Search results

This article aims to identify methodological openings and barriers for using managerial relevance as a method to further business to business (B2B) marketing theory.

There is currently an imbalance between two research modes; notably, the normative knowledge accumulation mode confers scant space to the solution mode. This negatively affects both the production of managerially relevant research and theoretical developments within B2B marketing which, in turn, hinders the development of marketing as an applied science. Against the background of an upgraded methodological cartography, emphasizing the equal importance of the two research modes, this article illustrates the context of using managerial relevance as a method to forward B2B marketing theory. An aggregate picture of corresponding calls in the literature shows why this is important.

Calls for increased managerial relevance and methodological diversity outside the normative knowledge accumulation mode will face difficulties in terms of changing researcher behavior, as long as the biased relationship between the two research modes persists. For managerially relevant research to increase, and for B2B marketing science to progress, underlying assumptions of different methodological stances have to be uncovered, calling for increased methodological clarity.

To prevent a relapse, the analysis suggests a further strategy by which to modify schematic models to study organizational change and behavior.

A more significant role attributed to managerial relevance for theory development early in the research process, permits to align the perspectives of research with the needs of practice and will decrease the research–practice gap.

The article pinpoints two research modes and three epistemological stances – predict, describe and depict – which sharpens methodological clarity beyond traditional qualitative–quantitative, and conceptual–empirical classifications.

The purpose of this paper is to gain knowledge on the character of managerial implications within business-to-business (B2B) marketing, in terms of type of relevance addressed in research articles on solution business and integrated solutions.

Use of Jaworski’s framework on role-relevance to classify the type of relevance addressed in 29 journal articles. A systematic literature review on solution business preceded the selection of articles and a concern to include different journal categories.

Managerial implications in the studied articles within solution business do not seem to emphasize role-relevance particularly; they rather address applicability of findings on a company level and for B2B marketing in a more general sense. The majority of implications for practice are framed to have an impact on “present actions”. Managerial knowledge needs are dominantly addressed by “empirical findings” or “frameworks”. The dominating managerial core tasks addressed are “transformer of marketing” and “marketing strategy”.

There do not seem to be studies with managerial implications addressing future actions and thinking; providing instruments, methods or models that are role- relevant; focusing on the challenges of a “coordinator”, “strategist” or “performance controller”. The focus on solution business limits the generalizability of findings.

Results suggest that implications for practice potentially would benefit from being written in the form of explicit recommendations; targeted to a particular managerial role; and increasingly developed when it comes to proposed frameworks for them to be useful for managers in industrial marketing.

This is one of the first studies to systematically examine the character of managerial implications by categorizing results in accordance with a framework specifically addressing role-relevance.

This article aims to analyze a set of features in the managerial implications of the most-cited business-to-business (B2B) marketing articles which are related to their managerial relevance. The purpose is to further identify which are the most recurrent features of managerial implications, as well as the connections between such features. Finally, the articles aim to verify if these features of managerial implications vary depending on the scientific impact of the article.

The 60 most-cited articles were selected from both generalist and specialized academic journals and a content analysis was conducted. Then the article assesses the formal features (e.g. dedicated space), the language (e.g. consulting or normative), the translation of scientific results (e.g. message efficacy) and such other features as time orientation, specificity and abstraction of the managerial implications in these high-impact articles. The article also analyses patterns and associations between the aforementioned dimensions across the 60 articles, also depending on their level of scientific impact (i.e. their number of citations).

The results point that six out of nine features contributing to managerial relevance are the most frequently present in the implications (dedicated section easy to find, balance between academic and consulting language, partly scientific approach, overlap with scientific findings, message neither too complicated nor too simplistic, and long-term orientation). However, three other features reducing managerial relevance afflict nearly half of the articles: non-normative, generic and abstract implications. The ten articles lacking completely managerial implications are slightly more frequent among highest impact ones, which also often include overly complicated implications; while speculative and overly simplistic implications typically appear more among lowest impact articles which, however, also stand for very specific messages. There seems not to be any statistical correlation between the features contributing to managerial relevance and the scientific impact (number of citations) of an article. Instead, several of these features are correlated among each other, meaning that when one is missing, it is likely that the others also are. Finally, when implications are included in a dedicated section of the article, they tend to be specific and consequently also tend to have the other features favoring relevance.

The article provides an empirically grounded assessment of features that influence the managerial relevance of scientific research in the areas of B2B marketing. Our results are, in fact, grounded in a detailed examination of the managerial implications of 60 high-impact articles in this disciplinary domain.

The purpose of the article is to identify and analyze the challenges of business-to-business (B2B) research relevance from the point of view of top executives.

Ten in-depth interviews with top executives from different B2B industries were conducted and analyzed by using Arndt’s (1985) elements of a healthy discipline, i.e. knowledge, problems and instruments.

The findings reveal 12 challenges that characterize contemporary B2B research relevance from a top executive perspective.

The research offers genuine top executive insight. More research from different perspectives is needed to broaden the understanding of B2B research relevance.

Reflecting B2B research with the identified challenges can contribute to better research designs, narrowing the gap between B2B scholars and practitioners. Altogether, it contributes to the health of the B2B discipline. The study also introduces a new approach to analyzing research relevance by using the elements of scientific balance.

This study aims to analyze how and why managers adopt and use business-to-business (B2B) research.

Data were collected through participant observations, focus groups and interviews in three organizations that had used a certain conceptual model from B2B research.

The study suggests that managers use B2B research in an action-oriented, flexible and dynamic manner. Such conceptual or translational use is characterized by managers’ creative translation of the research to match the problems they are facing at that particular time.

This study suggests that researchers and managers are on equal footing, and can contribute to one another in an active and creative way.

Through translating research into their specific context, managers can find a new spectrum of research usage in their organization, but can also contribute to research in an interactive and creative way.

This study gives empirical examples for how and why a certain piece of B2B research has been used by managers in three organizations. Moreover, this study contributes to existing models relating to marketing use by giving examples of the active translation process in which managers adopt the research to their specific challenges.

The purpose of this paper is organizing mindfully for relevant process research on strategic change. This essay arises from an increasing concern that our understanding of strategic change is not delivering meaningful, relevant and true process wisdom that allows researchers to enrich their academic discourse and practitioners to effectively realize strategic change imposed by hostile business markets. Our goal is to challenge fundamental assumptions of our field’s dominant discourse in performing research and generating theories for strategic change under real contexts, and redirect attention to a mindful organizing perspective to understand process elements of strategic change that really matter.

This paper is an essay based on theoretical reasoning. We address the relevance gap in the strategic business marketing field by focusing on one specific gap: the study and understanding of strategic change. To illustrate the relevance of a mindful organizing perspective for closing this relevance gap, we focus on the processes of mindful organizing identified by Weick and Sutcliffe (2007) and argue how these organizational processes contribute to a better understanding of strategic change while implicitly assuming a complexity-based perspective on organizing. These five processes, moreover, address the identified limitations of present approaches, i.e. formative causality, pre-interpretation and independent linearity.

We suggest a “provocative change research avenue” elaborating on the role of mindful organizing to bridge the relevance gap in this area. This advances a richer and more relevant framing to elevate theorizing in the area of strategic marketing and management beyond existing avenues, which not necessarily reflects organizational life’s equivocality, interdependencies and intricacies. We, thus, call for the field of strategic marketing and management to adopt a discourse grounded in complexity-based assumptions.

Overall, this essay highlights that closing relevance gaps in our field cannot be done with quick fix recipes. The endeavor implies a fundamental re-framing of the way we look at firms and managers. It also implies different theoretical underpinnings and more interpretive research approaches to tap the richness in real-life business settings. By focusing on one area, we have shown how such an effort might proceed.

Although the paper is mainly written for researchers of change processes and innovation in industrial companies, practitioners will get inspiration as several viewpoints for mindful organizing will help them in building a more realistic and viable change approach.

Our intended contribution is to advocate a deeper and richer process understanding of strategic change by advancing mindful organizing as an epistemological and praxeological perspective on strategic change, thereby bridging the relevance gap (Hodgkinson and Rousseau, 2009; Weick, 2001) and enriching our field’s strategic change theories. Epistemologically, mindful organizing offers a useful perspective by stressing the change process’ complexity, interdependence and emergence. Praxeologically, mindful organizing represents an adaptive organizational capability that allows organizations to develop higher awareness of their strategic change processes.

This study aims to formulate recommendations for business-to-business (B2B) researchers, with the potential to increase the extent to which B2B research is relevant to managers.

These recommendations are derived from and inspired by the grounded theory methodology.

In this article, we argue that conceptualizations which are potentially relevant to managers are those that discover new perspectives, simplify complexity, enable managers to take action and have an instant grab. To accomplish this as researchers, the authors emphasize fostering a beginner’s mind, creating umbrella models, increasing the level of abstraction of concepts and finding the core process in data.

In this article, we translate the basic principles within the grounded theory methodology into more general recommendations that can be used by B2B researchers.

The purpose of the study is to identify and discuss critical aspects of the academic/practitioner gap and suggest how to make marketing research more relevant.

The study uses data from an earlier study of eight qualitative interviews conducted with business-to-business (B2B) marketing practitioners and from an earlier quantitative study among 128 academics and 510 marketing research practitioners. The data are re-analyzed for this article.

Results show that academics and practitioners agree that academic research should be of more practical value. However, their priorities differ. For academics, publishing in refereed journals is the first priority and influencing practice is of much lower priority, while practitioners are not interested in the methodological and theoretical advances of marketing research; their priority is to satisfy day-to-day practical needs. Hence, practitioners have no interest in academic journals. The academic reward system tends to reinforce this divide because academic career progression depends substantially on the production of refereed journal articles.

Much prior consideration has been given to how academic journals can be made more relevant to practitioners, which is a desirable goal. However, a more fruitful approach for B2B academics would be to embrace new technologies such as blogging and social media to reach practitioners through their preferred channels. If greater relevance is to be achieved, then consideration needs to be given to the views of doctoral students, and to doctoral training processes in B2B marketing.

The study provides academics with guidance concerning how marketing research can have a greater effect on the practice of marketing.

The study contributes to the research base by identifying and discussing critical aspects of the academic/practitioner gap. The study also offers insights into how managerial relevance in marketing research can, practically, be improved.

The purpose of this study was to suggest pragmatic ways of dealing with the business-to-business (B2B) theory/practice gap.

Reflecting on experience both as a researcher and practitioner.

B2B marketing is characterized by complexity. There is no straight way to harmonize the relationship between its theory and practice but there are ways to make the two benefit from each other. A dilemma is that academics and practitioners are rewarded for different types of achievements.

Scholars can be made aware of the need for close involvement through action research and case theory to secure access to high-quality data in a complex B2B reality, and to their mission to contribute better real world based theory.

The article can make practitioners aware of the value of grand theory to improve the pragmatic use of mid-range theory as it materializes in models, checklists and heuristics.

The simultaneous emphasis on explicit and tacit knowledge in both theory generation and practice, and a framework of theory generation that sorts out substantive, mid-range and grand theory relationships.