julian et al-2014-thunderbird international business review

97FEATURE ARTICLE

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com)

© 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. • DOI: 10.1002/tie.21598

Correspondence to: Craig C. Julian, Southern Cross Business School, Southern Cross University, Locked Bag 4, Coolangatta, Queensland, Australia,

4225, 61-7-55893065 (phone), 61-7-55893703 (fax), [email protected], [email protected].

The Market Orientation–

Performance Relation-

ship: The Empirical

Link in Export Ventures

Introduction

There has been a proliferation of research pub-

lished over the past four decades on export mar-

keting performance (e.g., Aaby & Slater, 1989;

Cavusgil & Zou, 1994; Julian, 2003; Okpara, 2012). How-

ever, what stands out in the previous exporting literatures

are the multiplicity of views regarding the determinants

of export marketing performance and the nature of

the relationships between these variables and export

This study examines the empirical link between three dimensions of market orientation, namely,

customer orientation, competitor orientation and interfunctional coordination, and overall export

marketing performance in Indonesian export market ventures. The study was based on an empirical

investigation of fi rms involved in exporting to foreign countries from Indonesia. The primary data for

the study were collected from a self-administered mail survey of 877 export market ventures from

the manufacturing sector in Indonesia resulting in a sample of 109 usable responses being returned.

From the application of the multiple regression analysis it was concluded that all three dimensions

of market orientation had a signifi cant impact on export marketing performance when measured via

a composite measure of export marketing performance that included economic indicators, strategic

indicators, and satisfaction with performance. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

By

Craig C. Julian

Osman Mohamad

Zafar U. Ahmed

S. Sefnedi

98 FEATURE ARTICLE

Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 56, No. 1 January/February 2014 DOI: 10.1002/tie

relationship between market orientation and export mar-

keting performance still remains inconclusive at best.

Cadogan, Cui, Morgan, and Story (2005) argued that

the relationship between market orientation and export

marketing performance is of great interest to the inter-

national marketer. Furthermore, such a study is needed

because of the importance of international operations

to business survival and general economic well-being

(Abor, 2011; Deshpande & Farley, 2004; Okpara, 2012;

Owusu-Frimpong & Mmieh, 2007). Most research on the


keting performance has been conducted in a developed-

country context, and given the paucity of studies on this

relationship in a developing-country context, the need

for such a study was seen. As such, the objective of the

study was to examine the relationship between market

orientation and export marketing performance in export

market ventures in Indonesia, a developing country of the

Asia-Pacific Region. Therefore, the study’s contribution is

both contextual and theoretical. The study’s findings

provides empirical evidence on the relationship between

market orientation and export marketing performance in

a developing-country context, overcoming the void in the

marketing performance (Abor, 2011; Cavusgil & Zou,

1994; O’Cass & Julian, 2003; Singh, 2009). The research-

ers in this field suggest that it is partly due to the poor

conceptualization of the measures of export marketing

performance (Julian, 2003), the weakness in the theo-

retical foundations of the export marketing performance

literature, and its irrelevance in practice (Dhanaraj &

Beamish, 2003). Dhanaraj and Beamish (2003) suggested

that there is a need for a parsimonious model of export

marketing performance and its determinants so that it

can be understood and implemented by practitioners. As

such, these issues need to be addressed in future research

conceptually and empirically in order to reduce the con-

fusion in the literature (Griffith, Jacobs, & Richey, 2006;

Julian, 2010; Singh, 2009). Currently, in the literature

there is minimal consensus on a model of export market-

ing performance.

On the one hand, market orientation has been

identified as a significant variable impacting firm perfor-

mance (Kirca, Jayachandra, & Bearden, 2005). On the

other hand, the results of other studies on how market

orientation influences firm performance are not so

conclusive, suggesting that market orientation does not

directly influence firm performance but rather impacts

performance via other mediating variables (Sin, Tse,

Yau, Chow, & Lee, 2005; Singh, 2009). Furthermore,

some studies found positive and significant relationships

(Julian, 2010) while other studies reported nonsignificant

relationships when performance was measured via alter-

native measures of performance, for example, market

share (Baker & Sinkula, 2005). Even other studies found

that market orientation was related to firm performance

only for certain subjective measures (Rose & Shoham,

2002), and other studies suggested that market orienta-

tion had a negative impact on performance (Cadogan &

Cui, 2004). As such, the evidence of a significant relation-

ship between market orientation and firm performance is

still far from conclusive.

Additionally, it is interesting to note that most previ-

ous research on market orientation has been conducted

with respect to a firm’s performance in the domestic

market, with limited research being conducted on the


keting performance (Cadogan & Cui, 2004). Grinstein

(2008) also suggested that further conceptual and empiri-

cal research needs to be conducted on market orientation

in different environmental and organizational contexts.

Only in recent years have researchers explored market ori-

entation in an international context (Griffith et al., 2006;

Hastings & Saperstein, 2010; Julian, 2010; 2011; Singh,

2009). However, the empirical evidence of a significant

It is interesting to note that most previous research on market orientation has been conducted with respect to a firm’s performance in the domestic market, with limited research being con-ducted on the relationship between market orientation and export marketing performance.

The Market Orientation–Performance Relationship: The Empirical Link in Export Ventures 99

DOI: 10.1002/tie Thunderbird International Business Review Vol. 56, No. 1 January/February 2014

Although many studies have attempted to measure

market orientation differently when examining its empir-

ical relationship with different measures of performance

most previous research has either adopted the measures

developed by Narver and Slater (1990) (e.g., Grinstein,

2008; Hooley et al., 2003; Sin et al., 2005; Singh, 2009)

or that of Kohli and Jaworski (1990) (e.g., Baker &

Sinkula, 2005; Kyriakopoulos & Moorman, 2004; Racela,

Chaikittisilpa, & Thoumrungroje, 2007).

Kohli and Jaworski (1990) were, arguably, the pio-

neers of market orientation research. Kohli and Jaworski

viewed market orientation as the implementation of the

marketing concept. In other words, a firm that is market

oriented is one that acts consistently with the market-

ing concept, that is, determining the needs and wants

of target markets and delivering the desired satisfaction

more effectively and efficiently than competitors (Kotler,

Adam, Brown, & Armstrong, 2008). Kohli and Jaworski

conducted an extensive review of the marketing literature

over the previous 35 years, they conducted interviews with

62 managers both marketing and nonmarketing manag-

ers in the United States, and defined market orientation

as “the organization-wide generation of market intelli-

gence pertaining to current and future customer needs,

dissemination of the intelligence across departments, and

organization-wide responsiveness to it” (Kohli & Jaworski,

1990, p. 6).

As such, according to Kohli and Jaworski (1990),

there are three important components of market ori-

entation, namely, intelligence generation, intelligence

dissemination, and responsiveness. Intelligence gen-

eration refers to the collection and assessment of both

customers’ current and future needs, plus the impact

of government regulations, competitors, technology,

and other environmental forces. Market intelligence

is not the exclusive responsibility of the marketing

department. Instead, it is all departments’ responsibil-

ity. Market intelligence must be communicated and

disseminated throughout an organization in both for-

mal and informal ways. The effective dissemination

of market intelligence is seen as a vital action since it

provides a shared basis for collaborative efforts among

different departments (Racela et al., 2007). This is

similar to interfunctional coordination in organizations

(Grinstein, 2008).

Responsiveness refers to the ability of an organization

to react to intelligence generation and dissemination.

Responsiveness is divided into two activities, namely,

response design such as using market intelligence to

develop plans and response implementation such as

executing the plans.

literature on the relationship between market orientation

and performance in an international setting, as previous

research had been primarily focused on domestic settings

in developed countries. The theoretical contribution rests

with the study’s contribution to the export marketing lit-

erature by identifying market orientation as a significant

antecedent of export venture marketing performance,

whereas previous research had provided inconclusive

evidence suggesting that all future multivariate models

designed to assess export marketing performance and its

antecedents should include market orientation, as it may

also act as a mediating variable between other exogenous

and endogenous variables. A further contribution is the

contention that market orientation is a three-dimensional

construct, namely, customer orientation, competitor ori-

entation, and interfunctional coordination. Additionally,

the constructs developed here can serve as a foundation

for further research into export marketing.

Theoretical Framework

Substantial evidence has already been provided regarding

market orientation as a significant antecedent variable of

firm performance in a domestic context (e.g., Cadogan,

Cui, & Li, 2003; Cadogan, Diamantopoulos, & Siguw,

2002). It is a popular research theme and has received

great attention from many scholars (e.g., Cadogan et al.,

2002, 2003; Cadogan & Cui, 2004; Calontone, Kim,

Schmidt, & Cavusgil, 2006; Ellis, 2006; Griffith et al.,

2006; Grinstein, 2008; Julian, 2010; Kropp, Lindsay, &

Shoham, 2006; Singh, 2009). Scholars have provided

many different definitions of market orientation. For

example, Narver and Slater (1990) defined market orien-

tation as an organizational culture that has a set of shared

values and beliefs in putting customers first in business

planning. Narver and Slater also suggested that market-

oriented firms should focus not only on customers but

also on competitors and interfunctional coordination.

Deshpande and Farley (1998) defined market orienta-

tion as a set of cross-functional processes and activities

directed at creating and satisfying customers through

continuous needs assessment. However, their definition

did not emphasize or reflect the importance of com-

petitor orientation. Kohli and Jaworski (1990) defined

market orientation as the organization-wide generation

of market intelligence pertaining to current and future

customer needs, dissemination of the intelligence across

departments, and organization-wide responsiveness to

it. In their definition, Kohli and Jaworski (1990) empha-

sized the behavioral aspects and not the cultural aspects

of market orientation.

100 FEATURE ARTICLE


efforts to create superior products/services for their cus-

tomers, thereby satisfying the needs and wants of their

customers better than competitors.

The concept of market orientation proposed by both

Kohli and Jaworski (1990) and Narver and Slater (1990)

are similar in many ways. First, both Kohli and Jaworski

and Narver and Slater view market orientation as a con-

tinuous rather than a dichotomous variable. Second, both

concepts are similar in that they focus on obtaining and

disseminating information from customers and competi-

tors in order to achieve a sustainable competitive advan-

tage for the firm. However, Kohli and Jaworski’s concept

places greater emphasis on customers as opposed to com-

petitors. Third, both concepts emphasize the importance

of the combined efforts of all departments in responding

to customer needs. Finally, both concepts view market

orientation as a three-dimensional construct.

Nevertheless, important differences also exist between

the two concepts. For instance, Narver and Slater (1990)

explained market orientation as an organizational cul-

ture, which led to values and behaviors toward customers

and competitors with specific aims (i.e., profitability).

However, Kohli and Jaworski (1990) described market

orientation as the implementation of the marketing

concept and did not identify the cultural aspect of market

orientation (Racela et al., 2007).

Narver and Slater (1990) also reviewed the strategy

and marketing literatures and suggested that market

orientation is a form of organizational culture defining

market orientation as “the organizational culture that

most effectively and efficiently creates the necessary

behaviors for the creation of superior value for buyers

and, thus, continuous superior performance for the

business” (Narver & Slater, 1990, p. 21). As such, market

orientation as an organizational culture consists of three

components, namely, customer orientation, competitor

orientation, and interfunctional coordination (Grinstein,

2008; Hooley et al., 2003; Sin et al., 2005; Singh, 2009).

With respect to customer orientation, the heart of

market orientation is its customer focus. The customer

orientation element requires an understanding of cus-

tomers’ needs and wants in order to develop superior

products and/or services than their competitors to satisfy

customers’ needs and wants. It means that for companies

to be customer oriented, they need to find out what

customer needs and wants are both currently and in the

future, in order to create a superior value-added benefit

(Grinstein, 2008; Narver, Slater, & MacLachlan, 2004;

Singh, 2009).

As far as competitor orientation is concerned, firms

should understand and identify the short-term strengths

and weaknesses and long-term capabilities and strategies

of both current and future competitors. Employees of

every department in market-driven firms share informa-

tion about competitors, and this information can be used

to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage for the

firm (Grinstein, 2008; Frambach, Prabhu, & Verhallen,

2003; Singh, 2009). Thus, competitor orientation is

viewed as equally important as customer orientation.

In relation to interfunctional coordination, this is

where each department is recognized as being important,

regardless of whether or not it has anything to do with

the marketing function, and each department has a role

to play in customer satisfaction (Grinstein, 2008; Im &

Workman, 2004; Singh, 2009). This idea is paralleled with

the suggestion that market orientation is not marketing

orientation. In other words, a market orientation does

not view the marketing department as having the most

important role.

Customer orientation and competitor orientation

include all of the activities involved in generating market

intelligence about customers and competitors and dis-

seminating it throughout the organization (Frambach et

al., 2003; Singh, 2009). Moreover, in order to be market

oriented, it is important for all departments within the

organization to communicate information gathered from

customers and competitors and then use their combined

In relation to interfunctional coordination, this is where each department is recog-nized as being important, regardless of whether or not it has anything to do with the marketing function, and each department has a role to play in customer satisfaction.



change in sales, profits and change in profits) conse-

quences of a market orientation (intelligence generation,

intelligence dissemination and responsiveness) and the

potential mediating impact of the competitive, technol-

ogy, and foreign market environments. Their study found

that a positive change in export sales and profits was all

significantly related to a market orientation. Specifically,

a change in export sales and profits was significantly and

positively related to intelligence generation, responsive-

ness, and an overall market orientation. Additionally,

the impact of market orientation on export profits and a

change in export profits was stronger in technologically

turbulent environments. As a whole, their study synthe-

sized two important streams of research by establishing

an empirical relationship between market orientation

and export performance and examining the mediating

impact of the environment on export performance.

Akyol and Akehurst (2003) also studied the rela-

tionship between corporate export market orientation

and export performance variations. They examined 103

Turkish clothing exporting firms by employing Cadogan,

Diamantopoulos, and Mortanges’s (1999) measures

(export market intelligence generation, intelligence dis-

semination, and responsiveness). The results of their

study suggest that a relationship between export market

orientation and performance does exist, and in the case

of the Turkish clothing exporters, an improvement in the

export market orientation level is a significant contribu-

tor to enhanced export performance.

Finally, Singh (2009) studied the relationship between

market orientation, outsourcing, marketing capabilities,

and business performance, concluding that there were

two pathways through which market orientation and

outsourcing could build capability and enhance perfor-

mance. Singh (2009) examined 426 foreign and Indian

firms based in India by employing Narver and Slater’s

(1990) measures of market orientation (customer orienta-

tion, competitor orientation, and interfunctional coordi-

nation). The results of the Singh (2009) study suggest that

market orientation has a significant impact on business

performance when mediated by marketing capability.

As such, it is argued that a powerful way to enhance

the export marketing performance of firms is for them

to adopt a market orientation in their export operations

(Julian, 2011; Singh, 2009). Specifically, for most firms,

empirical studies indicated that higher levels of market

orientation in the firms’ export market is associated with

higher levels of performance (e.g., Akyol & Akehurst,

2003; Julian, 2011; Racela et al., 2007; Singh, 2009).

Export marketing performance has been measured,

principally, in three different ways. First, by measuring

This study adopts Narver and Slater’s (1990) notion

of market orientation for at least three primary reasons.

First, Narver and Slater’s (1990) notion of market orien-

tation separates customer orientation and competitor ori-

entation into two different constructs. As such, it enables

the impact of customer orientation and competitor orien-

tation on export marketing performance to be examined

separately, thereby enabling identification of which con-

struct has the greatest impact on performance. Second,

some researchers have suggested that Narver and Slater’s

(1990) market orientation construct has better criterion

validity and reliability than the Kohli and Jaworski (1990)

market orientation construct (e.g., Oczkowski & Farrell,

1998). Finally, other researchers have criticized the poor

conceptualization of the Kohli and Jaworski market ori-

entation construct in that it does not sufficiently capture

the notion of providing customer value (Pelham, 1997).

It is suggested here that market orientation as an

antecedent of export marketing performance seems

to have been largely overlooked by the international

marketing literature. Including market orientation as

an antecedent of performance in an export marketing

performance model, it is argued, will enhance our under-

standing of the antecedents of export marketing perfor-

mance and will make a worthy contribution to the body

of knowledge. This is because market orientation is a

proven indicator of enhanced performance in a domestic

context, but its relationship with performance in an inter-

national context is still open for debate, especially when

the investigation is conducted in a developing country

like Indonesia. In addition, knowledge of the impact of

market orientation on performance in an international

context will provide a solid foundation for the sustain-

able competitive advantage of a firm in foreign markets,

subsequently enhancing the firm’s overall performance

(Okpara, 2012; Racela et al., 2007; Singh, 2009).

As indicated earlier, most previous studies on market

orientation have been conducted on the firm’s domes-

tic operations with limited empirical research being

conducted on the impact of market orientation in an

international context, whether in relation to export ven-

tures or international joint ventures (Racela et al., 2007;

Julian, 2010). Only in the past few years have researchers

explored issues relating to market orientation in an inter-

national context (e.g., Akyol & Akehurst, 2003; Griffith et

al., 2006; Hastings & Saperstein, 2010; Julian, 2010, 2011;

Racela et al., 2007; Rose & Shoham, 2002; Singh, 2009).

For example, Rose and Shoham (2002) investigated

124 Israeli exporters from 9 industries. By employing

Jaworski and Kohli’s (1993) market orientation con-

struct, they examined the export performance (e.g., sales,

102 FEATURE ARTICLE


an integral part of marketing performance. Studies that

adopt this perspective often measure marketing perfor-

mance as the attainment of strategic goals, such as mar-

ket share, productivity, strategic presence in the export

market, or competitive position (Abor, 2011; Baker &

Sinkula, 2005; Griffith et al., 2006; Julian, 2010; Okpara,

2012; Sin et al., 2005).

Finally, measurement of export marketing perfor-

mance has also been undertaken via perceptual or atti-

tudinal measures. The theoretical perspective of using

this approach is that being positively disposed toward

exporting and/or satisfied with exporting operations

is a strong indication of success in exporting. Studies

adopting this perspective have measured a firm’s export

marketing performance either directly, such as perceived

success or satisfaction with the venture (O’Cass & Julian,

2003; Racela et al., 2007), or indirectly as the firm’s atti-

tude toward exporting (O’Cass & Weerawardena, 2009).

The particular theoretical perspective adopted here is

that export marketing performance is, first, measurable

at the export venture level (that is, the product/market

level). Second, it incorporates the major perspectives of

export marketing performance used in previous studies:

economic indicators, strategic indicators, and satisfac-

tion with the venture’s export marketing performance.

Finally, it is consistent with the existing export marketing

performance measures used by studies in different coun-

tries (Julian & O’Cass, 2004; Kropp et al., 2006; Racela

et al., 2007).

Given the growth in the literature on export market-

ing performance, one ponders the limited interest in

Southeast Asia given the economic growth rates of several

Southeast Asian countries over the past two decades and

the emphasis on Asia by many governments around the

world as trading opportunities. The export marketing

performance of Southeast Asian export market ventures

are an important dimension of contemporary business

because many of these markets are used for the reex-

port of products/services to third country markets. For

example, Indonesia is an important market because of

the contribution of manufactured exports to the domes-

tic economy (Indonesian Central Bureau of Statistics,

2005). In 2004, Indonesia reported that its total exports

(US$69.7 billion) contributed approximately 33.7% to

gross domestic product (GDP). The total exports con-

sisted of non–oil and gas (70.5%) and oil and gas

(29.5%). Of the non–oil and gas exports, the contribu-

tion of manufacturing, agricultural, and mining and oth-

ers were 78.5%, 11.4%, and 10.1%, respectively. In other

words, there was a significant contribution by the manu-

facturing sector to total exports and GDP (Indonesian

export marketing performance using the economic indi-

cators of performance (i.e., profit, sales, market share,

etc.). The underlying theoretical justification for using

economic indicators is that exporting is part of a firm’s

marketing program and performance should be mea-

sured in the same way that marketing operations are

measured, in economic or financial terms (Kropp et al.,

2006). Studies adopting such measures of export market-

ing performance have used indicators such as export sales

(Weerawardena, O’Cass, & Julian, 2006), export sales

growth (Julian, 2003; Okpara, 2012; Singh, 2009), export

profits (Abor, 2011; Owusu-Frimpong, & Mmieh, 2007;

Singh, 2009), and export/sales ratio (Guan & Ma, 2003;

Julian & O’Cass, 2004).

Second, measurement of export marketing per-

formance has also been via strategic outcomes, that is,

expand strategically into foreign markets, gain a foothold

in the export market, or simply increase the awareness

of the product/company. The underlying theoretical

justification here is that firms have a set of strategic goals

as well as economic goals in exporting (Julian & O’Cass,

2004). This theoretical perspective suggests that the

attainment of strategic goals such as improved competi-

tiveness, increased market share, increased productivity,

or strengthened strategic position should be considered

The underlying theoreti-cal justification for using economic indicators is that exporting is part of a firm’s marketing program and performance should be mea-sured in the same way that marketing operations are measured, in economic or financial terms.



research (Kaynak & Kuan, 1993) with sample sizes of 53

being reported (Mintu-Wimsatt & Calantone, 2000). A

response rate of 12.4% also compares favorably with the

response rates of McDougall et al. (1994) with 11%; Zairi

and Sinclair (1995) with 13%; and Koch and McGrath

(1996) with 6.5%. Considering that the sample was drawn

from a developing country where the first language is not

English, and where many of the respondents’ primary

language is not English, the response rate is even more

acceptable. Every possible mechanism was incorporated

into the study’s methodology to ensure a higher response

rate, and 12.4% was the maximum response rate possible.

Finally, it is acknowledged that US- based mail surveys

achieve a higher response rate; however, according to

Churchill (1987), a response rate above 10% is accept-

able for mail surveys.

The questionnaire and covering letter were translated

into Bahasa Indonesia and then back-translated into Eng-

lish. The use of only two languages reduced the potential

for errors resulting from multiple translations of the

questionnaire. Minimizing the diversity of languages also

helped ensure construct equivalence and data compara-

bility (Johnson, Cullen, Sakano, & Bronson, 2001).

To reach the most knowledgeable key informants,

the questionnaire was directed to the managing director

of the export venture. From the results of the pretest, it

was expected that the managing director as chief execu-

tive officer (CEO) would be the person most knowledge-

able about market orientation and the export venture’s

marketing performance.

The instrument contained items identified by the

literature intended to measure market orientation and

export marketing performance (Narver & Slater, 1990;

Singh, 2009; Zou et al., 1998). The measure of market

orientation was adapted from Narver and Slater (1990).

In their conceptualization, Narver and Slater identified

market orientation as a three-dimensional construct con-

sisting of, namely, customer orientation, competitor ori-

entation, and interfunctional coordination. This study’s

measure of market orientation comprised 14 items, with 6

items measuring customer orientation, 4 items measuring

competitor orientation, and 4 items measuring interfunc-

tional coordination.

Customer Orientation

Statements were included in the questionnaire to mea-

sure customer orientation. All items were adapted from

Narver and Slater (1990). These included the extent to

which the firm was driven by customer needs and satis-

faction, the extent to which the firm frequently assesses

their commitment in serving export customer’s needs,

Central Bureau of Statistics, 2005), even though the con-

tribution of the manufacturing industry to total exports

seemed to decrease during the 2002 to 2004 period, while

still making a substantial contribution. This contribution

by the manufacturing sector to the growth in exports and

overall GDP provides an ideal environment in which to

study the export marketing performance of export mar-

ket ventures in the manufacturing sector in a developing-

country context.

Furthermore, according to Pangestu (2004), foreign

competitors, marketing problems, and bureaucracy were

the main factors that contributed to a decline in the

overall performance of the Indonesian export sector.

In addition, Soewandi (2003) suggested that successful

Indonesian exporters should emphasize product quality,

pricing, promotion, and customer satisfaction such as on-

time delivery for enhanced performance. However, these

suggestions were all anecdotal, indicating a need to insti-

gate a study that investigates the significant determinants

of export marketing performance in the Indonesian

manufacturing sector. As a result, this study examines the

marketing performance of export ventures in an Asian

developing-country context and the significance of a

market orientation.

Research Design

This study was based on an empirical investigation of

manufacturing firms that were involved in exporting to

foreign countries from Indonesia. The sample of firms

came from a wide cross-section of companies from the

manufacturing sector and was provided by the Indo-

nesian Manufacturing Industry Directory. In order to

obtain valid and reliable measures of the variables, previ-

ously validated scales were used to measure all variables

(Narver & Slater, 1990; Singh, 2009; Zou, Taylor, &

Osland, 1998). All items were measured via 5-point bipo-

lar scales with scale poles ranging from strongly disagree

(1) to strongly agree (5).

The questionnaire was developed and pretested

using a small sample of exporters, with the final instru-

ment in English and a Bahasa equivalent with a cover-

ing letter and instructions that was mailed to a stratified

random sample that included 877 firms who were a

priori identified as being involved in direct export-

ing, yielding 109 usable questionnaires’ being returned,

accounting for an effective response rate of 12.4% and

considered to be acceptable. This response rate is normal

for most mail surveys (Groves, 1990; McDougall, Covin,

Robinson, & Herron, 1994). Also, similar response rates

have been reported in prior international marketing

104 FEATURE ARTICLE


differences were identified between the sample and the

target population for this classification variable. There-

fore, as the results suggest that there were no significant

differences between respondents and nonrespondents,

the sample can be considered sufficient to draw conclu-

sions about Indonesian export ventures for the issues

under study.

Next, some descriptive statistics of the sample is

provided. A profile of the Indonesian manufacturing

exporting firms participating in the study is presented in

Table 1. The major export market for the participating

Indonesian export firms was advanced developed coun-

tries such as the United States (24.8%), Japan (21.1%),

Germany (9.2%), and Australia (6.4%). A large percent-

age of the participating firms were in the textile and

apparel sectors (39.4%). In terms of international busi-

ness experience, slightly less than half of the firms were

relatively new to exporting, with six years’ or less export

experience (45.0%). The majority of the participating

the extent to which competitive advantage is based on the

understanding of export customers’ needs, the extent to

which strategies are driven by increasing export customer

value, the extent to which the firm measures export

customer’s satisfaction systematically, and the extent

to which the firm provides close attention to after-sales

service.

Competitor Orientation


sure competitor orientation. All items were adapted from

Narver and Slater (1990). These included the extent to

which the firm responds rapidly to competitor’s actions

that threaten them, the extent to which management

regularly shares information about competitor’s strate-

gies, the extent to which management regularly discusses

competitor’s strengths and weaknesses with all company

units, and the extent to which the firm targets export

customers to achieve a competitive advantage.

Interfunctional Coordination


sure interfunctional coordination. All items were adapted

from Narver and Slater (1990). These included the

extent to which customer information is communicated

between all the firm’s units, the extent to which internal

firm functions are integrated to serve customer needs,

the extent to which the firm’s units understand how

employees create export customer value, and the extent

to which resources are shared among the firm’s units.

Export Marketing Performance

Export marketing performance was measured via the use

of economic indicators, strategic indicators, and overall

satisfaction with performance. As a result, this study used

a composite measure of export marketing performance

that incorporated all three measures of export marketing

performance (Zou et al., 1998).

Data Analysis

Prior to analyzing the primary data, the issue of nonre-

sponse bias is discussed. An “extrapolation procedure”

technique was used to assess nonresponse bias. This

assumes that the groupings of actual respondents by an

identified criterion are similar to the “theoretical” non-

respondents (Armstrong & Overton, 1977). Frequencies

and independent t-tests were used to determine whether

significant differences existed between the sample of 109

Indonesian export ventures and the target population of

877, based on their industry classification. No significant

TABLE 1 The Profi le of Participating Indonesian Export+ Firms (n = 109)

Demographic Categories Frequency (%)

Number of full-time employees

Large Firm (more than 150)SMEs (150 and below)

6247

56.943.1

Export mode Direct to customer (distributor)Through foreign company based in SingaporeThrough foreign company based in IndonesiaThrough local Indonesian trading companyThrough own subsidiary company overseas

3928

23

16

3

35.825.7

21.1

14.7

2.7

Export experience

Experienced Exporter (more than 6 years)New exporter (6 years or less)

60

49

55.0

45.0

Industry category

Textile and ApparelWood and FurnitureFood, Beverages, and TobaccoPaper and PrintingRubber, Plastics, and ChemicalMachinery and Equipment

431915111110

39.417.413.810.110.1 9.2

Export destination

United StatesJapanSingaporeMalaysiaGermanyKoreaAustraliaChina

2723201010775

24.821.118.39.29.26.46.44.6



the variation in the export marketing performance of

Indonesian export market ventures as explanatory vari-

ables when measured by a composite measure of export

marketing performance that included satisfaction with

performance, economic indicators, and the achieve-

ment of strategic objectives as explanatory variables. The

results also show that all three dimensions of market ori-

entation—customer orientation, competitor orientation,

and interfunctional coordination (which is approaching

significance)—have a significant influence on the export

marketing performance of Indonesian export market

ventures.

Discussion

The relationship between market orientation and firm

performance can best be described as the ability of

market-oriented firms to understand and satisfy custom-

ers’ needs and wants in order to create a sustainable com-

petitive advantage (Ellis, 2006). In other words, firms that

know what their customers’ needs and wants are, both

companies could be categorized as large firms (56.9%)

with 150 or more full-time employees. With regard to for-

eign market distribution, the majority of the participating

Indonesian export firms exported directly to the distribu-

tor in the importing country (35.8%) or via a foreign

trading company based in Singapore (25.7%) or Indone-

sia (21.1%) as an intermediary. Approximately 14.7% of

the participating Indonesian export firms utilized a local

Indonesian trading company, and the remaining 2.8%

utilized their own international subsidiary.

The data were initially analyzed using confirmatory

factor analysis to assess the psychometric properties of

the instrument. Our primary concern was interpretability

of the factors. The dimensions of market orientation,

namely, customer orientation, competitor orientation,

and interfunctional coordination, all loaded appropri-

ately and no cross-loadings above 0.2 were identified,

with only factor loadings of above 0.5 being accepted (see

Table 2). The final reliabilities for all scales were greater

than 0.70. The preliminary results indicated that the

psychometric properties of the scales were acceptable,

and as such it was appropriate to examine the relation-

ship between market orientation and export marketing

performance.

A multiple regression analysis was then conducted

to examine the relationship between export marketing

performance as a dependent variable and the three

different dimensions of market orientation (Table 3).

The analysis resulted in an R2 = 0.268 suggesting that

the three different dimensions of market orientation,

namely, customer orientation, competitor orientation,

and interfunctional coordination explained 26.8% of

TABLE 2 Summary of Confi rmatory Factor Analysis

Factor/Statement Name Cronbach’s Alpha Dominant Statements Factor Loadings

Factor 1Customer orientation

0.93 Competitive advantage is based on the understanding of export customer needs.Frequently assess commitment in serving export customer needs.Measure our export customers’ satisfaction systematically.Driven by export customer needs and satisfaction.Strategies are driven by increasing export customer value.Close attention to after-sales service.

0.880.860.840.830.820.80

Factor 2Competitor orientation

0.89 Respond rapidly to our export competitors’ actions that threaten us.Target export customers for achieving competitive advantage.Regularly discuss our export competitors’ strengths and weaknesses with all company units.Regularly share information about export competitors’ strategies.

0.910.840.82

0.73

Factor 3Interfunctional coordination

0.92 We do share resources among our fi rm’s units.All of our fi rm units understand how employees create export customer value.Our internal fi rm functions are integrated to serve well the export customer needs.Free communication about export customer information among all our fi rm’s units.

0.900.890.890.87

TABLE 3 Multiple Regression Analysis

Variable Alpha Coefficient T-Statistic Sig T

Customer orientation 0.93 0.262 2.587 0.011**

Competitor orientation 0.89 0.239 2.319 0.022**

Interfunctional coordination 0.92 0.177 1.982 0.050*

R2 = 0.268; n = 109; df = 7.*p < 0.10.**p < 0.05.

106 FEATURE ARTICLE


customer orientation, competitor orientation, and inter-

functional coordination. Each of the three dimensions of

market orientation influences export marketing perfor-

mance significantly and positively. Customer orientation

as a predictor variable is the strongest predictor of overall

export marketing performance for the Indonesian export

market ventures. This is followed by competitor orienta-

tion, and interfunctional coordination. It is important for

the management of Indonesian export market ventures to

be aware of these findings for export marketing success.

Therefore, for higher export marketing performance in

their export ventures, the management of Indonesian

export market ventures need to have a dedicated focus

on customer orientation. In other words, the higher the

firms’ customer orientation, the higher their export mar-

keting performance. The logic behind this contention is

that customer-oriented firms will have greater knowledge

of their customers’ needs and wants, and this knowledge

will enable management to better position the firm with

respect to its competitors, thereby yielding better market-

ing performance.

With respect to competitor orientation, the results

of this study suggest that competitor orientation signifi-

cantly and positively influences overall export market-

ing performance. This finding further suggests that the

higher the Indonesian export market venture’s competi-

tor orientation is, the higher its overall export marketing

performance will be. This is completely understandable

because competitor-oriented firms are aware of the

strengths and weaknesses of their competitors as well as

their long-term capabilities and strategies. Therefore, by

understanding future and current competitors’ strengths

and weaknesses, the firm is able to undertake relevant

actions to better position its products and services,

thereby creating superior value for its customers more

so than its competitors. This finding is also consistent

with previous research in a domestic context (Grinstein,

2008).

Finally, interfunctional coordination also signifi-

cantly and positively impacts overall export marketing

performance. This finding suggests that the higher the

Indonesian export market ventures’ interdepartmental

and interfunctional coordination is, the higher their

overall export marketing performance will be. Firms col-

lect information about their customers and competitors

and disseminate this information to different depart-

ments and for different functions in response to custom-

ers’ needs and wants. The efficiency with which such a

process is conducted makes a significant contribution

to the Indonesian export market ventures’ overall high

export marketing performance.

currently and in the future, are able to develop long-term

strategies that maximize the firm’s strengths and mini-

mize its weaknesses, enabling the firm to take advantage

of existing opportunities and minimize potential and cur-

rent competitor threats, thereby creating superior value

for customers and stakeholders alike. Such a strategic

process is the means by which firms can achieve a sustain-

able competitive advantage.

Market orientation has been theorized to have a sig-

nificant and positive effect on overall export marketing

performance. The results of this study confirm that a long-

term competitive advantage and superior performance

can be achieved by being equipped to respond to current

and future market needs (Grinstein, 2008; Singh, 2009).

This finding suggests that market orientation is a necessary

ingredient for successful export marketing performance.

The impact of market orientation on export marketing per-

formance in the Indonesian export market ventures is con-

sistent with previous research (Julian, 2011; Singh, 2009).

The findings of this study suggest that market ori-

entation is a three-dimensional construct consisting of

Market orientation has been theorized to have a signifi-cant and positive effect on overall export marketing performance. The results of this study confirm that a long-term competitive advantage and superior performance can be achieved by being equipped to respond to current and future market needs.



in a unified manner in order to create superior value for

their customers. To achieve this, export venture manage-

ment should encourage free and open communication

about their customers throughout all of the venture’s units;

have internal functions that are integrated, with their over-

all objective being to better serve customer needs; under-

stand how employees create export customer value; and

share resources among the export venture’s different units.

Conclusion

The present study has extended the literature on export

marketing performance and market orientation in sev-

eral areas. First, the results of this study suggest that

the construct of market orientation is three-dimen-

sional, namely, customer orientation, competitor orien-

tation, and interfunctional coordination, with all three

dimensions being significant predictors of overall export

marketing performance when measured by economic

indicators, strategic indicators, and a perceptual measure

of performance in the context of Indonesian export mar-

ket ventures. This finding supports much of the previous

strategic marketing and strategic management literature

(Grinstein, 2008; Singh, 2009) and is not surprising

given that market-oriented firms create superior value

for customers, enabling the firms to achieve a sustainable

competitive advantage, which in turn produces superior

performance. Second, the constructs developed here can

serve as a foundation for further research into export

marketing. Third, the study has contributed to a more

comprehensive understanding of the success factors in

export marketing, with empirical evidence being fur-

nished that market orientation is a key success factor in

export marketing and should be included in multivariate

models of export marketing performance (e.g., Singh,

2009). Finally, the study provides empirical evidence of

the impact of market orientation on export marketing

performance in a developing-country context, of which

there was a substantial void in the literature. As a result,

the study’s findings provide empirical support for the

notion that issues affecting export marketing success in

a developed-country context are also applicable to the

developing countries of Southeast Asia. Such a finding

will enable comparison of findings from a developed-

country versus a developing-country perspective.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

Prior to discussing the directions for future research, some

of the study’s limitations are noted. One of the limitations

Managerial Implications

The findings of this study should identify for manag-

ers of export market ventures generally but, especially

in the Indonesian and developing-country context the

importance of market orientation, as a driver of export

marketing performance. The study findings indicate that

better export venture performance can be achieved for

export ventures through the implementation of a mar-

ket orientation. As a result, managers of export ventures

will be encouraged to allocate substantial resources in

the development and implementation of a market ori-

entation for their export ventures. In the development

and implementation of a market orientation for the

management of export ventures, there are three factors

that require careful consideration. First, export venture

managers need to gather continuous information about

their export customers’ needs and wants, both currently

and in the future. Furthermore, in order to be able to

understand what their customers’ needs and wants are,

exporting firms should be driven by their customers’

needs and wants and the satisfaction of those needs and

wants; the management of export ventures should fre-

quently assess their commitment to serving those needs

and wants; management should also derive a competitive

advantage that is based on the understanding of their

customers’ needs and wants; and the focus for all export

management should be on increasing export customer

value. Furthermore, export management should mea-

sure export customers’ satisfaction systematically and pay

close attention to after-sales service. These ingredients

of customer orientation highlight the significance of the

human factor in international marketing and the impor-

tance of the relationship between customers and export

venture management for successful export marketing

performance (e.g., Czinkota & Samli, 2010).

Second, managers of export ventures must be able

to understand and identify the short-term strengths and

weaknesses and long-term capabilities and strategies of

both current and future competitors. In order to develop

these inherent abilities, export venture managers should

respond rapidly to competitors’ actions that threaten

them; they should regularly share information about

competitors’ strategies; they should regularly discuss com-

petitors’ strengths and weaknesses with all company units;

and they should specifically target export customers in

order to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage.

Finally, export venture managers must disseminate

and respond to the collected information about customers’

needs and wants together with information on competitors’

strengths and weaknesses, both currently and in the future,

108 FEATURE ARTICLE


evaluate the impact of market orientation in export mar-

keting. Future research should also replicate this study in

another developing country of Southeast Asia (e.g., Thai-

land) to see if the findings of this study can be validated

using another developing country as a sampling frame.

From a methodological perspective, a potential con-

cern might be that all measures are self-reported. While

regression modeling is a robust technique, future research

could utilize multiple means by which to measure the

variables in order to reduce common method variance.

Efforts were made in this study to minimize the problem

by pretesting the instrument and selecting measures that

minimize item overlap. While utmost care was taken in

the development and administration of the instrument,

respondents still might not interpret all questionnaire

items uniformly. Also, executives who were not fluent in

English may have been responsible for some self-selection

of returns, which could have been a source of some sample

bias. The sample size was also smaller than desirable.

Future research should replicate the study with a larger

sample. Finally, a replication of this study should examine

whether the relationships between the variables still would

hold true on an industry-by-industry basis. For example, it

may be worth considering the category of companies by

consumer goods and business-to-business operations, as the

scales may be more consumer company oriented in nature.

of this study is its cross-sectional design. The results from

this investigation should be considered in this light.

Taking this study as a point of departure, longitudinal

research is encouraged to examine the effect of market

orientation on export marketing performance over time.

As such, future research should continue to monitor and

While regression modeling is a robust technique, future research could utilize multi-ple means by which to mea-sure the variables in order to reduce common method variance.

Craig C. Julian, PhD, is a senior lecturer in marketing in the Southern Cross Business School at Southern Cross University in Coolangatta, Queensland. He has won competitive research grants, including a prestigious large ARC Discovery Grant, and has over 130 publications. His work has appeared in quality international journals such as the European Journal of Marketing, Journal of Small Business Management, Journal of Macromarketing, Journal of Business Research, and many others. His primary research interests are aligned to the international marketing discipline and include strategic alliances, international joint ventures, and export marketing.

Osman Mohamad, PhD, started his career in 1985 as a lecturer at Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) and subse-quently earned a PhD at the University of Strathclyde in 1994. He lectures in marketing subjects at the Graduate

School of Business, USM. His research interests include internationalization of fi rms and marketing-related topics.

He has published in the Journal of Business Research, Multinational Business Review, Journal of Product and Brand Management, International Journal of E-Business Research, and Journal of Transnational Management, to name a few. To date, 20 PhD and 6 DBA students have graduated under his supervision.

Zafar U. Ahmed, PhD, is currently serving as a professor of marketing and international business at the Lebanese

American University in Beirut, Lebanon. He has well over 10 years’ industry experience earned across Africa as an exporter and global entrepreneur and 20 years’ academic experience to his credit, accumulated at six different

universities across the United States. He has more than 140 world-class scholarly publications to his credit, has organized and presided over more than 10 global conferences, serves on the editorial review board of more than

10 journals, and serves as the founding president/CEO of the Academy of Global Business Advancement.



References

Aaby, N., & Slater, S. F. (1989). Management influences on export per-formance: A review of the empirical literature 1978–1988. International Marketing Review, 6(4), 7–26.

Abor, J. (2011). Do export status and export intensity increase firm performance? Thunderbird International Business Review, 53(1), 9–18.

Akyol, A., & Akehurst, G. (2003). An investigation of export perfor-mance variations related to corporate export market orientation. Euro-pean Business Review, 15(1), 5–19.

Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating non-response bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.

Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2005). Market orientation and the new product paradox. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22, 483–502.

Cadogan, J. W., & Cui, C. C. (2004). Chinese export agents’ adoption of export market-oriented behaviors: Measurement and performance relationship. Journal of Asia Pacific Marketing, 3(2), 21–37.

Cadogan, J. W., Cui, C. C., & Li, E. K. Y. (2003). Export market-oriented behavior and export performance: The moderating roles of competi-tive intensity and technological turbulence. International Marketing Review, 20, 493–513.

Cadogan, J. W., Cui, C. C., Morgan, R. E., & Story, V. M. (2005). Factors facilitating and impeding the development of export market-oriented behavior: A study of Hong Kong manufacturing exporters. Interna-tional Marketing Review, 20(5), 1–39.

Cadogan, J. W., Diamantopoulos, A., & Mortanges, C. P. (1999). A mea-sure of export market orientation: Scale development and cross-cultural validation. Journal of International Business Studies, 30, 689–707.

Cadogan, J. W., Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguw, J. A. (2002). Export market-oriented activities: Their antecedents and performance con-sequences. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3), 615–626.

Calantone, R. J., Kim, D., Schmidt, J. B., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2006). The influence of internal and external firm factors on international product adaptation strategy and export performance: A three country compari-son. Journal of Business Research, 59(2), 176–185.

Cavusgil, S. T., & Zou, S. (1994). Marketing strategy-performance relationship: An investigation of the empirical link in export market ventures. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 1–21.

Churchill, G. A., Jr. (1987). Marketing research: Methodological foun-dations (4th ed.). Chicago, IL: Dryden Press.

Czinkota, M. R., & Samli, A. C. (2010). The people dimension in modern international marketing: Neglected but critical. Thunderbird International Business Review, 52, 391–401.

Deshpande, R., & Farley, J. U. (1998). Measuring market orientation: Generalization and synthesis. Journal of Market Focused Management, 2, 213–232.

Deshpande, R., & Farley, J. U. (2004). Organizational culture, market orientation, innovativeness, and firm performance: An international research odyssey. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(1), 3–22.

Dhanaraj, C., & Beamish, P. W. (2003). A resource-based approach to the study of export performance. Journal of Small Business Manage-ment, 41, 242–261.

Ellis, P. (2006). Market orientation and performance: A meta-analysis and cross-national comparisons. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1089–1107.

Frambach, R., Prabhu, J., & Verhallen, T. (2003). The influence of busi-ness strategy on new product activity: The role of market orientation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20, 377–397.

Griffith, D. A., Jacobs, L., & Richey, R. G. (2006). Fitting strategy derived from strategic orientation to international contexts. Thunderbird Inter-national Business Review, 48(2), 239–262.

Grinstein, A. (2008). The effect of market orientation and its com-ponents on innovation consequences: A meta-analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(2), 166–173.

Groves, R. M. (1990). Survey errors and survey costs. New York, NY: Wiley.

Guan, J., & Ma, N. (2003). Innovative capability and export perfor-mance of Chinese firms. Technovation, 23, 737–747.

Hastings, H., & Saperstein, J. (2010). How Cisco creates new value via global customer service. Thunderbird International Business Review, 52(5), 419–427.

Hooley, G., Fahy, J., Greenley, G., Beracs, J., Fonfara, K., & Snoj, B. (2003). Market orientation in the service sector of the transition econo-mies of Central Europe. European Journal of Marketing, 37(1), 86–106.

Im, S., & Workman, J. (2004). Market orientation, creativity, and new product performance in high-technology firms. Journal of Marketing, 68, 114–132.

Indonesian Central Bureau of Statistics. (2005). Manufacturing Industry Directory, Government of Indonesia, Jakarta.

Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57, 53–70.

Johnson, J. L., Cullen, J. B., Sakano, T., & Bronson, J. W. (2001). Driv-ers and outcomes of parent company intervention in IJV management: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Research, 52, 35–49.

Julian C. C. (2003). Export marketing performance: A study of Thailand firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 41, 213–221.

Julian, C. C. (2010). The market orientation–marketing performance relationship: The empirical link in international joint ventures. Interna-tional Journal of Trade and Global Markets, 3, 414–431.

Julian, C. C. (2011). Discriminant analysis of antecedents of perfor-mance in international marketing: A study of Australian exporting com-panies. Journal of International Marketing and Exporting, 16(1), 1–25.

Julian, C. C., & O’Cass, A. (2004). The antecedents of export marketing performance: An Australian perspective. Journal of Asia Pacific Market-ing, 3(2/3), 99–113.

Kaynak, E., & Kuan, W. (1993). Environment, strategy, structure and performance in the context of export activity: An empirical study of Taiwanese manufacturing firms. Journal of Business Research, 27, 33–49.

Kirca, A. H., Jayachandra, S., & Bearden, W. O. (2005). Market orien-tation: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and impact on performance. Journal of Marketing, 69, 24–41.

Koch, M. J., & McGrath, R. G. (1996). Improving labour productivity: Human resource management policies do matter. Strategic Manage-ment Journal, 17, 335–354.

Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market orientation: The construct, research propositions and managerial implications. Journal of Market-ing, 54, 1–18.

Kotler, P., Adam, S., Brown, L., & Armstrong, G. (2008). Principles of marketing (4th ed.). Sydney, Australia: Prentice Hall.

Kropp, F., Lindsay, N. J., & Shoham, A. (2006). Entrepreneurial, market, and learning orientations and international entrepreneurial

S. Sefnedi, PhD, is a senior lecturer in marketing at Bung Hatta University in Indonesia. He completed his PhD at

the University Sains Malaysia (USM) in 2007. At Bung Hatta University, he teaches master’s degree courses on

marketing management and consumer behavior, and lectures in executive programs on those topics. His research

interests are in the areas of international marketing and consumer behavior.

110 FEATURE ARTICLE


Owusu-Frimpong, N., & Mmieh, F. (2007). An evaluation of the percep-tions and marketing practices of nontraditional exporters in Ghana. Thunderbird International Business Review, 49(1), 57–76.

Pangestu, M. (2004). Tantangan membangkitkan daya saing Indonesia dan sector ril. Economic Review Journal, 198, 1–6.

Pelham, A. M. (1997), Mediating influences on the relationship between market orientation and profitability in small industrial firms. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 5(3), 55–76.

Racela, O., Chaikittisilpa, C., & Thoumrungroje, A. (2007). Market orientation, international business relationships and perceived export performance. International Marketing Review, 24(2), 144–163.

Rose, G. M., & Shoham, A. (2002). Export performance and market ori-entation: Establishing an empirical link. Journal of Business Research, 55, 217–225.

Sin, L. Y. M., Tse, A. C. B., Yau, O. H. M., Chow, R. P. M., & Lee, J. S. Y. (2005). Market orientation, relationship market orientation, and busi-ness performance: The moderating effects of economic ideology and industry type. Journal of International Marketing, 13(1), 36–57.

Singh, S. (2009). How market orientation and outsourcing create capa-bility and impact business performance. Thunderbird International Business Review, 51, 457–471.

Soewandi, R. (2003). Strategi jitu mendongkrak ekspor. Beinews, 17, 28–29.

Weerawardena, J., O’Cass, A., & Julian, C. C. (2006). Does industry matter? Examining the role of industry structure and organizational learning in innovation and brand performance. Journal of Business Research, 59, 37–45.

Zairi, M., & Sinclair, D. (1995). Business process re-engineering and process management: A survey of current practice and future trends in integrated management. Business Process Re-Engineering and Manage-ment Journal, 1(1), 8–30.

Zou, S., Taylor, C., & Osland, G. (1998). The EXPERF Scale: A cross-national generalized export performance measure. Journal of Interna-tional Marketing, 6, 37–58.

business venture performance in South African firms. International Marketing Review, 23, 504–523.

Kyriakopoulos, K., & Moorman, C. (2004). Tradeoffs in marketing exploitation and exploration strategies: The overlooked role of market orientation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 219–240.

McDougall, P. P., Covin, J. G., Robinson, R. B., & Herron, L. (1994). The effects of industry growth and strategic breadth on new venture performance and strategy content. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 537–554.

Mintu-Wimsatt, A., & Calantone, R. (2000). Crossing the border: Test-ing a negotiation model among Canadian exporters. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 15, 340–353.

Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20–35.

Narver, J. C., Slater, S. F., & MacLachlan, D. (2004). Responsive and pro-active market orientation and new product success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21, 334–344.

O’Cass, A., & Julian, C. C. (2003). Examining firm and environmental influences on export marketing mix strategy and export performance of Australian exporters. European Journal of Marketing, 37(3/4), 366–384.

O’Cass, A., & Weerawardena, J. (2009). Examining the role of interna-tional entrepreneurship, innovation and international market perfor-mance in SME internationalization. European Journal of Marketing, 43, 1325–1348.

Oczkowski, E., & Farrell, M. A. (1998). Discriminating between mea-surement scales using non-parametric tests and two stage least squares estimators: The case of market orientation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15(4), 349–366.

Okpara, J. O. (2012). An exploratory study of international strategic choices for exporting firms in Nigeria. Thunderbird International Busi-ness Review, 54(4), 479–491.

julian et al-2014-thunderbird international business review

Documents

export venturesintroductiont

customer orientation

competitor orientation

empirical link

empirical evidence

developing country

wiley periodicals

developingcountry context