Search results
1 – 4 of 4Nandini Nim, Kiran Pedada and Kelly Hewett
This article aims to provide greater clarity regarding the conceptualization and critical role of digital marketing ecosystems for the global expansion of multinational…
Abstract
Purpose
This article aims to provide greater clarity regarding the conceptualization and critical role of digital marketing ecosystems for the global expansion of multinational enterprises (MNEs) and offer novel research directions to prompt future research.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors first review the marketing literature related to marketing ecosystems, highlighting the evolution of this body of work across a range of domains such as services, innovation and new product development, communications and marketing strategy more broadly. Next, two case examples of MNEs whose global expansion efforts have been supported by their marketing ecosystems are used to highlight the role of marketing ecosystems in global market expansion. Finally, novel research directions are offered to prompt future research and provide greater insight into this emerging area.
Findings
The case examples we examine yield important insights into the role of marketing ecosystems for MNEs expanding from emerging markets (EMs) to developed markets (DMs). EM-MNEs such as TEMU face more communication and payment ecosystem challenges while opening their supply chain to DMs. Contrary to EM-MNEs, DM-MNEs face institutional and sociocultural challenges that require different marketing ecosystem orchestration approaches.
Originality/value
Marketing ecosystems can provide MNEs with greater multinational flexibility, enabling them to adapt their global strategies to navigate increasing complexities in global markets, such as trends toward increased protectionism and geopolitical disruptions. However, there is surprisingly little research addressing this issue.
Details
Keywords
V. Kumar, Ankit Anand and Nandini Nim
Traditionally, firms have been dependent on internal sources such as their own employees – and up to a certain extent, on some external sources, their customers – for innovation…
Abstract
Purpose
Traditionally, firms have been dependent on internal sources such as their own employees – and up to a certain extent, on some external sources, their customers – for innovation. However, in the current scenario of technological dynamism, firms are exploring multiple sources to generate ideas for innovation. Therefore, there is a need to understand the relative effect of various sources of innovations on a firm’s performance.
Methodology/approach
We offer a conceptual framework where we identify six distinct sources of innovations – firm, customers, external network, competition, macro-environment, and technology and how they create value for focal firms especially their brand equity. We introduce a taxonomy of various costs and benefits related to innovations. We then argue using our proposed taxonomy to understand the relative strengths of various sources of innovation affecting a firm’s brand equity.
Findings
We discuss and compare the relative effects of these sources of innovations on a firm’s brand equity by rank-ordering the sources. The customers and the technology as a source of innovation have the maximum impact on the firm’s brand equity followed by the marginal impact of macro-environment and external network of a firm. The firm itself has a moderate impact on its brand equity, while competition has the minimal impact. Further, we also discuss how the relationship is moderated by different innovation characteristics (nature and type of innovations).
Practical implications
The main practical implication is to create awareness among managers about various costs and benefits of the proposed six sources of innovations and their effects on brand equity. Managers would be able to prioritize their sources of innovation based on firms’ current needs, and whether to focus on lower costs or building higher brand equity in the scarce resource environment.
Originality/value
We offer a comprehensive list of six sources of innovation, build a conceptual framework wherein we discuss the relative strengths of these sources affecting brand equity.
Details