Deacon, J.H. (2011), "Editorial", Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 13 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/jrme.2011.48413aaa.001
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2011, Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Article Type: Editorial From: Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Volume 13, Issue 1
There are, in economically turbulent times, two certainties. One is that all recessions eventually end and the second is that it is entrepreneurial firms that drive economies out of recession and into growth – I guess I could add a third which is that, in my observation of industrialised economies, turbulence has become a permanent fixture, at every point of the economic cycle.
Thus, given that innovation, entrepreneurship and the development of entrepreneurial organisations are at the forefront of economic policy the world over – our research and this journal has clear value to policy makers, practitioners and of course, the academic community. Research at the interface lends itself to being both conceptual and contextual and to some extent can break the confinement of conformity in research design, as we seek both insight and paradigmatic development of the phenomena. As a practicing researcher I am aware too of the many “touch points” between entrepreneurship and marketing at the interface and have conceptualised it in my own work as a multi-dimensional, stratified and liquid interfusion of disciplines, as opposed to a rigid and structured two dimensional “face off”.
A discussion about the development of our understanding of the interface is the subject of our “lead” paper in this edition. Gerald E. Hills with the assistance of Claes Hultman return to revisit thoughts first expressed in the “inaugural commentary” of the JRME in 1998. This is a contortion of a series of retrospective papers from scholars that have been instrumental in the development of research at the interface and indeed in the wider development of knowledge within marketing and entrepreneurship – the retrospective nature of this and past papers are, in my mind, highly valuable for any student of the interface as they highlight past endeavours and more critically focus our thoughts on future orientations within the discipline – and of interest to many will be the thoughts expressed about Effectuation theory and its importance to our stream of research. On a personal note, I would like to thank Hills and Hultman for their continued support of my research, their efforts for the JRME and their friendship.
The second paper is a joy to publish. Laura Laaksonen, Antti Ainamo and Toni-Matti Karjalainen present their thoughts on entrepreneurial passion by exploring the niche music genre of “heavy metal” rock bands and undertake a series of case studies that highlight the fact that such bands are in-fact a variation on a small firm and they state:
Entrepreneurial passion has recently begun to fascinate a growing number of researchers. While only a few systematic studies exist, our study applies the recent theoretical advances in a particular empirical setting: the popular music industry, more specifically, the heavy metal genre.
The paper clearly illustrates my earlier comment about the multi-dimensionality of our research area and offers both a fascinating insight into an entrepreneurial sub culture and food for future research thought.
Research has little real value unless it is disseminated and the question of curricular development is considered by Sheilagh Resnick, Ranis Cheng, Clare Brindley and Carley Foster in a paper that:
[…] explores the role of marketing in SMEs and considers how amendments can be made to the higher education teaching curricula to inform marketing teaching and learning around a small business context.
The context of the paper is UK based and the case studies used for analysis are found among small firms in the East Midlands of the UK. Their exploration exposes the reality of graduates in 2011 – in that employment is most likely to be with a small firm and that we (as academics) must ensure that curricular reflect this economic framework. I would welcome similar research from scholars outside of the UK in order to develop a comparable set of research outcomes and thank Resnick et al. for stimulating this debate.
The paucity of literature available concerning the growing trend within the retail space whereby franchisees provide services to be sold at company-owned retail stores has been the stimulus for the submission from Kelley O’Reilly and David Paper where they pose the question: do entrepreneurs and customer relationship management (CRM) mix? It is a good question and clearly one that deserves investigation as franchising is often seen as a “lower risk” entrepreneurial option for start up and as the authors suggest:
[…] this study sheds light on the stakeholder perceptions (franchisees, franchisor headquarters’ support staff, and store associates) of the integration of the franchise system within the parent company’s brick-and-mortar locations, and how these perceptions impact CRM initiatives in the franchise company.
A few years back Gerry Hills (see above) held the UIC Symposium in Washington, DC. It is a city that I have returned to several times since and is one that I feel most at home in, perhaps due to the European influences in the architecture...or the best breakfasts in the world! Either way – my fond memories of the city were reawakened when JRME received a paper from scholars at Howard University in DC in relation to a case study exploring the successful entrepreneurial marketing communications undertaken by a small, residential real estate firm, Best Address LLC, in Washington, DC. The resultant paper from Yuvay Jeanine Meyers and Susan S. Harmeling is a rich contextual study of an industry sector which is under researched from an interface perspective and I hope a valuable case to use in class with students of both marketing and entrepreneurship.
The final paper from David C. Roach links back to comments contained within the Hills and Hultman paper about the need to consider the development of effectuation theory at the interface. Roach seeks to addresses a gap in the literature by investigating product management as a set of firm-level activities. Again such insight adds to the identification of theoretical constituency and assists in developing a better picture of the multi-dimensional aspects at the interface. Roach describes his study thus:
Product management activities are distinct from the behaviours embedded within the well established market orientation construct. This research establishes product management as a set of organizational activities, which lie at the boundary between the traditional functions of the firm.
I welcome comment and discussion from scholars researching at the interface, and encourage submissions (via Scholar One) that are contextual or conceptual, creative and considered... but most of all, stimulating! For those of a technical nature you can follow JRME and “interface” discussions via twitter (J_RME) and on Facebook where you will be in the capable hands of our “e” Editor, David Hansen. It just remains for me to comment that economies, at whatever stage of their natural cycle, are fuelled by entrepreneurial activity and as such scholars researching at the interface are at the forefront of knowledge development and understanding of such activity and thus the imperative to share and disseminate this knowledge remains critical to our collective wellbeing.
Jonathan H. Deacon