Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The paradox of a marketing planning capability

  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Strategy scholars have long debated the value of formal planning, and research has offered inconsistent support for planning to enhance firm performance. Given these mixed empirical effects, we draw from the resource-based view of the firm to illustrate a paradox firms may face. In particular, a strong marketing planning capability may not only reduce the incidence of postplan improvisation but also contain inherent process rigidity. Since both of these can also increase performance, results illustrate a performance paradox in marketing planning.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahuja, Gautam and Curba M. Lampert. 2001. “Entreprenuership in the Large Corporation.”Strategic Management Journal 22: 521–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, Leona S. and Stephen G. West. 1991.Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H. Igor. 1991. “Critique of Henry Mintzberg’s ‘The Design School: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Management’.”Strategic Management Journal 12: 449–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, Richard P. and Hans Baumgartner. 1994. “The Evaluation of Structural Equation Models and Hypothesis Testing.” InPrinciples of Marketing Research. Ed. Richard P. Bagozzi. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 386–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, Michael L. 2003. “Falling off the Fence? A Realistic Appraisal of a Real Options Approach to Corporate Strategy.”Journal of Management Inquiry 12 (2): 185–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, Jay B. 1991. “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage.”Journal of Management 17: 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, Kenneth and Richard Lennox. 1991. “Conventional Wisdom on Measurement: A Structural Equation Perspective.”Psychological Bulletin 110 (2): 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgeois, L. J. 1980. “Strategy and Environment.”Academy of Management Review 5 (1): 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brews, Peter J. and Michelle R. Hunt. 1999. “Learning to Plan and Planning to Learn: Resolving the Planning School/Learning School Debate.”Strategic Management Journal 20: 889–913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, Bo. 1989. “Flexibility and the Theory of the Firm.”International Journal of Industrial Organization 7: 179–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, Alfred D. 1962.Strategy and Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, Wynne W. 1998. “Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling.”MIS Quarterly 22 (March): vii-xvi.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 2000. “Partial Least Squares for Researchers: An Overview and Presentation of Recent Advances Using the PLS Approach.” Working paper, University of Houston, Texas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Patricia, Jacob Cohen, Jeanne Teresi, Margaret Marchi, and C. Noemi Velez. 1990. “Problems in the Measurement of Latent Variables in Structural Equations Causal Models.”Applied Psychological Measurement 14: 183–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, Robin and Robert S. Kaplan. 1988. “Measure Costs Right: Make the Right Decisions.”Harvard Business Review 66: 96–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das, T. K. and B. Elango. 1995. “Managing Strategic Flexibility: Key to Effective Performance.”Journal of General Management 20 (3): 60–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, George S. 1994. “The Capabilities of Market-Driven Organizations.”Journal of Marketing 58 (4): 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Prakash Nedungadi. 1994. “Managerial Representations of Competitive Advantage.”Journal of Marketing 58 (2): 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denison, Daniel R., Robert Hooijberg, and Robert E. Quinn. 1995. “Paradox and Performance: Toward a Theory of Behavioral Complexity in Managerial Leadership.”Organization Science 6 (5): 524–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos, Adamantios and Heidi M. Winklhofer. 2001. “Index Construction With Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development.”Journal of Marketing Research 38 (2): 269–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, Peter R. 1992. “Toward a General Theory of Competitive Rationality.”Journal of Marketing 56: 69–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1997.Marketing Management. 2d ed. Fort Worth, TX: Dryden.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 2003. “The Pigeon Breeders’ Cup: A Selection on Selection Theory of Economic Evolution.”Journal of Evolutionary Economics 13: 259–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, Deborah. 1992. “Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms.”Organization Science 3: 179–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. 1989. “Making Fast Strategic Decisions in High Velocity Environments.”Academy of Management Journal 32 (2): 1504–1511.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2000. “Paradox, Spirals, Ambivalence: The New Language of Change and Pluralism.”Academy of Management Review 25 (4): 703–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Behnam N. Tabrizi. 1995. “Accelerating Adaptive Processes: Product Innovation in the Global Computer Industry.”Administrative Science Quarterly 40: 84–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and B. J. Westcott. 1988. “Paradoxical Demands and the Creation of Excellence.” InParadox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization and Management. Eds. R. E. Quinn and K. S. Cameron. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 169–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. Stuart. 1991. “Strategic Flexibility for High Technology Manoeuvres: A Conceptual Framework.”Journal of Management Studies 28: 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, Claes and Fred L. Bookstein. 1982. “Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory.”Journal of Marketing Research 19 (November): 440–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and David F. Larcker. 1981. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models With Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.”Journal of Marketing Research 18 (February): 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, Gerard J. Tellis, and George M. Zinkhan. 1982. “Validity Assessment: A Structural Equations Approach Using Partial Least Squares.” InAn Assessment of Marketing Thought & Practice. Eds. B. J. Walker, W. O. Bearden, W. R. Darden, P. E. Murphy, J. R. Nevin, J. C. Olson, and B. A. Weitz. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 405–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredrickson, James W. 1984. “The Comprehensiveness of Strategic Decision Processes: Extension, Observations, Future Directions.”Academy of Management Journal 27 (2): 445–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Anthony L. Iaquinto. 1989. “Inertia and Creeping Rationality in Strategic Decision Processes.”Academy of Management Journal 32 (3): 516–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, Craig S. 1990. “Transferring Core Manufacturing Technologies in High-Technology Firms.”California Management Review 32: 56–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, Robert M. 1991. “The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation.”California Management Review 33 (3): 114–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, Michael T. and John H. Freeman. 1984. “Structural Inertia and Organizational Change.”American Sociological Review 29: 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrigan, Kathrun R. 1985.Strategic Flexibility. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedberg, Bo. 1981. “How Organizations Learn and Unlearn.” InHandbook of Organizational Design. Eds. P. C. Nystrom and W. H. Starbuck. London: Oxford University Press, 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulland, John. 1999. “Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management Research.”Strategic Management Journal 20: 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, R. Duane, Michael A. Hitt, Richard A. Bettis, and Deborah Auld de Porras. 1987. “Strategy Formulation Processes.”Strategic Management Journal 8: 469–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, Cheryl B., Scott B. Mackenzie, and Philip M. Podsakoff. 2003. “A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research.”Journal of Consumer Research 30 (September): 199–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John, George and John Martin. 1984. “Effects of Organizational Structure of Marketing Planning on Credibility and Utilization of Plan Output.”Journal of Marketing Research 21 (May): 170–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Jean L., Ruby Pui-Wan Lee, Amit Saini, and Bianca Grohmann. 2003. “Market-Focused Strategic Flexibility.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 31 (Winter): 74–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, William R. 1983. “Evaluating Strategic Planning Systems.”Strategic Management Journal 4: 263–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, Dorothy. 1992. “Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development.”Strategic Management Journal 13: 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, Daniel and James G. March. 1993. “The Myopia of Learning.”Strategic Management Journal 14: 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, Barbara and James G. March. 1988. “Organizational Learning.”Annual Review of Sociology 14: 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Marianne W. 2000. “Exploring Paradox: Toward a More Comprehensive Guide.”Academy of Management Review 25 (4): 760–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodish, Leonard M. 1986.Advertising and Promotion: Vaguely Right or Precisely Wrong? New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, James G. 1981. “Footnotes to Organizational Change.”Administrative Science Quarterly 26: 563–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1991. “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.”Organization Science 2: 71–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Herbert A. Simon. 1958.Organizations. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCann, Joseph E. and Luis Gomez-Mejia. 1992. “Going ‘On-Line’ in the Environmental Scanning Process.”IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 39 (November): 394–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menon, Anil, Sundar G. Bharadwaj, Phani Tej Adidam, and Steven W. Edison. 1999. “Antecedents and Consequences of Marketing Strategy Making.”Journal of Marketing 63 (April): 18–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —— and Roy Howell. 1996. “The Quality and Effectiveness of Marketing Strategy.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 24 (4): 299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Chet C. and Laura B. Cardinal. 1994. “Strategic Planning and Firm Performance: A Synthesis of More Than Two Decades of Research.”Academy of Management Journal 37 (6): 1649–1665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Danny and Peter H. Friesen. 1983. “Strategy Making and Environment: The Third Link.”Strategic Management Journal 4 (3): 221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miner, Anne S., Paula Bassoff, and Christine Moorman. 2001. “Organizational Improvisation and Learning: A Field Study.”Administrative Science Quarterly 46: 304–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, Henry. 1994.The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1990. “The Design School: Reconsidering the Basic Premises of Strategic Management.”Strategic Management Journal 11 (3): 171–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, Christine and Anne S. Miner. 1998. “The Convergence of Planning and Execution: Improvisation in New Product Development.”Journal of Marketing 62 (July): 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, Jum C., 1978.Psychometric Theory 2d ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nutt, Paul C. 1989. Selecting Tactics to Implement Strategic Plans.Strategic Management Journal 10: 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piercy, Nigel F. 1987. “The Marketing Budgeting Process: Marketing Management Implications.”Journal of Marketing 51 (October): 45–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Neil A. Morgan. 1994. “The Marketing Planning Process: Behavioral Problems Compared to Analytical Techniques in Explaining Marketing Plan Credibility.”Journal of Business Research 29: 167–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, Thomas C. 1992. “Organizational Alignment as Competitive Advantage.”Strategic Management Journal 13 (2): 119–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanujam, Vasudevan, N. Venkatraman, and John C. Camillus. 1986. “Multi-Objective Assessment of Effectiveness of Strategic Planning.”Academy of Management Journal 29 (2): 347–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, Richard B. and John A. Pearce. 1983. “The Impact of Formalized Strategic Planning on Financial Performance in Small Organizations.”Strategic Management Journal 4 (3): 197–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, Ron. 1995. “Strategic Flexibility in Product Competition.”Strategic Management Journal 16: 135–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, Herbert A. 1976. “From Substantive to Procedural Rationality.” InMethod and Appraisal in Economics. Ed. Spiro J. Latsis Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 129–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1991. “Bounded Rationality and Organizational Learning.”Organization Science 2 (1): 125–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1993. “Strategy and Organizational Evolution.”Strategic Management Journal 14: 131–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonson, Itamar and Barry M. Staw. 1992. “Deescalation Strategies: A Comparison of Techniques for Reducing Commitment to Losing Courses of Action.”Journal of Applied Psychology 77 (4): 419–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, Deepak K. 1990. “The Contribution of Formal Planning to Decisions.”Strategic Management Journal 11: 479–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. Brock and Donald W. Barclay. 1997. “The Effects of Organizational Differences and Trust on the Effectiveness of Selling Partner Relationships.”Journal of Marketing 61 (January): 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, Rajendra K., Tasadduq A. Shervani, and Liam Fahey. 1998. “Market-Based Assets and Shareholder Value: A Framework for Analysis.”Journal of Marketing 62 (January): 2–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staw, Barry M. 1981. “The Escalation of Commitment to a Course of Action.”Academy of Management Review 6 (October): 577–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, Howard. 1990.The Marketing Plan in the 1990s. Report No. 951. New York: The Conference Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman N. and J. Prescott. 1990. Environment-Strategy Coalignment: An Empirical Test of Its Performance Implications.Strategic Management Journal 11: 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Orville C., Harper W. Boyd, and Jean-Claude Larreche. 1996.Marketing Strategy: Planning and Implementation. Chicago: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, Karl E., 1996. “Drop Your Tools: An Allegory for Organizational Studies.”Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 301–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, Birger. 1984. “A Resource-Based View of the Firm.”Strategic Management Journal 5: 171–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, Glen. 1986. “Escalating Commitment to a Course of Action.”Academy of Management Review 11: 311–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wold, Herman. 1975. “Path Models With Latent Variables: The NIPALS Approach.” InQuantitative Sociology Eds. H. M. Blalock, A. Aganbegian, F. M. Borodkin, R. Boudon, and V. Cappecchi. New York: Academic Press, 307–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1985. “Partial Least Squares.” InEncyclopedia of Statistical Sciences, Vol. 6 Eds. S. Kotz and N. L. Johnson New York: John Wiley, 581–591.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinkhan, George M., Erich Joachimsthaler, and Thomas Kinnear, 1987. “Individual Differences and Marketing Decision Support System Usage and Satisfaction.”Journal of Marketing Research 24 (2): 208–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University, Indiana, USA

    Rebecca J. Slotegraaf

  2. Florida International University, Florida, USA

    Peter R. Dickson

Authors
  1. Rebecca J. Slotegraaf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter R. Dickson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Rebecca J. Slotegraaf (rslotegr@indiana.edu) is an assistant professor of marketing in the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. Her research focuses on the nature and effect of organizational resources, marketing capabilities, and deployment actions on competitive advantage. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. In addition to this publication in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, she has also published several articles in theJournal of Marketing Research.

Peter R. Dickson (dicksonp@fiu.edu) is the Knight-Ridder Eminent Scholar in Global Marketing at Florida International University. He was previously the Arthur C. Nielsen Jr., Chair of Marketing Research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and before that the Crane Professor of Strategic Marketing and a professor of industrial design at the Ohio State University. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Florida. Thirty of his articles on buyer and seller behavior have been published in leading marketing journals.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Slotegraaf, R.J., Dickson, P.R. The paradox of a marketing planning capability. JAMS 32, 371–385 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070304265217

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070304265217

Keywords

Search

Navigation