Kirca et al. (2005): Market Orientation: A Meta- Analytic Review and Assessment of Its Antecedents and Impact on Performance

17 important questions on Kirca et al. (2005): Market Orientation: A Meta- Analytic Review and Assessment of Its Antecedents and Impact on Performance

In which phase fits this article and why?

The learning phase, because it's about learning about the environment/making sense of the external environment.

What stipulates (bepaalt) the marketing concept?

In order to achieve sustained success, firms should
identify and satisfy customer needs more effectively than their competitors

Market orientation has been conceptualized from two perspectives. Which perspectives are those?

  • Behavioural
    • Concentrates on organisational activities that are related to the generation and dissemination of (verspreiding van) and responsiveness to market intelligence.
  • Cultural
    • Focuses on organisational norms and values that encourage behaviours that are consistent with market orientation.
  • Higher grades + faster learning
  • Never study anything twice
  • 100% sure, 100% understanding
Discover Study Smart

In the framework within the paper of Kirca et al. (2005), antecedents of market orientation are classified into three broad categories, which ones?

  • Top managers
    • They shape the values and orientation of an organization.
  • Interdepartmental factors
    • These include interdepartmental connectedness and conflict.
  • Organizational systems
    • These consists of two structural variables, formalization and centralization,
    • And two employee-related systems, market-based reward systems and market-oriented training.

In the framework within the paper of Kirca et al. (2005), the consequences of market orientation are classified into four broad categories, which ones?

  • Organization performance
    • Cost-based performance measures
    • Revenue-based performance measures.
  • Customer consequences
    • Perceived quality of products/services that a firm provides
    • Customer loyalty
    • Customer satisfaction with the organization’s products and services.
  • Innovation consequences
    • Firms’ innovativeness
    • New product performance.
  • Employee consequences
    • Organizational commitment
    • Team spirit
    • Customer orientation
    • Role conflict
    • Job satisfaction

Result (H1): Is the market orientation–performance relationship stronger for revenue-based performance measures than for cost-based performance measures?

No, this does not vary, it is the same

Result (H2): Is the market orientation–performance relationship stronger for subjective measures of performance than for objective measures of performance?

Yes, this is true.

Result (H3): Is the market orientation- performance relationship stronger for multi-item measures of performance than for single-item measures of performance?

No, this is not true.

Result (H4 a+b): Is the market orientation–performance relationship stronger in manufacturing firms than in service firms? And is this the same for revenue-based and cost-based performance measures?

  • Yes, the market orientation–performance relationship is stronger in manufacturing firms than in service firms.
  • Yes, this is the case both using revenue-based and cost-based peformance measures

Result (H5): Is the market orientation–performance relationship stronger in low-powerdistance cultures than in high power-distance cultures?

Yes, this is true.

Result (H6): Is the market orientation–performance relationship stronger in low-uncertainty avoidance cultures than in high-uncertainty-avoidance cultures?

Yes, this is true.

Which hypotheses appeared to be non significant?


  • H7: The market orientation–performance relationship is stronger in collectivist cultures than in individualist cultures (as moderators).
  • H8: The market orientation–performance relationship is stronger in high-masculinity cultures than in low masculinity cultures (as moderators).

What is the main conclusion of the paper by Kirca et al. (2005)?

It helps to have a market oriented culture

Result: In which kind of firms is the association of market orientation with performance (market orientation performance relationship) lower compared to manufacturing firms and why?

Service firms, possibly because of the higher levels of customization that service firms require.

Result: Why can market orientation be important for both service and manufacturing firms?

Market orientation may be imperative to ensure survival in service firms and may provide a greater competitive advantage that leads to superior performance in manufacturing firms.

Explain the conceptual framework for the meta-analysis provided in the paper of Kirca et al. (2005).

  • On the left, the antecedents of market orientation are displayed, they have an effect on market orientation.
  • On the right, the consequences of market orientation are displayed, market orientation causes these aspects. 
  • There are substantive moderators in play which are market/environmental turbulence, technological turbulence and competitive intensity

Kirca et al. (2005) created a revised model with the effects and relations. Explain this revised model.

  • Market orientation has an effect on a firm's innovativeness. New products enable the organization to meet the evolving needs of customers, thus influencing loyaly and the perceived quality of its products and services.
  • Innovativeness, customer loyalty and quality account for a substantial portion of the total effect of market orientation on performance. So this is showing a partial mediation regarding innovation and customer mechanism 

The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:

  • A unique study and practice tool
  • Never study anything twice again
  • Get the grades you hope for
  • 100% sure, 100% understanding
Remember faster, study better. Scientifically proven.
Trustpilot Logo