Search results

As a high school senior, there was no doubt I wanted to attend college, it was just a matter of where. I applied to only two universities – Oakland University (OU) and MSU. I was not too familiar with MSU, but it had a good reputation; I was much more familiar with Oakland. Although I had obtained an application for the University of Michigan (UM), I decided that the UM application was just too long to complete. And what the heck is a wolverine anyway? I lived in Michigan for most of my life, and I had never spotted this mythical rodent. As a tendency, I always found Michigan students and alumni to be either too arrogant or eccentric for my taste. Also, at that time of my life, I found the atmosphere in Ann Arbor not right in some way, so I applied to only two universities.¹

It is with this background that we planned and implemented a landmark event, The Invitational Symposium on MSU Contributions to Research in International Business and Innovation. We held the symposium during 7–9 May 2008 in East Lansing, Michigan. Nearly all of our graduates over the past 15 years joined faculty and other mentors who have been associated with the marketing and international business doctoral program at MSU. Some two dozen doctoral alumni were in attendance.

Understanding the impact of marketing-related investments on market-based assets is a fundamental issue for marketers. In this study we address the relationship between product-related investments and communication-related efforts, with respect to a basic intangible market-based asset: consumer-based dimensions of brand equity. We draw from a longitudinal study of pre-purchase brand attribute data derived from consumer panels, conducted within the context of the U.S. automotive market. Brand equity dimensions are statistically related to marketing investments and contextual factors of “region of origin” and “global brand reach,” employing a seemingly unrelated regression model. The results reveal a positive effect of communication-related investments, as measured by annual advertising expenditures, on all dimensions of brand equity except luxury image. Product-related investments, as indicated by a brand's innovativeness, positively affect brand image but negatively affect perceived economy. Region of origin and global brand reach have mixed effects on the consumer-based dimensions of brand equity.

My decision to pursue an academic life in international marketing was unplanned. It was spring 1989 and I was an MBA student in my last semester in East Lansing. Because my MBA concentration was in finance I had applied for a number of finance PhD programs. While waiting for my applications, I was taking an elective course, international marketing, from Prof. S. Tamer Cavusgil. I was immediately hooked. His lectures were absorbing. Difficult concepts became lucid when he explained them with vivid stories. Classical theories became refreshing when he used them as a backdrop for contemporary phenomena.

Becoming a scholar is a unique experience for each individual. It does not suddenly happen in the graduate office where you officially submit the final copy of your doctoral dissertation, along with a check for fees payable, and the clerk hands you a small green receipt with a curt, “Congratulations”. It is a journey. A journey, if undertaken properly, that does not really ever end.

Brent B. Allred is an Associate Professor of Strategic Management and International Business at The College of William & Mary, in Williamsburg, VA. He earned his Ph.D. in Strategic Management/International Business at The Pennsylvania State University. His current research interests are in technology sourcing and patent rights. He has published in various journals, including the Journal of International Business Studies, Management International Review, the Journal of International Management, Academy of Management Executive, and the Journal of Product Innovation Management.

Firms with market foresight – knowledge of market changes ahead of competitors – can convert that knowledge into creative and timely new product offerings. Based on a discovery-oriented process, working closely with managers throughout the research process, we develop and test a framework delineating market information determinants and new product outcomes of market foresight.

Using data collected primarily from senior executives of industrial manufacturers, the hypotheses were tested using partial least squares.

The results indicate that external (active scanning, lead user collaboration, and market experiments) and internal sources (boundary spanner input and interdepartmental connectedness) of market information positively affect market foresight. Further, the effects of active scanning, market experiments, and interdepartmental connectedness on market foresight are positively moderated by the organization’s open-mindedness. These findings also provide evidence that firms with superior market foresight develop more creative products, introduce them to the market faster, and introduce them at a more opportune time.

Our findings demonstrate that managers’ knowledge of market changes ahead of competitors is enhanced through acquiring both external and internal sources of market information. Furthermore, market foresight is significantly enhanced by managers being open-minded to the information gained from these sources as it may challenge long-held assumptions.

This chapter introduces a new construct, market foresight capability, to the literature that will aid managers in developing greater insight into emerging shifts in the market. For researchers, this new line of inquiry expands our understanding as to the critical sources and new product outcomes of obtaining future-focused market information.

For various reasons consumers find some innovations undesirable. These are identified as resistant innovations or those innovations that consumers are unable or unwilling to readily embrace, such as screw caps on fine wines, hybrid automobiles and nanotechnology-based products. What makes these types of innovations undesirable to consumers? How should marketers introduce into the marketplace these types of innovations? These questions are the foundation of my ongoing research. In reflecting on my research decisions for the past ten years, I came upon my application for PhD programs. In 1997, I wrote:“The past ten years I have been focused on product development for telecom firms, including five years as an entrepreneur. As I've worked, questions have frequently surfaced about the slow acceptance in the marketplace of some telecommunication offerings; Why has ISDN (Integrated Services Digital Network) not taken off? Why did 30,000 perfectly functioning Newton PDAs (Personal Digital Assistant) end up at the Los Angeles dump? Did AT&T misjudge the market timing for videophones? What role, if any, did marketing play in these product mis-launches?”…I have explored disruptive technologies with Christensen (1997), crossed the chasm with Moore (1991), searched for the sources of innovation with Von Hippel (1988), and evaluated Roger's diffusion theories (1995) looking for direction. These investigations have led to more questions.