Improving customer-focused marketing capabilities and firm financial performance via marketing exploration and exploitation

By Douglas W. Vorhies, Linda M. Orr, Victoria D. Bush. 2011

391 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Marketing, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Strategy and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/751a6253344b9eda36b7af4962397ace4e395592

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Marketing

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Strategy and Management

Citations in the corpus

Leveraging marketing capabilities into competitive advantage and export performance (2015, background): “Specifically, DC theory clearly argues that capabilities are dynamic, deeply embedded in organizations, and have a higher degree of inimitability and non-substitutability (Fang and Zou 2009; Teece, Pisano, and Shuen 1997; Theodosiou, Kehagias, and Katsikea 2012; Vorhies, Orr, and Bush 2011).”
Brand ambidexterity and commitment in higher education: An exploratory study (2016, background): “The study is the first to develop a conceptual model examining these relationships in a single study, thus, responding to a research gap in studying the combining effects of institutions and strategies (Vorhies et al., 2011).”
The Effects of Early Internationalization on Performance Outcomes in Young International Ventures: The Mediating Role of Marketing Capabilities (2012, background): “…have been recognized as important sources of competitive advantage in marketing (Morgan, Katsikeas, and Vorhies 2012; Vorhies, Harker, and Rao 1999; Vorhies, Orr, and Bush 2011), the role and impact of such capabilities in relation to early international venturing on the performance implications…”
The impact of dynamic capabilities on operational marketing and technological capabilities: investigating the role of environmental turbulence (2015, background): “To date, only limited theory has emerged regarding howmarketing and technological capabilities align with the environment (Vorhies et al. 2011).”
Unfolding the ambidextrous effects of proactive and responsive market orientation (2016, background): “Table 1 reveals that extant research reports both positive effects (e.g., Cillo et al. 2010; Lubatkin et al. 2006) and negative effects (e.g., Atuahene-Gima et al. 2005; Vorhies et al. 2011).”
Marketing capability, organizational adaptation and new product development performance☆ (2015, background): “003 from an outside-in view expands prior approach onmarketing capability and firm performance analysis (e.g., Theodosiou et al., 2012; Vorhies & Morgan, 2005; Vorhies et al., 2011).”
Strategic goal accomplishment in export ventures: the role of capabilities, knowledge, and environment (2018, background): “…(type of business) Enhancing new product development, customer management, and supply chain management performance (direct and interaction effects) Vorhies et al. (2011) Domestic Marketing exploitation and exploration capabilities, customer-focused marketing capabilities Control (market type)…”
Revisiting James March (1991): Whither exploration and exploitation? (2018, background): “For example, in the context of marketing efforts, Vorhies et al. (2011) found positive relationships between exploration and exploitation capabilities and a firm’s ability to enhance the organization’s customer-focused marketing but stress that organizations do not benefit from maximizing both…”
Stakeholder relationships, brand equity, firm performance: A resource-based perspective (2016, background): “Extant research on dynamic capabilities related to branding considers the processes of customer relationship management (e.g., Vorhies et al., 2011), new product development (e.g., Zou et al., 2003) and supply chain management (e.g., Kim & Cavusgil, 2009).”