complexity of the business-to-business marketing literature and helps the reader label, store, and retrieve pieces of this literature in a workbench manner. These contributions serve us well for reaching Weick’s 1979 (p. 261) recommendation on how to achieve deep understanding: “Complicate yourself! . . . The importance of complication is difficult to overemphasize.” Mostly the R&P review answers the questions of where to look and what you should expect to find in the scientific business-to-business marketing literature. Because so many business-to-business marketing information seekers are new to the field and have little knowledge of what is available, answering such questions is a worthwhile contribution. R&P’s choice of labels in Table 5 is appropriate for implying the need to move away from the overreliance on business-to-business marketing surpluses, such as “static [one-shot] cross-sectional research” using mail survey responses. This nondynamic research design is the dominant logic applied in scientific business-to-business marketing research. A substantial majority of scientific business-tobusiness marketing empirical studies include the following characteristics: • A positivistic theoretical view of how fifteen to forty-five un• • • • observable constructs perceived to be relevant in business-tobusiness marketing relate together Some amount of pretesting and revision of a questionnaire containing 100-plus, individual, closed-ended rating questions to measure fifteen to forty-five unobservable constructs An eight- to fourteen-page, mainly closed-ended questionnaire Mailed to one executive per firm in a sample of 500 to 2,000 organizations Achieving a response rate of less than 30 percent following a second mailing of the questionnaire to nonrespondents of the first mailing • Extensive multivariate data analysis of responses • A path analysis or structural equation model testing the hypoth- esized proposed theoretical view This dominant logic includes instructions in the questionnaire to answer the questions as they relate to the respondent’s firm or to a successful relationship regarding the respondent’s firm with a customer firm or a supplier firm. The collection of data from both buyers and sellers participating in the same relationship or multiple parties participating in multiple-interacting relationships is rare. This rarity of collecting data from more than one side of a two-sided or multiple-sided relationship across several time periods is disappointing—given that academic conferences on relationship marketing are held annually in North America and Europe. Yet, some exceptions can be examined, for example, von Hippel’s (1986) case studies on lead users of novel industrial and medical products in the United States, and Biemans (1989, 1991) network research on innovating and adopting new medical equipment in the Netherlands. How much knowledge, understanding, and insight have we achieved following the more than thirty years of applying the dominant research approach in business-to-business marketing? Given that the initial two generalized observations concluding R&P’s review call for more programmatic research on longitudinal business-to-business marketing processes, the implied answer to the question is not enough to justify the continuing use of one-sided, one-shot, closedended mail surveys. The good news is that several early empirical studies are available that illustrate research methods useful for longitudinal research of business-to-business marketing processes. These studies all suggest that particular streams of behaviors observed in business-to-business marketing processes depend on several contingencies—such as the presence or absence of third parties in the marketing adoption of new medical equipment (see Biemans 1989). Howard and his associates pioneered applications of “decision systems analysis” (DSA) of industrial marketing processes (e.g., see Capon and Hulbert 1975; Howard and Morgenroth 1968; Hulbert, Farley, and Howard 1972; Howard, Hulbert, and Farley 1975). DSA represents one category of mapping implemented strategies (see Huff 1990). Additional business-to-business marketing process research includes Montgomery’s (1975) “gatekeeping analysis” in examining a buying committee’s adoptions and rejections of 124 products in a business-to-business marketing setting. Morgenroth’s (1964) binary flow charting of pricing decisions is a classic contribution in the business-to-business marketing literature. Morgenroth (1964) and Howard and Morgenroth (1968) develop an artificial intelligence (AI) system of how managers think, decide, and act across two levels of distribution in pricing a commodity product and under dynamic pricing decisions of larger and smaller competitors. Such process research provides insights into business-to-business marketing subtleties, nuances, outcomes, and revisions in the decisions and behaviors that make up business-to-business relationships. Because of its focus on processes and its use of a triangulation of research methods (i.e., direct observation, document analysis, and multiple face-to-face interviews with several persons at several organizational levels), Pettigrew’s (1975) study of an “industrial purchasing decision as a political process” is a seminal contribution to the subtleties and nuances occurring often in business-to-business marketing. More recently, Woodside (1996) describes the rationales and decision/behavior processes involved in rejecting superior new technologies by manufacturers and their business customers (cf. Christensen 1997). Several possible reasons may occur in concert to limit the applications of process research in business-to-business marketing. First, the study of business-to-business marketing issues may be less glamorous and have less appeal for most doctoral students compared to consumer marketing studies. Second, most marketing doctoral students may perceive a requirement to demonstrate the use of multivariate analysis methods in their dissertations—methods receiving more attention in the training of these students than ethnographic and AI simulation methods. Third, organizational structures at most research and teaching universities in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia are conducive to pole-length, mail survey studies, but not to ethnographic paradigms of direct research—that is, being “in the field” using triangulation methods to collect process data for three months or longer (see Sanday 1979; Van Maanen 1979). Consequently, most business-to-business marketing process research stud- ies are limited to a handful of doctoral dissertations—one or two appearing once each year or less often. The structural biases against doing business-to-business marketing process studies might best be overcome by a concerted application of several actions. First, read the classic and recent literature on (inter)organizational process research (e.g., Arnould and Wallendorf 1994; Denzin and Lincoln 1994; Hirschman 1986; Howard et al. 1975; Van Maanen’s 1979 special issue of ASQ; Weick 1995; Workman 1993; Woodside 1994). Second, because a characteristic of business-tobusiness marketing process studies is long periods of on-site, direct observations, academic scholars should consider concentrating teaching responsibilities when possible to permit periods of three months or longer in the field. While not ideal, going into the field in the summer months is one way to implement this action (e.g., see Woodside and Samuel 1981). Third, adopt R&P’s prime observation concluding their review: “More programmatic research by teams of researchers is needed. The rare instances of programmatic research that have been done have been quite fruitful.” Fourth, seek funding and help in gaining cooperation from firms for participating in process studies of national trade organizations, for example, in the United States, the National Association of Purchasing Management. WHY PROCESS RESEARCH? Process research extends beyond the long-time dominant logic in business-to-business marketing studies of having one decision maker per firm self-report beliefs using mostly concept-based, closed-ended rating questions. Process research studies usually employ multiple methods to achieve both confirmation and diversity in collected data. A hallmark characteristic of particularly insightful process research is collecting behavioral data via direct observation as the behavior occurs in natural environments, preceded and followed by interviewing the multiple participants engaged in the behavior. This approach may be followed by asking the participants to read and comment on the researcher’s draft “thick description” (see Geertz 1973) of the process, as well as subsequent revisions of the thick description. See Hirschman (1986) for an exposition of this approach; Morgenroth (1964) for a research example in industrial pricing; and Woodside and Sam- uel (1981) for an application in organizational buying behavior. Thus, process research often includes direct observation of specific meetings and decisions, multiple interviews of the several persons before and after behavioral events, and revising thick descriptions based on reviews of drafts by participants in the behavior processes being studied. Embracing such process research is recommended for several reasons. First, the telling biases and limits in answering questions (see Ericsson and Simon 1980) and asking questions (see Tanur 1992; Schwarz 1999) are documented well. Second, processes through several weeks, months, and years represent the heart and soul of business-to-business marketing and business relationships—how can we continue to use such ill-suited tools as rating instrument data from self-reported, single-person-per-firm mail surveys? Direct observation is a necessary requisite for achieving deep understanding of behavior and decision processes. Third, a sense of time is missing from almost all scholarly business-to-business marketing research; yet business-to-business marketing decisions and events are processes occurring through days, weeks, months, and years. The current dominant logic in business-tobusiness marketing research fails to capture and report the stream of behaviors through time. Fourth, any one research method has strengths and limitations. Fortunately, the limitations of one method are often overcome by the strengths of a second method. Process research is suited particularly well for implementing multiple data collection methods. The continued use of the one-person-per-firm mail surveys in business-to-business marketing research is analogous to searching under a street lamp for an object lost in an unlit alleyway. A better way is to equip ourselves with several alternative tools and begin new searches. COVERAGE OF KEY FINDINGS While R&P’s review is useful in its breadth of coverage, not enough depth is reported on methods used in the reported studies, what was found, and why the studies are particularly useful. To cite an example, R&P report, “Paun (1993) provides a set of normative standards for determining when to bundle or unbundle products.” Describing the prime normative standard for each approach would en- rich the review. R&P cite the study by Day and Barksdale (1992) on how firms select a professional service provider without any information on how firms do it. With a few exceptions, most pages of R&P’s review fail to report the key finding of the studies cited. One approach to achieve such a goal is to organize summaries of the literature on specific topics in exhibits. Each exhibit might include a limited number of lines for topic, key propositions, method, key findings, and a primary conclusion. While granting that space is limited in broad reviews, more knowledge and insights could have been packed into space taken by R&P’s review. THEORETICAL PROPOSITIONS ON RELATIONSHIPS AND STRATEGIES What nuggets of wisdom about business-to-business relationships and strategies do we learn from the research spanning twenty years that is reported in R&P’s review? R&P report very few nuggets. In part, this is due to lack of focus on reporting the key findings in the cited studies. Certainly, useful propositions for improving sensemaking in theory and applied business-to-business marketing strategies can be found in the literature reviewed by R&P. Here are a few nuggets of useful sensemaking from the literature cited in R&P’s review. First, prospector strategies focusing on new product development work well in achieving high performance, even though most business-to-business firms do not adopt such strategies. Being the “low cost” supplier is not enough for high performance; customers’ primary drivers for buying always involve more than cost savings. Identifying and working closely with lead users is a useful step toward achieving a prospector strategy. Firms offering new products based on superior new technologies have the highest returns on investments. However, implementing such high-tech strategies also results in failure when such firms do not design the new products with specific customers in mind; and when they focus on marketing such new-tech products to big customers whom the marketers find most attractive, rather than smaller customers whom prefer the new technologies. INTEGRATIVE RESEARCH: A VALUABLE RECOMMENDATION Another valuable concluding observation made by R&P is the need for “more emphasis on integrative research that looks at several issues at once.” Forrester (1961) founded rigorous integrative research involving business-to-business marketing. The lack of “systems thinking” (see Senge 1990) and the lack of simulation testing of business-to-business marketing-customer systems are telling weaknesses in the literature reviewed by R&P. However, the core theory and the basic tools for integrative research relevant to business-tobusiness marketing are available elsewhere (e.g., see issues of Human Systems Management, an integrative-focused academic journal; Alpha/Sim software applications at ; Hans Thorelli’s ; Weick 1995). The widespread human tendency is toward oversimplifying and being overconfident that our simplified views of what has happened and what will happen accurately reflect reality (see Gilovich 1991; Plous 1993; Senge 1990). Researchers and strategists in businessto-business marketing are not immune to these two tendencies. Embracing systems thinking (Senge 1990), strategy mapping (Huff 1990), and building/testing simulation models of business-to-business marketing-customer systems is useful advice. REFERENCES Arnould, Eric J. and Melanie Wallendorf (1994), “Market-Oriented Ethnography: Interpretation Building and Marketing Strategy Formulation,” Journal of Marketing Research, 31 (4), 484-504. Biemans, Wim G. (1989), Developing Innovations Within Networks, Eindhoven, The Netherlands: Technische Universiteit. (1991), “User and Third-Party Involvement in Developing Medical Equipment Innovations,” Technovation, 11 (3), 163-182. Capon, Noel and James Hulbert (1975), “Decision Systems Analysis in Industrial Marketing,” Industrial Marketing Management, 4 (2), 143-160. Christensen, Clayton M. (1997), The Innovator’s Dilemma, Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Day, Ralph L. and Hiram C. Barksdale Jr. (1992), “How Firms Select Professional Services,” Industrial Marketing Management, 21 (2), 85-91. Denzin, Norman K. and Yvonna S. Lincoln (eds.) (1994), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ericsson, K.A. and Herbert A. Simon (1980), “Verbal Reports As Data,” Psychological Review, 87, 215-251. Forrester, Jay W. (1961), Industrial Dynamics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Geertz, Clifford (1973), “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture,” in Clifford Geertz (ed.), The Interpretation of Cultures, New York: Basic Books. Gilovich, Thomas (1991), How We Know What Isn’t So, New York: Free Press. Hall, Roger I. (1984), “The Natural Logic of Management Policy Making: Its Implications for the Survival of an Organization,” Management Science, 30 (6), 905927. (1999), “A Study of Policy Formation in Complex Organizations: Emulating Group Decision-Making with a Simple Artificial Intelligence and a System Model of Corporate Operations,” Journal of Business Research, 45 (2), 157171. Hall, Roger I. and William Menzies (1983), “A Corporate System Model of a Sports Club: Using Simulation As an Aid to Policy-Making in a Crisis,” Management Science, 29 (1), 52-64. Hirschman, Elizabeth (1986), “Humanistic Inquiry in Marketing Research: Philosophy, Method, and Criteria,” Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (3), 237-249. Howard, John A., James Hulbert, and John U. Farley (1975), “Organizational Analysis and Information-Systems Design: A Decision-Process Perspective,” Journal of Business Research, 3 (2), 133-148. Howard, John A. and William M. Morgenroth (1968), “Information Processing Model of Executive Decision,” Management Science, 14 (4), 416-428. Huff, Anne S. (1990), Mapping Strategic Thought, New York: Wiley. Hulbert, James, John U. Farley, and John A. Howard (1972), “Information Processing and Decision Making in Marketing Organizations,” Journal of Marketing Research, 9 (1), 75-77. Montgomery, David B. (1975), “New Product Distribution: An Analysis of Supermarket Buyer Decisions,” Journal of Marketing Research, 12 (3), 255-264. Morgenroth, William M. (1964), “A Method for Understanding Price Determinants,” Journal of Marketing Research, 1 (3), 17-26. Pettigrew, Andrew M. (1975), “The Industrial Purchasing Decision As a Political Process,” European Journal of Marketing, 9 (1), 4-20. Plous, Scott (1993), The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making, New York: McGraw-Hill. Reid, David A. and Richard E. Plank (2000), “Business Marketing Comes of Age: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature,” Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 7 (2/3), 1-185. Sanday, Peggy R. (1979), “The Ethnographic Paradigm(s),” Administrative Science Quarterly, 24 (4), 527-538. Schank, Roger C. (1990), Tell Me a Story: A New Look at Real and Artificial Memory, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Schwarz, Norbert (1999), “Self-Reports: How the Questions Shape the Answers,” American Psychologist, 52 (2), 93-105. Senge, Peter (1990), The Fifth Discipline, New York: Currency Doubleday. Tanur, Judith (1992), Questions About Questions, New York: Sage. Van Maanen, John (1979), “The Fact of Fiction in Organizational Ethnography,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 24 (4), 539-550. (1979), “Qualitative Methodology [Special Issue],” Administrative Science Quarterly, 24 (4), 517-706. von Hippel, Eric (1986), “Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts,” Management Science, 32 (7), 791-805. Weick, Karl E. (1979), The Social Psychology of Organizing, New York: McGrawHill. Woodside, Arch G. (1994), “Network Anatomy of Industrial Marketing and Purchasing of New Manufacturing Technologies,” Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 9 (3), 52-63. (1995), Sensemaking in Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (1996), “Rejecting Superior New Technologies,” in Susan A. Shaw and Neil Hood (eds.), Marketing in Evolution, London: Macmillan. Woodside, Arch G. and David M. Samuel (1981), Industrial Marketing Management, 10 (4), 191-205. Workman, John P. (1993), “Marketing’s Limited Role in New Product Development in One Computer Systems Firm,” Journal of Marketing Research, 30 (4), 405421.