Ningun Archivo

Ajay K. Kohli & Bernard J. Jaworski

Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implications
The literature reflects remarkably little effort to develop a framework for understanding the implementation of the marketing concept. The authors synthesize extant knowledge on the subject and provide a foundation for future research by clarifying the construct's domain,developing research propositions, and constructing an integrating framework that includes antecedents and consequences of a market orientation. They draw on the occasional writings on the subject over the last 35 years in the marketing literature, work in related disciplines, and 62 field interviews with managers in diverse functions and organizations. Managerial implications of this research arediscussed.

T

HOUGH the marketing concept is a cornerstone of the marketing discipline, very little attention has been given to its implementation. The marketing concept is essentially a business philosophy, an ideal or a policy statement (cf. Barksdale and Darden 1971; McNamara 1972). The business philosophy can be contrasted with its implementation reflected in the activities and behaviorsof an organization. In keeping with tradition (e.g., McCarthy and Perreault 1984, p. 36), we use the term "market orientation" to mean the implementation of the marketing concept. Hence, a market-oriented organization is one whose actions are consistent with the marketing concept. In recent years, there has been a strong resurgence of academic as well as practitioner interest in the mar-

AjayK. Kohli is Assistant Professor, Department of Marketing Administration, The University of Texas at Austin. Bernard J. Jaworski is Assistant Professor, Department of Marketing, Karl Eller Graduate School of Management, University of Arizona. The authors thank Dipankar Chakravarti, Rohit Deshpande, Jonathan Frenzen, Richard Lutz, Deborah Maclnnis, Kent Nakamoto, C. W. Park, P. Rajan Varadarajan,Melanie Wallendorf, Frederick Webster, Robert Westbrook, Gerald Zaitman, and four JM reviewers for their helpful comments on previous versions of the article. Research support provided by the Marketing Science Institute is gratefully acknowledged. Both authors contributed equally to the article.

keting concept and its implementation (e.g., Deshpande and Webster 1989; Houston 1986; Olson 1987;Webster 1988). We seek to further that interest by providing a foundation for the systematic development of a theory of market orientation. Given its widely acknowledged importance, one might expect the concept to have a clear meaning, a rich tradition of theory development, and a related body of empirical findings. On the contrary, a close examination of the literature reveals a lack of cleardefinition, little careful attention to measurement issues, and virtually no empirically based theory. Further, the literature pays little attention to the contextual factors that may make a market orientation either more or less appropriate for a particular business. The purpose of this article is to delineate the domain of the market orientation construct, provide an operational definition, develop apropositional inventory, and construct a comprehensive framework for directing future research. We first describe our method. Essentially, we draw on the literature in marketing and related disciplines, and supplement it with findings from field interviews with managers in diverse functions, hierarchical levels, and organizations. Our discovery-oriented approach (cf. Deshpande 1983; Mahrer 1988) issimilar to the qualitative, practitioner-based approach used by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1985) and is de-

Joumal of Marketing Vol. 54 (April 1990), 1-18

Market Orientation / 1

signed to tap the "cause and effect" maps of managers (see Zaltman, LeMasters, and Heffring 1982). We then compare and contrast the alternative conceptualizations in the literature with the view that...