Content uploaded by Sven Reinecke
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sven Reinecke
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Task-Oriented Approach
A Contribution to Marketing Theory Concerning the Development of the Resource-Based View
Torsten Tomczak, Sven Reinecke, Silke Mühlmeier
Institute of Marketing and Retailing at the University of St. Gallen
Dufourstrasse 40a, CH-9000 St. Gallen, Tel. +41/71/2242820, Fax +41/71/2242857
www.imh.unisg.ch
St. Gallen, August 2007
Torsten Tomczak, Prof. Dr. rer. pol., Professor of Business Administration with special emphasis on
marketing at the University of St. Gallen and Director of the Institute of Marketing and Retailing
(Email: Torsten.Tomczak@unisg.ch).
Sven Reinecke, Prof. Dr. oec. HSG, Assistant Professor of Business Administration with special em-
phasis on marketing at the University of St. Gallen and Head of the “Marketing Performance Man-
agement” Competence Center at the Institute of Marketing and Retailing (Email:
Sven.Reinecke@unisg.ch).
Silke Mühlmeier, Dr. oec. HSG, Head of the "Strategic Marketing Research Group" at the Institute of
Marketing and Retailing and assistant lecturer at the University of St. Gallen (Email:
Silke.Muehlmeier@unisg.ch).
The most important lever to increase corporate value in future will continue to be market success. The
core statement of the task-oriented approach implies that companies attain strategic competitive ad-
vantages by aligning their competencies with the available market potential in the best possible man-
ner. In other words: companies achieve long-term success within a market when they are able to tap
into new product or customer potential respectively to exploit existing potential more effectively and
efficiently than their competitors do. Therefore, an integrated management system regarding the four
resulting core tasks (customer acquisition, customer retention, product innovation, and product main-
tenance) becomes necessary to generate sustainable value for the company. Within the context of this
working paper, the principle concepts of the task-oriented approach will be introduced and empiri-
cally tested.
- 2 -
Table of Contents
1
Introduction and Summary .........................................................................................................................4
2
The Theoretical Foundations of the Task-Oriented Approach................................................................4
2.1
Perspectives within the Field of Strategic Management ...........................................................................5
2.1.1
The Outside-in Perspective .............................................................................................................5
2.1.2
The Inside-out Perspective..............................................................................................................6
2.1.3
The Integration of Outside-in and Inside-out..................................................................................8
2.2
The Basic Concept of the Task-Oriented Approach..................................................................................9
3
Core Tasks of Marketing ...........................................................................................................................11
3.1
Utilizing Customer Potential: Customer Acquisition and Customer Retention......................................11
3.1.1
Customer Acquisition: Tapping into Customer Potential.............................................................11
3.1.2
Customer Retention: Exploiting Customer Potential....................................................................12
3.2
Utilizing Product Potential: Product Innovation and Maintenance.........................................................12
3.2.1
Product Innovation: Tapping into Product Potential.....................................................................12
3.2.2
Product Maintenance: Exploiting Product Potential.....................................................................13
3.3
Specific Competencies to Fulfill Core Tasks ..........................................................................................14
4
The Coordination of Market Potential and Competencies.....................................................................17
5
Integrating Core Tasks...............................................................................................................................19
5.1
Types of Core Task Profiles ....................................................................................................................19
5.2
Superior Core Task Profiles ....................................................................................................................20
6
Empirical Findings .....................................................................................................................................23
6.1
Design of the Data Collection .................................................................................................................23
6.2
Descriptive Analysis................................................................................................................................23
6.3
Summary and Discussion of the Empirical Findings ..............................................................................25
7
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................26
Endnotes .................................................................................................................................................................27
References ..............................................................................................................................................................28
- 3 -
Table of Figures
F
IGURE
1:
S
UMMARY OF THE CORE TASKS IN MARKETING
.........................................................................................4
F
IGURE
2:
R
ELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RESOURCE HETEROGENEITY
,
VALUABLENESS
,
SCARCITY
,
IMPERFECT
IMITABILITY
,
DIFFICULTY OF SUBSTITUTION
,
AND SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
. .................7
F
IGURE
3:
M
ARKET POTENTIAL AND NEEDS
...............................................................................................................9
F
IGURE
4:
C
OMPETENCIES AND CORE TASKS
...........................................................................................................11
F
IGURE
5:
O
PTIONS FOR GROWTH AND PROFIT
.........................................................................................................14
F
IGURE
6:
S
PECIFIC COMPETENCIES TO FULFILL CORE TASKS
..................................................................................16
F
IGURE
7:
M
ARKET POTENTIAL COMPETENCIES MATRIX
.........................................................................................17
F
IGURE
8:
F
INANCIAL TARGET SYSTEM
....................................................................................................................18
F
IGURE
9:
T
YPOLOGY EXAMPLE FOR VARIOUS CORE TASK PROFILES
.....................................................................19
F
IGURE
10:
S
UPERIOR
C
ORE
T
ASK
P
ROFILES
...........................................................................................................22
F
IGURE
11:
E
MPIRICAL FREQUENCY OF THE CORE TASK PROFILES
..........................................................................24
F
IGURE
12:
R
ELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CORE TASK PROFILES AND SUCCESS
.............................................................25
- 4 -
1 Introduction and Summary
Increasing the shareholder value (Ehrbar 1999; Rappaport 1998, 1986) is one of the main challenges
for management at the beginning of the 3rd Millennium. Exploiting all internal and external potential
of a company to increase its value is placed center stage within strategic management. Besides exploit-
ing market potential, companies have to utilize the potential of procurement, information management,
human resources, cooperation, take-over, organization and much more. Strategies of diversification,
disinvestment, restructuring and financial engineering will continue to increase in importance (see
Gomez 1999, 1993, p. 9).
Besides the diversity of options presented, the most important lever to increase corporate value in fu-
ture will continue to be market success – expressed in terms of gain in market share, growth in sales,
flow of funds, and improvements in profit. Only companies which succeed in continually growing in
terms of sales and real profit returns will be in a position to increase their corporate value in a sustain-
able way and, thus, to 'survive' (von Krogh/ Cusumano 2001, p. 88; Timmons 1998, p. 14).
By focusing on what is known as the core tasks of marketing, the task-oriented approach
(Tomczak/Reinecke 1999, 1996) puts the basic generators of growth and profit as well as the man-
agement of competencies, required to take advantage of them, into the center of strategic marketing
planning.
1
In brief, there are four sources of growth and profit respectively four core tasks to be differ-
entiated. These are presented in Figure 1 below. Thereafter, companies can achieve growth and profit
targets by acquiring new customers and/or by increasing the price willingness, the buying frequency
and intensity, as well as the cross selling among present customers. Furthermore, they can try to intro-
duce new products into the market and/or extend and optimize the life cycles of existing products.
The task-oriented perception in marketing is in no way ‘revolutionary’. It ties in with existing concepts
such as the one of Ansoff (1965), and, hence, complies with the management thinking in categories
such as sales growth and profit increase. Neither are any of the four core tasks (customer acquisition
and retention, product innovation and maintenance) basically new. What is guiding and innovative is
the explicit focus on dealing with customers and product potential, as well as the postulation to match
these with the competencies of a company in the best possible manner. According to this concept,
market-oriented business management is to be understood as an integrated management of the four
core tasks.
Classifica-
tion
Growth or Profit
Source
Core Task Approaches
Customer-
Acquisition
Future
Customers
Tapping into
Customer Potential
• Winning Non-Users
• Winning Customers from the Compe-
tition
Customer-
Retention
Present
Customers
Exploiting
Customer Potential
• Customer Retention
• Customer Penetration
Product
Innovation
New
Products
Tapping into
Product Potential
• Developing and Introducing Real
Market Novelties
• Developing and Introducing Imita-
tions
Product
Maintenance
Existing
Products
Exploiting
Product Potential
• Product Preservation
• Product Expansion
Figure 1: Summary of the core tasks in marketing
2 The Theoretical Foundations of the Task-Oriented Approach
As revealed in the following, the task-oriented approach constitutes a contribution to the marketing
theory concerning the knowledge-based view, an independent advancement of the resource-based
- 5 -
view. At its heart, the task-oriented approach deals with the specific competencies required by a com-
pany to utilize market potential more effectively and efficiently than their competitors do.
For this reason, the central concepts and terms of the ‘classical’ marketing approach as well as those of
the industry-economic competitive-forces approach, on the one hand, and the resource- respectively
knowledge-based view, on the other, will be discussed initially. In a second step, the constructs of
market potential, competencies and core tasks - all essential to the task-oriented approach - will be
further defined and classified.
2.1 Perspectives within the Field of Strategic Management
The discourse within the field of strategic management in recent years has been dominated by three
theoretical perspectives (see Madhok 2002; Spanos/Lioukas 2001; Börner 2000; Teece/Pisano/Shuen
1997; Rasche/Wolfrum 1994, among others): the new institution-economy, the outside-in perspective,
and the inside-out perspective.
Property rights, principal-agent relations and transaction-costs are subjects of the new institution econ-
omy. According to the transaction cost theory (see Williamson 1985; Williamson 1975; Richardson
1972; Coase 1937), the central challenge of an economy is the coordination among commercial sub-
jects involved in trade. Williamson, the most prominent proponent of this theory, assumes that differ-
ent ways coordination cannot be understood sufficiently without considering coordination costs, i.e.
transaction costs (Plinke/Söllner 2000, p. 62; Williamson 1985; Williamson 1975).
Besides the new institution economy, the discussion within the field of strategic management is domi-
nated by an outside-in perspective, which can primarily be assigned to the 'classical' marketing respec-
tively the competitive-forces approach (Porter 1980); as well as by an inside-out perspective. The lat-
ter mostly corresponds to what is referred as the 'resource-based view' (see Barney 1999, 1992, 1991;
Wernerfelt 1995, 1984; Penrose 1959; Selznick 1957 among others), and its enhancements.
What is common to both perspectives is the question of how companies can achieve and maintain
competitive advantages (Rumelt/Schendel/Teece 1994). However, methods suggested to achieve those
competitive advantages differ and are controversially discussed among their respective proponents
(see the critical analysis by Rasche/Wolfrum 1994, pp. 510). In simple terms, the outside-in perspec-
tive postulates to first look for an attractive market and then to come up with the resources required to
achieve competitive advantages within this market; whereas the inside-out perspective suggests to first
analyze one's own capabilities and resources and then to choose the right market to utilize them to the
best effect. The difference between those two perspectives lies in prioritization: in the first case, the
attractiveness of the market is taken as the basis for achieving competitive advantages; in the second,
it is the specificness of the resources.
2.1.1 The Outside-in Perspective
Both the ‘classical’ marketing approach and the ‘competitive forces approach’ primarily observe (not
exclusively however) the opportunities and risks offered by the market. The ‘classical’ marketing
approach is first of all geared to the needs, problems, desires, expectations and demands of the cus-
tomer (Meffert 1977; Weinhold-Stünzi 1964; Levitt 1960; Schäfer 1928). Thus, all commercial activi-
ties have to be aligned with the specific requirements of a market and only those companies are ex-
pected to realize competitive advantages, which conduct every job with customer's benefit in mind.
Especially the empirical work of Fritz (1997) and Homburg (1995) has proven the substantial contri-
bution of market- respectively customer-orientation to corporate success. Slater and Narver (1995, p.
67) define 'market-orientation' as "the culture that (1) places the highest priority on the profitable crea-
tion and maintenance of superior customer value while considering the interests of other key stake-
holders; and (2) provides norms for behavior regarding the organizational development of and respon-
siveness to marketing information" (see Deshpandé/Farley/Webster 1993; Kohli/Jaworski 1990,
Narver/Slater 1990 and Shapiro 1988).
- 6 -
Based on the awareness that an exclusive customer orientation falls too short, a broader and much
more competition oriented perspective took hold in strategic management during the 1980s (Meffert
1994, p. 4). According to the 'Structure-Conduct-Performance' hypothesis of the industry-economy,
industry attractiveness takes center stage within Porter's (1980) competitive forces approach. Industy
attractiveness is largely determined by the intensity of competition, which, in turn, depends on the
behavior of several competitive forces (suppliers, customers, direct and new competitors, and substitu-
tion competition) (Porter 1988, 1986). Competitive advantage, i.e. product differentiation or cost ad-
vantage should be aimed for within the most attractive markets. Thus, the focus lies no longer on cus-
tomers alone, but also on industries and competitors – peculiarities of the company itself yet remain of
secondary importance.
The main critical point concerning the outside-in perspective consists in its exclusive focus on external
variables of influence (Hunt/Lambe 2000; Rasche 1994, p. 3). It does not allow any specific conclu-
sions regarding the strategic arrangement of the inner world of a company. As a result, the company
itself is basically dealt with as a black box (Wolfsteiner 1995, p. 40).
2.1.2 The Inside-out Perspective
The Resource-based View
The resource-based view implies an inside-out orientation. It strongly prioritizes the development and
efficient utilization of company-specific assets. According to the resource-based view, company suc-
cess is primarily rests upon a superior asset base.
Within the framework of the resource-oriented approach, only those assets containing a company-
specific component are regarded as resources (Rasche 1994, p. 38). Wernerfelt, for instance reduces
the term 'resource' to the company-specific level and defines resources as follows: “More formally, a
company's resources at any given time could be defined as those (tangible and intangible) assets which
are tied semi-permanently to the company” (Wernerfelt 1984, p. 172). Tangible resources are also
defined as visible assets, while intangible resources are defined as invisible assets (Itami/Roehl 1987).
Resources in the form of visible assets are, for example, production units, capital equipment, computer
systems, or even a distribution network specific to the company. Patents, licenses, the skills of indi-
vidual members of the workforce as well as a corporate culture, for example, count as invisible assets
(Rühli 1995, p. 96 f.; Wolfrum/Rasche 1993, p. 66; Grant 1991a, p. 118).
2
Two basic assumptions
concerning the resource-based view need to be emphasized (Barney 1991, p. 101):
1) The assumption of resource heterogeneity: In contrast to the outside-in approach, the proponents of
the resource-based view presume heterogeneous resource settings among companies. The reason given
for such asymmetric resource settings is the imperfection of factor markets, which leads to a second
premise.
2) The assumption of resource immobility: Another assumption of the resource-based view is the im-
mobility of resources. Whereas mobile resources are characterized by the fact that they can be largely
bought and sold on factor markets, no or only imperfect factor markets exist for immobile resources.
This is because immobile resources are not transferable, or only to a certain degree.
Based on these suppositions, a company, according to Barney (1991, p. 102), holds a competitive ad-
vantage, "[...] when it is implementing a value creating strategy not simultaneously being implemented
by any current or potential competitors." If, in addition, competitors are not able to duplicate the un-
derlying success factors of such a strategy, competitive advantage can be regarded as sustainable
(Barney 1991, p. 102). However, not all companies are in a position to realize sustainable competitive
advantages. This is because resources have to hold specific characteristics to serve as a basis for com-
petitive advantages (Barney 1991, p. 105 ff; similar to Grant 1991a, pp. 111; Grant 1991b, pp. 123).
One such characteristic is valuableness. Furthermore, resources need to be scarce and only imperfect
imitatable within the environment of current and potential competitors. Latter means that other com-
- 7 -
Unternehmens-
ressourcen -
heterogenität
Unternehmens-
ressourcen -
Heterogenity
of corporate
resources
Immobility
of
corporate
resources
Werthaltigkeit
Knappheit
Begrenzte Imitierbarkeit
Schwere Substituierbarkeit
Resources:
- valuable
- rare
- imperfect imitable
- non-substitutable
Nachhaltiger
Wettbewerbs-
vorteil
Sustainable
competitive
advantage
Unternehmens-
ressourcen -
heterogenität
Unternehmens-
ressourcen -
Heterogenity
of corporate
resources
Immobility
of
corporate
resources
Werthaltigkeit
Knappheit
Begrenzte Imitierbarkeit
Schwere Substituierbarkeit
Resources:
- valuable
- rare
- imperfect imitable
- non-substitutable
Nachhaltiger
Wettbewerbs-
vorteil
Sustainable
competitive
advantage
panies cannot copy resources easily (Williams 1992; Dierickx/Cool 1990). Ultimately, resources need
to be non-substitutable, because substitution by other resources threatens the uniqueness of the cus-
tomer's benefit a resource provides (Dierickx/Cool 1989, p. 1509).
The relationship between these individual requirements for resources and sustainable competitive ad-
vantage is presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Relationship between resource heterogeneity, valuableness, scarcity, imperfect imitability,
difficulty of substitution, and sustainable competitive advantage.
(Source: based on Barney 1991, p. 112)
Summarized, according to the resource-oriented approach, sustainable competitive advantage requires
a unique market position, based on the availability strategically relevant resources. These resources
must 'immune' to imitation and substitution while possessing a certain corporate specificness (Rasche
1994, p. 90).
The resource-based view, as well as the outside-in perspective, constitutes an elementary theoretical
foundation within the field of strategic management. However, it needs further development. For in-
stance, it is not yet clear how valuable resources actually develop. The question arises, whether such a
process can be understood adequately within the framework of the resource-based view alone. Fur-
thermore, sustainable competitive advantages are attributed to individual, isolated resources; fre-
quently, however, resources become only productive when being combined with other resources and,
thus, complement each another (Müller-Stewens/Lechner 2001, pp. 278).
The Knowledge-Based View
The knowledge-based view is an independent advancement of the resource-oriented approach. While
no significant importance is attributed to 'knowledge' as a resource within the resource-based view, it
becomes the decisive characteristic of a company within the knowledge-based view.
Non-tangible assets, which are invisible (Itami/Roehl 1987) and imperceptible (Hall 1994, 1993,
1992), frequently imply strategically relevant characteristics. The main intangible resource to be men-
tioned here is knowledge. Licenses and patents, for instance, are based on knowledge; personal and
organizational networks are formed and fostered by transfers of knowledge. Even databases can be
interpreted as coded knowledge. Since knowledge constitutes a valuable and only partially imitatable
resource, which is also difficult to transfer (especially tacit knowledge), it plays an important role con-
cerning the explanation of sustainable competitive advantages (see von Krogh/Venzin 1995, p. 420
and Nonaka/Toyama/Konno 2000; Bierly/Chakrabarti 1996; Conner/Prahalad 1996; Grant 1996; Lie-
beskind 1996; Spender/Grant 1996; Collis/Montgomery 1995 and Boos/Jarmai 1994).
As a consequence, companies are no longer regarded as a bundle of resources, but as bodies of knowl-
edge (Spender 1989, p. 185). This knowledge has to be aligned with the company's task system in
order to realize competitive advantage. Von Krogh/Roos defines such a coordination of knowledge
and tasks as competencies: "The competence concept is simply the synthesis of a company’s particular
task and knowledge systems (competentia (lat.) = agreement between task and knowledge)" (von
- 8 -
Krogh/Roos 1992, p. 424). Based on their respective knowledge base, competencies enable companies
to perform in a way that is perceived as beneficial by the customer (see von Krogh/Venzin/Rogulic
1997, p. 121).
Considered critically, the knowledge-based view stands out because it takes a dynamic perspective.
Knowledge is dynamic, since it is created in social interactions among individuals, groups, depart-
ments, divisions and organizations (von Krogh/Nonaka/Aben 2001, p. 426; Nonaka/Toyama/Konno
2000, pp. 7; von Krogh/Roos 1992, p. 424). In contrast to other approaches, the knowledge-oriented
perspective provides a reasonable and feasible operationalization of the term 'competence'. Hence, it
provides new insights regarding the microstructures of competencies: The complexity of competencies
depends on the intensity of the integrated knowledge as well as on the complexity of the task system.
The analysis of competencies reveals under which conditions competitive advantage can be realized
and maintained. For instance, companies like Marks and Spencer, McDonald’s and Toyota are in a
position to use their competencies so effectively that they replicate internally. Their success is based
on the initial identification of superior business models as well as on the systemization and replication
of these business models.
However, companies need to built up barriers to protect themselves from potential rivals. The more
intensive the integrated knowledge, the more complex the tasks, and the more demanding the integra-
tion mechanism of both of these components, the more difficult it becomes to copy a competence
(Grant 1997, p. 452). Altogether, the concentration on knowledge as the decisive characteristic can
help searching at the right places. Nevertheless, knowledge is an omnipresent phenomenon within
companies, and, thus, an exclusive focus on knowledge bears the risk of valuing everything within a
company as 'relevant to knowledge'. The challenge here is to separate what is relevant from what is
irrelevant in terms of knowledge (Müller-Stewens/Lechner 2001, p. 283).
2.1.3 The Integration of Outside-in and Inside-out
Altogether, the outside-in and the inside-out perspective in no way constitute mutually exclusive con-
cepts (also Knyphausen 1993). The integrated consideration of both perspectives allows new and fruit-
ful ways of fostering strategic management as well as marketing science in particular.
Such an integrated perspective has always been emphasized within German business literature, even
though the terminologies used vary. According to Gälweiler (1987), potential for strategic success
results from the comparison of market constellations and the internal factors of a company. Pümpin
(1986, p. 34) speaks about strategic positions of success. With this, he describes a state within the
company consciously created by the development of capabilities. According to Pümpin, these strategic
positions of success permit the realization of above average profits in the long run. Also Kirsch (1991,
p. 17) emphasizes the combination of both perspectives as the precondition for success: “In order to
unfold a contribution to success, corporate capabilities and resources, which correlate with market
chances, must be transformed into competitive advantages from the perspective of the customer.” Fur-
thermore, Bleicher (1996) combines the two perspectives within the framework of the St. Gallen Man-
agement Concept. He differentiates technology potential, market potential, and management potential
as those kinds of potential that sustainably influence corporate development. Thereby technology and
management (human) potential are regarded as resource potential, whereas market potential consti-
tutes customer potential.
Against the background of the knowledge-based view, the task-oriented approach asks for the types of
competencies required to utilize specific market potential - a question so far only been marginally dis-
cussed in management literature. The task-oriented approach makes an important contribution to clari-
fying the question of how competencies can be combined to meet market requirements in the best
possible way. This includes both customer acquisition and the internal development of new competen-
cies, as well as the market-oriented bundling and integration of existing competencies.
- 9 -
2.2 The Basic Concept of the Task-Oriented Approach
Market potential, core tasks and competencies are the main constructs of the task-oriented approach.
In order to be able to tap into specific market potential, certain core tasks (customer acquisition, cus-
tomer retention, product innovation, and product maintenance) need to be performed, which, in turn,
requires the availability of certain competencies (outside-in perspective). Formulated the other way
around: Due to the fact that a company is able to link and align knowledge with task systems, it is able
to utilize certain market potential (inside out perspective) (von Krogh/Roos 1995; von Krogh/Roos
1992).
Market Potential
Within the framework of the task-oriented approach
3
the construct market potential is understood in a
broad way. It contains all kind of needs a company (or business unit) may be able to satisfy in future.
Two aspects need to be highlighted here:
1. The needs of (potential) customers form the most decisive point of reference. This is because,
at least hypothetically, every need can be transformed into demand by using appropriate mar-
keting measures (provided that there is purchasing power). Generally, a need is understood as
the feeling underlying the striving for the elimination of shortage. This well-established defini-
tion (see Balderjahn 1995, Weinhold-Stünzi 1991, p. 127) goes back to Hermann (1870).
4
Current and latent (with regard to a specific market: future) needs have to be differentiated
(Geschka/Eggert-Kipfelstuhl 1994). Current needs are needs that exist presently. Customers
are aware of them and they are satisfied either one's own products und services or by those of
competitors. Latent needs do also exist at present, but are, with regard to a specific market, not
yet relevant to the customer. These needs become satisfied within (partially immature) substi-
tution markets.
2. In order to be able to utilize market potential, companies do compete – either based on direct
cutthroat competition or based on indirect substitution competition. However, they compete
for purchasing power.
Two forms of market potential need to be differentiated (also refer to Figure 3): customer potential and
product potential.
Needs
Customers
=
„Bearing
needs“
Product
=
„Satisfying
needs
“
Market potential
Needs
Customers
=
„Bearing
needs“
Product
=
„Satisfying
needs
“
Market potential
Figure 3: Market potential and needs
Customer Potential
To be able to measure customer potential, customer groups with specific needs have to be identified.
Metaphorically speaking, customers can be characterized as 'bearers of needs', who differ in terms of
their needs and their purchasing power. The relevance of a need differs between customers and de-
pends on the situation of purchase and consumption respectively usage. Thus, for instance, within the
- 10 -
automotive market the need for 'steering dynamics' plays a central role for a specific group of cus-
tomer (typical BMW and Porsche drivers); for other target groups (typical Volvo and Saab drivers),
however, this need is of minor importance.
With regard to a specific customer, the characteristic of a certain need can also vary over time (days,
years, decades). There are customers who eat healthily in the morning (cereals, for instance), tend to
eat convenience food at lunchtime (for instance, a sandwich) and behave hedonistic in the evening
(e.g. by visiting a five star restaurant, for instance) (keyword: phenomenon of the 'hybrid' customer).
It can be stated that:
• the higher the number of customers sharing a need (bearers of a need),
• the more subjectively relevant a need is, and
• the more purchasing power the respective bearers of a need have,
the higher customer potential.
If just the size of a market and the wish for mobility would have been considered, the customer poten-
tial for motor cars in the Peoples Republic of China, for example, were to be estimated as extremely
high. However, due to the generally low purchasing power the actual customer potential in much
lower there.
Product Potential
The point here is to determine which needs can potentially be satisfied by specific products. Products
– usually combinations of tangible assets, services and rights – can also be understood as 'need satisfi-
ers'. Due to their specific attributes, they are potentially in the position to satisfy a more or less broad
spectrum of needs.
In principle, all products and services can be the object of a need. Needs in reality are never pure and
consistent, but rather complex constructs (Lisowsky 1968, p. 7 and p. 79). The means-end chain ap-
proach covers this phenomenon clearly (Kuss/Tomczak 2000; Kuss 1994; Olson/Reynolds 1983
among others), by revealing that various functional and psychosocial consequences (holding weight,
good looks, health) can be derived from the attributes of a product (e.g. a low calorie refreshing drink).
These consequences (= means), in turn, serve to realize superordinate individual value concepts (=
ends), such as self-confidence or self-respect (see Lisowsky 1968, pp. 86). It is all about product po-
tential, which is to be utilized based on adequate company measures.
The product potential is higher,
- the more diverse the needs a product can satisfy and
- the higher the subjective significance of these needs, compared to others.
The enormous sum of approximately EUR 50 billion paid for UMTS licenses in Germany in 2000
demonstrates how high companies like Deutsche Telekom or France Telecom/Mobilcom have consid-
ered the product potential of this technology to be. These companies assumed that with the aid of
UMTS technology an enormous range of needs could be satisfied for a large variety of customers.
Competencies and Core Tasks
To be in the position to utilize market potential, i.e. customer and product potential, companies require
specific competencies; on the one hand, to tap into new potential (innovation), and on the other, to
exploit potential already tapped into (persistence) (see Figure 4). Thus, the following four types of
competence build the center of attention within market-oriented strategic management:
• customer acquisition competence (the ability to tap into customer potential),
• customer retention competence (the ability to exploit customer potential),
- 11 -
• product innovation competence (the ability to tap into product potential), and
• product maintenance competence (the ability to exploit product potential).
Customers
Products
Market Potential
Developing
customer potential
„Customer acquisition“
Developing
product potential
„Product innovation“
Exploiting
customer potential
„Customer retention“
Exploiting
product potential
„Product maintenance“
Developing
Potential
Exploiting
Potential
Customers
Products
Market Potential
Developing
customer potential
„Customer acquisition“
Developing
product potential
„Product innovation“
Exploiting
customer potential
„Customer retention“
Exploiting
product potential
„Product maintenance“
Developing
Potential
Exploiting
Potential
Figure 4: Competencies and core tasks
(Source: based on Tomczak/Reinecke 1999, p. 208)
Within the following section, the individual core tasks and the competencies required to achieve them
will be explained in more detail.
3 Core Tasks of Marketing
3.1 Utilizing Customer Potential: Customer Acquisition and Customer Retention
3.1.1 Customer Acquisition: Tapping into Customer Potential
The term ‘customer acquisition’ stands for the task of tapping into new customer potential. This can
happen, for instance, by setting up a new distribution channel, staging a sales promotion action, inter-
nationalizing or expanding field sales. The computer suppliers Compaq and Dell as well as Citibank,
for instance, are considered as benchmarks for exemplary customer acquisition within their respective
industries (Tomczak/Reinecke 1998).
Two basic strategies to acquire customers can be differentiated (Karg 2001; Tomczak/Karg 1999):
• addressing non-users and
• enticing customers away from competitors.
Customers who have not yet purchased or made use of certain products or services are referred as non-
users. Non-users hold either a latent or an unsatisfied current need concerning such a product or ser-
vice. Altogether, suppliers rather compete by substituting other kind products or services when ad-
dressing non-users. The essential task is to convince the respective customer that a need, which has so
far been latent, is a relevant one which has to be taken into account when making a buying decision.
To be able to activate latent needs, the circumstances under which a customer’s need occurs have to be
understood. Which steps concretely have to be taken, depends, among other things, on the innovative-
ness of the non-users addressed and on the behavior of competitors (how they try to activate latent
needs) (Kotler/Bliemel 1999, p. 325; Kroeber-Riel/Weinberg 1999, pp. 90; O'Shaughnessy 1987, pp.
- 12 -
25). To win potential customers with current, but unsatisfied needs, a supplier must try to remove all
those barriers (such as financial restrictions) keeping customers from making purchases.
In order to entice customers away from competitors another approach is required. In saturated markets,
where cutthroat competition is common, competitors implement customer retention strategies (Diller
1996, p. 81; Dittrich 2002; Meffert 2005, p. 147;). The principal task is to convince customers of the
relative advantages of one's own services ('better or cheaper principle'). An exact understanding of the
determining factors of customer retention (see also the comments concerning customer retention), of
the reasons for changing as well as of the right point in time is essential for successfully performing
this form of customer acquisition.
3.1.2 Customer Retention: Exploiting Customer Potential
Concerning 'customer retention' the central question is how to exploit customer potential, which has
already been tapped into (see Dittrich 2002 in particular). In order to exploit customer potential, com-
panies need to optimize psychological (customer satisfaction, trust) and factual, i.e. technological,
legal and economical barriers of change for selected customer groups. According to the estimation of
industry insiders, companies like Lego, Bosch, Allianz, Aldi and IBM count as excellent 'customer
retainers' (Tomczak/Reinecke 1998). Within the field of customer retention, the two approaches can be
distinguished:
• Retention: Customer potential can be exploited by crating continuous re-purchases, avoiding mi-
gration to competitors and recover customers. In order to achieve this, both proactive measures,
such as increasing customer satisfaction (Dittrich 2002) and reactive measures, such as profes-
sional complaints management (Stauss/Seidel 2007) or systematic customer recovery manage-
ment are required (Stauss 1997; 2000).
• Penetration: Customer relationships can also be upgraded by better exploiting a customer's will-
ingness to pay, by increasing re-purchasing as well as by creating and increasing effect purchases
and cross selling. Effect purchases can result from direct purchasing links between the initial prod-
uct and other services (such as the purchase of a Barbie Doll and the subsequent purchase of oth-
ers dolls and accessories). Cross-selling means to generate additional purchases (for example: the
sale of a life assurance to someone, who, by then, has only purchased property insurances such as
car insurances).
3.2 Utilizing Product Potential: Product Innovation and Maintenance
3.2.1 Product Innovation: Tapping into Product Potential
The core task 'product innovation' deals with the development of product potential. It comprises all
measures taken to come up with new problem solutions and successfully place them on the market. An
innovation has to be based on unique resources or capabilities. This, for instance, can be a brand
(Marlboro, Nivea), investment in research & development (SAP), a specific corporate culture (3M), or
a core product (the synthetic PTFE [Polytetrafluorethylene] from Gore). Best practice companies con-
cerning product innovation are the confectionary producer Ferrero, the toy manufacturer Playmobil
and the computer company Hewlett Packard (Tomczak/Reinecke 1998).
Two directions of impact can be distinguished with regard to this core task. On the one hand, a com-
pany can develop and introduce real market novelties ('new to the world'), or, on the other, copy ser-
vices already found in the market by supplying imitations. Whereas really new, innovative services are
mainly based on internal factors and resources, such as know-how regarding a new technology, the
services supplied by competitors and the own ability to copy or even upgrade them become essential
when creating imitations.
Concerning the evaluation of the degree of novelty, it makes sense to differentiate between a market
perspective and a company perspective. Market novelties (at extreme case 'new to the world' offers)
- 13 -
are principally new problems solutions (either a challenge is dealt with in a totally new way or a need
becomes satisfied for which no concept existed before). Novelties to the company (in an extreme case
imitations), in contrast, also contain such services which only differ in design or in a slightly modified
functionality from similar services already found within the market (Nieschlag/Dichtl/Hörschgen
2002, pp. 692). In these cases, the company applies technical improvements for the first time, but
without considering whether other companies have done so before (Witte 1973, p. 3).
Rather flat hierarchies and a participatory management style characterize excellent innovators like
Apple, Gore and 3M. At innovative companies workforce is usually extremely well educated and
characterized by a relatively high degree of intrinsic motivation.
3.2.2 Product Maintenance: Exploiting Product Potential
If a company has succeeded in tapping into potential with new offers, according to the core task 'prod-
uct maintenance' it is further necessary to exploit this potential (Tomczak et al. 2007). The objective
here is to keep the respective problem solution successfully within the market for as long and as com-
prehensively as possible (keyword: extension and optimization of the product lifecycle) in order to
generate sustainable value. Referring to this, the building security technicians Siemens-Cerberus, the
Swiss retailer Migros, BMW, the confectionary producers Masterfoods and Adidas are all companies,
which are considered leaders within their respective industries (Tomczak/Reinecke 1998). Two ap-
proaches are critical here (Kaetzke/Tomczak 2000, p. 19):
•
The preservation of product potential: Modification and revitalization represent two opportunities
for a company to preserve an existing service. Modification means a marginal adaptation of a ser-
vice already existing within the market, whereby the service frequently remains almost completely
unchanged (development of the VW Golf during the past 30 years). If existing values become re-
freshed, one speaks of revitalization. Depending on the initial position and the targeted aim, revi-
talization may not only sustain but also increase product potential.
•
Expansion of product potential: Variation, upselling, bundling and multiplication are all options to
expand product potential. Variation implies to generate or increase sales of similar services.
Though, besides the service version already found within the market additional versions (varia-
tions) of this service are introduced (different versions of the BMW 3 series, for instance)
5
. Up-
selling attempts to ad value by selling more expensive versions of a product or service (for exam-
ple: the replacement of the Nivea-Créme by the premium quality Nivea face cream). In contrast to
this, bundling aims at generating or increasing sales by combining 'old' products or services with
complementary products or (additional) services. This option is based on the product and service
system approach (Belz et al. 1997, pp. 14, 1991). Multiplication means to apply existing service
concepts repeatedly and systematically to new markets (see von Krogh/Cusumano 2001, who
characterize this using the terms 'scaling' and 'duplicating'). Sales in new markets are to be gener-
ated or increased (for example: the distribution of the fast-food concept designed by McDonald’s
throughout the world, decades ago) (Tomczak et al. 2007).
In order to use market potentials systematically an integrated approach oriented towards the four core
tasks is necessary. The introduced options, which are generally available to generate growth and
profit, are presented in figure 5.
- 14 -
Exploiting
potential
Customer
potential
Developing
potential
Product
potential
Competencies
Customer acquisition
Product innovation
Product maintenance
Nonuser
Retention
Penetration
Market
novelty
Imitation
Expansion
Preservation
Competitor‘s
customer
Customer retention
Exploiting
potential
Customer
potential
Developing
potential
Product
potential
Competencies
Customer acquisition
Product innovation
Product maintenance
Nonuser
Retention
Penetration
Market
novelty
Imitation
Expansion
Preservation
Competitor‘s
customer
Customer retention
Figure 5: Options for growth and profit
3.3 Specific Competencies to Fulfill Core Tasks
Within the last paragraph it has been illustrated how to derive growth options using market potential
analysis and core tasks. In order to utilize these growth options a company needs certain competencies
(see the competencies of customer acquisition and retention as well as product innovation and mainte-
nance, mentioned above). Internally available competencies can be identified by means of a compe-
tence analysis.
The following exemplary competencies, which conduce to tapping into customer potential in particu-
lar, can be derived based on the analysis of success stories (Tomczak/Reinecke 1998) as well as on
qualitative research with regard to management focus groups (Tomczak/Reinecke 2001):
•
The ability to reduce risks: The risks perceived by a customer when making initial purchases are
usually higher than those, perceived while making re-purchases (Robinson/Farris/Wind 1967). In
order to acquire customers successfully, companies need to reduce different kinds of risks, espe-
cially
a. individual-related risks (may be influenced by the appearance and behavior of sales represen-
tatives),
b. supplier-related risks (may be influenced by brand management and references), and
c. product-related risks (may be influenced by the complexity of the product and the assortment
as well as by the degree of innovativeness (Rogers 1995). In order to reduce complexity and,
thus, decrease risk, successful companies initially try to target entry-level sales and avoid sell-
ing extensive problem solutions right from the beginning.
•
An effective selling: With regard to continued customers acquisition, an aggressive appearance
within the market ('hunter mentality') may help to remove or overcome the 'barriers' (such as cus-
tomer satisfaction, discount systems) created round the customer by competitors. Depending on
the customer acquisition strategy, respective employees need a high level of frustration tolerance.
- 15 -
Companies, which are excellent in customer acquisition, such as the financial optimizer AWD or
the vacuum cleaner manufacturer Vorwerk, therefore employ extroverted, extrinsically motivated
sales representatives, who are compensated based on performance.
•
The ability to focus: To acquire customers successfully, it is also necessary to understand how
purchasing-decisions are made. This can be facilitated by a comprehensive market segmentation
that is as utility-oriented as possible.
Specific competencies are also required with regard to customer retention, to implement the various
building bricks within this core task successfully (see also Tomczak/Reinecke 2001, 1998;
Tomczak/Dittrich 1998, pp. 35; Specht 1996, pp. 11; Diller 1995, pp. 50):
•
The ability to comprehensively capture customer information and to process it (Day 2000): The
better a company knows its customers, the more effectively it can meet their expectations and ad-
dress them individually. Besides high competencies in market research (e.g. concerning customer
satisfaction and the own competitive position) the possibility to obtain customer feedback is essen-
tial for continuously developing and gradually optimizing customer relationships.
•
The ability to service the customer individually and interact with him regularly: The more indi-
vidualized a customer is cared for, the more tailor-made the problem solution he is supplied with.
At the same time, however, the circle of alternative supplies able to supply equal services becomes
smaller as a result. Interaction implies that both partners are in a position of acting and reacting -
not just during purchases themselves, but also during presales, after sales and the usage (in terms
of a 'buying cycle').
•
The ability to integrate customers into corporate processes (customer integration; see Kleinal-
tenkamp/Fliess/Jacob 1996): If value-adding processes are split between suppliers and customers,
mutual ties arise at personal, service and organizational level.
•
The ability to form rational and emotional relationships (see Rust/Zeithaml/ Lemon 2000, pp.
100): These kinds of relationships can be created by customer loyalty programs as well as by spe-
cific personalized treatments.
The following components help to generate real innovations (see also the models of Blecher 1991, p.
272):
•
Creativity and openness (Thinking out of the box): the ability to approach unknown problems
visionary and to understand coherences holistically.
•
Readiness to take a risk: The ability of a missionary and unhesitant behavior, which implies con-
sciously searching for imbalances and striving for opportunities to disrupt traditional concepts in a
creative manner and utilize them entrepreneurially.
•
Speed ('time-based competition'): The ability to provide high, market driven speed with regard to
both product development and market launch. This makes high demands on information manage-
ment and knowledge management.
Finally, utilizing product potential requires the following competencies (see Bleicher 1991, pp. 271
analogue to this):
•
The ability to optimize: Within the field of product maintenance priority is given to persistence
and sustainability. In order to achieve this, analytical skills and expert knowledge are required in
particular.
•
The striving for security: Product potential can be exploited more effectively in untroubled situa-
tions, which are 'under control'. For this reason, the achievement of this core task can be promoted
by skills that facilitate controllability and order.
- 16 -
•
Competence in standardization: Product maintenance is, amongst other things, geared to improve
the efficiency of familiar activities in order to achieve economies of scale.
It can be summarized that highly different, often even competing competencies are required to per-
form individual core tasks successfully (see Figure 6).
Core Task Philosophy Competencies Required (Examples) Examples of
Companies
Customer
Acquisition
"Win the customer"
•
Risk-reduction ability
•
Effective selling, hunter mentality
•
Ability to focus
Vorwerk, AWD
Customer-
Retention
"Care for the
customer"
•
Ability to capture and process customer
information
•
Consultancy and interaction skill
•
Skills in integrating customers
•
Skills in developing commitment
IBM, MLP,
Ritz Carlton
Product
Innovation
"Leave for new
shores"
•
Creativity and openness ("thinking out
of the box")
•
Readiness to take a risk
•
Speed ("time-based competition")
Apple, 3M,
Gore
Product
maintenance
"Optimize your
solution"
•
Capability in optimization
•
Striving for security
•
Skill in standardization
(economies of scale)
Procter & Gamble
Figure 6: Specific competencies to fulfill core tasks
According to the knowledge-based definition, each of the competencies mentioned above imply the
alignment and linking of knowledge and tasks. Thus, for instance, the competence 'creativity' requires
that an individual knows about how to develop ideas, methods and products, which are new and pro-
vide utility for both the customer and the company. For the development of these ideas, methods and
products an individual additionally has to have an idea about which information or materials have to
be used in which way. Furthermore, this knowledge has to be linked to complex tasks to build up com-
petence in creativity. Only when challenged by complex tasks, knowledge can entirely develop - by
higher motivation, stronger satisfaction and higher productivity (Zimmer 2001; Cummings/Oldham
1997; von Krogh/Roos 1995).
It is important to mention that the capabilities referred to are only examples. Due to the complex struc-
ture of knowledge, it is difficult to reveal all the capabilities required to fulfill a core task in a superior
way with regard to a specific situation - at least with the methods available to-date (see von
Krogh/Venzin 1995, pp. 420 and the literature quoted there). This is not least because capabilities
partly rely on company-specific developments and are embedded in complex structures. Cause-and-
effect relationships between capabilities and competitive advantages frequently remain unknown even
to the company itself. But exactly this characteristic makes capabilities to be the basic condition for
sustainable competitive advantages (Barney 1991, pp. 107). In such a case of complexity, it is the sci-
entist's challenge to recognize typical patterns of competence (Ulrich 1981). Differentiated methods
and measuring instruments need to be developed to be able to adequately detect and operationalize
capabilities.
6
Every company faces two core challenges: One is to develop competencies in order to fulfill single
core tasks in a superior way (see Section 4). The other is to integrate the four core tasks. The aim here
is to develop an optimal core task profile.
- 17 -
4 The Coordination of Market Potential and Competencies
Whether – and if yes, which – measures are to be taken to win or bond specific customers, heavily
depends on where a company's scarce resources can be implemented most effectively and efficiently.
In other words: market potential, on the one hand, and competencies, on the other, are to be recon-
ciled. The Market Potential Competencies Matrix, represented in Figure 7, illustrates the general op-
tions a company faces. Fundamentally, resources should be applied where existing competencies en-
counter the largest possible market potential (use competence). A company which possesses
necessary, but not yet sufficient, competencies to grow in areas with high market potential, generally
should built upon these competencies und further develop them selectively (use and development of
selected competencies). If, however, a company lacks even some fundamental competencies basically
required to develop a market the question arises, whether or not high market potential really justifies
additional investment, respectively, whether or not market potential can be utilized in a profitable
manner. For reasons of an economic resource allocation in such cases it sometimes may be preferable
to do without additional investment or even to divest.
Figure 7: Market potential competencies matrix
To illustrate this point, several examples of competence use and development are presented in the
following.
Competence Use
• The leading European hotel group Accor uses its customer acquisition competencies, developed in
France in particular, to tap into the German market of economy-price hotels (Sofitel, Novotel,
Mercure, Suitehotel, Ibis, ETAP hotels, Formula 1).
• 3M uses its in-house innovation competence in very different fields like healthcare, office sup-
plies, electronics and communications as well as transport.
• Beiersdorf (Nivea, Eucerin, Florena, 8x4, and Labello) uses its product maintenance competence
to complement the Nivea product line with the Nivea Men Series.
- 18 -
Competence Development
• Hilti, an international company active in the field of fastening and dismantling technology, pos-
sesses strong competence in customer acquisition, which in the past has been particularly based on
direct sales. Hilti enhanced this competence by selectively introducing a shop-in-shop concept
within selected do-it-yourself stores.
• IBM rounded off its traditional customer retention competence by implementing a global account
management system in order to service its customers worldwide as effectively as possible.
• The launch of the Xbox demonstrates Microsoft’s innovation competency. Therewith, Microsoft,
whose actual core competence is the development of software, succeeded in tapping into the dy-
namic market of game consoles.
• Opening a first store in Tokyo in 1996, the Starbucks' Coffee Company launched an international
expansion strategy. Core of this strategy is to export a distribution concept, which has been highly
successful in the US, and adopt it to the specific requirements of foreign markets. Therefore, Star-
bucks' had to advance its product maintenance capability gradually.
There are three generic approaches to develop lacking competencies required to achieve strategic
goals (like growth, profit, and increase in value) (Verdin/Williamson 1994, p. 84):
• Internal Development (asset accumulation): Existing competencies within the company are set-up
and further developed.
• Cooperative Development (asset sharing): The basic idea here is to concentrate on one's own com-
petencies, but to get access to the competencies of others (for instance, the expertise of specialist
companies).
• External Development (asset acquisition): Competencies lacking are obtained via mergers and
acquisitions.
The path to be taken in order to develop these competencies depends on the specificness of the indus-
try and the negotiability of the competencies. The relative costs of the acquisition are decisive (Ver-
din/Williamson 1994, p. 84).
The demand to always match market potential with the competencies of a company permits an effective
allocation of resources and, thus, constitutes an important basis for strategic goal setting. Thereby, the
resource allocation can be conducted on the basis of a rating system which assigns the available means to
the four different fields of possible growth (customer acquisition, customer retention, product innovation
and product maintenance). Figure 8 illustrates the target system which results from such a rating.
newexisting
1.000
450
200
250 150
400
400
600
Customers
new
customers
productsproducts
550
200
250 150
400
400
600
actual
newexisting
1.000
450
200
250 150
400
400
600
Customers
new
customers
productsproducts
550
200
250 150
400
400
600
actual
Figure 8: Financial target system
- 19 -
5 Integrating Core Tasks
For a company, in general, it will not be possible to utilize all growth options in every situation due to
a lack of competencies. Therefore, it is a central challenge to identify an adequate core-task profile
which provides highest added value and to make it the groundwork of all company activities.
5.1 Types of Core Task Profiles
Several core task profiles are described in the following as examples (also Figure 9).
Trend
setter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Trend
setter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Multiplier
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Multiplier
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Potential
exploiter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Potential
exploiter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Marketing
virtuoso
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
virtuoso
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Trend
setter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Trend
setter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Multiplier
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Multiplier
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Potential
exploiter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Potential
exploiter
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Marketing
virtuoso
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
virtuoso
Customer
acquisition
Customer
retention
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Figure 9: Typology example for various core task profiles
Customer acquisition and product innovation are essential especially within new and innovative mar-
kets. The outcome of this is the core task profile of a Trendsetter, who simultaneously wants to tap
into customer potential and product potential. The marginal utility of the marketing budget in such a
situation is considerably higher for these core tasks than for those of customer retention and product
maintenance. Higher marginal utility is also the reason why cell phone operators currently are using
their marketing resources especially for customer acquisition. Priority is given to advertising, sponsor-
ship and promotion. At the same time, numerous suppliers are significantly investing in the develop-
ment of their network services and are forming marketing coalitions with hardware companies and
service providers to be in a position to provide an attractive range of services. Pricing is highly differ-
entiated and tailored to different potential user groups in order to acquire new customers. Thus, E-plus
network suppliers in Germany developed specific service offerings for 'computer freaks' as a (poten-
tial) customer group. In contrast, new suppliers by now have (still) not made any relevant investments
in customer retention; contractual and technical barriers primarily ensure it. Neither does product
maintenance play an important role within this immature market. To achieve long-term success it is
necessary either to continuously offer new products (as a real trendsetter) or to gradually shift the fo-
cus from customer acquisition to customer retention at an appropriate time. Due to increasingly satu-
rated markets, the second alternative currently is rather popular within the European cell phone mar-
ket.
Potential Exploiters follow a core task profile inversely to the profile of a Trendsetter. They concen-
trate on existing customer and product potential and optimize their marketing activities to exploit this
potential in a sustainable way. Lufthansa is an example of a potential exploiter within the airline in-
- 20 -
dustry. This company has a big customer base and provides a broad range of services. After the liber-
alization of the air traffic markets, Lufthansa had to make sure that preferred customers like business
travelers and individual frequent flyers would not switch over to competitors (e.g. with its
Miles&More frequent flyer program and by raising customer satisfaction). Additionally, it had to
adapt its services and capacities to the new conditions of the market, for instance, by improving in-
flight and ground services for business class travelers.
The Multiplier emphasizes customer acquisition and product maintenance. Typical examples of multi-
pliers are international franchisers like McDonald’s. Their aim is to exploit the potential of a success-
ful idea worldwide. Therefore, new customer potential has to be tapped into, as the following state-
ment by the CEO of McDonald’s illustrates: "The 120 countries in which we operate represent 95
percent of the world’s purchasing power. Yet, we feed less than 1 percent of the world’s population on
any given day." (Greenberg 2001, p. 3). Between 1995 and 2000, McDonald’s opened 10,408 new
restaurants worldwide (total number at the end of 2005: 31,886); meaning that one branch was added
to the McDonald’s network nearly every four hours. Franchisers like McDonald’s clearly focus on the
core tasks of customer acquisition and product maintenance. This is also reflected by the division of
work with franchisees: The franchiser is responsible for customer acquisition (advertising) and product
maintenance (quality management, training courses, mobilization and development of know-how,
positioning etc.). Customer retention is primarily the result of the operative business ('marketing
brings customers in, operations bring them back in.').
Some companies do without accentuating individual core tasks. They prefer to pursue all four core
tasks simultaneously. One example of this type of marketing virtuoso respectively all-round marketing
fighter is the company Swisscom. Swisscom transformed itself from a traditional telecom company to
a “TIME,” which stands for Telecommunications, IT, and Media & Entertainment. Swisscom con-
stantly introduces new products into the market (product launches like digital TV (Bluewin TV) and
broadband telephony (Bluewin Phone)), wins new customers in international markets by developing
existing products and offering new ones, and emphasizes customer retention (by offering extras, and
raising customer willingness to pay for higher-grade products). Additionally, the company fosters the
Swisscom brand as well as single products by regularly performing updates and improving products
and services.
5.2 Superior Core Task Profiles
Two basic aspects have to be mentioned regarding the formulation of and differentiation between core
task profiles:
Focus on core competencies
Companies tend to focus on only one core task where they try to realize and increase competitive ad-
vantage. The shortcoming of such an approach is that it does not allow the company to exploit the full
market potential. In order to achieve business excellence, the company should at first concentrate on
core competencies rather than on core tasks. This implies the outsourcing of all non-competitive ac-
tivities, respectively, the concentration on only such activities, that are really value adding. (Töpfer
2006, p. 119).
Exploiting the full market potential
In order to realize all conceivable opportunities for growth and profits, companies should attempt to
cope as best as possible with every core task (“multi-event athlete”). This, however, holds the risk of
having too many irons in the fire. Based on a lack of competencies it is usually not possible to develop
such a superior core task profile. “No company can be good at everything. Firstly, companies have
limited funds and must decide where to concentrate them. Secondly, choosing to be good at one thing
may reduce the possibility of being good at something else.” (Kotler 1999, p. 55).
- 21 -
Against the background presented here, the question needs to be asked whether there are general rules
for formulating individual core task profiles. In the literature, many authors are debating this problem
with approaches similar to the task-orientated approach. This discourse provides valuable hints con-
cerning the formulation of superior core task profiles. The approaches made by Miles/Snow (1978)
and Treacy/Wiersema (1995) and enhancements respectively applications by Slater/Olson/Reddy
(1997), Hagel/Singapore (1999), Meffert/Burmann (2000) und Rudolph (2000) need to be mentioned
in particular. These approaches are based on different theories and theoretical concepts. Latest ap-
proaches, are for instance, the generic competition strategies of Porter, the resource-oriented ap-
proaches, and the network theory.
According to Treacy/Wiersema (1995), a company or strategic business unit must, first of all, provide
a unique value proposition, secondly, develop a new, operative business model and, thirdly, pursue its
value disciplines consistently despite continual changes and improvements in order to act successfully
within the market. These considerations are based on the assumption that three types of customer exist
in each market: customers who prefer innovations, customers who prefer reliable services instead of
novel ones, and customers whose individual wishes and needs have to be corresponded to as closely as
possible. A total of three value disciplines can be derived from this with regard to how a company can
link business model and value proposition: operational excellence, product leadership und customer
intimacy. Each of the three strategies rests on its own business model, in which organizational struc-
ture, business processes, information systems and corporate culture demonstrate very specific charac-
teristics.
Treacy/Wiersema (1995) emphasize that a company, on the one hand, needs to strive for maximum
performance in one of the three disciplines, and, on the other, must attempt to avoid significant com-
petitive disadvantages with regard to the other two disciplines.
Slater/Olson/Reddy (1997) added the Brand Champion model to the three business models of
Treacy/Wiersema. The Brand Champion business model stresses the customer perspective as does the
Customer Intimacy business model, but presents the 'mass market complementary' to this. Decisive
with regard to this business model is the development and cultivation of brand value including market
segmentation as well as the analysis, positioning and cultivation of good channel relations.
Defining customer relationship, product innovators, and operational excellence as three generic types
of strategy, Hagel/Singer (1999) basically differentiate the same types of strategy as Treacy/Wiersema
do. However, Hagel/Singer explicitly take an inside-out perspective and emphasize that their strategy
types respectively focus on one of the company’s core processes, i.e. sales, product development, and
infrastructure management.
If the above statements concerning the information presented before are considered in summary and
are placed in relation to the task-oriented approach, the following conclusions can be made: Firstly,
different types of strategy require different types of competencies. Secondly, it is necessary to concen-
trate on one discipline or core process in order to achieve competitive advantages.
Qualitative and quantitative findings on successful core task profiles also indicate that, for reasons of
complexity and capital intensity, only a few companies are in a position to exploit the full market po-
tential. Accordingly, Tomczak (2007) identifies three successful core tasks: customer relationship,
product leadership, and focused market leadership
Customer relationship companies continuously raise their share-of-wallet and improve economies of
scope. Therefore, they need a relatively diverse and broad service offering. They focus on the core
tasks of customer acquisition and customer retention. The key challenge here is to treat each customer
individually and regulate customer accesss, which can be achieved in particular by direct distribution.
Dell, Amazon, and other typical retailers like Germany’s Rewe or Switzerland’s Coop are examples of
such customer relationship companies.
Product leadership companies concentrate on the product side of a task-oriented approach, which
covers the core tasks of product innovation and product maintenance. These companies regularly
- 22 -
launch products that redefine the state of the art, and keep an eye out for first-mover advantages. The
company’s management focuses on economies of scale and takes a global perspective. Broad and
rapid expansion counts for these types of companies. Therefore they mainly use indirect distribution,
key account management, and a relatively small set of standardized products that stand out due to su-
perior quality or brands. Procter & Gamble, Gore-Tex, Nike, and Hilcona are successful examples for
this kind of core task profile.
Focused market leadership companies direct their attention simultaneously on customer relationship
and product leadership. Thus, they combine all core tasks and focus on narrow but attractive market
segments. They strive to get price premiums for innovative services while utilizing customer knowl-
edge and providing extensive customer service. Selective distribution with a strong and direct lead
channel is characteristic for this type of core task profile. Companies like H&M, Starbucks, Hilti, or
Nespresso are representatives of focused market leadership companies.
The matrix in Figure 10 systematizes these superior core task profiles.
Product
Orientation
Customer
Orientation
Focus
Market Potential
Narrow
Orientation
Wide
Orientation
Product
Leadership
Customer-
Relationship
Focused
Market Leadership
Product
Orientation
Customer
Orientation
Focus
Market Potential
Narrow
Orientation
Wide
Orientation
Product
Leadership
Customer-
Relationship
Focused
Market Leadership
Product
Orientation
Customer
Orientation
Focus
Market Potential
Narrow
Orientation
Wide
Orientation
Product
Leadership
Customer-
Relationship
Focused
Market Leadership
Figure 10: Superior Core Task Profiles
For reasons of complexity, companies that combine all core tasks usually focus on a relative small
market segment. Therefore they are also named focused market leadership companies. In contrast,
companies that concentrate on the product side and provide only a relatively limited range of services
target a broad market area. Customer-oriented companies enhance their competitive advantages for the
core tasks of customer acquisition and retention. Addressing a relatively small target group with a
broad range of products is characteristic for these kind of companies. Examples from the fastening
industry serve to illustrate each of the superior core task profiles.
• Customer relationship companies: The German Würth company produces fixing and assembly
materials. It is a worldwide leading trading corporation with a general specialization on the dis-
tribution through sales representatives. Customers are primarily companies from the construction,
woodworking, automobile, and metal industry. High-quality service is an integral element of
Würth’s resolute customer orientation, which gives Würth access to valuable customer informa-
tion and results in enhanced customer loyalty. Würth offers its customers a line of roughly
100,000 different fastening and assembly products and tools. These range from simple bulk goods
like screws to individually customized problem solutions. Products are manufactured externally
(outsourcing) but all sold under the Würth brand. The Würth Group is one of the largest non-
- 23 -
publicly listed corporations in Germany. The newspaper Die Welt ranked it as #91 of Germany’s
Big 500.
• Product leadership companies: The German Fischer Group has four lines of business: fastening
technologies (dowels and construction accessories), automotive systems (multi-function compo-
nents for interiors), fischertechnik (building toys), and process consulting. The fastening technology
unit is by far the biggest revenue generator. Approximately two-thirds of the revenues stem from
abroad. The company’s global perspective is reflected by the foundation of eight new country divi-
sions in 2006 alone. Klaus Fischer (CEO) commented, “We are expanding rapidly to serve our cus-
tomers better and faster, win new market share, and reach new customer groups"
(www.fischer.com). Pursuing the principle of a lean company, corporate management promotes the
generation of scaling effects. Fischer develops and manufactures products for all relevant fastening
sectors and considers itself a leader in innovation, as evidenced by its corporate motto: “If you seek
innovation, you’ll find fischer.” The company has over 2,000 patents and comes up with roughly 40
new inventions each year. Products are primarily distributed through do-it-yourself stores and trad-
ing partners. Over the last five years, fisher captured the global leadership for dowel technology. In
2006, fisher generated gross revenues of € 493 million.
• Focused market leadership companies: Hilti of Liechtenstein is a leading company that develops,
manufactures, and markets high-quality fastening and other products and systems for the con-
struction industry. Hilti has its own direct distribution network for commercial end users. De-
pending on individual needs a help desk staffed by sales advisors, the Hilti Center, phones
manned by customer service personnel, and a Web site is available. In the context of a so called
shop-in-shop model Hilti additionally provides Products and consulting through sales person
within selected retail warehouses. Of its more then 17,000 employees, about two-third have direct
or indirect contact with customers. Based on superior quality and a strong brand, Hilti realizes a
price premium for its innovative products within selected market segments. Hilti has created a
complete genus of tools. So construction workers typically do not call out “Pass me the drill,” but
“Hand me the Hilti.” In the year 2006, Hilti generated revenues of over CHF 4 billion with oper-
ating income of CHF 422 million (31% more than the prior year).
6 Empirical Findings
6.1 Design of the Data Collection
The Institute of Marketing and Retailing at the University of St. Gallen performed a cross-sector em-
pirical study on the topic of 'Marketing in the 21
st
century' in Switzerland in 2006. Within the context
of this standardized written survey, the core-task profile, resources and abilities, competitive advan-
tages, and success statistics were raised at business unit level. Each member of the business (unit)
management team, responsible for marketing and/or sales, was surveyed. The population for the data
collection was taken from a random selection out of altogether 2500 companies in Switzerland.
A total of 377 management executives participated in the survey. The response rate of 15 % is to be
considered satisfactory from our point of view for a non industry-specific survey (Diekmann 1995, p.
441 in reference; Hüttner 1989, pp. 41).
6.2 Descriptive Analysis
The next paragraph will present based on what kind of core task profiles companies or business units
7
actually strive for and achieve success within the market.
The operationalization of the core task profiles happened based on the measurement of the competitive
advantages within the field of the individual core tasks. Therefore, the questioned managers had to
estimate whether or not their companies hold a competitive advantage compared to their main com-
- 24 -
= no competence advantage in core task
= competence advantage in core task
customer acquisition
customer retention
product innovation product maintenance
n=367
15%
14%
11%
9%
8%
7%
7%
5%
5%
5%
4%
3%
2%
2%
2%
1%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
= no competence advantage in core task
= competence advantage in core task
customer acquisition
customer retention
product innovation product maintenance
n=367
15%
14%
11%
9%
8%
7%
7%
5%
5%
5%
4%
3%
2%
2%
2%
1%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
petitors within the field of the individual core tasks (such as customer acquisition, customer retention,
product innovation, and product maintenance). For this a five level rating scale has been used.
Figure 11: Empirical frequency of the core task profiles
16 (= 2
4
) different core task profiles are conceivable in theory. Figure 10 shows that examples of each
of these potential core task profiles can be found in reality. However, what is clearly shown is that
several core task profiles appear more frequently than others. For example, 15% of all companies have
superior competency in the areas of both customer retention and product maintenance, whereas 14%
act as customer acquirers. It also needs to be emphasized that anyway about six percent of the compa-
nies are in a position to accomplish the core task profile of a "marketing virtuoso" (`all-round fighter´)
in the market.
Another important aim of the empirical study was to analyze the correlation between success and core
task profiles. 'Success' as a variable needs to be operationalized. Since success requires to outperform
competitors (Ambler 1999, p. 706), the emphasis of this study was put on the operationalization of
success compared to the respondent’s main competitor. The realization of gross profits and revenues
served as a success factor. Of 377 companies surveyed, 333 provided details concerning their respec-
tive core task profile as well as concerning success.
Figure 12 displays the success of the various core task profiles. The underlying empirical findings
indicate that the core tasks of customer relationship, product leadership, and focused market leadership
are performing above average. On the contrary, a core task profile without any competitive advantage
concerning one of the core tasks as well as core task profiles with competitive advantages in diametric
core tasks (such as customer retention and product innovation) are underperforming.
- 25 -
Sales
Volume*
Average
Average
Customer
acquisition
Below
Average
Above
Average
Below
Above
n=333
Product
Leader
Customer
Relationship
Customer
retention
52%
42%
* Compared to the main competitor
-
in the past year
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Focused
Integration
Overall
Profit*
Sales
Volume*
Average
Average
Customer
acquisition
Below
Average
Above
Average
Below
Above
n=333
Product
Leader
Customer
Relationship
Customer
retention
52%
42%
* Compared to the main competitor
-
in the past year
Product
innovation
Product
maintenance
Focused
Integration
Overall
Profit*
Figure 12: Relationship between core task profiles and success
6.3 Summary and Discussion of the Empirical Findings
All theoretically possible core task profiles can be verified in reality. However, it became clear that
some profiles occur more frequently than others do. This shows that core task profiles do not occur by
chance or randomly, but that core task profiles stand in contextual relation.
Furthermore, first empirical evaluations prove that taping into or exploiting potential is not enough to
be successful. The respective core task profiles of a 'potential exploiter' or a 'taper into potential' have
not proven to be above average in general. It was possible to prove, in contrast, that the business mod-
els set-up by Tomczak (2007) such as customer relationship, product leadership und focused market
leadership frequently go hand-in-hand with commercial success.
This finding also confirms the knowledge-based view, which finally ascribes competitive advantages
and, thus, differences in performance to the competencies of a company.
Altogether, the empirical analysis proved valuable in examining and clarifying the theoretical con-
structs of the task-oriented approach. During the discussion, however, it became clear that even more
empirical work is required to further develop the inside-out perspective, and in particular, the knowl-
edge-based perspective in marketing science. Above all, it is necessary to prove empirically those
characteristic competencies required to fulfill each of the four core tasks in a superior way. Further-
more, competencies integrating across all tasks (Tomczak/Reinecke 1996, p. 9) need to be identified.
These bundles of competencies and core task profiles have to be relativized situatively, which means
in particular that they have to be aligned with the potential of those markets or industries which are
available for the respective companies.
Dynamics aspects, respectively, time-period related analyses by now have merely been suggested
within the context of this contribution. However, it is a very central topic (Meffert/Burmann 2000) -
particularly for what are known as turbulent markets with a high pace of technological development
(Burmann 2000). Partially diametrical contrasted competencies are therefore required to secure suc-
cess within different phases of a lifecycle (Moore 1995, pp. 174). Because product lifecycles have
become shorter over the last few years (particularly in turbulent markets) and product lifecycle phases
take place at ever shorter intervals, a quick and efficient switching between various competencies cru-
- 26 -
cial for success and the different marketing strategies that go hand-in-hand with them are becoming a
central challenge for sustainable marketing success. It is this dynamic in particular which is taken into
consideration within the context of the task-oriented approach. Companies do not hold a fixed core
task profile over time. It is critical for them to align their company-specific knowledge with the
growth options reflected by market potential and, if necessary, to change their profile.
The empirical results discussed primarily demonstrate exploratory character. Regarding further re-
search on the task-oriented approach, it appears reasonable to utilize also explanatory causal analyses
to investigate cause-effect relationships in particular.
7 Conclusion
The task-oriented approach constitutes a contribution to the marketing theory concerning the further
development of the inside-out perspective, respectively the knowledge-based view. At its heart, the
task-oriented approach deals with the specific competencies of companies necessary to utilize market
potential more effectively and efficiently than competitors do.
This contribution elaborates and proves empirically that it is possible to formulate strategic archetypes
based on the task-oriented approach, which go hand-in-hand with above average success.
Empirical findings refer to the superiority of the following strategy types: customer relationship, prod-
uct leadership, and focused market leadership.
As a contribution to the knowledge-based view and, thus, to the resource-based view, the task-oriented
approach does not exist in contrast to industry-economy approaches, but rather strives towards a syn-
thesis of 'inside-out' and 'outside-in' as apparently opposing poles. The competitive advantages needed
by a multiplier like McDonald’s, for instance, can definitely be reasoned in industry-economic terms.
They are based on cost advantages resulting from learning effects and economies of scale and scope
(Porter 1988, 1986, 1980; Boston Consulting Group 1976). However, from a knowledge-oriented per-
spective specific links between knowledge and task systems, respectively specific competencies, are
crucial for the realization of sustainable competitive advantages based on such a strategy (von 1
Krogh/Roos 1995, 1992 among others). Competitive advantages can not simply be bought on the free
market, but are rather founded in a company's knowledge and task systems, respectively in strategic
competencies that companies already possess or need to develop. For this reason, it is important for
market-oriented companies to enhance permanently their knowledge- and competence-base, in order
to implement a successful long-term strategy of expansion (von Krogh/Cusumano 2001). This is the
only way to ensure one's own ability to survive and create corporate value.
- 27 -
Endnotes
1
In this exposé, the task-oriented approach will be applied merely at business unit level, since devel-
opment efforts to-date have been concentrated here. Fundamentally, the concept of task orientation
can be transferred to each planning level (corporate group, company, regional sales organization,
trade operation outlet, individual fields sales representative etc.)
2
Penrose (1959, pp. 24) emphasises that, “it is never resources themselves that are the 'inputs' to the
production process, but only the services that the resources render.”
3
From more of a product-oriented perspective, the number of sellable units for a service in a specific
market is understood under market potential, i.e. the take up capacity of a market possible at all
(Meffert 1998, p. 165; Nieschlag/Dichtl/Hörschgen 1997, p. 35; Olfert/Rahn 1996; Pümpin 1992, p.
21 among others).
4
See Lisowsky (1968) for a classical, critical analysis of the topic "Das Bedürfnis als absatz-
wirtschaftliches Problem" (The Need as a Distributive Trade Problem).
5
If a comprehensive change takes place here compared to the original product, so that the core of the
product is defined anew, then the variation to the service can possibly even be characterised as an in-
novation. According to the opinion of numerous authors, whether a product is referred to as being
completely new or a modified version depends on the view of the customer (Herrmann 1998, pp.
535).
6
Knowledge management as a research area is dedicated to this topic in particular (von
Krogh/Ichijo/Nonaka 2000; Probst/Raub/Romhardt 1997 and Nonaka/Takeuchi 1995 in particular
here).
7
The term 'company' will be used in the following for language reasons, even when independent busi-
ness units, rather than complete companies, are meant in many cases.
- 28 -
References
Ambler, T. (1999): Where Does the Cash Flow From?, in: Journal of Marketing Management, 15, H.
8, S. 705-710.
Ambler, T./Kokkinaki, F. (1997): Measures of Marketing Success, in: Journal of Marketing Manage-
ment, 13, H. 7, S. 665-678.
Amit, R./Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993): Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent, in: Strategic Man-
agement Journal, 14, H. 1, S. 33-46.
Ansoff, H. I. (1965): Corporate Strategy, New York.
Backhaus, K./Meyer, M. (1993): Strategische Allianzen und strategische Netzwerke, in: Wirtschafts-
wissenschaftliches Studium, 22, H. 7, S. 330-334.
Balderjahn, I. (1995): Bedürfnisse, Bedarf, Nutzen, in: Tietz, B./Köhler, R./Zentes, J.: Handwörter-
buch des Marketing, 2. Aufl., Stuttgart, Sp. 179-180.
Barney, J. B. (1999): How a Firm’s Capabilities Affect Boundary Decisions, in: Sloan Management
Review, 40, Spring, S. 137-145.
Barney, J. B. (1992): Integrating Organizational Behavior and Strategy Formulation Research: A Re-
source Based Analysis, in: Shrivastava, P./Huff, A./Dutton, J. (Hrsg.): Advances in Strategic
Management, Vol. 8, Greenwich, CI, S. 39-61.
Barney, J. B. (1991): Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, in: Journal of Manage-
ment, 17, H. 1, S. 99-120.
Belz, C. et al. (1991): Erfolgreiche Leistungssysteme, Stuttgart.
Belz, C./Schuh, G./Groos, S.A./Reinecke, S. (1997): Industrie als Dienstleister, St. Gallen.
Berekoven, L./Eckert, W./Ellenrieder, P. (1996): Marktforschung: Methodische Grundlagen und prak-
tische Anwendung, 7. Aufl., Wiesbaden.
Bierly, P./Chakrabarti, A. (1996): Generic Knowledge Strategies in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry,
in: Strategic Management Journal, 17, Winter Special Issue, S. 123-135.
Bleicher, K. (1996): Das Konzept integriertes Management, 4. Aufl., Frankfurt/New York.
Bleicher, K. (1991): Das Konzept integriertes Management, St. Galler Managementkonzept, Bd. I,
Frankfurt/New York.
Boos, F./Jarmai, H. (1994): Kernkompetenzen – gesucht und gefunden, in: Harvard Business Mana-
ger, 16, H. 4, S. 19-26.
Boston Consulting Group (1976): Perpectives on Experience, Boston (Massachusetts).
Büning, H./Trenkler, G. (1978): Nichtparametrische statistische Methoden, Berlin/ New York.
Burmann, C. (2001): Strategische Flexibilität und Strategiewechsel in turbulenten Märkten – Neuere
theoretische Ansätze zur Unternehmensflexibilität, in: Die Betriebswirtschaft, 61, H. 2, S.
169-188.
Burmann, C. (2000): Strategiewechsel in turbulenten Märkten - Neuere theoretische Ansätze zur Un-
ternehmensflexibilität, Arbeitspapier Nr. 134 der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft für Marke-
ting und Unternehmensführung e. V., hrsg. von Meffert, H./Backhaus, K./Becker, J., Münster.
Campbell, D. J./Goold, M. (1992): Building Core Skills, Working Paper, Januar, Ashridge Strategic
Management Centre.
Collis, D. J. (1991): Organizational Capability as a Source of Profit, Working Paper, Harvard Business
School, March.
Collis, D. J./Montgomery, C. A. (1995): Competing on Resources: Strategy in the 1990s, in: Harvard
Business Review, 73, H. 4, S. 118-128.
Conner, K. R./Prahalad, C. K. (1996): A Resource-based Theory of the Firm: Knowledge versus Op-
portunism, in: Organization Science, 7, H. 5, S. 477-501.
- 29 -
Cummings, A./Oldham, G. R. (1997): Enhancing Creativity: Managing Work Contexts for the High
Potential Employee, in: California Management Review, 40, H. 1, S. 22-38.
Day, G. S. (2000): Capabilities for Forging Customer Relationships, MSI Working Paper No. 00-118,
Cambridge (Mass.).
Deshpandé, R./Farley, J. U./Webster, F. E. (1993): Corporate Culture, Customer Orientation, and In-
novativeness in Japanese Firms: A Quadrad Analysis, in: Journal of Marketing, 57, H. 1, S.
23-37.
Diekmann, A. (1995): Empirische Sozialforschung – Grundlagen, Methoden, Anwendungen, Reinbek.
Dierickx, I./Cool, K (1990): A Resource Based Perspective on Competitive Strategy, Arbeitspapier,
September, Fountainebleau.
Dierickx, I./Cool, K. (1989): Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage,
in: Management Science, 35, December, S. 1504-1510.
Diller, H. (1996): Kundenbindung als Marketingziel, in: Marketing ZFP, 18, H. 2, S. 81-94.
Diller, H. (1995): Kundenbindung als Zielvorgabe im Beziehungs-Marketing, Arbeitspapier Nr. 40,
Institut für Marketing, Universität Nürnberg-Erlangen.
Dittrich, S. (2000): Kundenbindung als Kernaufgabe im Marketing, St. Gallen.
Ehrbar, A. (1999): EVA – Economic Value Added: Der Schlüssel zur wertsteigernden Unternehmens-
führung, Wiesbaden.
Eisenhardt, K. M./Martin, K. A. (2000): Dynamic Capabilities: What are They?, in: Strategic Man-
agement Journal, 21, H. 10-11, S. 1105-1121.
Freiling, J. (2000): Entwicklungslinien und Perspektiven des Strategischen Kompetenz-Management,
in: Hammann, P./Freiling, J. (Hrsg.): Die Ressourcen- und Kompetenzperspektive des Strate-
gischen Management, Wiesbaden, S. 13-46.
Fritz, W. (1997): Erfolgsursache Marketing – Warum marktorientiert geführte Unternehmen erfolg-
reich sind, Stuttgart.
Fritz, W. (1992): Marktorientierte Unternehmensführung und Unternehmenserfolg, Stuttgart.
Gälweiler, A. (1987): Strategische Unternehmensführung, Frankfurt.
Geschka, H./Eggert-Kipfelstuhl, K. (1994): Innovationsbedarfserfassung, in: Tomczak, T./Reinecke,
S. (Hrsg.): Marktforschung, Fachbuch für Marketing, St. Gallen, S. 116-127.
Gibbons, J. D./Chakraborti, S. (1992): Nonparametric Statistical Inference, 3rd Edition, New York.
Gomez, P. (1999): Integrated Value Management, London u. a. O.
Gomez, P. (1993): Wertmanagement - Vernetzte Strategien für Unternehmen im Wandel, Düsseldorf.
Grant, R. M. (1997): The Knowledge-Based View of the Firm: Implications for Management Practice,
in: Long Range Planning, 30, H. 3, S. 450-454.
Grant, R. M. (1996): Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm, in: Strategic Management Jour-
nal, 17, Winter Special Issue, S. 109-122.
Grant, R. M. (1991a): The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strat-
egy Formulation, in: California Management Review, 33, H. 3, S. 114-135.
Grant, R M. (1991b): Contemporary Strategy Analysis. Concepts, Techniques, Applications. Oxford-
Cambridge (Mass.).
Greenberg, J. M. (2001): Letter to the Shareholders, in: McDonald’s 2000 Annual Report, Oak Brook
(IL), S. 1-4.
Gussek, F. (1992): Erfolg in der strategischen Markenführung, Wiesbaden.
Haedrich, G./Gussek, F./Tomczak, T. (1989): Differenzierte Marktbearbeitung und Markterfolg im
Reiseveranstaltermarkt der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, in: Marketing-ZFP, 11, H. 1, S. 11-
18.
- 30 -
Hagel, J./Singer, M. (1999): Unbundling the Corporation, in: Harvard Business Review, March-April,
S. 133-141.
Hall, R. (1994): Intangible Sources of Sustainable Competitive Advantage, in: Hamel, G./Heene, A.
(Hrsg.): Competence-based Competition, Chichester, S. 149-169.
Hall, R. (1993): A Framework linking Intangible Resources and Capabilities to Sustainable Competi-
tive Advantage, in: Strategic Management Journal, 14, H. 8, S. 607-618.
Hall, R. (1992): The Strategic Analysis of Intangible Resources, in: Strategic Management Journal, 13,
H. 2, S. 135-144.
Hamel, G. (1994): The Concept of Core Competence, in: Hamel, G./Heene, A. (Hrsg.) (1994): Com-
petence-based Competition, Chichester, S. 11-33.
Hamel, G./Heene, A. (Hrsg.) (1994): Competence-based Competition. Chichester.
Heinke, V. G. (2000): Der Signal- und Zertifizierungswert von Credit Ratings am Euromarkt, in: Die
Betriebswirtschaft, 60, H. 3, S. 314-335.
von Hermann, F. B. W. (1870): Staatswissenschaftliche Untersuchungen, 2. Aufl., München.
Herrmann, A. (1998): Produktmanagement, München.
Homburg, C. (1995): Kundennähe von Industriegüterunternehmen: Konzeption – Erfolgsauswirkun-
gen – Determinanten, Wiesbaden.
Horváth, P. (1998): Controlling, 7. Aufl., München.
Hunt, S. D./Lambe, C. J. (2000): Marketing's Contribution to Business Strategy: Market Orientation,
Relationship Marketing and Resource-advantage Theory, in: International Journal of Man-
agement Reviews, 2, H. 1, S. 17-43.
Hüttner, M. (1989): Grundzüge der Marktforschung, 4. Auflage, Berlin u. a. O.
Itami, H./Roehl, T. (1987): Mobilizing Invisible Assets, Cambridge (Mass.).
Janssen, J./Laatz, W. (1994): Statistische Datenanalyse mit SPSS für Windows: Eine anwendungsori-
entierte Einführung in das Basissystem, Berlin.
Jenner, T. (1994): Internationale Marktbearbeitung – Erfolgreiche Strategien für Konsumgüterherstel-
ler, Wiesbaden.
Kaetzke, P./Tomczak, T. (2000): Ausschöpfen von Leistungspotenzialen - Ein Konzept zur Gestaltung
existierender Leistungen, in: Thexis, 17, H. 2, S. 19-22.
Kaplan, R. S./Norton, D. P. (1996): The Balanced Scorecard, Translating Strategy into Action, Boston
(Massachusetts).
Kaplan, R. S./Norton, D. P. (1992): The Balanced Scorecard – Measures that Drive Performance, in:
Harvard Business Review, 70, H. 1, S. 71-79.
Karg, M. (2001): Kundenakquisition als Kernausgabe im Marketing, St. Gallen.
King, A. W./Zeithaml, C. P. (2001): Competencies and Firm Performance: Examining the Causal
Ambiguity Paradox, in: Strategic Management Journal, 22, H. 1, S. 75-99.
Kirsch, W. (1991): Grundzüge des Strategischen Managements, in: Kirsch, W. (Hrsg.): Beiträge zum
Management strategischer Programme, München, S. 3-38.
Kleinaltenkamp, M./Fliess, S./Jacob, F. (Hrsg.) (1996): Customer Integration – Von der Kundenorien-
tierung zur Kundenintegration, Wiesbaden.
zu Knyphausen, D. (1993): Why are Firms Different?, Der „Ressourcenorientierte Ansatz“ im Mittel-
punkt einer aktuellen Kontroverse im Strategischen Management, in: Die Betriebswirtschaft,
53, H. 6, S. 771-792.
Kohli, A. K./Jaworski, B. J. (1990): Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Proposition, and
Managerial Implications, in: Journal of Marketing, 54, H. 4, S. 1-18.
- 31 -
Kokkinaki, F./ Amber, T. (1999): Marketing Performance Assessment: An Exploratory Investigation
into Current Practice and the Role of Firm Orientation, Working Paper Report, Nr. 99-114,
Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge (Massachusetts).
Kotler, P. (1999): Kotler on Marketing, How to Create, Win, and Dominate Markets, New York.
Kotler, P./Bliemel, F. (1999): Marketing-Management – Analyse, Planung, Umsetzung und Steuerung,
9. Aufl., Stuttgart.
Kroeber-Riel, W./Weinberg, P. (1999): Konsumentenverhalten, 7. Aufl., München.
von Krogh, G./Cusumano, M. A. (2001): Das Unternehmen soll wachsen – aber nach welchem Plan,
in Harvard Business Manager, 23, H. 4, S. 88-100.
von Krogh, G./Ichijo, K./Nonaka, I. (2000): Enabling Knowledge Creation, New York.
von Krogh, G./Nonaka, I./Aben, M. (2001): Making the Most of Your Company’s Knowledge: A Stra-
tegic Framework, in: Long Range Planning, 34, H. 4, S. 421-439.
von Krogh, G./Rogulic, B. (1997): Management von Marketing-Kompetenzen im Unternehmen: Vom
Marketing-Wissen zum Kundennutzen, in: Belz, C. (1997): Marketingtransfer, Kompetenz für
Marketing-Innovationen, Schrift 5, St. Gallen, S. 120-129.
von Krogh, G./Rogulic, B. (1996): Branchen gestalten statt Marktanteile verwalten, in: Tomczak,
T./Rudolph, T./Roosdorp, A. (Hrsg.): Positionierung – Kernentscheidung des Marketings, St.
Gallen, S. 58-68.
von Krogh, G./Roos, J. (1995): A Perspective on Knowledge, Competence and Strategy, in: Personnel
Review, 24, H. 3, S. 56-76.
von Krogh, G./Roos, J. (1992): Figuring out your Competence Configuration, in: European Manage-
ment Journal, 10, H. 4, S. 422-427.
von Krogh, G./Venzin, M. (1995): Anhaltende Wettbewerbsvorteile durch Wissensmanagement, in:
Die Unternehmung, 49, H. 6, S. 417-436.
Kuss, A. (1994): Analyse von Kundenwünschen mit Hilfe von Means-End-Chains, in: Tomczak,
T./Belz, C. (Hrsg.): Kundennähe realisieren, Ideen – Konzepte – Methoden – Erfahrungen,
Fachbuch für Marketing, St. Gallen, S. 251-262.
Kuss, A./Tomczak, T. (2000): Käuferverhalten, 2. Aufl., Stuttgart.
Lado, A. A./Boyd, N. G./Wright, P. (1992): A Competency-Based Model of Sustainable Competitive
Advantage, in: Journal of Management, 18, H. 1, S. 77-91.
Levitt, T. (1960): Marketing Myopia, in: Harvard Business Review, 38, H. 4, S. 45-56.
Liebeskind, J. P. (1996): Knowledge, Strategy, and the Theory of the Firm, in: Strategic Management
Journal, 17, Winter Special Issue, S. 93-107.
Lisowsky, P. U. (1968): Das Bedürfnis als absatzwirtschaftliches Problem, Diss., St. Gallen.
Meffert, H. (2000): Kundenbindung als Element moderner Wettbewerbsstrategien, in: Bruhn,
M./Homburg, C. (Hrsg.): Handbuch Kundenbindungsmanagement. Grundlagen - Konzepte -
Erfahrungen, 3. Aufl., Wiesbaden, S. 115-135.
Meffert, H. (1998): Marketing, Grundlagen marktorientierter Unternehmensführung, 8. Aufl., Wies-
baden.
Meffert, H. (1994): Marketing-Management, Analyse – Strategie – Implementierung, Wiesbaden.
Meffert, H. (1977): Marketing, 1. Aufl., Wiesbaden.
Meffert, H./Burmann, C. (2000): Product Life Cycle Management - Grundmodell und neuere Entwick-
lungen, in: Thexis, 17, H. 2, S. 6-10.
Miles, R. E./Snow, C. C. (1986): Unternehmensstrategien, Hamburg u. a. O.
Miles, R. E./Snow, C. C. (1978): Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process, New York u. a. O.
- 32 -
Moore, G. A. (1995): Inside the Tornado, Marketing Strategies from Silicon Valley's Cutting Edge,
New York (zitiert nach der Paperbackversion, New York 1999).
Müller-Stewens, G./Lechner, C. (2001): Strategisches Management – Wie strategische Initiativen
wirksam werden, Stuttgart.
Narver, J. C./Slater, S. F. (1990): The Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability, in:
Journal of Marketing, 54, H. 10, S. 20-35.
Nelson, R./Winter, S. (1982): An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge.
Nieschlag, R./Dichtl, E./Hörschgen, H. (1997): Marketing, 18. Aufl., Berlin.
Nonaka, I./Takeuchi, H. (1995): The Knowledge-Creating Company, New York.
Nonaka, I./Toyama, R./Konno, N. (2000): SECI, Ba and Leadership: a Unified Model of Dynamic
Knowledge Creation, in: Long Range Planning, 33, H. 1, S. 5-34.
Olfert, K./Rahn, H.-J. (1996): Marktpotentiale, in: Olfert, K. (Hrsg.): Lexikon der Betriebswirtschafts-
lehre, Ludwigshafen.
Olson, J./Reynolds, T. (1983): Understandig Consumers‘ Cognitive Structures – Implications for Ad-
vertising Strategy, in: Percy, L./Woodside, A. (Hrsg): Advertising and Consumer Psychology,
Lexington (Mass.)/Toronto, S. 77-90.
O'Shaughnessy, J. (1987): Why People Buy, New York u. a. O.
Penrose, E. T. (1959): The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, New York/London.
Peters, T. J. (1984): Strategy Follows Structure: Developing Distinctive Skills, in: California Man-
agement Review, Vol. 26, Spring, S. 111-124.
Porter, M. E. (1988): Wettbewerbsstrategie, 5. Aufl., Frankfurt am Main.
Porter, M. E. (1986): Wettbewerbsvorteile, Frankfurt am Main.
Porter, M. E. (1980): Competitive Strategy, Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors,
New York.
Prahalad, C. K./Hamel, G. (1991): Nur Kompetenzen sichern das Überleben, in: Harvard Business
Manager, 13, Nr. 2, S. 66-78.
Prahalad, C. K./Hamel, G. (1990): The Core Competences of the Corporation, in: Harvard Business
Review, 68, H. 3, S. 79-91.
Probst, G./Raub, S./Romhardt, K. (1997): Wissen managen – Wie Unternehmen ihre wertvollste Res-
source optimal nutzen, Frankfurt am Main.
Pümpin, C. (1986): Management strategischer Erfolgspositionen, 3. Auflage, Bern/Stuttgart.
Pümpin, C. (1992): Strategische Erfolgspositionen: Methodik der dynamischen strategischen Unter-
nehmensführung, Bern.
Raffée, H./Fritz, W. (1990): Unternehmensführung und Unternehmenserfolg, Arbeitspapier Nr. 85,
Institut für Marketing, Universität Mannheim.
Rappaport, A. (1998): Creating Shareholder Value, A Guide for Managers and Investors, New York.
Rappaport, A. (1986): Creating Shareholder Value, The New Standard for Business Performance, New
York.
Rasche, C. (1994): Wettbewerbsvorteile durch Kernkompetenzen: Ein ressourcen-orientierter Ansatz,
Wiesbaden.
Rasche, C./Wolfrum, B. (1994): Ressourcenorientierte Unternehmensführung, in: Die Betriebswirt-
schaft, 54, H. 4, S. 501-517.
Reinecke, S. (2000): Konzeptionelle Anforderungen an Marketingkennzahlensysteme, Arbeitspapier
des Forschungsinstituts für Absatz und Handel an der Universität St. Gallen, St. Gallen.
Robinson, P. J./Farris, C. W./Wind, Y. (1967): Industrial Buying und Creative Marketing, Boston
(Mass.).
- 33 -
Rogers, E. M. (1995): Diffusion of Innovations, New York.
Rössl, D. (1994): Gestaltung komplexer Austauschbeziehungen – Analyse zwischenbetrieblicher Ko-
operation, Wiesbaden.
Rühli, E. (1995): Ressourcenmanagement, in: Die Unternehmung, 49, H. 2, S. 91-105.
Rumelt, R. P./Schendel, D. E./Teece, D. J. (1994) (Hrsg.): Fundamental Issues in Strategy: A Research
Agenda, Boston.
Rust, R. T./Zeithaml, V. A./Lemon, K. N. (2000): Driving Customer Equity – How Customer Lifetime
Value is Reshaping Corporate Strategy, New York et al.
Sanchez, R./Heene, A./Thomas, H. (1996): Introduction: Towards the Theory and Practice of Compe-
tence-Based Competition, in: Sanchez, R./Heene, A./Thomas, H. (Hrsg.): Dynamics of Com-
petence-Based Competition: Theory and Practice in the New Strategic Management, Kidling-
ton u. a. O., S. 1-35.
Schäfer, E. (1928): Grundlagen der Marktbeobachtung mit einer Darstellung der Beobachtungspraxis
in der deutschen Porzellanindustrie, Nürnberg.
Selznick, P. (1957): Leadership in Administration, Evanston.
Shapiro, B. P. (1988): What the Hell is Market Oriented, in: Harvard Business Review, 66, Novem-
ber/December, S. 119-125.
Slater, S. F./Narver, J. C. (1995): Market Orientation and the Learning Organization, in: Journal of
Marketing, 59, H. 7, S. 63-74.
Slater, S. F./Olson, E. M./Reddy, V. K. (1997): Strategy-Based Performance Measurement, in: Busi-
ness Horizons, 40, H. 4, S. 37-44.
Specht, U. (1996): Relationship Marketing, in: Absatzwirtschaft, 39, Sondernummer Oktober, S. 10-
12.
Spender, J. C. (1989): Industry Recipes: The Nature and Sources of Managerial Judgement, Oxford.
Spender, J. C./Grant, R. M. (1996): Knowledge and the Firm: Overview, in: Strategic Management
Journal, 17, Winter Special Issue, S. 5-9.
Stalk, G./Philip, E./Shulman, L. E. (1992): Competing on Capabilities: The New Rules of Corporate
Strategy, in: Harvard Business Review, 70, March/April, S. 57-69.
Stauss, B. (1997): Regaining Service Customers. Costs and Benefits of Regain Management, Diskus-
sionsbeitrag der Wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Fakultät Ingolstadt, Nr. 86, Ingolstadt.
Stauss, B./Seidel, W. (1998): Beschwerdemanagement, 2. Aufl., München/Wien.
Sydow, J. (1992): Strategische Netzwerke, Wiesbaden.
Teece, D.J. (1982): Towards an Economic Theory of the Multiproduct Firm, in: Journal of Economic
Behavior and Organization, 3, H. 1, S. 39-63.
Teece, D.J./Pisano, G./Shuen, A. (1997): Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management, in: Strate-
gic Management Journal, 18, H. 7, S. 509-533.
Timmons, J. (1998): New Venture Creation, Burr Ridge (Illinois).
Tomczak, T. (1989): Situative Marketingstrategien, Grundsatzstrategien für „Dogs“, Berlin.
Tomczak, T./Dittrich, S. (1998): Erfolgreich Kunden binden – Eine kompakte Einführung, Zürich.
Tomczak, T./Karg, M. (1999): Grundstrategien der Kundenakquisition, in: Thexis, 16, H. 2, S. 4-8.
Tomczak, T./Reinecke, S. (2001): Best Practice in Marketing, Abschlussberichte der Top-
Management-Fokusgruppen 2000, St. Gallen.
Tomczak, T./Reinecke, S. (1999): Der aufgabenorientierte Ansatz als Basis eines marktorientierten
Wertmanagements, in: Grünig, R./Pasquier, M. (Hrsg.): Strategisches Management und Mar-
keting, Bern/Stuttgart/Wien, S. 297-337.
- 34 -
Tomczak, T./Reinecke, S. (Hrsg.) (1998): Best Practice in Marketing – Erfolgsbeispiele zu den vier
Kernaufgaben im Marketing, St. Gallen/Wien.
Tomczak, T./Reinecke, S. (1996): Der aufgabenorientierte Ansatz - Eine neue Perspektive für das
Marketing-Management, Fachbericht für Marketing, 1996/5, St. Gallen.
Tomczak, T./Reinecke, S./Kaetzke, P. (2000): Konzept zur Gestaltung und zum Controlling existie-
render Leistungen, in: Albers, S./Herrmann, A. (Hrsg.): Handbuch Produktmanagement,
Wiesbaden, S. 443-459.
Tomczak, T./Reinecke, S./Karg, M./Mühlmeyer, J. (1998): Best Practice in Marketing: Empirische
Erfolgsstudie zum aufgabenorientierten Ansatz, Fachbericht für Marketing, 2/1998, St. Gallen.
Töpfer, A. (1998): Audit von Business Excellence in der marktorientierten Unternehmensführung, in:
Reinecke, S./Tomczak, T./Dittrich, S. (Hrsg.): Marketingcontrolling, Fachbuch für Marketing,
St. Gallen, S. 44-59.
Treacy, M./Wiersema, F. (1995): The Discipline of Market Leaders, Boston.
Ulrich, H. (1981): Die Betriebswirtschaftslehre als anwendungsorientierte Sozialwissenschaft, in:
Geist, M./Köhler, R. (Hrsg.): Die Führung des Betriebs, Stuttgart, S. 1-26.
Venkratraman, N./Ramanujam, V. (1987): Measurement of Business Economic Performance: An Ex-
amination of Method Convergence, in: Journal of Management, 13, H. 1, S. 109-122.
Verdin, P. J./Williamson, P. J. (1994): Core Competences, Competitive Advantage and Market Analy-
sis: Forging the Links, in: Hamel, G./Heene, A. (Hrsg.): Competence-based Competetion,
Chichester, S. 77-110.
Weber, J./Schäffer, U. (2000): Balanced Scorecard & Controlling. Implementierung – Nutzen für Ma-
nager und Controller – Erfahrungen in deutschen Unternehmen, 3. Aufl., Wiesbaden.
Weinhold-Stünzi, H. (1991): Marketing in 20 Lektionen, 22. Aufl., St. Gallen.
Weinhold-Stünzi, H. (1964): Grundlagen wirtschaftlicher Absatzführung, Bern.
Wernerfelt, B. (1995): A Resource-Based View of the Firm: Ten Years After, in: Strategic Manage-
ment Journal, 16, H. 3, S. 171-174.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984): A Resource-Based View of the Firm, in: Strategic Management Journal, 5, H.
2, S. 171-180.
Williams, J. (1992): How Sustainable is Your Competitive Advantage, in: California Management
Review, 34, H. 1, S. 29-51.
Witte, E. (1973): Organisation für Innovationsentscheidungen, das Promotoren-Modell, Göttingen.
Wolfrum, B./Rasche, C. (1993): Kompetenzorientiertes Management, in: Thexis, 10. Jg., H. 5/6, S.
65-70.
Wolfsteiner, W. D. (1995): Das Management der Kernfähigkeiten – Ein ressourcenorientierter Strate-
gie- und Strukturansatz, Diss., St. Gallen.
Zimmer, D. (2001): Wenn Kreativität zu Innovationen führen soll, in: Harvard Business Manager, 23,
H. 1, S. 42-56.
