See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/322934559

The views and perceptions of managers on the role of marketing research in

decision making

Article  in  International Journal of Market Research · January 2018

DOI: 10.1177/1470785317744854

CITATIONS READS

4 1,267

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Comparison of measurement scales and measurement theory View project

Wpływ przystąpienia Polski do strefy euro na międzynarodową konkurencyjność i internacjonalizację polskich przedsiębiorstw View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Piotr Tarka on 05 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

744854
research-article2018
MRE0010.1177/1470785317744854International Journal of Market ResearchTarka

Article

International Journal of

The views and perceptions of

Market Research
2018, Vol. 60(1) 67­–87
© The Author(s) 2018
managers on the role of marketing Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
research in decision making DOI: 10.1177/1470785317744854
https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785317744854
journals.sagepub.com/home/mre

Piotr Tarka
Poznań University of Economics and Business, Poland

Abstract
In this article, the author conducts an empirical diagnosis of managers’ views and perceptions in the
context of use of information obtained from marketing research in decision-making processes. It
is argued that decision makers who take charge of management, despite their strong declarations
and beliefs about the potential and usefulness of information in decisions, in reality prefer solutions
based on intuition and irrational thinking. Therefore, the objective of the conducted study is
to explore mechanisms of such paradoxes. However, through empirical research, the author
endeavored to find the answers associated with the specific factors that are likely to favor such
an unreasonable thinking and activities undertaken by managers in decision-making processes.
Based on the sample (N = 213), which contained mainly information users, it was confirmed that
managers, faced with a difficulty of information processing (e.g., due to information overloading
problems and requirements of analytical thinking), or narrow cognitive capacities, limited memory,
and strong reliance on personal experience, look for much simpler solutions in decision making.
They preferably move toward the irrational sphere of making choices. Thus, the information,
obtained from research, that is available to managers is rather neglected instead of being closely
inspected (scrutinized). Moreover, the greater the surprise in information derived from marketing
research (i.e., the wider is the discrepancy between the value of information provided by analysts
and managers’ expectations), the greater their inclination to reject any information and much
greater exposure toward irrational thinking in decision making. As a matter of fact, the problems
associated with information adaptation in decisions, as well as the problems of analytical thinking,
put the question mark over the entire usefulness of information and further deliberate conducting
of the marketing research.

Keywords
business organizations, information-decision problems, managers, marketing research

Corresponding author:
Piotr Tarka, Poznań University of Economics and Business, Al. Niepodleglosci 10, 61-875 Poznań, Poland.
Email: piotr.tarka@ue.poznan.pl
68 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

Introduction
In the literature, causes to apply directly the information from marketing research in decisions still
remain solid, as many authors make up the unquestionable arguments favoring the information and
research (Aaker & Day, 1995; Churchill & Iacobucci, 2005; Deshpande, 1982; Malhotra, 2004). It
is also argued that for managers, who endeavor to make a perfect or at least satisfying choices, the
rational or bounded-rational theory associated with decision-making processes, should always be
considered as the most important factor, as long as they want to create a solid basis for thinking and
making valid decisions. In other words, if in the course of any decision (fully or partially supported
by the information obtained from the research), there is a lack of an analytical approach in solving
the problem, such decisions become enormously risky and typically are doomed to failure (Steers
& Shaw, 1993). The fact is that people in business organizations often search for information and
alternatives which may be limited, so their decisions often reflect the use of standard operating
procedures rather than systematic analyses. There is also no doubt that, if managers’ approach to
information processing and making decision depends largely on the analytics, their ability to
respond appropriately to information from marketing research and simultaneously make valid
decisions leads to enhanced organizational learning (Sinkula, 1994); success of new products’
development (Citrin, Lee, & McCullough, 2007; Moorman, 1995); and sustainable, hard-to-copy
competitive advantages (Theoharakis & Hooley, 2008).
In the literature, despite arguments of many scholars (Beyer & Trice, 1982; Cherney & McGee,
2011; Fisher & Maltz, 1997; Low & Mohr, 2001; Maltz, 2000; Maltz & Kohli, 2001; Moorman,
Zaltman, & Deshpande, 1992; Zaltman & Deshpande, 2000), claiming that managers are using
marketing research just to make decisions and to enhance their understanding about the market,
former studies did not pay attention to negative factors which can interrupt the processes of an
appropriate use of information and valid decision making. As Wierenga (2011) explained, market-
ing as a discipline which has acquired extensive knowledge about consumers’ behavior knows
hardly anything about managers’ behavior relating to the use of marketing information in decision
making. In fact, we know little about consequences of the managers’ limited capacity influencing
the information processing, for example, due to information overloading problems. In fact, we
know little about consequences associated with lack of analytical thinking in the sphere of decision
making, related to narrow cognitive capacity, limited memory, and strong reliance on personal
experience which make managers to look for much simpler solutions in making decisions, based
on intuition. The problems with information adaptation in decisions, as well as the problems of
analytical thinking, put the question mark over the entire usefulness of information and further
conduct of the marketing research.
Considering the above arguments, we will need to explain on what basis, managers encounter
problems in the processes of decision making and to what extent they can solve (or not) them in the
framework of the informational sources derived from marketing research. In other words, the main
question which is being tackled in the article is whether the research results actually create an effect
in decision making or whether they are overruled by intuition and other irrational managerial
behavior. It is also believed that useful information and valid decisions are in fact separate issues,
because for the most managers one thing is to possess and use information (derived from the mar-
keting research) to its maximum, and the other thing is to make valid decisions based on that
information. The successful integrity of both spheres is dependent on activities personally under-
taken by managers and their internal capabilities—predispositions. In that case, the risk of making
wrong business decisions should be assumed wholly by the manager and not shared with the mar-
ket researcher or marketing research projects. Thus, in description of the research results, we will
focus on obstacles interfering with the area of proper use of information as well as the process of
Tarka 69

decision making, proposing at the end of this article some useful hints on how to improve both
spheres.

Problems with decision making in business environment

There are two general theories responsible for decision making (Montgomery, 1983), where the
first group of theory represents models that are too complex, so the manager does not under-
stand these models and, consequently, does not use them in practice. The other theory repre-
sents models which tend to be too simple so they are not valid representations of the real world
(Chakravarti, Mitchell, & Staelin, 1981). The first theory is connected with the assumptions of
the rational decision-making theory (Allison, 1971; March & Simon, 1958; Simon, 1979;
Tversky & Kahneman, 1974, 2000), in which the whole analysis of making effective choice is
dependent on prediction and explanation of the actual state of knowledge and its consequences,
as well as on searching for the real facts. According to the model of rational decision making,
managers behave similarly as actors when they enter decision situations with known objectives.
The actors gather appropriate information and develop a set of alternative solutions. They select
the optimal alternative. As such, in view of this theory, people (decision makers) are generally
thought to be effective in pursuing the goals provided, and they are able to describe their
choices (alternatives) and predict consequences in the maximization process. They should
strive to make optimal decisions, through solving problems mathematically (or strong analyti-
cal reasoning), as it increases their chances of survival in a competitive environment. For
instance, Little (1970) suggested to use a model building approach, which he termed Decision
Calculus. This approach may seem to have a major impact on decision model in marketing, and
although it has the advantage of rigor, precision which significantly facilitates the derivation of
testable implications from various alternative decisions, its disadvantage lies in the fact that
making decisions, both small and big in the business environment, is often much more difficult
and complex than it might have been. It is due to many variables which influence the managers’
decisions, such as the uncertainty of environment, organizational conflicts, human limitations,
or personal interests between various organization players. Hence decisions, due to complexity
and various interacting factors which play certain role in the course of decision making, cannot
be only structured on the basis of mathematics. They cannot be understood and solved in their
optimal way either, as long as there is no perfect information and knowledge regarding the
completeness of all important factors contributing to managerial decisions and their conse-
quences which are hard to predict (Fredrickson & Mitchell, 1984). Therefore, an objectively
rational theory was inevitably replaced by the theory, which was formed on the bounded-
rational rules in decision making (Schafir, Simonson, & Tversky, 2000).
In the bounded-rationality theory, although managers are still obliged to sustain the mathemati-
cal rigorous approach in the process of making decisions, they have also a chance to approach the
decision on much more loose conditions. In that case, they have to keep open minds in making
choices and to find the explanation of their best made choice. The choice is, however, grounded on
the subjective reasons, and it is essentially qualitative in its nature and typically vague. As Simon
(1957) explained, managers in order to make complex decision situations more manageable tend
to construct simplified solutions (decision rules and models). Consequently, such model may be
overly simple and thus incorrect. Dean and Sharfman (1992) have found, by examining rationality
in a study of 57 strategic decisions in 24 corporations, that threatening environments, high uncer-
tainty, and external control decreased rationality in decisions. This result may suggest that decision
makers move along the continuum, from the rationality sphere to bounded rationality (Cosier &
Schwenk, 1990; Schweiger, Sandberg, & Rechner, 1989).
70 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

Managers’ limitations in processing information

At this point, understanding the problems of decision makers and their internal human limitations
is becoming crucial. They are as follows: narrow cognitive capacity and limited memory, too
strong reliance on personal experience, and information overloading versus selectivity of the infor-
mation contents derived from marketing research. These problems are consequently leading to
preference of intuition (see, for example, the works of Cyert & March, 1963; Dane & Pratt, 2007;
Edmunds & Morris, 2000; Jacoby, 1984; Kharti & Alvin, 2000; Pinfield, 1986; Sinclair &
Ashkanasy, 2005).

The narrow cognitive capacity and limited memory

The first problem pertains to the narrow cognitive capacity that puts the limits on the managers’
rational way of thinking and consequently decision making. Narrow cognitive ability makes man-
agers more myopic and selective in the perception of information and its further processing (Case,
2012). People are not cognitive superheroes who integrate information or calculate reasonably
different alternatives within the undertaken decisions, and although decision makers in companies
may potentially develop many alternatives, virtually, due to limited cognitive capacity, they ana-
lyze them superficially. This situation is a result of selective perception of the information contents
derived from marketing research, which definitely works in favor of intuition. In fact, managers in
order to meet challenges with limited information-processing capabilities need to construct belief
structures that are simplified representations of their world (March & Simon, 1958; O’Reilly,
1983; Simon, 1955). These structures are considered indispensable to any decision maker, for
without them, individuals would be overwhelmed by an information world of staggering complex-
ity. The problem, however is that, through the selective approach to informational sources from
marketing research, managers unconsciously get rid of important parts of information which make
up the whole system of the correct understanding of external environment (Walsh, 1988). Thus,
selectivity can limit not only the managers’ ability to appropriate comprehension of any informa-
tion domain, but it can also narrow their horizon and perception of the environment, leading them
toward largely biased decisions, supported to a greater extent by intuition. It can be even argued
that managers are more inclined to consider certain information in a situation that relates specifi-
cally to the activities in their area of interest.
Since the managers’ limited memory capacity affects their knowledge level, that memory will
also play significant role in their approach to remember the research results. It can be argued that
a great memory capacity and simultaneously better cognitive ability facilitates managers’ reason-
ing, information processing, which leads to higher level of knowledge and more valid decision
processes (Glenberg, 1997; Reyna, Lloyd, & Brainerd, 2003). Hence, the greater is the memory
capacity which is influencing the managers’ knowledge, the better is the final effect on their con-
viction to this research (Tarka, 2017). However, in context of the influence of knowledge, we need
to implement the conceptual distinction between memory of managers, that is, their ability to
memorize and store information from marketing research and the learning processes which influ-
ence the knowledge level. When managers need to make decisions based on market research infor-
mation, they are forced to thoroughly evaluate, draw conclusions, and contextualize the data
themselves which then leads to obtaining in-depth knowledge about the environment (Keszey,
2015). However, when managers continuously face various urgent tasks in the company, they have
no enough time to contextualize and synthesize the information available to them. Constant time
pressure and the dominance of short-term over long-term goals limit managers’ ability to learn
from the information available to them. Moreover, as Kyllonen and Stephens (1990) explained,
Tarka 71

each human being may have a lot of declarative knowledge but not be able to memorize and store
new information in the long run. The person in business organization may have access to valuable
information derived from the marketing research, yet still be facile in acquiring new information
from that research, that is, be an adept learner about certain new market facts. Speaking more gen-
erally, information-knowledge availability and information-knowledge acquisition are separable
entities.

Problems with information overloading

Another issue appears in the context of information overload and thus makes a kind of paradox
with regard to the limitations put on the managers’ capabilities in the area of information process-
ing. The paradoxical situation is that although there is an abundance of information available, it is
still difficult to obtain useful, relevant information when it is needed (Edmunds & Morris, 2000).
The paradox is also that the technological developments of the last 50 years have made more infor-
mation more available to more managers than at any other time in human history. However, while
there are obvious benefits from easier access to information, research has found that information
overload can lead to stress and increased confusion (Lewis, 1996). Information overloading is
much complicated by the big data trends, which cause problems with information adaptation and
its processing, although from the perspective of securing far and wide, (especially new) sources of
available information, big data create some opportunities for managers too (George, Haas, &
Pentland, 2014). For instance, new insights obtained from such data value extraction can meaning-
fully complement official statistics, survey, and archival data sources that remain largely static,
adding depth and insight from collective experiences, thereby narrowing both information and
time gaps. The problem is that such data often need sophisticated operations in the process of com-
bining and synthesis, so that the data might be eligible for the end users. That is why companies
need huge resources, mainly well-paid researchers capable of controlling such unprecedented vol-
ume and multifaceted richness of data. The problem is that the computers and Internet communica-
tion channels (Swash, 1998), which were invented by humans to produce and disseminate
information, at present generate information much faster than any company and manager can pro-
cess it.1 Therefore, it is apparent that an abundance of information, instead of enabling managers to
do their job, threatens to engulf and diminish their control over the situation. In the end, informa-
tion overload seems to be bringing negative effect on managers discouraging them from engage-
ment in the effort of processing data and information, not to mention the market researchers. In
other words, a lack of control, too much effort, and confusion due to the overflowing informational
sources pushes decision makers again, toward simpler solutions based on intuition.

Belief structure and strong reliance on personal experience

Finally, it can be proved that managers when routinely confront ill-structured, complex problems
that challenge their cognitive capacities (Mason & Mitroff, 1981; Mintzberg, Raisinghani, &
Theoret, 1976; Schwenk, 1984; Ungson, Braunstein, & Hall, 1981), in order to meet such chal-
lenges with limited information-processing capabilities, often construct a belief structure that is
substitute of information, otherwise simplified representation of their world (O’Reilly, 1983;
Simon, 1955). A belief structure reduces information-processing demands and renders information
worlds manageable by structuring experience (Bower, Black, & Turner, 1979), by facilitating
information acquisition and retrieval (Cantor & Mischel, 1977) and by providing a basis for infer-
ence (Snyder & Uranowitz, 1978). In short, a belief structure acts as a guide to an information
domain. It is indispensable to any decision maker, and for without it, individuals would be
72 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

overwhelmed by an information world of staggering complexity (Daft & Weick, 1984). However,
even the belief structures can seriously limit the manager’s ability to understand an information
domain (Walsh, 1988). In consequence, as Tversky and Kahneman (1974) proved long time ago,
human judgments which accompany decisions are frequently subject to systematic biases.
Despite the above limitations, the bounded-rationality theory and its conception of making
choice have many prospective advantages for development, especially in business organizations,
as compared to the completely rational (typically mathematically based) models of making choice.
It is due to the fact that managers, when assuming the background for this theory, are free of rigor-
ous decision rules and focus on the subjective line of reasoning, which, in fact, seems to be closer
to the way they normally think and talk about the choices they are faced with. Another positive
aspect is that thinking about the choice (as guided by subjective reasons) provides a natural way to
understand the conflict that characterizes the process of making decisions.
There also seems to appear a real interplay between managers’ experience and their approach to
use information as well as further decision making. However, the empirical research findings indi-
cate (Perkins & Rao, 1990) that strong reliance on previous experiences distorts the process of the
information adaptation too, especially its correct understanding and positioning in decision pro-
cess, although, however, the experience can also improve that process. A manager with consider-
able experience, that refers to some level of accumulated knowledge, can be on one side
intellectually conscious regarding the potential and threats flowing out of the marketing research,
but, that experience can paradoxically put some limits on the understanding of the real value of
information. In consequence, even if there exist pure facts or reliable informational sources, they
are not taken into consideration, for the managers can be prejudiced to such information and make
decisions based on their own rules, previous knowledge, and experience.

Two contrasting theories of decision making

From the perspective of problems described above, we should think that the choice of rationally
bounded theory in decisions made by managers, as well as the elimination of issues associated with
information use in an organization, is a natural course of action and thinking (Glazer, 1991). The
problem, however, is that even a formal acceptance of the bounded-rationality theory does not
exclude the likelihood that information derived from marketing research will not be considered in
practice. In short, managers may treat it officially as important, but virtually, the information will
be meaningless for them or only partially supportive in their work, decisions, and plans. In fact, the
information will be neglected, and the decision makers will display only their superficial interest
in information sources (Payne, Bettman, & Johnson, 1993). In this context, there seems to be ongo-
ing contradiction between the managers’ thinking (including a procedural and reasonable way of
making choices, as well as thinking of acceptance of the risk) and the perception of information
usefulness in decisions and other activities (Sinkula, 1994). Even despite all bounded-rationality
theory arguments and worked out rules for decision-making processes, managers may still avoid
the information sources derived from marketing research in reference to undertaken decisions.
Finally, it is worth remembering that managers (despite their human inclination to the reduction
of effort in thinking and the limitation of making decisions, as well as despite sometimes difficult
external conditions accompanying making decisions) are not relieved of analyzing research results.
They are not relieved of rational thinking either. The fact that they, as human beings, are limited in
the scope of using the whole spectrum of cognitive capacities does not yet mean that they are
allowed to reject such a way of thinking completely. Their behavior should be, therefore, balanced,
considering the theory of complete rationality and bounded rationality. It even appears that in some
situations, they should plan their decisions according to rational strategy, and in the other cases,
Tarka 73

they need to consider the bounded-rationality strategy. As Fredrickson (1985) mentioned, “the
decision makers’ approaches need to be simultaneously rational and intuitive” (p. 821). In other
words, they should be rational in some ways and intuitive (according to the rules of the bounded-
rationality theory) in the other way. At this point, we may argue that whether decision makers in
organizations are still able to make valid decisions. Does it, however, happen in reality, that infor-
mation still influences the managers’ decisions? Do they seek complete information from market-
ing research? Since we do not know what information and decision styles are accompanying the
managers, the author will attempt in this study to answer this and other questions on the basis of
empirical research results. They will be discussed in the next (i.e., empirical and final remarks)
sections of this article.

Methodology of the empirical research

Measurement instrument and its contents
In the conducted empirical research, that is, in the process of gathering the information, the Internet
questionnaire survey was used, which means that a direct link to the questionnaire, to the chosen
group of the respondents (invited to the survey through the two social networking sites: LinkedIn
and Golden Line),2 was sent via personal emails. The method of providing answers to the questions
in the online survey included indication by the respondents the answers on Likert 7-point scale for
respective items which were expressed in format of agree/disagree statements. All information
which was collected on their basis was used mainly for the descriptive analysis of the empirical
results. In that case, the author has followed the recommendations of other researchers, who often
stressed the importance of simple forms of statistical description of the research results (Creswell,
2013; Schiff & D’Agostino, 1996; Tukey, 1975, 1980).
Given theoretical assumptions, two main areas of the research (which have included their own
separate sets of items) were generated and examined. First area of the empirical research was given
a name usefulness of marketing information (UMI) since the contents of particular items described
mainly the influences of informational aspects on the managers, such as increase in market knowl-
edge level (3.1.A.1), information overload (3.1.A.2), value of information in time (3.1.A.3), analy-
sis of information from perspective of personal experience (3.1.A.4), intuition as cause of
information rejection (3.1.A.5), limited memory capacity disabling information storage for longer
time (3.1.A.6), value of information describing future (3.1.A.7), a requirement of in-depth analysis
of information derived from marketing research (3.1.A.8) and information compliance with deci-
sion makers’ knowledge (3.1.A.9).
The second section which referred to the validity of marketing decisions (VMD) was defined by
the following items: a need for consulting information with others before making decision (3.1.B.1),
importance of information in decision making (3.1.B.2), reliance on information as the most
important factor in decisions (3.1.B.3), reliance on easy-to-access information in the undertaken
decisions (3.1.B.4), time of making decisions (3.1.B.5), a need for consulting decisions with others
(3.1.B.6), analytical approach in solving decision problems (3.1.B.7) and intuitive approach in
solving decision problems (3.1.B.8).
It needs to be mentioned that both sets of items measuring two separate areas of research:
UMI and VMD (see Table 1) were generated on the basis of the author’s knowledge and the
interviews (as part of execution of the qualitative research with respect to in-depth analysis) with
10 experienced managers, employed in multinational corporations in Poland. Participants were
asked to write down their thoughts that come to mind in relation to the contents of particular
areas, namely, UMI and VMD. At this point, it is also worth emphasizing, that the construct
74 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

Table 1.  The lists of items describing two areas of the empirical research: overall usefulness of
information and validity of marketing decisions.

Item Statement
3.1.A.1 After conducting the marketing research, the level of my knowledge about the market
increases
3.1.A.2 I don’t have a problem with making a correct decision, if I get a lot of information from
the research
3.1.A.3 If marketing research lasts too long, the information from it doesn’t lose cognitive value
for me
3.1.A.4 I analyze the information from the research from the perspective of my personal
experience I got from the work
3.1.A.5 I reject some information from the research, because intuition tells me to do so, on the
basis of the present status quo
3.1.A.6 It’s not difficult to me to keep in mind in the long term the results of the marketing
research, which my company conducted, for example a half a year ago,
3.1.A.7 I give more attention to the information from the research, which describes future than
the present
3.1.A.8 I don’t only focus on the final conclusions in the research report, but also I analyze other
information
3.1.A.9 I prefer the kind of information, which is not compliant to my earlier knowledge about
market environment
3.1.B.1 After receiving the results from the marketing research, I always consult them with other
people in the company
3.1.B.2 In making decisions, I only rely on the information from the research
3.1.B.3 I don’t always have a gut feeling in case of making a correct decision, so I must use the
information obtained from the marketing research
3.1.B.4 In making decisions, I don’t only relay on easy-to-access and quickly obtained information
3.1.B.5 I don’t make quick decisions, which extends my decision making process
3.1.B.6 I don’t always analyze the decision problem, which I face in the company, with other
colleagues
3.1.B.7 I don’t define in writing (i.e. in notes) the way of solving a decision problem, which I face
on my own
3.1.B.8 I can intuitively identify these decision variants, which are the greatest market risks for
my company

VMD describes a completely new area of research. Similarly, the UMI, although it may be simi-
lar to the idea of measurement perceived information quality (PIQ) by Deshpande & Zaltman
(1982) or conceptual use of information (CUI) by Menon and Wilcox (2001), in reality, it bears
a quite different context of reference and application. First, PIQ and CUI measures refer only to
information quality and information use on the basis of the given research project in the com-
pany, which means both measures can be used only to examine very specific research projects
which take place in companies at the same time. As such, they can be used mostly in the study
cases. Second, the PIQ and CUI measures describe the PIQ by managers and its use only in the
context of the market research reports, thus narrowing needlessly the scope of knowledge of the
researched problem. For these reasons, the proposed two constructs UMI and VMD should be
rather perceived as broader and more detailed extensions, as well as the generalizations of the
researched problem which in practice can be applied in studies measuring the overall level of the
UMI and VMD in the companies.
Tarka 75

Finally, before the whole measurement instrument was positioned on the website, and it had
been pretested in the offline pilot study (N = 50) with decision makers working in the large compa-
nies, in order to improve the quality of the final version of questionnaire. The logic behind this type
of analysis follows not only commonly accepted procedures in instrument development (Cronbach,
1990; Fiske, 1978; Goldstein & Hersen, 1984; Kline, 1986), but it follows also from the rules of
securing high quality of the measurement and assessment (Nunnally, 1978). Therefore, prior to
conducting the main study, a pretest was carried out to test the psychometric properties of the items
and questions listed in the measurement instrument.
The questionnaire was standardized, which means that all the questions put in it had the closed-
ended character, so the questionnaire reflected pre-specified by the author procedure of providing
by respondents answers according to suggested scale. Finally, the measurement instrument was
divided into appropriate thematic subsections such as screening questions (process of selection of
appropriate respondents for sample design), problem-specific questions (discussed above), and
questions concerning the status of the company.

Data collection process and sample design

The whole empirical research was conducted between 1 March and 31 August in 2014 in a
European country (Poland), and the process of choosing the appropriate respondents for the
sample was conducted with the use of the two techniques: judgmental sampling and snowball
sampling. Initially, during the construction of the judgmental sample, such information (about
general population characteristics) was used as employment and types of the industry according
to the classification provided by the Central Statistical Office in Poland. This kind of informa-
tion was taken into account before the beginning of the research at the stage of looking for the
sampling units, who would match the structure of the sample and the population of active enter-
prises in Poland. The snowball sampling technique, however, used in the research, helped to
increase the chance of reaching the specific individuals in the companies and target groups,
such as owners, managing directors, and product managers. The snowball sampling was used,
in particular, as the element supporting the judgmental sampling technique. So, in the first
place, during judgmental sampling, the choice of an appropriate sampling unit (company and
respondent) was made. However, in snowball sampling, the selected sampling unit was asked
for information about the network structure organization of the group of people working at
similar positions in different companies, which have similar profile of the research activity. In
this way, the chance of reaching the hard-to-access respondents having similar characteristics
and attitudes increased.
In sum, from 1100 sent emails (invitations) to the potential respondents, 289 responded. Thus,
one may argue that the response rate (26%) to the online questionnaire was quite decent against
typically low response rates, which take place in many empirical studies conducted online. The
advantage of such communication was mainly due to the personal contact, which was initiated by
the researcher with the respondent via private email. Therefore, this strategy of respondent recruit-
ment seems to be very effective, as it helps to increase the sample size. Obviously, there were also
respondents who did not agree to the participation in the research or simply did not complete the
questionnaire. In that case, a nonresponse analysis was conducted to clarify the reasons for not
returning the completed questionnaire. The used method was a direct telephone contact with a
randomly selected subsample of 15 nonrespondents to determine why they did not respond. The
main reason for the lack of response of the eligible nonrespondents was the lack of time to engage
in the research and to return it before the deadline. The remainder claimed that company policy
prevented them from responding to the questionnaire.
76 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

Table 2.  Percentage of respondents according to their positions and functions in companies—after
identifying the companies conducting marketing research in the sample, N = 213.

Category Respondent type Percentage

Position Marketing/sales director 45
Product manager 27
Co-/owner, vice-/chairman, managing 20
director, CEO
Marketing executives 8
Total 100
Function The user of research results, without 100
the responsibility of the research
Total

CEO: chief executive officer.

Table 3.  Employment in the companies, which conduct marketing research—percentage of responses,
N = 213.

Employment Number of companies, which

conduct marketing research
Less than 15 (at least 6) 9
From 16 to 99 17
From 100 to 249 16
From 250 to 499 8
Above 499 50
Total 100

Additionally, after eliminating from sample (N = 289), the companies that did not conduct the
marketing research projects at all, or did not make such type of research over the previous 5 years,
the size of sample equaled to N = 213. As a consequence, other companies, which did not yet con-
duct any marketing research, and at the same time did not meet the requirements of the merits of
the empirical research conducted by the author (which were identified during the recruitment),
were excluded from further analysis.
The structure of the sample included the individuals in companies, who have borne the respon-
sibility mainly for the organization of strategic and tactic marketing activities. In short, the sample
structure consisted of the respondents responsible for decision-making processes and included
marketing directors (45%), product managers (27%), managing directors and chief executive offic-
ers (20%), as well as marketing executives (8%) (Table 2). These respondents were chosen to
obtain the sample units who worked most closely to the researchers contracted for a particular
project. Besides, mainly the medium and large firms were taken into account (see Table 3); hence,
the survey sample has an intended skew toward firms with large marketing research budgets. The
results of the empirical research confirm that due to the limitations in human capital and finance
(i.e., the lack of appropriate experience, knowledge, and competences), marketing research pro-
jects are usually not conducted in small organizations. In most cases, marketing research is realized
by large companies (Tarka, 2017), and managers in such firms tend to have more resources avail-
able for the research projects and have more technically sophisticated research conditions. Also, as
the theory hints (Bellenger, 1979), managers in large companies have a more favorable attitude
Tarka 77

Figure 1.  The structure of the sample according to industry and companies conducting marketing
research, N = 213.

toward marketing research than managers in small companies have. In the process of selecting
sampling units, the main focus was on the companies from industries such as fast-moving con-
sumer goods (FMCG), finance and insurance, retail and wholesale, and media. The choice of com-
panies from these industries resulted indirectly from their big share of expenditures on marketing
research in the marketing budget, where for years the FMCG manufacturers are the leaders (see
Figure 1).

The empirical research findings

Moving on to the analysis of the results of the empirical research (see Figure 2), it can be claimed
that a substantial percentage of managers said that the level of their knowledge had not increased
after completing the marketing research. Only 14% (after summing up categories of the answer
numbers 5–7 of a variable 3.1.A.1) said the knowledge about market phenomena increased under
the influence of the specific research activities and information resulting from conducting them.
This result advocates the fact that the availability of marketing information is not necessary condi-
tion for the generation of knowledge, which largely depends on learning processes. In order to gain
appropriate level of knowledge, decision makers need to contextualize, evaluate, and synthesize
available information. The problem is that constant time pressure and the dominance of short-term
over long-term goals often limits the managers’ ability to learn from such information. In conse-
quence, even if there is available information, from marketing research, they learn little from it.
In addition, a lot of the surveyed decision makers rely much on intuition (see variable 3.1.A.5 of
41% of the answers resulting from joining category numbers 5, 6, and 7, as well as variable 3.1.B.8
78 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

Figure 2.  Distributions of the examined variables in the context of the researched subject.
Source: Own calculations based on the empirical research, N = 213.
Explanation: Values displayed in the white rectangles denote medians. The information describing symbols used (i.e.,
statements 3.1.A.1–3.1.A.9 and 3.1.B.1–3.1.B.8) can be found in Table 1.

of 91% of the answers including the three categories of 5–7), which influences negatively the way
they use information obtained from marketing research, and what is more, results in lowering the
level of the quality of the whole decision process (compare the results of Figure 2) and variables
proving the lack of information importance in managerial decisions (3.1.B.2); too strong reliance
Tarka 79

on gut feeling instead of information (3.1.B.3); too much focus on easy-to-access informational
sources (3.1.B.4); hasty process of decision making, which limits time needed in information pro-
cessing (3.1.B.5); the lack of consulting decisions which have to be made with others in company
(3.2.B.6); and the lack of analytical approach in solving decision problems by managers (3.1.B.7).
This situation is perhaps due to fact (Hogarth, 2001) “intuition can be reached with little apparent
effort and without conscious awareness, as it involves little or no conscious deliberation” (p. 14).
However, these results also suggest that intuition will rather not lead to increase in precision level
of the managers’ thinking and simultaneously improvement of their processes of decision making.
Too strong reliance on intuition as remedy for solving decision problems mistakenly leads them to
undertaking gambling acts with a higher level of risk. Given this, it is clear that information from
marketing research stands in the opposite direction to intuition and vice versa.
Since managers pay a lot of their attention to intuition (3.1.B.8 of 91% of the answers including
the three categories of 5–7), we may think it is due to the nature of problems they may encounter
in their work. For instance, the complexity of decisions and difficult tasks associated with informa-
tion processing make managers opt for the effortless and sometimes simplified ways of compre-
hending the external environment. Even when they decide to process information from marketing
research, they usually do not conduct in-depth analysis of information, focusing on the final con-
clusions in the research report (3.1.A.8 of 62% of the answers after combining response categories
of 1–3). Another argument tells us that decision makers make their choices under time pressure
(3.1.B.5 of 80% responses on the three categories: 1–3), what has been also proved in other studies
(see the works of Eisenhardt, 1989; Hitt, Keats, & DeMarie, 1998; Perlow, Okhuysen, & Repenning,
2002). Given this, intuition helps managers to reduce the time needed to undertake instant deci-
sions. Interestingly, the argument inclining decision makers to prefer intuition (while making deci-
sions) to information from marketing research arises from the fact that managers, generally, have
serious dilemmas in the area of selection and interpretation of proper information (i.e. from research
reports). As they admit, it is because of too much information from research provided by research-
ers (61% of the answers—joined categories 1–3, variable 3.1.A.2). In fact, too much information
discourages them from using information to a larger extent. Moreover, information becomes a
subject of criticism, since information overloading causes managers’ confusion in the process of
making decisions. This result supports other empirical research conducted by Borges, Goldstein,
Ortmann, and Gigerenzer (1999) who argued that the strategy of choosing the optimal decision
from a set of too many alternatives for people is more interesting when the level of information and
simultaneously knowledge is moderate than when it is very low or very high. Therefore, we can
infer that too many informational sources and requirement of their processing works in favor of
intuition.
Given the above facts, we can also infer that managers neither comprehend nor manage infor-
mation successfully, because their perception of data is limited, which is partially due to fact that
most of them have difficulties to keep in mind in the long term the results of the marketing research
(66% of the answers—joined categories 1–3 for variable 3.1.A.6). Thus, decision makers due to
limited memory capacity, not only absorb less information from market research, at slower speed,
causing often inappropriate “adaption” of information (i.e., information processing, its storing, and
memorizing), but also this limited memory influences negatively their state of knowledge. For all
these reasons, probably, any investment in the marketing research project can be sometimes use-
less, even harmful, unless managers learn how effectively train their memory and incorporate the
informational sources into their decisions. Otherwise, we can argue that managers will drown in
“oceans of data” and by default will turn completely to sphere of intuition.
However, managers make incorrect assumptions about available information, what in practice
happens due to lack of the comfort of free time. We cannot forget that managers act often under
80 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

time pressure. Therefore, we agree with a point of view of Shah, Horne, and Capella (2012), who
argued that even good data would not guarantee good decisions in the company. The data and
informational sources, no matter how comprehensive or well produced, need to be complemented
by meaningful interpretation, in various possible contexts, and reasonable judgment based on
logic. Thus, the only means of having an impact on managerial processes of decision making and
learning is for marketing researchers to deliver only superior quality of information that is accu-
rate, transparent, comprehensive, relevant, and that reduces managerial uncertainty by giving
direct answers to managerial questions (see also the works of Gupta & Wilemon, 1988; Low &
Mohr, 2001; Maltz & Kohli, 2001). Managers will paradoxically not learn a lot from those research
studies that usually serve to describe the market and provide general background information.
Also, their expectations toward the information rise not only as far, as the information extraction is
concerned, but also in terms of its selectivity (see the 84% of answers—joined categories 1–3 for
variable 3.1.B.4).
Managers need primarily to ensure that their informational decision processes and capabilities
will keep pace with the computing possibilities and information reported by marketing researchers,
although the latter mentioned group of professionals cannot forget either on how to tailor the most
important informational contents to the managers’ needs. The fact is that marketing researchers too
often overly focus on the analytical tool itself and methodological aspects instead of on how man-
agers will use important information from research to improve their judgment, decision processes,
and so on (Tarka, 2017). Therefore, managers may have difficulties in objectively evaluating the
professional quality of marketing research as they lack the required statistical background knowl-
edge to judge the accuracy of the applied methods and the results which are derived from the
research (Keszey, 2015). It can be argued that between marketing researchers and managers, there
appears even information asymmetry, due to relative managerial unfamiliarity with statistical pro-
cedures compared to that of market researchers. This asymmetry, as Lee, Lindquist, and Acito
(1997) have explained, encumbers the objective judgment of the research quality. In consequence,
marketing researchers should play a considerable role in “smoothing” the contents of information
in order to enable managers their easier adaptation in decisions, as well as effective perception of
the quality of marketing research. Still their influence on the managers’ ultimate use of marketing
research information in decisions and on the learning process about the external environment is
vague and probably less direct.
The decision makers are also prone to rejecting information, if marketing research lasts too long
in time (variable 3.1.A.3). They require from researchers providing information in reports within a
short period of time, without necessary technical and methodological details (see answers of vari-
able 3.1.A.8 where 62% regard the negative answers resulting from joining the categories 1–3 and
3.1.B.4 of 84% answers, assuming the categories 1–3). We cannot forget that managers are over-
whelmed with urgent tasks and simply do not have the capacity to profoundly analyze market data
each time. Therefore, the fact that decision makers in companies are somewhat forced to make
decisions in short term was proved (among others by the 80% of answers of answers from joined
categories 1–3, obtained on the basis of variable 3.1.B.5). Promptly undertaken decisions generate
further paradoxes, as long as the managers, who receive the results from the marketing research,
do not always consult them with the other people in the company (variable 3.1.B.1 with 1 and 2
response categories explaining 88% in total). The similar problem exists in case when they have to
consult their decisions, especially those which concern their closest area of duties (compare the
results of variable 3.1.B.6, with combined answers from the categories 5–7 of 95% in total). The
point is, however, that in many research projects, the time of realization should not be automati-
cally limited, since limitation of the time decreases the level of effectiveness of the whole research
and at the same time provides the lower level of information usefulness (Low & Mohr, 2001). For
Tarka 81

example, the research report and its conclusions are much more well-thought-out when the
researcher has ample time for its preparation, but under the pressure of time limits and the require-
ments of management, he/she draws conclusions, which can turn out to be trivial or too general,
sometimes even erroneous. However, it has to be stressed that time limitations imposed in compa-
nies on marketing research do not result from the irrational (ill-advised) approach of the manage-
ment to the preparation of the report but are the consequence of socio-economic situation and
market conditions as well as changes occurring in the market and society environment.
The results prove that decision makers, users do not have much time for a thorough analysis
and consultation of the results with researchers or other employees in the company. This is
astonishing result if we assume conducted years ago by Janis (1982) and Schweiger, Sandberg,
and Ragan (1986), who acknowledged that due to often bounded-rational decision processes,
managers rather seek to improve their rational activity, usually using more information and cre-
ating more diverse viewpoints including so-called groupthink, as the excessive tendency to seek
concurrence within their thinking. This group interaction in the company although helps manag-
ers from many perspectives, its disadvantage lies in the ongoing debates among the members of
the company and finding the optimal solution among many alternatives or preferences. As a
result, finding ultimate approval of solution leads to possible conflicts between participants of
the interactive meetings. The assumption here is that organizations are coalitions of people with
competing interests, and while the individuals may share some goals such as welfare of the com-
pany, they also have conflicts. For example, some people in business organization may favor
growth, while others may favor profitability. These conflicting preferences arise from different
bets on shape of the future, biases induced by position within the organization, and clashes in
personal ambitions and interests. Simply put, decisions follow the desires and subsequent choices
of the most powerful people, and decision makers often attempt to change the power structure
by engaging in “political” tactics such as coalition formation, use of information, and the
employment of outside experts. This is also why managers are more inclined to make their deci-
sions on their own, without consulting them with the others.
Ultimately, the process of making decisions in the companies is paradoxically biased by manag-
ers’ personal experience (see answers from the joined categories 5–7 of 3.1.A.4 of 64% in total).
Consequently, managers lack the appropriate objective standards in the process of information
evaluation, as well as in decision making. They strongly rely on the previous decision schemas
which are often biased by past experiences and look only for data to justify themselves and their
choices. Moreover, making decisions in highly complex, competitive and dynamic environments,
based largely on personal experience can cause less than optimal decisions to be made, placing the
organization in a less effective and competitive position than it would be otherwise. In the worst
case scenario, this may result in dire consequences for the organization. Interestingly, some of the
managers are even prone to rejecting information from marketing research, if intuition tells them
something different (about the examined reality)—as we know—it can be the consequence of hav-
ing erroneous information or previous experience (see answers regarding variable 3.1.A.5). This
conclusion results from the distribution of the answers concerning the variable 3.1.B.8, suggesting
that almost 66% of the managers (see categories 6 and 7) are convinced that they could identify, on
the basis of intuition, these decision options, which constitute the greatest market risk for the com-
pany or which bring them the largest benefits—without the necessity of referring to reliable infor-
mation from marketing research. Therefore, the highest proportion of decision makers in companies
(by comparison the results derived from variable 3.1.B.3 of 78% of responses on the basis of joined
categories 1–3) declare a good attitude toward their already-made decisions.
The empirical research indicates also that the UMI decreases due to personal analytical barriers,
which managers encounter with reference to keeping in mind the former results of the marketing
82 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

research (66% of the answers of joined categories 1–3 regarding the variable 3.1.A.6); focusing too
much attention on marketing research information describing to a greater extent the present than
the future aspects of market phenomena (see variable 3.1.A.7 explaining 55% of responses across
categories 1–3) or personal preference in terms of the gathered marketing information, which
(according to the surveyed) should comply with the earlier beliefs about the external environment
(variable 3.1.A.9 and 61% of answers in total assuming the categories from 1 to 3).

Conclusion and final remarks

The conducted research and analysis allows us to draw the following conclusions. First of all, the
information derived from marketing research plays a rather supporting role for decision makers in
companies. Information users while making market decisions do not only rely on information from
the research. Moreover, they do not always make decisions concerning the particular problems,
which they are faced with, in consultation with other employees in a company. Therefore, it can be
claimed that there is a lack of a genuine willingness in companies to cooperate in solving common
or individual decision problems.
Second, there is a lack of systematic analytical approach of the managers in the solving decision
problems and looking for the best alternatives. A lot of managers make decisions and analyze deci-
sion problems on the basis of their own intuition and creativity rather than on rational thinking. As
a result, they do not consider analytically the potential consequences of the decisions made so far
as well as they do not think about the choice of the optimal (or the most satisfactory) decision
among the possible alternatives. The frequent use of intuition, however, is not panacea for all the
managerial problems, especially it cannot replace information which delivers complete and objec-
tive understanding of the external market conditions surrounding the company. The frequent use of
intuition may facilitate the decision problems at the expense of their accuracy. In fact, mistakes
which are committed by managers can be largely avoided with the objective information derived
from the marketing research, provided that research is effectively conducted. Therefore, intuition
although can be used in certain decision processes, it cannot completely replace information. The
former should play only a supporting role in the managerial judgment and thinking (the intuition
under certain conditions may indeed facilitate rapid and effective decision making in business
organizations). However, information from the research cannot be omitted too, as it contributes to
decisions in its own specific way. Perhaps, balancing between two spheres (intuition and informa-
tion) would be a more reasonable behavior.
Third, decision makers have serious dilemmas in the area of selecting and interpreting proper
information from marketing research. It is worth stressing that the key element of a well-prepared
report is avoiding the effect of overloading the users with data and information, because under the
influence of excessive information of different kinds, the managers start to appreciate simple
messages, revolving around the core of the subject of the problems solved. In many reports, mar-
keting researchers make occasionally simple and methodological mistakes, because they cannot
resist temptation to present too much and often unnecessary information. Consequently, informa-
tion overloading creates negative effect on an individual’s ability to cope with solving problems
and making decisions. Perhaps, some solutions which might be put forward to reduce information
overload for managers, are a reduction in the duplication of information found in the marketing
research reports, the adoption of personal information for management presented in the reports,
and the provision of value-added information. In fact, the use of marketing research information
depends on how researchers manage to understand the embedded managerial expectations from
the research, and since products delivered by researchers are not just the market information, but
a service to decrease managerial uncertainty, researchers should learn how to communicate in
Tarka 83

manager’s language and provide consulting-like added value. Executives expect mostly the
actionable results that provide forthright answers. They need information which is placed in a
certain context.
Also, Simpson and Prusak (1995) argued that problem with information overload occurs as a
result of a failure of the business community to recognize the ways in which information processes
add value to information. Consequently, in the companies, the roles of both information providers
(researchers) and information users (managers) should be examined, with particular emphasis on
the needs of managers (decision makers) for high value-added or quality marketing information.
Any conflicts which occur between researchers and managers are often encoded as the former
think of themselves as scientists, while the latter see themselves as businessmen (Deshpande &
Zaltman, 1982, 1984). In other words, there is a need to constantly bridge the gap between infor-
mation providers and users in their respective views of each other’s roles, competencies, and
requirements in information terms. Marketing researchers should play the role of intelligent agents
who are able to scan and comprehend text and summarize and automatically route the information
from the research for end users in order to reduce information overload. Perhaps, one of the most
effective ways, to increase that collaboration, that is, between a decision maker and a marketing
researcher is the development of mutual trust-based relationship (see the work of Moorman et al.,
1992) through regular meetings which will provide occasions for the researcher to gain insights
into managers’ everyday problems. Furthermore, interactions between these two parties provide
opportunities for marketing researchers to demonstrate their competence and benevolence for
managers. The managers will only trust researchers if they are convinced of the researchers’ meth-
odological competencies and willingness to assist in problem solving. If one of the two aspects is
missing, the managers will probably not trust the researchers.
Another investigated aspect refers to the decision makers’ well-being in terms of the decisions
made. One can even conclude that decision makers are convinced about their infallibility in terms
of making decisions. This effect of positive thinking and indirectly of overestimating own decision
abilities at work, as well as the assumption of not making any mistakes when making decisions,
results from purely human inclinations to keeping up positive images about themselves. People
have a natural inclination to perceiving themselves as being competent and having more control
over their own behavior and thinking, including the correctness of making decisions. The last issue
from the discussed problems here would mean that if a certain status quo, which is revealed by
decision makers through the information from marketing research, does not meet their earlier
expectations, the information becomes for them inconvenient in terms of the so far conducted
market activities. In other words, it is a specific kind of a burden for them, because the newly
obtained information makes managers revise their action plans. However, it can be claimed that
marketing research is valuable, but only from the theoretical point of view, because in some com-
panies, it is assumed that it generates additional value, but this is not verified. Thus, marketing
research is mostly the confirmation of already-made decisions and generates information, which is
to assure managers that their thinking was correct. Managers find it easier to maintain a certain
status quo and to remain silent about particular facts coming from marketing research, although it
is not common sense but a peculiar situation. It should be claimed that the greater is the “informa-
tional surprise,” and the more divergent are expectations of decision makers from the results
obtained from marketing research, the greater is their inclination to rejecting research information
and the greater is the inclination to using intuition and irrational thinking in the process of decision
making.
To conclude, the decision-making processes in business organization differ from perspective of
analytical conditions of making decisions. Managers rely on their experiences and gut feelings
more than marketing research, and consequently, they have also a greater difficulty to adapt
84 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

information from marketing research. It can be even claimed that the usefulness of information
(i.e., their use in the decision-making process) is influenced by personal experience, beliefs, as well
as managers’ bias. What is more, it is difficult to change peoples’ existing beliefs. In view of cogni-
tive dissonance theory, one can even claim that a human expresses a natural inclination to selecting
information, which is not in conflict with one’s personal beliefs and previously obtained informa-
tion. In consequence, further upholding such convictions results from a poor human self-confi-
dence, infallibility, and at the same time a high level of trusting in own decision skills and
judgments.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank all the people from the management and board of Millward Brown, TNS Global, and
GFK research agencies, for their valuable comments of an early draft of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes
1. The consensus in the literature is that we live in a climate of infoglut or, as Shenk (1997) puts it, we are
surrounded by data smog an expression for the muck and druck of the information age. Two other terms
found in the literature that are aptly used to describe the problem of information overload are analysis
paralysis (Stanley & Clipsham, 1997) and information fatigue syndrome (Oppenheim, 1997).
2. Their usefulness resulted among others from the fact that they included an in-depth personal information
about each of the respondents, taking into account different occupational groups.

References
Aaker, D., & Day, G. (1995). Marketing research. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
Bellenger, D. N. (1979). The marketing manager’s view of marketing research. Business Horizons, 22, 59–65.
Beyer, J. M., & Trice, H. M. (1982). The utilization process: A conceptual framework and synthesis of empiri-
cal findings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 591–622.
Borges, B., Goldstein, D. G., Ortmann, A., & Gigerenzer, G. (1999). Can ignorance beat the stock market?
In G. Gigerenzer & P. M. Todd (Eds.), Heuristics that make us smart (pp. 59–72). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., & Turner, T. J. (1979). Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology, 11,
177–220.
Cantor, N., & Mischel, W. (1977). Traits as prototypes: Effects of recognition memory. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 35, 38–48.
Case, D. O. (2012). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behav-
ior (3rd ed.). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
Chakravarti, D., Mitchell, A., & Staelin, R. (1981). Judgement based marketing decision models: Problems
and possible solutions. Journal of Marketing, 45(4), 13–23.
Cherney, A., & McGee, T. R. (2011). Utilization of social science research. Journal of Sociology, 47,
144–162.
Churchill, G. A., & Iacobucci, D. (2005). Marketing research: Methodological foundations. Fort Worth, TX:
Harcourt College Publishers.
Citrin, A. V., Lee, R. P., & McCullough, J. (2007). Information use and new product outcomes: The contin-
gent role of strategy type. The Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 259–273.
Cosier, R., & Schwenk, C. (1990). Agreement, consensus and thinking alike: Ingredients for poor decisions.
Academy of Management Journal, 4, 69–74.
Tarka 85

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Cronbach, L. J. (1990). Essentials of psychological testing. St. Louis, MO: Harper & Row.
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of
Management Review, 9, 284–295.
Dane, E., & Pratt, M. G. (2007). Exploring intuition and its role in managerial decision making. Academy of
Management Review, 32, 33–54.
Dean, J. W., & Sharfman, M. P. (1992). Procedural rationality in the strategic decision making process.
Journal of Management Studies, 30, 339–357.
Deshpande, R. (1982). The organizational context of market research use. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), 91–
101.
Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1982). Factors affecting the use of market research information: A path analy-
sis. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 14–31.
Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1984). A comparison of factors affecting researcher and manager perceptions
of market research use. Journal of Marketing Research, 21, 32–38.
Edmunds, A., & Morris, A. (2000). The problem of information overload in business organisations: A review
of the literature. International Journal of Information Management, 20, 17–28.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high velocity environments. Academy of Management
Journal, 32, 543–576.
Fisher, R. J., & Maltz, E. (1997). Enhancing communication between marketing and engineering: The mod-
erating role of relative functional identification. Journal of Marketing, 61(3), 54–71.
Fiske, D. W. (1978). Strategies for personality research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fredrickson, J. W. (1985). Effects of decision motive and organizational performance level on strategic deci-
sion processes. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 821–843.
Fredrickson, J. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (1984). Strategic decision processes: Comprehensiveness and perfor-
mance in an industry with an unstable environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 399–423.
George, G., Haas, M. R., & Pentland, A. (2014). Big Data and management: From the editors. Academy of
Management Journal, 57, 321–326.
Glazer, R. (1991). Marketing in an information-intensive environment: Strategic implications of knowledge
as asset. Journal of Marketing, 55(4), 1–19.
Glenberg, A. M. (1997). What memory is for. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 1–55.
Goldstein, G., & Hersen, M. (1984). Handbook of psychological assessment. New York, NY: Pergamon.
Gupta, A. K., & Wilemon, D. (1988). The credibility-cooperation at the R&D-Marketing interface. Journal
of Product Innovation Management, 5, 20–31.
Hitt, M. A., Keats, B., & DeMarie, S. M. (1998). Navigating in the new competitive landscape: Building
strategic flexibility and competitive advantage in the 21st century. Academy of Management Executive,
12(4), 22–42.
Hogarth, R. M. (2001). Educating intuition. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 98–109.
Jacoby, J. (1984). Perspectives of information overload. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 432–435.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton
Mifflin.
Keszey, T. (2015). The role of market researchers in managerial use of market research information. Trziste,
27(1), 43–56.
Kharti, N., & Alvin, H. (2000). The role of intuition in strategic decision making. Human Relations, 53,
57–86.
Kline, P. (1986). A handbook of test construction. New York, NY: Methuen.
Kyllonen, P. C., & Stephens, D. L. (1990). Cognitive abilities as determinants of success in acquiring logic
skill. Learning and Individual Differences, 2, 129–160.
Lee, H., Lindquist, J. D., & Acito, F. (1997). Managers’ evaluation of research design and its impact on the
use of research: An experimental approach. Journal of Business Research, 39, 231–240.
Lewis, D. (1996). Dying for information? London, England: Reuters Business Information.
86 International Journal of Market Research 60(1)

Little, J. D. C. (1970). Models and managers: The concept of a decision calculus. Management Science, 16,
466–485.
Low, G. S., & Mohr, J. J. (2001). Factors affecting the use of information in the evaluation of marketing com-
munications productivity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29, 70–88.
Malhotra, N. (2004). Marketing research: An applied orientation. London, England: Pearson.
Maltz, E. (2000). Is all communication created equal? An investigation into the effect of communication
mode on perceived information quality. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17, 110–127.
Maltz, E., & Kohli, A. K. (2001). Market intelligence dissemination across functional boundaries. In R.
Deshpande (Ed.), Using market knowledge (pp. 273–314). London, England: SAGE.
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Mason, R., & Mitroff, I. (1981). Challenging strategic planning assumptions. New York, NY: Wiley.
Menon, A., & Wilcox, J. B. (2001). USER: A scale to measure use of market research. In R. Deshpande (Ed.),
Using market knowledge (pp. 243–272). London, England: SAGE.
Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D., & Theoret, A. (1976). The structure of unstructured decision processes.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 246–275.
Montgomery, H. (1983). Decision rules and the search for dominance structure: Towards a process model of
decision making. Advances in Psychology, 14, 343–369.
Moorman, C. (1995). Organizational market information processes: Cultural antecedents and new product
outcomes. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 318–335.
Moorman, C., Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (1992). Relationships between providers and users of market-
research—The dynamics of trust within and between organizations. Journal of Marketing Research, 29,
314–328.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
O’Reilly, C. A. (1983). The use of information in organizational decision making: A model and some propo-
sitions. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp.
103–139). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Oppenheim, C. (1997). Managers’ use and handling of information. International Journal of Information
Management, 17, 239–248.
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Perkins, W. S., & Rao, R. C. (1990). The role of experience in information use and decision making by mar-
keting managers. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 1–10.
Perlow, L. A., Okhuysen, G. A., & Repenning, N. P. (2002). The speed trap: Exploring the relationship
between decision making and temporal context. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 931–955.
Pinfield, L. T. (1986). A field evaluation of perspectives on organizational decision making. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 31, 365–388.
Reyna, V. F., Lloyd, F. J., & Brainerd, C. J. (2003). Memory, development, and rationality: An integrative
theory of judgment and decision making. In S. L. Schneider & J. Shanteau (Eds.), Emerging perspectives
on judgment and decision research (pp. 201–245). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Schafir, E., Simonson, I., & Tversky, A. (2000). Reason-based choice. In D. Kahneman & A. Tversky (Eds.),
Choices, values, and frames (pp. 597–619). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Schiff, D., & D’Agostino, R. B. (1996). Practical engineering statistics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Schweiger, D. M., Sandberg, W. R., & Ragan, J. W. (1986). Group approaches for improving strategic deci-
sion making: A comparative analysis of dialectical inquiry, devil’s advocacy and consensus. Academy of
Management Journal, 29, 51–71.
Schweiger, D. M., Sandberg, W. R., & Rechner, P. L. (1989). Experimental effects of dialectical inquiry,
devil’s advocacy, and consensus approaches to strategic decision making. Academy of Management
Journal, 32, 745–772.
Schwenk, C. R. (1984). Cognitive simplification processes in strategic decision-making. Strategic
Management Journal, 5, 111–128.
Shah, S., Horne, A., & Capella, J. (2012). Good data won’t guarantee good decisions. Harvard Business
Review, 90(4), 45.
Tarka 87

Shenk, D. (1997). Data smog: Surviving the information glut. London, England: Abacus.
Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99–118.
Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man. New York, NY: Wiley.
Simon, H. A. (1979). Rational decision making in business organizations. The American Economic Review,
69, 493–513.
Simpson, C., & Prusak, L. (1995). Troubles with information overload: Moving from quantity to quality in
information provision. International Journal of Information Management, 15, 413–425.
Sinclair, M., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2005). Intuition: Myth or a decision-making tool? Management Learning,
36, 353–370.
Sinkula, J. M. (1994). Market information processing and organizational learning. Journal of Marketing,
58(1), 35–45.
Snyder, M., & Uranowitz, S. W. (1978). Reconstructing the past: Some cognitive consequences of person
perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 941–950.
Stanley, A. J., & Clipsham, P. S. (1997). Information overload * myth or reality? IEE Colloquium Digest,
97(340), 1–4.
Steers, W. N., & Shaw, J. I. (1993). Information search and impression formation. Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, 8, 323–334.
Swash, G. (1998). UK business on the Internet. New Library World, 99, 238–242.
Tarka, P. (2017). Marketing research effectiveness: Conditions and determinants. Poznań: Poznań University
of Economics.
Theoharakis, V., & Hooley, G. (2008). Customer orientation and innovativeness: Differing roles in new and
old Europe. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25, 69–79.
Tukey, J. W. (1975). Mathematics and the picturing of data. In Proceedings of the International Congress of
Mathematicians (pp. 523–531) (Vancouver, B.C., 1974, August 21–29), Vol. 2, Canad. Math. Congress,
Montreal, Que.
Tukey, J. W. (1980). We need both exploratory and confirmatory. The American Statistician, 34, 23–25.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185,
1124–1131.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (2000). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. In D. Kahneman & A.
Tversky (Eds.), Choices, values, and frames (pp. 209–223). New York, NY: Cambridge University
Press.
Ungson, G. R., Braunstein, D. N., & Hall, P. D. (1981). Managerial information processing: A research
review. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 16–134.
Walsh, J. P. (1988). Selectivity and selective perception: An investigation of managers’ belief structures and
information processing. The Academy of Management Journal, 31, 873–896.
Wierenga, B. (2011). Managerial decision making in marketing: The next research frontier. International
Journal of Research in Marketing, 28, 89–101.
Zaltman, G., & Deshpande, R. (2000). The use of market research: An exploratory study of manager and
researcher perspectives. In R. Deshpande (Ed.), Using market knowledge (pp. 31–81). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.

View publication stats