Description
Entrepreneurship is the act and art of being an entrepreneur or one who undertakes innovations or introducing new things, finance and business acumen in an effort to transform innovations into economic goods. This may result in new organizations or may be part of revitalizing mature organizations in response to a perceived opportunity.
Case Study on Effect of Entrepreneurial Marketing on Firm's Innovative
Abstract Merging two formerly distinct disciplines, the term entrepreneurial marketing is used to describe the marketing processes of firms pursuing opportunities in uncertain market circumstances, often under constrained resource conditions. The aim of the study is to dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance are tested with data collected through structured questionnaires administered face-to-face to managers of 560 SMEs in the Turkish manufacturing industry. Analyses results revealed that proactiveness, innovativeness, customer intensity, resource leveraging dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing are positively related with innovative performance. Finally, the limitations of the study and the suggestions for future research will be presented.
Keywords: Entrepreneurial marketing; Innovativeness; Performance; Small and medium-sized enterprises
1. Introduction Merging two formerly distinct disciplines, the term entrepreneurial marketing is used to describe the marketing processes of firms pursuing opportunities in uncertain market circumstances, often under constrained resource conditions (Becherer et al., 2006). Morris et al. (2002:5) define identification and exploitation of opportunities for acquiring and retaining profitable customers through innovative approaches to risk management, resource ntrepreneurial marketing is characterized as an organizational orientation having seven underlying dimensions, namely, proactiveness, opportunity focus, calculated risk taking, and innovativeness, customer intensity, resource leveraging, and value creation (Morris et al., 2002). Based on the idea that entrepreneurial marketing is appropriate for small scale enterprises, the aim of this study
872
is to explore the relationship between entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance of the small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in Turkey. The article proceeds in the following manner. First, we briefly review the literature regarding entrepreneurial marketing and innovativeness. We develop hypotheses concerning the effects of dimensions of entrepreneurial ng data collected from a sample of 560 manufacturing SMEs in Turkey using convenient sampling technique via a structured questionnaire derived from the literature. We explain in detail the data collection method and analytical procedures. Finally, we provide the research findings and also managerial implications and future research opportunities will be presented. 2. Literature Review And Hypotheses 2.1. Entrepreneurial Marketing Firms operating in an entrepreneurial context are not well served by the theories, processes and tools of (Hills et al., 2008) (Jones and Rowley, 2011). Entrepreneurial marketing is defined as effectual action or adaptation of marketing theory to the particular needs of the small business (Becherer et al., 2006). While some authors argue that it can be described as marketing activities with an entrepreneurial mindset, irrespective of firm size or age (Kraus et al., 2010), it is widely accepted that the concept is particularly appropriate to the small business context (Jones and Rowley, 2011; Gilmore and Carson, 1991). According to Bjerke and Hultman (2002), entrepreneurial marketing is the marketing of small firms growing through entrepreneurship. As SMEs face some limitations such as having few major customers, limited resource in business and marketing; the influence of the entrepreneur, the lack of formal organizational structures or formal systems of communication (Jones and Rowley, 2011; Kolabi et al., 2011), entrepreneurial marketing becomes more appropriate to small and medium size enterprises. Kraus et al. (2010) identify two perspectives in definition of entrepreneurial marketing. The first one defines entrepreneurial marketing as marketing for small or new ventures by emphasizing the quantitative aspect of the company, and the second one defines entrepreneurial marketing as marketing with an entrepreneurial spirit (marketing by entrepreneurs) by highlighting the qualitative aspect of entrepreneurial marketing. Then it is argued that both attempts of defining entrepreneurial marketing might be two sides of the same coin, as the qualitative characteristics (smallness and newness) seems to be a context which favours marketing activities which are driven by an entrepreneurial, i.e. innovative, risk-oriented and proactive spirit (Kraus et al., 2010). Carson and Cromie (1989) contended that an entrepreneurial orientated firm that seeks opportunity is likely to exhibit a market development orientation and that both are related to the overall organizational culture, the personality of the owner/manager/entrepreneur and the environment that the small firm finds itself in (Kurgun et al., 2011). Combining the American Marketing Association (AMA definition of marketing and the definitions of marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders, and that is characterized by innovativeness, risk-taking, proactiveness, and may be performed without resources currently Morris et al. (2002) developed seven core dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing: proactiveness, calculated risk-taking, innovativeness, opportunity focus, resource leveraging, costumer intensity, and value creation. These dimensions distinguish entrepreneurial marketing from traditional marketing (Hills et al., 2008). First five dimensions are entrepreneurial orientation dimensions and last two are marketing orientation dimensions. The proactiveness dimension reflects top management orientation in pursuing enhanced competitiveness and includes initiative and risk taking and competitive aggressiveness and boldness (Antoncic and Hisrich, 2001:499). Proactiveness involves the attitude and capabilities that allow implementation and control of the new products, service, or processes ahead of the competitors in the market (Liu et al., 2002:370). Proactiveness is an opportunity- seeking, forward-looking perspective involving introducing new products or services ahead of the competition and acting in anticipation of future demand to create change and shape the environment (Lumpkin and Dess, 2001:431). Proactiveness shows a strong positive relationship with firm performance (Lumpkin and Dess, 2001:445).
873
Opportunities represent unnoticed market positions that are sources of sustainable profit potential. They derive from market imperfections, where knowledge about these imperfections and how to exploit them distinguish entrepreneurial marketing. The availability of opportunities tends to correlate with rates of environmental change, indicating a need for marketers to engage in heightened levels of both active search and discovery. Further, exploitation of opportunity entails learning and ongoing adaptation by marketers before, during, and after the actual implementation of an innovative concept (Morris et al., 2002:6). Company operations can be characterized in terms of a risk profile. Risks are reflected in the various resource allocation decisions made by an organization, as well as in the choice of products, services, and markets to be emphasized. Entrepreneurship is associated with calculated risk-taking, which implies overt efforts to identify risk factors, and then to mitigate or share those factors. Entrepreneurial marketing defines an explicit role for marketing in managing the f (Srivastava et al., 1998; Morris et al., 2002). Innovativeness has become a preseems particularly vital to small entrepreneurial firms with limited resources (Van de Vrande et al., 2009). Innovativeness is a critical determinant of business performance (Cooper, 2000). With entrepreneurial marketing, the marketing function plays an integral part in sustainable innovation. Its roles range from opportunity identification and concept generation to leadership in managing an innovation portfolio. Further, entrepreneurial marketing seeks discontinuous and dynamically continuous initiatives that lead the customer, as well as the more conventional marketing emphasis on incremental improvements and line extensions that follow customers. Within marketing operations process innovation is ongoing. Managers continually champion new approaches to segmentation, pricing, brand management, packaging, customer communication and relationship management, credit, logistics, and services levels, among other operational activities (Morris et al., 2002:7). Entrepreneurial marketing incorporates the need for creative approaches to customer acquisition, retention, and development. Moving estimates of value and customer equity guide decisions regarding customer investment and customization levels (Morris et al., 2002:7). Entrepreneurial marketers develop a creative capacity for resource leveraging. The ability to recognize a resource not being used optimally, see how the resource could be used in a non-conventional way, and convince those that control the resource to let the marketer use it involves insight, experience, and skill. The same can be said for the ability to get team members to work extra hours, convince departments to perform activities they normally do not perform, or put together unique sets of resources that, when blended, are synergistic (Morris et al., 2002:8). The focal point of marketing has historically been the transaction, and more recently, the relationship. The focal point of entrepreneurial marketing is innovative value creation, on the assumption that value creation is a prerequisite for transactions and relationships. The task of the marketer is to discover untapped sources of customer value and to create unique combinations of resources to produce value. In dynamic markets, the value equation is continually redefined. The ongoing responsibility of the marketer is to explore each marketing mix element in a search for new sources of customer value. Moreover, the amount of new value being created is the benchmark for judging marketing initiatives (Morris et al., 2002:8). 2.2. Innovativeness The entrepreneurial marketing concept is focused on innovations and the development of ideas in line with an intuitive understanding of market needs (Stokes, 2000) and it can create a substantial competitive advantage for firms who proactively seek innovative options for their customers (Becherer et al., 2006) being proactive by exploring new opportunities (Santos-Vijande and Alvarez-Gonzales, 2007). The very concept of entrepreneurship requires some autonomy and freedom paving the way for action taken free of structural constraints that stifle risk taking, exploration, and out-of-the-box thinking to foster creativity and the discovery of new ideas (Merlo and Auh, 2009). Besides market orientation enhance an
874
toward meeting customer needs and it emphasizes greater information use (Kirca et al., 2005). Also Baker and Sinkula suggest that EO complements MO by instilling an opportunistic culture that impacts the quality and quantity of innovations in small firms (Baker and Sinkula, 2009). Based on the discussion above following hypotheses were developed. H1: Proactiveness will be positively related to innovative performance. H2: Opportunity focus will be positively related to innovative performance. H3: Calculated risk taking will be positively related to innovative performance. H4: Innovativeness will be positively related to innovative performance. H5: Customer intensity will be positively related to innovative performance. H6: Resource leveraging will be positively related to innovative performance. H7: Value creation will be positively related to innovative performance. 3. Methodology 3.1. Research Goal In this survey we aim to identify the effe the propositions, a field survey using questionnaires was conducted. 3.2. Measures The constructs in our study are developed by using measurement scales adopted from prior studies. All constructs are measured using five-point Likert scales ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree. Items for measuring Entrepreneurial Marketing are adopted from Becherer et al. (2008). This scale consists of seven dimensions, namely Proactiveness (3 items), Opportunity Focus (3 items), Calculated Risk Taking (3 items), Innovativeness (3 items), Customer Intensity (3 items), Resource Leveraging (4 items), Value Creation (7 items). To measure a fir innovative performance, its position compared to competitors in terms of the items adopted from Bulut et al. (2009) was measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1= much worse to 5=much better. 3.3. Sample and Data Collection The hypothesized relationships will be tested with data collected through structured questionnaires administered faceto-face to managers of firms located in Turkey. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews with executives of the SMEs in the Turkish manufacturing industry. Sample size of the study is 560. 3.4. Analyses and Results To examine the suitability of the data for factor analysis, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was used, which was 0.794, indicating that the data are suitable for factor analysis. The lower limit for factor loadings, which show the correlation between individual variables and relevant factors, was set as 0.50 because factor loadings over 0.50 provide better results (Hair et al. 2006). Eigenvalue was used to determine the number of factors, and only factors with Eigenvalues over 1were selected. Results of the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) are reported in Table 1. The slight differentiation occurred in existing scale. Four items are deleted because they showed a weak loading or loaded two different factors. All other items were placed in the construct that was hoped for. Overall, 29 items using 5 Likert-type scale are used to measure entrepreneurial marketing and firm innovative performance. To examine the reliability of the scales used in the study, internal consistency coefficients were used, which varied between 0.61 and 0.83 as shown in Table 1. All scales had reliability figures over 0.60, indicating that the scales used were reliable. Those items with factor loadings Table 1. . To test
875
Table 1 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) results Factors Items (1) Proactiveness Pro_1 Pro_2 Pro_3 (2) Opportunity Focus OF_1 OF_2 OF_3 (3) Calculated Risk Taking Risk_1 Risk_2 (4) Innovativeness Innov_1 Innov_2 Innov_3 (5) Customer Intensity Cust_1 Cust_2 (6) Resource Leveraging Resource_1 Resource_2 Resource_3 Resource_4 (7) Value Creation Value_1 Value_2 Value_3 Value_4 (8) Innovative Performance Innov_Perf_1 Innov_Perf_2 Innov_Perf_3 Innov_Perf_4 Innov_Perf_5 Innov_Perf_6 Innov_Perf_7 Total Explained Variance Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Bartlett's Test of Sphericity 1 0.76 0.81 0.65 0.61 0.66 0.76 0.50 0.64 0.63 0.77 Risk_3 0.80 0.65 0.73 0.82 0.60 0.72 0.75 0.80 0.62 0.78 0.53 0.59 0.70 0.66 0.67 0.60 0.52 0.60 0.83 0.68 0.81 0.79 0.67 0.63 0.63 0.57 % 60.00 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.65
0.794 Approx. Chi-Square 3611.18 df 406 Sig. 0.000 Notes: Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis; Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
Mean values, standard deviations (SD), and correlations are presented in Table 2. Mean values of each construct were calculated by averaging scores of items included in each construct. The dimension with the highest mean score is consumer intensity; and value creation takes second place after consumer intensity. The dimension with the lowest score is calculated risk taking. It shows that Turkish firm are wary of risk taking behaviours. All constructs of entrepreneurial marketing other than calculated risk taking are positively correlated with each other. Calculated risk taking is negatively correlated with other constructs of entrepreneurial marketing. It is positively correlated only with innovativeness; even it is negligible not statistically significant. In same vein, all constructs other than are calculated risk taking positively correlated with innovative performance. T calculated risk taking and innovative performance.
Table 2 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Coefficients Variables n Mean SD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
876
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Proactiveness Opportunity Focus Calculated Risk Taking Innovativeness Customer Intensity Resource Leveraging Value Creation Innovative Performance
557 552 557 523 543 532 557 558
3.64 4.07 2.10 3.87 4.28 3.48 4.25 3.64
0.78 0.48 0.73 0.73 0.59 0.69 0.48 0.66
1 0.260** -0.160** 0.142** 0.172** 0.194** 0.201** 0.231** 1 -0.316** 0.179** 0.282** 0.226** 0.355** 0.226** 1 0.023 -0.143** -0.220** -0.206** -0.023 1 0.242** 0.214** 0.154** 0.255** 1 0.094* 0.393** 0.220** 1 0.125** 0.193** 1 0.158** 1
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
In this study, regression analysis is conducted to test the hypotheses. As seen in the Table 3, the adjusted R 2 is 15.7 and entrepreneurial marketing explains the 15.7 percent of the variance of the innovative performance and also the four dimensions of the entrepreneurial marketing have significant effect on innovative performance. Proactiveness ,174; p= ,000), innovativeness ), customer intensity ) and resource leveraging ,110; p=,016) have significant relationship to innovative performance. Regression analysis results support H1, H4, H5 and H6 hypotheses. On the other hand H2, H3 and H7 hypothesis is not supported.
Table 3 Regression analysis results for entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance Independent Variables Proactiveness Opportunity Focus Calculated Risk Taking Innovativeness Customer Intensity Resource Leveraging Value Creation F= 13.820 Adj. R2 = 0.157 S. Beta ,174 ,081 ,070 ,166 ,108 ,110 ,063 p = 0.000 T 3,840 1,677 1,548 3,705 2,323 2,422 1,314 p ,000 ,094 ,122 ,000 ,021 ,016 ,189
877
4. Conclusion Entrepreneurial marketing is seen appropriate for small scale enterprises. Besides, innovativeness can be seen as a crucial tool to gain competitive advantage for small and medium sized firms. Thus the survey examines the relationship between entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance. Data collected through structured questionnaires administered face-to-face to managers of 560 SMEs in the Turkish manufacturing industry. Analyses results revealed that proactiveness, innovativeness, customer intensity, resource leveraging dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing are positively related with innovative performance. It can be thus argued that small and medium sized Turkish firms do attach a great importance to consumers to reach higher innovative performance. Besides, they tend to be proactive and emphasize the importance of innovativeness. Also they are aware of resource leveraging as a tool to compensate for resource scarcity they suffer in reaching high innovative performance. The survey also revealed that Turkish SMEs are taking as a way of reaching innovative performance. However, this survey is conducted on small and medium sized firms of Turkey; findings might not be transferable to all types of organizations. Thus, it is recommended that further researches can be conducted on large-scale organizations and, also in different countries for the generalizability of findings. Also further surveys can be designed to explore relationship between entrepreneurial marketing and other performance indicators such as financial performance, customer performance.
References
(5), September, pp. 495- 527. Baker, W. E., and Sinkula, J. M. (2009), The Complementary Effects of Market Orientation and Entrepreneurial Orientation on Profitability in Small Businesses, Journal of Small Business Management, 47(4), pp. 443-464. Becherer, R. C., Haynes, P. J., and Helms, M. M. (2008), An Exploratory Investigation of Entrepreneurial Marketing, Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 20, 44-64. Becherer, R.C., Haynes, P.J. and Fletcher L.P. (2006), Paths to Profitability in Owner-Operated Firms: The Role of Entrepreneurial, Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 18(1), pp.17-31. Bjerke, B. and Hultman, C.M. (2002), Entrepreneurial Marketing: The Growth of Small Firms in the New Economic Era, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, UK. 538. arketing Management 5, No.1, pp. 33-49. ournal of Management, 25 (1), 17 45. Gilmore, A. and Carson, D. (1991), Entrepreneurial Marketing by Networking, New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 12(2), pp.31-38. Hair, F.J.; Black, C.W.; Babin, J.B.; Anderson, E.R.; Totham, L.R. 2005. Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson Printice Hall, Sixth Edition, New Jersey. Hills, G. E., Hultman, C. M. and Miles, M. P. (2008), The Evolution and Development of Entrepreneurial Marketing, Journal of Small Business Management, 46(1), 99 112. Jones, R and Rowley, J. (2011), Entrepreneurial Marketing in Small Businesses: a Conceptual Exploration, International Small Business Journal, 29(1), pp.25-36. Kirca, A.H., Jayachandran, S., and Bearden, W.O. (2005), Market Orientation: A Meta-Analytic Review and Assessment of Its Antecedents and Impact on Performance, Journal of Marketing, 69(2), pp.24-41. Kolabi, A.M., Hosseini, H. K., Mehrabi, R. and Salamzadeh, A. (2011), Developing Entrepreneurial Marketing Mix: Case Study of Entrepreneurial Food Enterprises in Iran, Journal of Knowledge Management Economics and Information Technology, (5), 1-17. Kraus, S., Harms, R. And Fink, M. (2010), Entrepreneurial Marketing: Moving beyond Marketing in New Ventures, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 11(1), pp.19-34. Innovation Manage. Special Issue: 1- 20. Qualitative Research on Boutiq -The Interface between Marketing and Entrepreneurship: A -357 in Organizations-inernational Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, pp. 367- 382.
878
Merlo, O., and Auh, S. (2009), The Effects of Entrepreneurial Orientation, Market Orientation, and Marketing Subunit Influence On Firm Performance, Marketing Letters, 20(3), pp. 295-311. Morris, M.H., Schindehutte, M. and LaForge, R.W. (2002), Entrepreneurial Marketing: A construct for Integrating Emerging Entrepreneurship and Marketing Perspectives, Journal of Marketing Theory Practice, 10(4), pp.1-19. Santos-Vijande, M., and Alvarez-Gonzalez, L. (2007), Innovativeness and Organizational Innovation in Total Quality Oriented Firms: The Moderating Role of Market Turbulence, Technovation, 27(9), pp.514-532. -Based Assets and Sharehold Marketing 62(1), pp. 2-18. Stokes, D. (2000), Putting Entrepreneurship into Marketing: The Processes of Entrepreneurial Marketing, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 2(1), pp.1-16. management 437.
doc_569191750.docx
Entrepreneurship is the act and art of being an entrepreneur or one who undertakes innovations or introducing new things, finance and business acumen in an effort to transform innovations into economic goods. This may result in new organizations or may be part of revitalizing mature organizations in response to a perceived opportunity.
Case Study on Effect of Entrepreneurial Marketing on Firm's Innovative
Abstract Merging two formerly distinct disciplines, the term entrepreneurial marketing is used to describe the marketing processes of firms pursuing opportunities in uncertain market circumstances, often under constrained resource conditions. The aim of the study is to dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance are tested with data collected through structured questionnaires administered face-to-face to managers of 560 SMEs in the Turkish manufacturing industry. Analyses results revealed that proactiveness, innovativeness, customer intensity, resource leveraging dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing are positively related with innovative performance. Finally, the limitations of the study and the suggestions for future research will be presented.
Keywords: Entrepreneurial marketing; Innovativeness; Performance; Small and medium-sized enterprises
1. Introduction Merging two formerly distinct disciplines, the term entrepreneurial marketing is used to describe the marketing processes of firms pursuing opportunities in uncertain market circumstances, often under constrained resource conditions (Becherer et al., 2006). Morris et al. (2002:5) define identification and exploitation of opportunities for acquiring and retaining profitable customers through innovative approaches to risk management, resource ntrepreneurial marketing is characterized as an organizational orientation having seven underlying dimensions, namely, proactiveness, opportunity focus, calculated risk taking, and innovativeness, customer intensity, resource leveraging, and value creation (Morris et al., 2002). Based on the idea that entrepreneurial marketing is appropriate for small scale enterprises, the aim of this study
872
is to explore the relationship between entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance of the small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in Turkey. The article proceeds in the following manner. First, we briefly review the literature regarding entrepreneurial marketing and innovativeness. We develop hypotheses concerning the effects of dimensions of entrepreneurial ng data collected from a sample of 560 manufacturing SMEs in Turkey using convenient sampling technique via a structured questionnaire derived from the literature. We explain in detail the data collection method and analytical procedures. Finally, we provide the research findings and also managerial implications and future research opportunities will be presented. 2. Literature Review And Hypotheses 2.1. Entrepreneurial Marketing Firms operating in an entrepreneurial context are not well served by the theories, processes and tools of (Hills et al., 2008) (Jones and Rowley, 2011). Entrepreneurial marketing is defined as effectual action or adaptation of marketing theory to the particular needs of the small business (Becherer et al., 2006). While some authors argue that it can be described as marketing activities with an entrepreneurial mindset, irrespective of firm size or age (Kraus et al., 2010), it is widely accepted that the concept is particularly appropriate to the small business context (Jones and Rowley, 2011; Gilmore and Carson, 1991). According to Bjerke and Hultman (2002), entrepreneurial marketing is the marketing of small firms growing through entrepreneurship. As SMEs face some limitations such as having few major customers, limited resource in business and marketing; the influence of the entrepreneur, the lack of formal organizational structures or formal systems of communication (Jones and Rowley, 2011; Kolabi et al., 2011), entrepreneurial marketing becomes more appropriate to small and medium size enterprises. Kraus et al. (2010) identify two perspectives in definition of entrepreneurial marketing. The first one defines entrepreneurial marketing as marketing for small or new ventures by emphasizing the quantitative aspect of the company, and the second one defines entrepreneurial marketing as marketing with an entrepreneurial spirit (marketing by entrepreneurs) by highlighting the qualitative aspect of entrepreneurial marketing. Then it is argued that both attempts of defining entrepreneurial marketing might be two sides of the same coin, as the qualitative characteristics (smallness and newness) seems to be a context which favours marketing activities which are driven by an entrepreneurial, i.e. innovative, risk-oriented and proactive spirit (Kraus et al., 2010). Carson and Cromie (1989) contended that an entrepreneurial orientated firm that seeks opportunity is likely to exhibit a market development orientation and that both are related to the overall organizational culture, the personality of the owner/manager/entrepreneur and the environment that the small firm finds itself in (Kurgun et al., 2011). Combining the American Marketing Association (AMA definition of marketing and the definitions of marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders, and that is characterized by innovativeness, risk-taking, proactiveness, and may be performed without resources currently Morris et al. (2002) developed seven core dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing: proactiveness, calculated risk-taking, innovativeness, opportunity focus, resource leveraging, costumer intensity, and value creation. These dimensions distinguish entrepreneurial marketing from traditional marketing (Hills et al., 2008). First five dimensions are entrepreneurial orientation dimensions and last two are marketing orientation dimensions. The proactiveness dimension reflects top management orientation in pursuing enhanced competitiveness and includes initiative and risk taking and competitive aggressiveness and boldness (Antoncic and Hisrich, 2001:499). Proactiveness involves the attitude and capabilities that allow implementation and control of the new products, service, or processes ahead of the competitors in the market (Liu et al., 2002:370). Proactiveness is an opportunity- seeking, forward-looking perspective involving introducing new products or services ahead of the competition and acting in anticipation of future demand to create change and shape the environment (Lumpkin and Dess, 2001:431). Proactiveness shows a strong positive relationship with firm performance (Lumpkin and Dess, 2001:445).
873
Opportunities represent unnoticed market positions that are sources of sustainable profit potential. They derive from market imperfections, where knowledge about these imperfections and how to exploit them distinguish entrepreneurial marketing. The availability of opportunities tends to correlate with rates of environmental change, indicating a need for marketers to engage in heightened levels of both active search and discovery. Further, exploitation of opportunity entails learning and ongoing adaptation by marketers before, during, and after the actual implementation of an innovative concept (Morris et al., 2002:6). Company operations can be characterized in terms of a risk profile. Risks are reflected in the various resource allocation decisions made by an organization, as well as in the choice of products, services, and markets to be emphasized. Entrepreneurship is associated with calculated risk-taking, which implies overt efforts to identify risk factors, and then to mitigate or share those factors. Entrepreneurial marketing defines an explicit role for marketing in managing the f (Srivastava et al., 1998; Morris et al., 2002). Innovativeness has become a preseems particularly vital to small entrepreneurial firms with limited resources (Van de Vrande et al., 2009). Innovativeness is a critical determinant of business performance (Cooper, 2000). With entrepreneurial marketing, the marketing function plays an integral part in sustainable innovation. Its roles range from opportunity identification and concept generation to leadership in managing an innovation portfolio. Further, entrepreneurial marketing seeks discontinuous and dynamically continuous initiatives that lead the customer, as well as the more conventional marketing emphasis on incremental improvements and line extensions that follow customers. Within marketing operations process innovation is ongoing. Managers continually champion new approaches to segmentation, pricing, brand management, packaging, customer communication and relationship management, credit, logistics, and services levels, among other operational activities (Morris et al., 2002:7). Entrepreneurial marketing incorporates the need for creative approaches to customer acquisition, retention, and development. Moving estimates of value and customer equity guide decisions regarding customer investment and customization levels (Morris et al., 2002:7). Entrepreneurial marketers develop a creative capacity for resource leveraging. The ability to recognize a resource not being used optimally, see how the resource could be used in a non-conventional way, and convince those that control the resource to let the marketer use it involves insight, experience, and skill. The same can be said for the ability to get team members to work extra hours, convince departments to perform activities they normally do not perform, or put together unique sets of resources that, when blended, are synergistic (Morris et al., 2002:8). The focal point of marketing has historically been the transaction, and more recently, the relationship. The focal point of entrepreneurial marketing is innovative value creation, on the assumption that value creation is a prerequisite for transactions and relationships. The task of the marketer is to discover untapped sources of customer value and to create unique combinations of resources to produce value. In dynamic markets, the value equation is continually redefined. The ongoing responsibility of the marketer is to explore each marketing mix element in a search for new sources of customer value. Moreover, the amount of new value being created is the benchmark for judging marketing initiatives (Morris et al., 2002:8). 2.2. Innovativeness The entrepreneurial marketing concept is focused on innovations and the development of ideas in line with an intuitive understanding of market needs (Stokes, 2000) and it can create a substantial competitive advantage for firms who proactively seek innovative options for their customers (Becherer et al., 2006) being proactive by exploring new opportunities (Santos-Vijande and Alvarez-Gonzales, 2007). The very concept of entrepreneurship requires some autonomy and freedom paving the way for action taken free of structural constraints that stifle risk taking, exploration, and out-of-the-box thinking to foster creativity and the discovery of new ideas (Merlo and Auh, 2009). Besides market orientation enhance an
874
toward meeting customer needs and it emphasizes greater information use (Kirca et al., 2005). Also Baker and Sinkula suggest that EO complements MO by instilling an opportunistic culture that impacts the quality and quantity of innovations in small firms (Baker and Sinkula, 2009). Based on the discussion above following hypotheses were developed. H1: Proactiveness will be positively related to innovative performance. H2: Opportunity focus will be positively related to innovative performance. H3: Calculated risk taking will be positively related to innovative performance. H4: Innovativeness will be positively related to innovative performance. H5: Customer intensity will be positively related to innovative performance. H6: Resource leveraging will be positively related to innovative performance. H7: Value creation will be positively related to innovative performance. 3. Methodology 3.1. Research Goal In this survey we aim to identify the effe the propositions, a field survey using questionnaires was conducted. 3.2. Measures The constructs in our study are developed by using measurement scales adopted from prior studies. All constructs are measured using five-point Likert scales ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree. Items for measuring Entrepreneurial Marketing are adopted from Becherer et al. (2008). This scale consists of seven dimensions, namely Proactiveness (3 items), Opportunity Focus (3 items), Calculated Risk Taking (3 items), Innovativeness (3 items), Customer Intensity (3 items), Resource Leveraging (4 items), Value Creation (7 items). To measure a fir innovative performance, its position compared to competitors in terms of the items adopted from Bulut et al. (2009) was measured using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1= much worse to 5=much better. 3.3. Sample and Data Collection The hypothesized relationships will be tested with data collected through structured questionnaires administered faceto-face to managers of firms located in Turkey. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews with executives of the SMEs in the Turkish manufacturing industry. Sample size of the study is 560. 3.4. Analyses and Results To examine the suitability of the data for factor analysis, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was used, which was 0.794, indicating that the data are suitable for factor analysis. The lower limit for factor loadings, which show the correlation between individual variables and relevant factors, was set as 0.50 because factor loadings over 0.50 provide better results (Hair et al. 2006). Eigenvalue was used to determine the number of factors, and only factors with Eigenvalues over 1were selected. Results of the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) are reported in Table 1. The slight differentiation occurred in existing scale. Four items are deleted because they showed a weak loading or loaded two different factors. All other items were placed in the construct that was hoped for. Overall, 29 items using 5 Likert-type scale are used to measure entrepreneurial marketing and firm innovative performance. To examine the reliability of the scales used in the study, internal consistency coefficients were used, which varied between 0.61 and 0.83 as shown in Table 1. All scales had reliability figures over 0.60, indicating that the scales used were reliable. Those items with factor loadings Table 1. . To test
875
Table 1 Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) results Factors Items (1) Proactiveness Pro_1 Pro_2 Pro_3 (2) Opportunity Focus OF_1 OF_2 OF_3 (3) Calculated Risk Taking Risk_1 Risk_2 (4) Innovativeness Innov_1 Innov_2 Innov_3 (5) Customer Intensity Cust_1 Cust_2 (6) Resource Leveraging Resource_1 Resource_2 Resource_3 Resource_4 (7) Value Creation Value_1 Value_2 Value_3 Value_4 (8) Innovative Performance Innov_Perf_1 Innov_Perf_2 Innov_Perf_3 Innov_Perf_4 Innov_Perf_5 Innov_Perf_6 Innov_Perf_7 Total Explained Variance Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Bartlett's Test of Sphericity 1 0.76 0.81 0.65 0.61 0.66 0.76 0.50 0.64 0.63 0.77 Risk_3 0.80 0.65 0.73 0.82 0.60 0.72 0.75 0.80 0.62 0.78 0.53 0.59 0.70 0.66 0.67 0.60 0.52 0.60 0.83 0.68 0.81 0.79 0.67 0.63 0.63 0.57 % 60.00 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0.65
0.794 Approx. Chi-Square 3611.18 df 406 Sig. 0.000 Notes: Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis; Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization
Mean values, standard deviations (SD), and correlations are presented in Table 2. Mean values of each construct were calculated by averaging scores of items included in each construct. The dimension with the highest mean score is consumer intensity; and value creation takes second place after consumer intensity. The dimension with the lowest score is calculated risk taking. It shows that Turkish firm are wary of risk taking behaviours. All constructs of entrepreneurial marketing other than calculated risk taking are positively correlated with each other. Calculated risk taking is negatively correlated with other constructs of entrepreneurial marketing. It is positively correlated only with innovativeness; even it is negligible not statistically significant. In same vein, all constructs other than are calculated risk taking positively correlated with innovative performance. T calculated risk taking and innovative performance.
Table 2 Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Coefficients Variables n Mean SD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
876
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Proactiveness Opportunity Focus Calculated Risk Taking Innovativeness Customer Intensity Resource Leveraging Value Creation Innovative Performance
557 552 557 523 543 532 557 558
3.64 4.07 2.10 3.87 4.28 3.48 4.25 3.64
0.78 0.48 0.73 0.73 0.59 0.69 0.48 0.66
1 0.260** -0.160** 0.142** 0.172** 0.194** 0.201** 0.231** 1 -0.316** 0.179** 0.282** 0.226** 0.355** 0.226** 1 0.023 -0.143** -0.220** -0.206** -0.023 1 0.242** 0.214** 0.154** 0.255** 1 0.094* 0.393** 0.220** 1 0.125** 0.193** 1 0.158** 1
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
In this study, regression analysis is conducted to test the hypotheses. As seen in the Table 3, the adjusted R 2 is 15.7 and entrepreneurial marketing explains the 15.7 percent of the variance of the innovative performance and also the four dimensions of the entrepreneurial marketing have significant effect on innovative performance. Proactiveness ,174; p= ,000), innovativeness ), customer intensity ) and resource leveraging ,110; p=,016) have significant relationship to innovative performance. Regression analysis results support H1, H4, H5 and H6 hypotheses. On the other hand H2, H3 and H7 hypothesis is not supported.
Table 3 Regression analysis results for entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance Independent Variables Proactiveness Opportunity Focus Calculated Risk Taking Innovativeness Customer Intensity Resource Leveraging Value Creation F= 13.820 Adj. R2 = 0.157 S. Beta ,174 ,081 ,070 ,166 ,108 ,110 ,063 p = 0.000 T 3,840 1,677 1,548 3,705 2,323 2,422 1,314 p ,000 ,094 ,122 ,000 ,021 ,016 ,189
877
4. Conclusion Entrepreneurial marketing is seen appropriate for small scale enterprises. Besides, innovativeness can be seen as a crucial tool to gain competitive advantage for small and medium sized firms. Thus the survey examines the relationship between entrepreneurial marketing and innovative performance. Data collected through structured questionnaires administered face-to-face to managers of 560 SMEs in the Turkish manufacturing industry. Analyses results revealed that proactiveness, innovativeness, customer intensity, resource leveraging dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing are positively related with innovative performance. It can be thus argued that small and medium sized Turkish firms do attach a great importance to consumers to reach higher innovative performance. Besides, they tend to be proactive and emphasize the importance of innovativeness. Also they are aware of resource leveraging as a tool to compensate for resource scarcity they suffer in reaching high innovative performance. The survey also revealed that Turkish SMEs are taking as a way of reaching innovative performance. However, this survey is conducted on small and medium sized firms of Turkey; findings might not be transferable to all types of organizations. Thus, it is recommended that further researches can be conducted on large-scale organizations and, also in different countries for the generalizability of findings. Also further surveys can be designed to explore relationship between entrepreneurial marketing and other performance indicators such as financial performance, customer performance.
References
(5), September, pp. 495- 527. Baker, W. E., and Sinkula, J. M. (2009), The Complementary Effects of Market Orientation and Entrepreneurial Orientation on Profitability in Small Businesses, Journal of Small Business Management, 47(4), pp. 443-464. Becherer, R. C., Haynes, P. J., and Helms, M. M. (2008), An Exploratory Investigation of Entrepreneurial Marketing, Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 20, 44-64. Becherer, R.C., Haynes, P.J. and Fletcher L.P. (2006), Paths to Profitability in Owner-Operated Firms: The Role of Entrepreneurial, Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 18(1), pp.17-31. Bjerke, B. and Hultman, C.M. (2002), Entrepreneurial Marketing: The Growth of Small Firms in the New Economic Era, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, UK. 538. arketing Management 5, No.1, pp. 33-49. ournal of Management, 25 (1), 17 45. Gilmore, A. and Carson, D. (1991), Entrepreneurial Marketing by Networking, New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 12(2), pp.31-38. Hair, F.J.; Black, C.W.; Babin, J.B.; Anderson, E.R.; Totham, L.R. 2005. Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson Printice Hall, Sixth Edition, New Jersey. Hills, G. E., Hultman, C. M. and Miles, M. P. (2008), The Evolution and Development of Entrepreneurial Marketing, Journal of Small Business Management, 46(1), 99 112. Jones, R and Rowley, J. (2011), Entrepreneurial Marketing in Small Businesses: a Conceptual Exploration, International Small Business Journal, 29(1), pp.25-36. Kirca, A.H., Jayachandran, S., and Bearden, W.O. (2005), Market Orientation: A Meta-Analytic Review and Assessment of Its Antecedents and Impact on Performance, Journal of Marketing, 69(2), pp.24-41. Kolabi, A.M., Hosseini, H. K., Mehrabi, R. and Salamzadeh, A. (2011), Developing Entrepreneurial Marketing Mix: Case Study of Entrepreneurial Food Enterprises in Iran, Journal of Knowledge Management Economics and Information Technology, (5), 1-17. Kraus, S., Harms, R. And Fink, M. (2010), Entrepreneurial Marketing: Moving beyond Marketing in New Ventures, International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, 11(1), pp.19-34. Innovation Manage. Special Issue: 1- 20. Qualitative Research on Boutiq -The Interface between Marketing and Entrepreneurship: A -357 in Organizations-inernational Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, pp. 367- 382.
878
Merlo, O., and Auh, S. (2009), The Effects of Entrepreneurial Orientation, Market Orientation, and Marketing Subunit Influence On Firm Performance, Marketing Letters, 20(3), pp. 295-311. Morris, M.H., Schindehutte, M. and LaForge, R.W. (2002), Entrepreneurial Marketing: A construct for Integrating Emerging Entrepreneurship and Marketing Perspectives, Journal of Marketing Theory Practice, 10(4), pp.1-19. Santos-Vijande, M., and Alvarez-Gonzalez, L. (2007), Innovativeness and Organizational Innovation in Total Quality Oriented Firms: The Moderating Role of Market Turbulence, Technovation, 27(9), pp.514-532. -Based Assets and Sharehold Marketing 62(1), pp. 2-18. Stokes, D. (2000), Putting Entrepreneurship into Marketing: The Processes of Entrepreneurial Marketing, Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 2(1), pp.1-16. management 437.
doc_569191750.docx