تأثیر عملکرد برند بر رقابت پذیری برند با تبیین نقش فرصت طلبی فناورانه

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار دانشکده اقتصاد، مدیریت و علوم اداری دانشگاه سمنان

2 دانشیار دانشکده حسابداری و مدیریت دانشگاه شهید بهشتی

3 دانشیار دانشکده اقتصاد و مدیریت دانشگاه تربیت مدرس

4 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت دانشگاه سمنان

چکیده

موضوع رقابت­پذیری برند از آن دسته مباحثی است که طی سال­های اخیر به شدت مورد توجه پژوهشگران و محققان اقتصادی قرار گرفته است. پژوهش حاضر با هدف مطالعه و بررسی تأثیر عملکرد برند بر رقابت­پذیری برند از طریق نقش میانجی فرصت­طلبی فناورانه در میان مدیران و کارشناسان بازاریابی  36 شرکت­ صادرکننده برتر محصولات صنایع غذایی انجام پذیرفته است. ابزار گرد­آوری اطلاعات پرسشنامه استاندارد سنتوز ویجانده و همکاران (2013)، وولا و همکاران(2012) و ایکسیانگمینگ و هایمی (2011) بوده که برای روایی آن از روایی صوری و همچنین برای پایایی آن از ضریب آلفای کرونباخ استفاده شده است که مقدار کلی آن برابر با 856/0 می­باشد. تحقیق حاضر از نظر هدف، کاربردی و از نظر نحوه گردآوری ­داده­ها، از نوع توصیفی- پیمایشی می­باشد. از رویکرد مدلسازی معادلات ساختاری برای بررسی فرضیه­ها و تأیید مدل مفهومی تحقیق استفاده شده است. نتایج مدل آماری نشان می­دهد، مدل پیشنهادی برازنده داده­ها می­باشد و عملکرد برند تأثیر مثبت معناداری بر رقابت­پذیری برند دارد، این در حالی است که فرصت­طلبی فناورانه در رابطه فوق نقش میانجی دارد.
 



 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Impact of Brand Performance on Brand Competitiveness with Clarifying the role of Technological Opportunism

نویسندگان [English]

  • Davoud Feiz 1
  • Alireza Motameni 2
  • Asadollah Kordnaeij 3
  • Azime Zarei 1
  • Mehdi Dehghani Soltani 4
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Introduction
Competitiveness currently is a main in issue all over the world and is used as a means for achieving desired economic growth and sustained development. Considering the importance of these industries in high job creation (0/015 occupation in industry) and direct and indirect participation in the production of national income (almost 0/03/5 of the gross domestic production (GDP) and more than 0/015 of the value added in industry), one of the priorities and work programs in industry, mining, and business must be paying special attention to these industries. Iran has exported more than one billion and 575 million dollars foodstuffs in 1394 (Trade Promotion Organization of Iran, 1395). However, food industry in Iran doesn’t enjoy strong brands in the international markets. So, to reinforce this strategy in international markets, at first, brand competitiveness power should rise (food industry strategic plan, 1395).  Having desired brand performance and increasing brand competitiveness power for food industry are issues that can create export boom for the country.  No doubt, since foreign countries are seeking for known brand goods with high quality, enhancing brand performance for Iranian food industry improves exports. Thus, the main aim of the present study, with regard to branding and brand performance in today’s competitive economic conditions is examining the effect of brand performance on brand competitiveness with clarifying the role of technological opportunism among top exporter food industry companies.
Case study
Research population includes managers and marketing experts in top exporter food industry companies. Population size is 36 based on Iran’s trade promotion organization list.
Materials and Methods
The standard questionnaire (Santos-Vijande et al (2013), Voola et al (2012) and Xiangming & Haimei (2011)) was used as a data gathering tool and its validity and reliability was approved by nominal validity and Cronbach's alpha coefficient, respectivelyThe present study, in terms of purpose and data collection was functional and descriptive, respectively. Structural equation modeling approach was used to examine the hypothesis and conceptual model confirming.
Discussion and Results
Results show that the conceptual model has overall validity and all key paths are statistically significant in the model. The model provides a good description of the brand performance and brand competitiveness. The obtained significant results show that branding has a vital role in the overall model and brand performance, is a suitable measure for the final performance. 
The results also show that brand performance has a significant positive effect on brand competitiveness (α= 2/39) and technological opportunism has α= 4/00; technological opportunism with the Alpha Coefficient of 2/39 has also a significant positive effect on brand competitiveness among these firms; brand performance via technological opportunism (α=15/2) has more effect on brand competiveness. The reason is that opportunism in technology is a company potential, in which special and complex processes are involved and imitating them is difficult for other firms. Consequently, they are advantageous resources for competition and cause brand competitiveness improvement in these companies in comparison with competitors. The results confirm the vital role of branding in the international marketing. The first result was that one of the main factors in brand competitiveness is brand performance which represents branding role in overall performance evaluation of an international company.
Moreover, it is very important that companies complement information gathered from identifying and reacting to customers’ needs (brand market performance) with information obtained from identifying and reacting to technology (opportunism in technology) with  developing appropriate processes.  The reason is that being complementary; these variables will affect strategic decisions related to adopting new technologies in international business. 
Conclusion
The results show that brand performance has a significant positive effect on brand competitiveness and technological opportunism; technological opportunism has also a significant positive effect on brand competitiveness of these companies. Brand performance via technological opportunism has more effect on brand competitiveness.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Brand Performance
  • Brand Competitiveness
  • Technological Opportunism
  • Food Industry
1- Aaker, D. A., & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000). Brand leadership: Building assets in an information economy: Free Press.

2- Abbasi, M. R., Mahmoudi Meimanad, M., Amini, M. T. & Rahimi Klor, Ho. (2011). Designing the Structural Equations Modeling for Insurance Companies’ Competitive Factors. Tomorrow Management Journal, 10(2): 27-44. (In Persian)

3- Ahmad, A.R. & Sapry, M. (2008). Brand competitiveness: a study of cement brand in Malaysia. Paper presented at the International Accounting and Business Conference 2008, Johor, Malaysia.

4- Ajitabh, A. & Momaya, K. S. (2004). Competitiveness of Firms: Review of Theory, Framework and Models. Singapore Management Review, 26(1): 45-61.

5- Chen, C.W. & Lien, N.H. (2013). Technological opportunism and firm performance: Moderating contexts. Journal of Business Research, 67(1): 2218-2225.

6- Chailan, C. (2008). Brands portfolios and competitive advantage: an empirical study. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17(4): 254-264.

7- Chirani, E. Taleghani, M. & Esmailie Moghadam, N. (2012). Brand Performance and Brand Equity. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research In Business, 3(9): 1033-1036.

8- Country’s Food industry Strategic Plan. (2016). (In Persian)

9- de Chernatony, L. Harris, F. J. & Christodoulides, G. (2004). Developing a Brand Performance Measure for Financial Services Brands. The Service Industries Journal, 24(2): 15-33.

10- Dosi, G., Grazzi, M. & Moschella, D. (2015). Technology and costs in international competitiveness: From countries and sectors to firms. Research Policy, 44(10), 1795-1814.

11- Ghodeswar, B.M. (2008). Building brand identity in competitive markets: a conceptual model. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 17(1): 4-12.

12- Haji Karimi, A., Jamalie Bastami, B. & Makizade, V. (1389). Investigation of the Effect of Information Technology and Communication on Industrial International Markets.  Business Management Viewpoint Journal, 1(34): 9-22. (In Persian)

13- Hasani, A., Mousavi Bazargan, S. J. & Qadirinia, M. (2013). Brand Performance, Conceptualization and Measurement. Tourism Quarterly of University of Science and Culture, (1): 1-38. (In Persian)

14- Hult, G.T., Hurley, R.F. & Knight, G. (2004). Innovativeness: its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 429-438.

15- Ille, F. R. & Chailan, C. (2011). Improving global competitiveness with branding strategy. Journal of Technology Management in China, 6(1): 84-96.

16- Iran Trade Promotion Organization. (2016). (In Persian)

17- Lee, J. Park, S. Y. Baek, I. & Lee, C. (2008). The impact of the brand management system on brand performance in B2B and B2C environments. Industrial MarketingManagement, 37(1): 848-855.

18- Liberali, G., Urban, G.L. & Hauser, J.R. (2013). Competitive information, trust, brand consideration and sales: Two field experiments. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30(2): 101-113.

19- Lucia-Palacios, L., Bordonaba-Juste, V., Polo-Redondo, Y. & Gru¨ nhagen, M (2016). Complementary IT resources for enabling technological opportunism. Information & Management, 53(1): 654-667.

20- Man, T.W.Y., Lau, T. & Chan. K.F. (2002). The Competitiveness of Small and Medium Enterprises A Conceptualization with Focus on Entrepreneurial Competencies. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(2): 123-142.

21- Melewar, T.C., Gupta, S. & Czinkota, M. (2013). Global business management for sustainability and competitiveness: The role of corporate branding, corporate identity and corporate reputation. Journal of World Business, 48(3), 285-286.

22- Najari, R., Sarlak, M. A., Javad Hozouri, M. & Ahangari, J. (2016). Designing and Investigating the Effect of Employees’ Attitude on Using Electronic Government in Taxation Affairs Organization. Management Researches, 9(32): 25-45. (In Persian)

23- O’Cass, A. & Viet Ngo, L. (2007). Market orientation versus innovative culture: two routes to superior brand performance. European Journal of Marketing, 41 (7/8): 868-887.

24- Overby, J. W. & Min, S. (2001). International SupplyChain Management in an Internet Environment: a Network-Oriented Approach to Internationalization. International Marketing review, 18(4): 392-419.

25- Pena-Vinces, J.C., Acedo, F.J. & Roldan, J.l. (2014). Model of the international competitiveness of SMNEs for Latin American developing countries. European Business Review, 26(6): 552-567.

26- Petruzzellis, L. (2010). Mobile phone choice: technology versus marketing: The brand effect in the Italian market. European Journal of Marketing, 44(5), 610-634.

27- Porter, M.E. (2001). Strategy and the Internet. Harvard Business Review, 79(3): 63-78.

28- Qasemi, P. & Darzian Azizi, A. (2012). Investigation of the Effect of Brand Orientation on Brand Performance and Financial Performance among Active Industrial Companies of Ahvaz. Marketing Management Journal, 8(18): 75-90. (In Persian)

29- Rastegar, A., Dehghani Soltani, M., Farsizadeh, H. & Balouchi, H. (2015). Clarifying the Effect of Organizational-Structural Intelligence on Gaining Competitive Advantage: the Mediating Role of Competitive Intelligence.  New Marketing Research Quarterly, First National Conference of Service Marketing Special Issue (Emphasizing Marketing Challenges and Solutions in Insurance Industry), 65-82. (In Persian)

30- Santos-Vijande, M.L. del Río-Lanza, A.B. Suárez-Álvarez, L. & Díaz-Martín, A.M. (2013). The brand management system and service firm competitiveness. Journal of Business Research, 66(1): 148-157.

31- Sarkees, M. (2011). Understanding the links between technological opportunism, marketing emphasis and firm performance: implications for B2B. Industrial Marketing Management, 40: 785-795.

32- Sarnad, Z., Bazargan, A. & Hejazi, E. (2014). Research Methods in Behavioral Sciences. Tehran: Agah Publishing Institute. (In Persian)

33- Seo, S. & Jang, S.C. (2013). The roles of brand equity and branding strategy: A study of restaurant food crises. International Journal of Hospitality, 34: 192-201.

34- Sharma, B. & Fisher, T. (1997). Functional Strategies and Competitiveness: an Empirical Analysis Using Data from Australian Manufacturing, Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology, 4(4): 286-294.

35- Sheikh Esmae’li, S. & Moulaei, S. (2014). Evaluating the Effects of Marketing Unified Communications on Brand Special Value; with the Role of Brand Mental Image and Brand Performance. New Marketing Research Quarterly, National Conference of research Marketing, Special Issue, 33-54. (In Persian)

36- Shurchuluu, P. (2002). National Productivity and Competitive Strategies for the New Millennium. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 13(6): 408-414.

37- Soivell, O. (2015). The Competitive Advantage of Nations 25 years-opening up new perspectives on competitiveness, Competitiveness Review, 25(5): 471-481.

38- Srinivasan, R., Lilien, L.G. & Rangaswamy, A. (2002). The role of technological opportunism in radical technology adoption: an application to e-business. Journal of Marketing, 66 (3): 47-60.

39- Szerb, L. & Ulbert, J. (2009). The Examination of the Competitiveness in the Hungarian SME Sector: A Firm Level Analysis. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 6(3): 105-123.

40- Tan, V., Ochoa, J.J., Langston, C. & Shen, L. (2015). An empirical study on the relationship between sustainability performance and business competitiveness of international construction contractors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 93(1): 273-278.

41- Tsai, K. (2004). The impact of technological capability on firm performance in Taiwan’s electronics industry. Journal of High Technology, 15: 183–195.

42- Viet Ngo, L. & O’Cass, A. (2011). The relationship between business orientations and brand performance. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 23(5): 684-713.

43- Voola, R., Casimir, G., Carlson, J. & Agnihotri, M.A. (2012). The effects of market orientation, technological opportunism, and e-business. Australasian Marketing Journal, 20: 136-146.

adoption on performance: A moderated mediation analysis

44- Wahyuni, S. & Kee Ng, K. (2012). Historical outlook of Indonesian competitiveness: past and current performance. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 22(3): 207-234.

45- Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2): 171-80.

46- Xiangming, W., & Haimei, L. (2011). Study on brand competitiveness of Chinese toy industry. Management Science and Electronic Commerce (AIMSEC). 8-10 Aug. 2011 2nd International Conference on.

47- Yaghoubi, N. M., Shekari, A. & Rahat Dehmorde, Mahboube. (1391). Studying Fast Organizational Structural Empowerments in Banking System. Strategic Management Thought Journal, 10(1), 133-158. (In Persian)

48- Yoon, J., Yong Lee, H. & Dinwoodie, J. (2012). Competitiveness of container terminal operating companies in South Korea and the industry–university–government network, Transportation Research Part A, 80, 1-14.