Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intelligence generation and superior customer value

  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has become conventional wisdom that an organization's ability to continuously generate intelligence about customers' expressed and latent needs, and about how to satisfy those needs, is essential for it to continuously create superior customer value. However, intelligence generation typically has been treated as a generic firm activity. The authors propose that there are four distinct modes of intelligence generation, each of which is part of a welldeveloped intelligence-generation capability. The article reports the results of an exploratory study that supports this proposition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberts, William W. 1989. “The Experience Curve Doctrine Reconsidered.”Journal of Marketing 53 (July): 36–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima, K. 1995. “An Exploratory Analysis of the Impact of Market Orientation on New Product Performance: A Contingency Approach.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 12 (September): 275–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleeke, Joel and David Ernst. 1995. “Is Your Strategic Alliance Really a Sale?”Harvard Business Review 73 (1): 97–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, John S. 1991. “Research That Reinvents the Corporation.”Harvard Business Review 69 (1): 102–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzzell, Robert D. and Bradley Gale. 1987.The PIMS Principles. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bylinsky, Gene. 1998. “How to Bring Out Better Product Faster.”Fortune, November 23, pp. 238[B]-238[T].

  • Day, George S. 1990.Market Driven Strategy. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1994a “The Capabilities of Market-Driven Organization.”Journal of Marketing 58 (4): 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1994b “Continuous Learning About Markets”California Management Review 36 (Summer): 9–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Robin Wensley. 1988. “Assessing Advantage: A Framework for Diagnosing Competitive Superiority.”Journal of Marketing 52 (2): 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garvin, David A. 1993. “Building a Learning Organization.”Harvard Business Review 71 (4): 78–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat, Pankaj. 1986. “Sustainable Advantage.”Harvard Business Review 64 (September–October): 53–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glazer, Rashi. 1991. “Marketing in an Informatio-Intensive Environment: Strategic Implications of Knowledge as an Asset.”Journal of Marketing 55 (4): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, Gary. 1991. “Competition for Competence and Inter-Partner Learning Within International Strategic Alliances.”Strategic Management Journal 12 (Summer): 83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and C. K. Prahalad. 1991. “Corporate Imagination and Expeditionary Marketing.”Harvard Business Review 69 (4): 81–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 1994Competing for the Future. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heskett, James, W. Earl Sasser, and Christopher Hart. 1990.Service Breakthroughs. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, George P. 1991. “Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures.”Organization Science 2 (February): 88–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, Robert F. and G. Tomas M. Hult. 1998. “Innovation, Market Orientation, and Organizational Learning: An Integration and Empirical Examination.”Journal of Marketing 62 (3): 42–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, Bernard J. and Ajay K. Kohli. 1993. “Market Orientation: Antecedents and Consequences.”Journal of Marketing 57 (July): 53–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, Rosabeth M. 1992. “Six Certainties for CEOs.”Harvard Business Review 70 (2): 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, Robert and David Norton. 1996.The Balanced Scorecard. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohli, Ajay K. and Bernard J. Jaworski. 1990. “Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implication.”Journal of Marketing 54 (2): 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, Dorothy. 1995.Wellsprings of Knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T. and Gregory Dess. 1996. “Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking It to Performance.”Academy of Management Review 21 (1): 135–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, Gary. 1998. “New Product Team Learning: Developing and Profiting From Your Knowledge Capital.”California Management Review 40 (4): 74–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, J. Morone, & A. Paulson. 1996. Marketing and Discontinuous Innovation: The Probe and Learn Process.California Management Review 38 (3): 8–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLachlan, Alexander. 1995. “Trusting Outsiders to Do Your Research: How Does Industry Learn to Do It?”Research Technology Management 38 (6): 48–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • McQuarrie, Edward F. and Shelby H. McIntyre. 1992. “The Customer Visit: An Emerging Practice in Business-to-Business Marketing.” Working Paper. Report No. 92-114. Marketing Science Institute.

  • Menon, Anil and P. Rajan Varadarajan. 1992. “A Model of Marketing Knowledge Use Within Firms.”Journal of Marketing 56 (4): 53–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Geoffrey. 1995.Inside the Tornado. New York: HarperBusiness.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, Christine. 1995. “Organizational Market Information Processes: Cultural Antecedents and New Product Outcomes.”Journal of Marketing Research 32 (3): 318–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narver, John C. and Stanley F. Slater, 1990. “The Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability.”Journal of Marketing 54 (4): 20–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nevis, Edwin, Anthony DiBella, and Janet Gould. 1995. “Understanding Organizations as Learning System.”Sloan Management Review 36 (2): 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, Ikujiro. 1991. “The Knowledge-Creating Company.”Harvard Business Review 69 (November–December): 96–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. 1980.Competitive Strategy. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W., K. Koput, and L. Smith-Doerr. 1996. “Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology.”Administrative Science Quarterly 41: 116–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, James B. 1992.Intelligent Enterprise. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, P. Anderson, and S. Finkelstein. 1996. “Managing Professional Intellect: Making the Most of the Best.”Harvard Business Review 74 (2): 71–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichheld, Frederick. 1996. “Learning From Customer Defections.”Harvard Business Review 74 (2): 56–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, Peter M. 1990.The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinkula, James M. 1994. “Market Information Processing and Organizational Learning.”Journal of Marketing 58 (1): 35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, William Baker, and Thomas Noordewier. 1997. “A Framework for Market-Based Organizational Learning: Linking Values, Knowledge, and Behavior.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (4): 305–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, Stanley F. and John Narver. 1994. “Does Competitive Environment Moderate the Market Orientation Performance Relationship?”Journal of Marketing 58 (1): 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 1995. “Market Orientation and the Learning Organization.”Journal of Marketing 59 (3): 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 1998. “Customer Led and Market Oriented: Let's Not Confuse the Two.”Strategic Management Journal 19 (10): 1001–1006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, Eric Olson, and Venkateshwar Reddy. 1997. “Strategy-based Performance Measurement.”Business Horizons 40 (4): 37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stalk, George, Philip Evans, and Lawrence E. Shulman. 1992. “Competing on Capabilities: The New Rules of Corporate Strategy.”Harvard Business Review 70 (March–April): 57–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stata, Ray. 1989. “Organizational Learning—The Key to Management Innovation.”Sloan Management Review 30 (Spring): 63–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, Thomas. 1997.Intellectual Capital: The New Wealth of Organizations. New York: Doubleday/Currency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, Frances, Seymour Zivan, and Robert Camp. 1987. “How to Measure Yourself Against the Best.”Harvard Business Review 65 (January–February): 8–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. 1986. “Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts.”Management Science 32 (July): 791–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wajnert, T. 1993. “Letters to the Editor.”Harvard Business Review 71 (5): 190–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Jeffrey. 1992. “How Sustainable Is Your Competitive Advantage?”California Management Review 34 (Spring): 29–51.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Washington, Bothell

    Stanley F. Slater

  2. University of Washington, Seattle

    John C. Narver

Authors
  1. Stanley F. Slater
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John C. Narver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Stanley F. Slater is the vice chancellor for academic affairs and a professor of business administration at the University of Washington, Bothell. His research interests lie primarily in the areas of market-based organizational learning and market strategy implementation. He has published more than 30 articles in theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, theStrategic Management Journal, and theJournal of Management, among others. He has won “Best Paper” awards from the International Marketing Review and from the Marketing Science Institute. He currently serves on five editorial review boards including those of theJournal of Marketing and theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science.

John C. Narver is a professor of marketing in the Graduate School of Business Administration at the University of Washington, Seattle. His general research interests lie in the area of strategic marketing. His current research is primarily concerned with the creation and effects of a market orientation in an organization. His work has been published in theJournal of Marketing, theStrategic Management Journal, theAcademy of Management Journal, and theJournal of Market-Focused, Management, among other scholarly journals. He has won the “Best Paper” award from the Marketing Science Institute.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Slater, S.F., Narver, J.C. Intelligence generation and superior customer value. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 28, 120–127 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070300281011

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070300281011

Keywords

Search

Navigation