Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Fuzzy multi criteria decision making approach to innovative strategies based on Miles and Snow typology

  • Published:
Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Innovation which utilizes both competitive and co-operative relationships can be defined as the improvement of some new products, services or systems. Generation of an innovation strategy is an essential challenge in today’s competitive business world. Innovation provides a sustainable competitive advantage when the related activities become an indispensable element of the management within the company. In line with this issue, after a comprehensive literature review, five characteristic parameters of innovation are selected to analyze a company’s innovation strategy. The determined parameters are the strategic orientation of a firm, the abilities of a firm, the cultural structure, the attributes of products, and the environment of competition. The data belonging to the leading companies of their sector are evaluated by using these parameters and with the help of Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. Based on both the conceptual and empirical research, organizations are classified according to the Miles & Snow typology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akman, G., & Yılmaz, C. (2008). Innovative capability, innovation strategy and market orientation: An empirical analysis In Turkish software industry. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12(1), 69–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. I., & Stewart, J. M. (1967). Strategies for a technology-based business. Harvard Business Review, 45, 71–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayag, Z., & Özdemir, R. G. (2006). A fuzzy AHP approach to evaluating machine tool alternatives. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. doi:10.1007/s1084500566351.

  • Ayag, Z., Samanlioglu, F., & Büyüközkan, G. (2012). A fuzzy QFD approach to determine supply chain management strategies in the dairy industry. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. doi:10.1007/s1084501206394.

  • Badri, M., & Davis, D. (2000). Operations strategy, environmental uncertainty and performance: A path analytic model of industries in developing countries. Omega, 28(2), 155–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2009). The complementary effects of market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation on profitability in small businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 47, 443–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bean, R. (2001). Business of innovation: Managing corporate imagination for maximum results. Saranac Lake, NY: Amacom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buyukozkan, G., Feyzioğlu, O., & Nebol, E. (2008). Selection of the strategic alliance partner in logistics value chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 113(1), 148–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calantone, R., Çavuşgil, S., & Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31(6), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpano, C., & Martin, M. (2010). Barriers to the adoption of foreign production technologies: An empirical analysis. Journal of Global Business Issues, 2(1), 53–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerami, J. (2000). Research in organizational design: The capacity for innovation in large, complex organizations. The Innovation Journal. http://www.innovation.cc/discussion-papers/organizational-design.htm. Accessed 15 Nov 2012.

  • Chagantı, R., & Sambharya, R. (1987). Strategic orientation and characteristics of upper management. Strategic Management Journal, 8(4), 393–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, D. Y. (1996). Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 95, 649–655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conant, J., Mokwa, M., & Varadarajan, P. (1990). Strategic types, distinctive marketing competencies and organizational performance: A multiple measures-based study. Strategic Management Journal, 11(5), 365–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G. (1984). The performance of product innovation strategies. European Journal of Marketing, 18(5), 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Desarbo, W., Benedetto, C., Song, M., & Sinha, I. (2005). Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework: Uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(1), 47–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durna, U. (2002). Yenilik yönetimi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erensal, Y. C., Öncan, T., & Demircan, M. L. (2006). Determining key capabilities in technology management using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: A case study of Turkey. Information Sciences, 176(18), 2755–2770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. D., & Gren, C. L. (2000). Marketing strategy, constituent influence, and resource allocation: An application of the Miles and Snow typology to closely held firms bankruptcy. Journal of Business Research, 50(2), 225–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. (1974). The economics of innovation. Manchester: Penguin.

  • Gilbert, J. (1994). Choosing an innovation strategy: Theory and practice. Business Horizons, 337(6), 16–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafeez, K., Malak, N., & Zhang, Y. B. (2007). Outsourcing non-core assets and competences of a firm using analytic hierarchy process. Computers & Operations Research, 34(12), 3592–3608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. (1983). Some tests of the effectiveness and functional attributes of Miles and Snow’s strategic types. The Academy of Management Journal, 26(1), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassan, H., & Minden, J. (2010). The relationship between firms’ strategic orientations and strategic planning process. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(11), 35–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, S. P., Hsu, Y., & Lin, E. (2011a). Model for knowledge-sharing strategies: A game theory analysis. The Engineering Project Organization Journal, 1(1), 53–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, Y., Fang, H., & Lin, J. (2011b). Technological and design capabilities: Is ambidexterity possible? Management Decision, 49(2), 208–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M., Hurley, R. F., & Knight, G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hultink, E. J., & Robben, H. S. J. (1995). Measuring new product success: The difference that time perspective makes. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 12, 392–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, R., & Hult, T. (1998). Innovation, market orientation and organizational learning: An integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 62, 42–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, M. S. (2007). The effect of female strategic managers on organizational performance. Public Organization Review, 7(3), 269–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johne, A., & Snelson, P. (1990). Successful product development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

  • Johnson, G., & Scholes, K. (1998). Exploring corporate strategy (5th ed.). Prentice Hall.

  • Kahraman, C., Ertay, T., & Buyukozkan, G. (2006). A fuzzy optimization model for QFD planning process using analytic network process. European Journal of Operational Research, 171(2), 390–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabir, G., & Hasin, M. A. A. (2011a). Evaluation of customer oriented success factors in mobile commerce using fuzzy AHP. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 4(2), 361–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kabir, G., & Hasin, M. A. A. (2011b). Comparative analysis Of AHP and fuzzy AHP models for multicriteria inventory classification. International Journal of Fuzzy Logic Systems, 1(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassel, S., & Tittmann, C. (2007). Implications from customer behavior for manufacturing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 18(4), 475–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, A., & Gupta, M. M. (1988). Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science. North-Holland, Amsterdam, NY: Elsevier Science Publishers.

  • Kearns, S. (2005). An electronic commerce strategic typology: Insights from case studies. Information & Management., 42(7), 1023–1036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S. K., Lee, B. G., Park, B. S., & Oh, K. S. (2011). The effect of R &D, technology commercialization capabilities and innovation performance. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 17(4), 563–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschatzky, K., Bross, U., & Stanovnık, P. (2001). Development and innovation potential in the Slovenia manufacturing industry: Analysis of an industrial innovation survey. Technovation, 21(5), 311–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwong, C. K., & Bai, H. (2002). A fuzzy AHP approach to the determination of importance weights of customer requirements in quality function deployment. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 13, 367–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambkin, M. (1988). Order of entry and performance in new markets. Strategic Management Journal, 9, 127–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laugen, B., Boer, H., & Acur, N. (2006). The new product development improvement motives and practices of Miles and Snow’s prospectors, analyzers and defenders. Creativity and Innovation Management, 15(1), 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B., & Samson, D. (2001). Developing innovation capability in organizations: A dynamic capabilities approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(3), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, C., Serrano, A., & Yin, G. (2011). Customer-driven product design and evaluation method for collaborative design environments. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 22(5), 751–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, G. S., & Mazzuca, M. (1998). Learning the critical success factor in developing truly new products. Research Technology Management, 41(3), 45–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malakooti, B. (2011). Systematic decision process for intelligent decision making. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing., 22(4), 627–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik, M. E., & Naeem, B. (2011). Miles and Snow strategy typology: A critical commentary interdisciplinary. Journal of Contemporary Research In Business, 3(4), 805–812.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manu, F. (1992). Innovation orientation, environment and performance: A comparison of us and European markets. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(2), 333–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manu, F. A., & Sriram, V. (1996). Innovation, marketing strategy, environment and performance. Journal of Business Research, 35(1), 79–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, H. J., Jr. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 545–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, V., & Zmud, R. (2006). Endogenous adaptation: The effects of technology position and planning mode on it-enabled change. Decision Sciences, 37(3), 325–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Modarres, M., Nezhad, S., & Arabic, F. (2010). Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process using preference ratio: A case study for selecting management short course in a business school. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, 1, 173–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. (2005). Towards a confirmatory model of retail strategy types: An empirical test of Miles and Snow. Journal of Business Research, 58(5), 696–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R. E., & Strong, C. A. (1998). Market orientation and dimensions of strategic orientation. European Journal of Marketing, 32(11/12), 1051–1073.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. (2000). Managing creative people: Strategies and tactics for innovation. Human Resource Management Review, 10(3), 313–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neely, A. D., Filippini, R., Forza, C., Vinelli, A., & Hii, J. (2001). The impact of innovation on business performance: Perceptions of managers and policy makers. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 12(2), 114–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Omar, M., Mears, L., Kurfess, T., & Kiggans, R. (2011). Organizational learning in automotive manufacturing: A strategic choice. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 22(5), 709–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozsomer, A., Calantone, R., & Benedetto, A. (1997). What makes firms more innovative? A look at organizational and environmental factors. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 12(6), 400–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parnell, J. A., Lester, D. L., & Menefee, M. L. (2000). Strategy as a response to organizational uncertainty: An alternative perspective on the strategy performance relationship. Management Decision, 38(8), 520–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittino, D., & Visintin, F. (2009). Innovation and strategic types of family SMEs. A test and extension of miles and snow’s configurational model. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 17(3), 257–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pleshko, L., & Nickerson, I. (2008). Strategic orientation, organizational structure, and the associated effects on performance in industrial firms. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 7, 95–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press.

  • Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory Practice, 33, 761–787.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. (2004). The impact of a company’s business strategy on its technological competence, network competence and innovation success. Journal of Business Research, 57(5), 548– 556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roger, A. F. (2001). Manager’s guide to strategy. McGraw-Hill Professional.

  • Romjin, H., & Albaladojo, M. (2002). Determinants of innovation capability in small electronics and software firms in Southeast England. Research Policy, 31(7), 1053–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1990). How to mark a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shortell, S., & Zajac, E. (1990). Perceptual and archival measures of Miles and Snow’s strategic types: A comprehensive assessment of reliability and validity. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 817–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S., & Narver, F. (1994). Does competitive environment moderate the market orientation–performance relationship. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Song, M., Benedetto, C., & Nason, R. (2007). Capabilities and financial performance: The moderating effect of strategic type. Journal Of the Academy Marketing Science, 35(1), 18–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavakolian, H. (1989). Linking the information technology structure with organizational competitive strategy: A survey. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 309–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tay, J. Y. W., & Tay, L. (2007). Market orientation and the property development business in Singapore. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 11(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thamhain, H. (1996). Managing technology based innovation. Handbook of technology management. USA: Mcgrawhill.

  • Torres, A. M., & Murray, J. A. (2002). Diversity, marketing practice and organisational evolution: Implications for the management of productive evolution. Journal of Change Management, 2(3), 229–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urban, G. L., & Hauser, J. R. (1980). Design and marketing of new products. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

  • Valos, M. J., & Bednall, D. (2010). The alignment of market research with business strategy and CRM. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 18(3), 187–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N. (1989). Strategic orientation of business enterprises: The construct, dimensionality and measurement. Management Science, 35(8), 942–962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers, R., & Cassiman, B. (1999). Make and buy in innovation strategies: Evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 28, 63–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., & Dargahi, F. (2012). Service customization under capacity constraints: An auction-based model. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. doi:10.1007/s10845-012-0689-7.

  • Weerawardena, J. (2003). The role of marketing capability in innovation-based competitive strategy. Journal of Strategic Marketing., 11(1), 15–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisenfeld-Schenk, U. (1994). Technology strategies and the Miles & Snow typology: A study of the biotechnology industry. R &D management, 24, 57–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. M. S., Gillican, C., & Pearson, D. (1992). Strategic marketing management: Planning, implementation and control. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Limited.

  • Woodman, R., Sawyer, J., & Griffin, R. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, O., & Doll, W. J. (2001). Fuzzy front end and success of new product development: A casual model. European Journal of Innovation Management, 4(2), 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhuang, L. (1995). Bridging the gap between technology and business strategy: A pilot study on the innovation process. Management Decision, 33(8), 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Industrial Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Kocaeli University, Umuttepe, 41380 , Kocaeli, Turkey

    Gülşen Akman, Burcu Özcan & Tuğçen Hatipoğlu

Authors
  1. Gülşen Akman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Burcu Özcan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tuğçen Hatipoğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gülşen Akman.

Appendix

Appendix

A sample of questions from the questionnaire is given below:

If an attribute on the left is more important than the one on the right, put cross mark “X” to the left of the “Equal Importance” column, under the importance level (column) you prefer. On the other hand, if an attribute on the left is less important than the one on the right, put cross mark “X” to the right of the“Equal Importance” column, under the importance level (column) you prefer.

  1. Q1.

    How important is the customer orientation when it is compared to technological orientation?

  2. Q2.

    How important is the customer orientation when it is compared to competitor orientation?

  3. Q3.

    How important is the customer orientation when it is compared to innovative orientation?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Akman, G., Özcan, B. & Hatipoğlu, T. Fuzzy multi criteria decision making approach to innovative strategies based on Miles and Snow typology. J Intell Manuf 26, 609–628 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-013-0820-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-013-0820-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation