The effect of knowledge breadth and depth on new product performance[Download PDF] Defeng Yang, Lu Jin and Shibin Sheng This study distinguishes two features of a firm’s knowledge base â€“ breadth and depth â€“ and elucidates their interplay in determining new product performance. Papers drawing from the knowledge-based view of the firm often argue a positive role for knowledge base in new product development, however empirical evidence shows an equivocal relationship between knowledge base and new product performance. The empirical results from a sample of 192 high-tech firms indicate that a deep knowledge in a specific industry is imperative to a firm’s new product success. However, the effect of knowledge breadth is contingent on knowledge depth: a firm’s deep knowledge in a specific field causes a systematic shift in the effect of knowledge breadth, from a negative to a positive effect. In other words, knowledge breadth has a negative effect on new product performance for lower levels of knowledge depth, but a positive effect for higher levels of knowledge depth.
These findings offer valuable managerial implications for knowledge management, i.e. if firms expand their knowledge base across various fields or submarkets, they need to correspondingly accumulate deep knowledge in each specific field to take advantage of a broad knowledge base. [Digital First] Published 5 January 2017
Book review: How brands grow: part two, by Jenni Romaniuk and Byron Sharp[Download PDF] Peter Mouncey Vol. 58 No. 6, 2016 pp. 881–882 This book review looks at 'How brands grow: part 2' by Jenni Romaniuk and Byron Sharp, the 2015 follow up to Byron Sharp's 2010 'How brands grow'. Like the first book, it attempts to challenge the reader to recognise the fundamental errors in contemporary marketing thought. The first two chapters reiterate material from the first book and throughout the work there is reused material. The third and fourth chapters, 'Building mental availability' and 'Leveraging distinctive assets', are the most valuable, compared to some of the more basic later chapters. The reviewer's reaction to the book was mixed, while some of it was insightful it didn't live up to the first book though some readers of the first book may find more detail on its key concepts. Published 30 November 2016
Forum: Comparing association grids and 'pick any' lists for measuring brand attributes[Download PDF] Duncan Rintoul, Homa Hajibaba and Sara Dolnicar Vol. 58 No. 6, 2016 pp. 779–794 Using a split-ballot experiment with 940 respondents, this study compares the quality of data from an association grid with data gathered through a single ‘pick any’ list repeated for each brand on a new page in a web survey. The association grid is a multiple response matrix used to measure brand image associations for a number of brands at the same time. Attributes are usually presented as rows, and brands in columns, allowing respondents to select each association they perceive to be true (e.g. Coca Cola – Popular). Our results indicate that larger association grids are answered considerably faster, but are heavily prone to evasion bias and perform worse when it comes to drop-out, comprehension and attention to the task. Smaller association grids have no ill effect on the respondent experience, but are also devoid of material benefit in terms of field time or data quality. As a tool for measuring brand-image association, the association grid is therefore not recommended. Published 30 November 2016
Viewpoint: Importance-performance analysis: common misuse of a popular technique[Download PDF] Josip Mikulic, Darko Prebežac and Marina Dabic Vol. 58 No. 6, 2016 pp. 775–778 This viewpoint discusses the misuse of Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA). The authors argue that in contemporary IPA research importance is rarely regarded as a multidimensional concept despite the topic being debated since the late 1960s. They say that the practice of making absolute, categorical conclusions in IPA, based solely on the relative positioning of attributes, should be abandoned but that stated and derived measures must not be regarded as alternative measures for the same concept, i.e. importance. Therefore, managerial implications in future IPA research must necessarily be adapted to the type of importance measure used, although ideally both should be utilised. Published 30 November 2016
Editorial[Download PDF] Peter Mouncey Vol. 58 No. 6, 2016 pp. 767–774 In this editorial, Peter Mouncey previews the articles in volume 58(6) of IJMR, covering topics including the application of consumer perceptions to brand categorisation, methods for identifying store personalities, the consumer style index in an Arabian context and the application of SCM models. Peter also discusses the forum section on measuring brand image and the viewpoint section on the misuse of Importance-Performance Analysis. His editorial examines Rob Santos, article on why polls have not been accurate recently. He also writes about the MRS evening meeting on augmenting polls with passive data. Peter ends the editorial with the announcement of a special issue of IJMR on the challenges of measuring public opinion and he highlights the Call for Papers. Published 30 November 2016