Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Market-Sensing Capability, Innovativeness, Brand Management Systems, Market Dynamism, Competitive Intensity, and Performance: an Integrative Review

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article reviewed existing strategic management and marketing literature, and then proposes a framework that links market-sensing capability, firm innovativeness, brand management systems, and firm performance. Drawing on resource based theory (RBT) and dynamic capability theory, a framework that proffers firm innovativeness and brand management systems as mediators in the relationship between market-sensing capability and firm performance, this paper proposes the moderating role of environmental factors (i.e., competitive intensity and market dynamism) on the relationship between firm innovativeness and firm performance, and brand management systems and firm performance. A set of propositions that represent an empirically driven research agenda are presented.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abubakar, A. M., Elrehail, H., Alatailat, M. A., & Elçi, A. (2017). Knowledge management, decision-making style and organizational performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2017.07.003.

  • Achrol, R., & Stern, L. (1988). Environmental determinants of decision-making uncertainty in marketing channels. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(1), 36–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akgün, A. E., Keskin, H., & Byrne, J. (2012). The role of organizational emotional memory on declarative and procedural memory and firm innovativeness. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(3), 432–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexiev, A., Volberda, H., & Van den Bosch, F. (2016). Interorganizational collaboration and firm innovativeness: unpacking the role of the organizational environment. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 974–984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anees-ur-Rehman, M., Wong, H. Y., & Hossain, M. (2016). The progression of brand orientation literature in twenty years: a systematic literature review. Journal of Brand Management, 23(6), 612–630.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anees-ur-Rehman, M., Wong, H. Y., Sultan, P., & Merrilees, B. (2018). How brand-oriented strategy affects the financial performance of B2B SMEs. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-10-2016-0237.

  • Ardyan, E. (2016). Market sensing capability and SMEs performance: the mediating role of product innovativeness success. DLSU Business & Economics Review, 25(2), 79–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arora, S., & Cason, T. N. (1995). An experiment in voluntary environmental regulation: participation in EPA’s 33/50 program. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 28(3), 271–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrigo, E. (2015). Open innovation and market orientation: an analysis of the relationship. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 9, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0327-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima, K., Slater, F. S., & Olson, M. E. (2005). The contingent value of responsive and proactive market orientations for new product program performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(6), 464–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2005). Balancing exploration and exploitation: the moderating role of competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 58(12), 1652–1661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, J. (1954). Economies of scale, concentration, and the condition of entry in twenty manufacturing industries. The American Economic Review, 44(1), 15–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, J. (1959). Industrial organization. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1986). Organizational culture: can it be a source of sustained competitive advantage? Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 656–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (2001a). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 41–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (2001b). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: a ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view. Journal of Management, 27(6), 643–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgarth, C., Merrilees, B., & Urde, M. (2013). Brand orientation: past, present, and future. Journal of Marketing Management, 29(9–10), 973–980. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2013.817768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham, C., Eisenhardt, K., & Furr, N. (2007). What makes a process a capability? Heuristics, strategy, and effective capture of opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1-2, 27–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, S. A., Dwertmann, D. J. G., Bruch, H., & Shamir, B. (2015). The missing link? Investigating organizational identity strength and transformational leadership climate as mechanisms that connect CEO charisma with firm performance. The Leadership Quarterly, 26(2), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.07.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodie, R., Whittome, J., & Brush, G. (2009). Investigating the service brand: a customer value perspective. Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 345–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buil, I., Martínez, E., & Matute, J. (2016). From internal brand management to organizational citizenship behaviors: evidence from frontline employees in the hotel industry. Tourism Management, 57, 256–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.06.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Nevo, S., Benitez-Amado, J., & Kou, G. (2015). IT capabilities and product innovation performance: the roles of corporate entrepreneurship and competitive intensity. Information & Management, 52(6), 643–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chien, S., & Tsai, C. (2012). Dynamic capability, knowledge, learning, and firm performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 25(3), 434–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chmielewski, D., & Paladino, A. (2007). Driving a resource orientation: reviewing the role of resource and capability characteristics. Management Decision, 45(3), 462–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, H. J., & Pucik, V. (2005). Relationship between innovativeness, quality, growth, profitability, and market value. Strategic Management Journal, 26(6), 555–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christodoulides, G., & De Chernatony, L. (2010). Consumer-based brand equity conceptualization and measurement: a literature review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 52(1), 43–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colins, D., & Montgomery, C. (1995). Competing on resources: strategy in the 1990s. Harvard Business Review, 73(4), 118–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner, K. (1991). A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five schools of thought within industrial organization economics: do we have a new theory of the firm? Journal of Management, 17(1), 121–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, J. B., Dibrell, C., & Garrett, R. (2014). Examining relationships among family influence, family culture, flexible planning systems, innovativeness and firm performance. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 5(3), 229–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2013.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui, A., Griffith, D., & Cavusgil, S. (2005). The influence of competitive intensity and market dynamism on knowledge management capabilities of multinational corporation subsidiaries. Journal of International Marketing, 13(3), 32–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danneels, E., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (2015). Product innovativeness from the Firm’s perspective: its dimensions and their impact on project selection and performance. In C. Noble (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1999 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference. Developments in Marketing Science: Proceedings of the Academy of Marketing Science. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13078-1_123.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S., & Dunn, M. (2002). Building the brand-driven business. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. (1994). The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 37–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. (2002). Managing the market learning process. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 17(4), 240–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Chernatony, L., & Cottam, S. (2006a). Internal brand factors driving successful financial services brands. European Journal of Marketing, 40(5–6), 611–633.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Chernatony, L., Cottam, S., & Segal-Horn, S. (2006b). Communicating services brands' values internally and externally. The Service Industries Journal, 26(8), 819–836.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dess, G. G., Lumpkin, G. T., & Covin, J. G. (1997). Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: tests of contingency and configurational models. Strategic Management Journal, 18(9), 677–695.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dess, G. G., Newport, S., & Rasheed, A. M. A. (1993). Configuration research in strategic management: key issues and suggestions. Journal of Management, 19(4), 775–795.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibrell, C., Craig, J. B., & Neubaum, D. O. (2014). Linking the formal strategic planning process, planning flexibility, and innovativeness to firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 67(9), 2000–2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.10.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12), 1504–1511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drnevich, P., & Kriauciunas, A. (2011). Clarifying the conditions and limits of the contributions of ordinary and dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 32(3), 254–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Droge, C., Calantone, R., & Harmancioglu, N. (2008). New product success: is it reallycontrollable by managers in highly turbulent environments? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 272–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F., & Maciariello, J. A. (2008). Management (revised edition). New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunes, M., & Pras, B. (2013). Practices in the brand management system: identification and considerations for five business sectors. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 22(7), 444–461. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-09-2013-0396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durst, S., Mention, A. L., & Poutanen, P. (2015). Service innovation and its impact: what do we know about? Investigaciones Europeas de Direccion y Economia de la Empresa, 21(2), 65–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eng, T., & Okten, D. (2011). Exploring a dynamic framework of innovative capability: a theoretical integration of technological and marketing capabilities. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(9), 1001–1013. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2011.616700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, S., Chang, E., Ou, C., & Chou, C. (2014). Internal market orientation, market capabilities and learning orientation. European Journal of Marketing, 48(1/2), 170–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foroughi, A., Buang, N., Senik, Z., Hajmirsadeghi, R., & Bagheri, M. (2015). The role of open service innovation in enhancing business performance: the moderating effects of competitive intensity. Current Science, 109(4), 691–698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(2), 110–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Benito, Ó., González-Benito, J., & Muñoz-Gallego, P. A. (2014). On the consequences of market orientation across varied environmental dynamism and competitive intensity levels. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. (1996a). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(52), 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, R. (1996b). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenley, G. E. (1995). Market orientation and company performance: empirical evidence from UK companies. British Journal of Management, 6, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadjimanolis, A. (2000). A resource-based view of innovativeness in small firms. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 12(2), 263–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, J. K., Kim, N., & Srivastava, R. K. (1998). Market orientation and organizational performance: is innovation a missing link? Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 30–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929–964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatak, I., Kautonen, T., Fink, M., & Kansikas, J. (2016). Innovativeness and family-firm performance: the moderating effect of family commitment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.02.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatzikian, Y. (2015). Exploring the link between innovation and firm performance. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6(4), 749–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-012-0143-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heusinkveld, S., Benders, J., & van den Berg, R. (2009). From market sensing to new concept development in consultancies: the role of information processing and organizational capabilities. Technovation, 29(8), 509–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2009.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirvonen, S., & Laukkanen, T. (2014). Brand orientation in small firms: an empirical test of the impact on brand performance. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 22(1), 41–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(5), 651–661.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M., & Ketchen Jr., D. J. (2001). Does market orientation matter? A test of the. relationship between positional advantage and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(9), 899–906.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung, K., & Chou, C. (2013). The impact of open innovation on firm performance: the moderating effects of internal R&D and environmental turbulence. Technovation, 33(1), 10–11, 368–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2013.06.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, R., & Hult, G. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 62(3), 42–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Itami, H. (1987). Mobilizing invisible assets. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jancenelle, V. E., Storrud-Barnes, S., & Javalgi, R. G. (2017). Corporate entrepreneurship and market performance: a content analysis of earnings conference calls. Management Research Review, 40(3), 352–367. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-01-2016-0019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, O., Van De Vliert, E., & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and group innovation: a special issue introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 129–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jap, S. (1999). Pie-expansion efforts: collaboration processes in buyer-supplier relationships. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(4), 461–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, B., & Kohli, A. (1993). Market orientation: antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57(3), 53–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilic, K., Ulusoy, G., Gunday, G., & Alpkan, L. (2015). Innovativeness, operations priorities and corporate performance: an analysis based on a taxonomy of innovativeness. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 35(1), 115–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., & Lee, K. (2007). A study on brand management system of Korean companies. Korea Journalism Review, 61–87.

  • Kohli, A. K., Jaworski, B. J., & Markor, K. A. (1993). A measure of market orientation. Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 467–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraiczy, N. D., Hack, A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2015). The relationship between top management team innovation orientation and firm growth: the mediating role of firm innovativeness. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langerak, F., Peelen, E., & van der Veen, M. (1998). Exploratory results on the antecedents and consequences of green marketing. Journal of the Market Research Society, 40(4), 323–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, T., Tuominen, S., Reijonen, H., & Hirvonen, S. (2016). Does market orientation pay off without brand orientation? A study of small business entrepreneurs. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(7–8), 673–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2015.1122659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, L. (1967). Organization and environment. Homewood: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lechner, C., & Gudmundsson, S. V. (2012). Entrepreneurial orientation, firm strategy and small firm performance. International Small Business Journal, 32(1), 36–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242612455034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, W. J. T., O’Cass, A., & Sok, P. (2017). Unpacking brand management superiority: examining the interplay of brand management capability, brand orientation and formalization. European Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-09-2015-0698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J., Park, S., Baek, I., & Lee, C. (2008). The impact of the brand management system on brand performance in B–B and B–C environments. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(7), 848–855.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, D., & Liu, J. (2014). Dynamic capabilities, environmental dynamism, and competitive advantage: evidence from China. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2793–2799.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, J., Poppo, L., & Zhou, K. (2008). Do managerial ties in China always produce value? Competition, uncertainty, and domestic vs. foreign firms. Strategic Management Journal, 29(4), 383–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Y., & Wu, L. (2014). Exploring the role of dynamic capabilities in firm performance under the resource-based view framework. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 407–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louro, M., & Cunha, P. (2001). Brand management paradigms. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(7–8), 849–875.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, S., & Javalgi, R. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation, marketing capabilities and performance: the moderating role of competitive intensity on Latin American international new ventures. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2040–2051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menguc, B., & Auh, S. (2006). Creating a firm-level dynamic capability through capitalizing on market orientation and innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(1), 63–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1175–1195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, N., Slotegraaf, R., & Vorhies, D. (2009). Linking marketing capabilities with profit growth. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 284–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mu, J. (2015). Marketing capability, organizational adaptation and new product development performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 49, 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.05.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, N., Lynch, P., & Foley, A. (2016). Unlocking the magic in successful tourism destination marketing: the role of sensing capability. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(9/10), 877–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2016.1192557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Najafi-Tavani, S., Sharifi, H., & Najafi-Tavani, Z. (2016). Market orientation, marketing capability, and new product performance: the moderating role of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5059–5064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narver, J., Slater, S., & MacLachlan, D. (2004). Responsive and proactive market orientation and new product success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(5), 334–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ngo, L. V., & O'Cass, A. (2012). In search of innovation and customer‐related performance superiority: The role of market orientation, marketing capability, and innovation capability interactions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(5), 861–877. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00939.x.

  • Ngo, L. V., Bucic, T., Sinha, A., & Lu, V. N. (2017). Effective sense-and-respond strategies: mediating roles of exploratory and exploitative innovation. Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.050.

  • Olavarrieta, S., & Friedmann, R. (1999). Market-oriented culture, knowledge-related resources, reputational assets and superior performance: a conceptual framework. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 7(4), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/096525499346332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olavarrieta, S., & Friedmann, R. (2008). Market orientation, knowledge-related resources and firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 61(6), 623–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.06.037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr, L. M., Bush, V. D., & Vorhies, D. W. (2011). Leveraging firm-level marketing capabilities with marketing employee development. Journal of Business Research, 64, 1074–1081.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osakwe, C., Chovancova, M., & Ogbonna, B. (2016). Linking SMEs profitability to brand orientation and market-sensing capability: a service sector evidence. Periodica Polytechnica. Social and Management Sciences, 24(1), 34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parida, V., Pesämaa, O., Wincent, J., & Westerberg, M. (2017). Network capability, innovativeness, and performance: a multidimensional extension for entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 29(1–2), 94–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2016.1255434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf, M. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: a resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf, M., & Bergen, M. (2003). Scanning dynamic competitive landscapes: a market-based and resource-based framework. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 1027–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (1985). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: FreePress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 86(1), 78–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punjaisri, K., & Wilson, A. (2011). Internal branding process: key mechanisms, outcomes and moderating factors. European Journal of Marketing, 45(9/10), 1521–1537.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramadani, V., Abazi-Alili, H., Dana, L., Rexhepi, G., & Ibraimi, S. (2017). The impact of knowledge spillovers and innovation on firm-performance: findings from the Balkans countries. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(1), 299–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau, D. M., & Fried, Y. (2001). Location, location, location: contextualizing organizational research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M., & Fouts, P. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos-Vijande, M., del Río-Lanza, A., Suárez-Álvarez, L., & Díaz-Martín, A. (2013). The brand management system and service firm competitiveness. Journal of Business Research, 66(2), 148–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar, S., Coelho, D. M., & Maroco, J. (2016). Strategic orientations, dynamic, capabilities, and firm performance: an analysis for knowledge intensive business services. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 7(4), 1000–1020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-016-0415-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaegel, C., & Reichel, L. (2017). Organizational learning capability, firm innovativeness, and firm performance: a meta-analysis. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2017, 16227. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2017.16227abstract.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpley, R. (2000). Tourism and sustainable development: exploring the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. G., Grimm, C. M., Gannon, M. J., & Chen, M. J. (1991). Organizational information processing, competitive responses and performance in the U.S. domestic airline industry. Academy of Management Journal, 34(1), 60–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sreejesh, S., Mitra, A., & Sahoo, D. (2015). The impact of customer’s perceived service innovativeness on image congruence, satisfaction and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 6(3), 288–310. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-10-2014-0061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szymanski, D. M., Kroff, M. W., & Troy, L. C. (2007). Innovativeness and new product success: insights from cumulative evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35, 35–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theoharakis, V., & Hooley, G. (2008). Customer orientation and innovativeness: differing roles in new and old Europe. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(1), 69–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (1967). Organizations in action: docial science bases of administration. New-York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, M. C., & Wang, C. (2017). Linking service innovation to firm performance: the roles of ambidextrous innovation and market orientation capability. Chinese Management Studies, 11(4), 730–750. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-03-2017-0045.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, K., & Yang, S. (2013). Firm innovativeness and business performance: the joint moderating effects of market turbulence and competition. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(8), 1279–1294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., & Ahmed, P. (2004). The development and validation of the organisational innovativeness construct using confirmatory factor analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 7(4), 303–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., Chen, K., & Chen, S. (2012). Total quality management, market orientation and hotel performance: the moderating effects of external environmental factors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 119–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C., Senaratne, C., & Rafiq, M. (2015). Success traps, dynamic capabilities and firm performance. British Journal of Management, 26(1), 26–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, P., Duray, R., Leong, G., & Sum, C. (1995). Business environment, operations strategy, and performance: an empirical study of Singapore manufacturers. Journal of Operations Management, 13(2), 99–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(1), 71–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilden, R., Gudergan, S., Nielsen, B., & Lings, I. (2013). Dynamic capabilities and performance: strategy, structure and environment. Long Range Planning, 46(1), 72–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. (2003). Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991–995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S., Sapienza, H., & Davidsson, P. (2006). Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4), 917–955.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zawawi, N., Wahab, S., Al-Mamun, A., Yaacob, A., Samy, N., & Fazal, S. (2016). Defining the concept of innovation and firm innovativeness: a critical analysis from Resorce-based view perspective. International Journal of Business and Management, 11(6), 87–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., & Li, H. Y. (2010). Innovation search of new ventures in a technology cluster: the role of ties with service intermediaries. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1), 88–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., & Wu, W. (2013). Social capital and new product development outcomes: The mediating role of sensing capability in Chinese high-tech firms. Journal of World Business, 48(4), 539–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2012.09.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, North Cyprus, via Mersin 10, Turkey

    Steven W. Bayighomog Likoum

  2. Department of Business Management, American University in Emirates, Dubai, United Arab Emirates

    Mohamed Dawood Shamout

  3. Department of Tourism Management, Middle East University, Amman, Jordan

    Ibrahim Harazneh

  4. College of Business, Antalya Bilim University, Antalya, Turkey

    A. Mohammed Abubakar

Authors
  1. Steven W. Bayighomog Likoum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed Dawood Shamout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ibrahim Harazneh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Mohammed Abubakar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven W. Bayighomog Likoum.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bayighomog Likoum, S.W., Shamout, M.D., Harazneh, I. et al. Market-Sensing Capability, Innovativeness, Brand Management Systems, Market Dynamism, Competitive Intensity, and Performance: an Integrative Review. J Knowl Econ 11, 593–613 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-018-0561-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-018-0561-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation