1

Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan

Department of Commerce
Assignment
SUBMITTED TO: Dr. Asad ur Rehman

SUBMITTED BY: Muhammad Ali Raza

ROLL NUMBER: 15

CLASS: MS(I&E)

SUBJECT: Entrepreneurial Marketing

Date of Submission: 11/Sep/2020

Muhammad Ali Raza (Roll Number: 15) MS (Innovation and Entrepreneurship)

2

Title:
The role of entrepreneurial marketing in new technology ventures first product
commercialization: An overview
Article:
I chose the article titled” The role of entrepreneurial marketing in new technology
ventures first product commercialization”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2015.1035039
Purpose:
This paper is a brief historical examination of entrepreneurial Marketing (EM),
Market Orientation (MO), exploratory and exploitative innovation activities in SMEs. The
discussion is situated within the context of new technology ventures first product
commercialization.
Entrepreneurial marketing:
Over the past two decades, Small and medium Enterprises marketing has been
extensively researched and this research has shown that small companies have different
sales tactics with large firms and form the basis for conventional marketing theory (Freel
2000). Tries to adapt and implement conventional marketing strategies to small and
medium-sized companies were unsuccessful, based on the assumption that the basic
marketing concepts established in big business extend universally. Research into small
business owners found it not unusual for them to have a negative attitude to traditional
marketing strategies (Lindberg and Cohn 1972). SMEs' market orientation depends
heavily on the entrepreneur's or small business owner's marketing experience and tends
to be a general practitioner rather than a manager or marketing specialist (Hogarth-Scott,
Watson, and Wilson 1996).
However, there is now a recognition that although the marketing strategy of SMEs
does not fit well-established theories, successful SMEs may focus on their distinct
'smallness' benefits.
(Carson et al. 1995) suggested that SME marketing was in fact entrepreneurial
marketing, a distinguishing style characterised by a variety of factors which included an
essentially informal, simplistic. This approach is the product of numerous factors,
including: small size; business and marketing restrictions; entrepreneurial influence; and,
lack of structured organisational structures or structured communication systems, often
with no marketing systems at all.
This type of marketing appears to be sensitive and open to competition and
naturally this is opportunistic (Carson et al. 1995) This also appears to be highly

Muhammad Ali Raza (Roll Number: 15) MS (Innovation and Entrepreneurship)

3

dependent on networks (Gilmore, Carson, and Grant 2001) and and on the opportunities
it creates for social capital generation (Bowey and Easton 2007). Networks promote the
development and creation of consumer contacts where word-of - mouth referral is
facilitated by utilising inter-organizational network connexions and personal
communication networks (Gilmore et al. 2001). More recently, (Morris, Schindehutte, and
LaForge 2002) EM has described 'the constructive identification and exploitation of
opportunities to acquire and maintain profitable clients through creative approaches to
risk management, resource utilization and value creation'.
Researchers often see EM actions as being derived from entrepreneurial thought,
entrepreneurs being creative, risk-takers, constructive and opportunities-oriented (Kirzner
1979) while (Hills and Hultman 2006) Defined EM behavioural characteristics which
included 'often two-way marketing strategies with customers' and 'daily-contact and
network-based marketing decisions.' It was suggested that marketing has a lot to
contribute in entrepreneurship studies (Hills 1987; Murray 1981) and In comparison,
entrepreneurship will look at marketing as the company's main role, which can involve
innovation and creativity (Collinson and Shaw 2001). Admittedly, empirical evidence
indicates that there is a strong link between marketing and entrepreneurial orientations of
an enterprise, both of which are commonly responsible for company performance (Miles
and Arnold 1991).
The pretty recent development of EM theory has produced a significant body of
literature surrounding the marketing-entrepreneurial interface. But research results on the
interface between marketing and entrepreneurship are scattered, and there is no
systematic review or detailed theory yet (Kraus, Harms, and Fink 2010).

Market orientation:
Marketing and more specifically market orientation was described as an significant
contributor to the success of companies (Deshpandé, Farley, and Webster 1993).
While literature has given a lot of definitions of MO, it appears that most writers
take one of two (Tajeddini, Trueman, and Larsen 2006), that of (Jaworski and Kohli 1993)
or (Narver and Slater 1990) definition.
Kohli and Jaworski take a behavioural approach, using marketing insight as the
centrepiece rather than consumer attention. The Narver and Slater scale, on the other
hand, is based on a cultural perspective that distinguishes three components of
behaviour: consumer orientation; competitor orientation; and interfunctional coordination.
Both models are tested extensively by big firms for accuracy in research but the position
remains divided as to which is the most suitable (Tajeddini et al. 2006).

Muhammad Ali Raza (Roll Number: 15) MS (Innovation and Entrepreneurship)

4

(Deshpandé et al. 1993) created a MO scale with a consumer orientation (CO)

emphasis and then, (Deshpandé and Farley 1998) a 'MORTN' scale based on elements
of the scale (Narver and Slater 1990) scale (Jaworski and Kohli 1993) of 'MARKOR' and
and (Deshpandé and Farley 1998) scale.
Due to their accuracy, reliability and validity,, (Narver and Slater 1990) Market
Orientation scale and ‘MARKOR’ Scale developed by (Jaworski and Kohli 1993) are
used in the MO variable of the proposed entrepreneurial marketing orientation model. The
EMO model's market orientation variables are: consumer intelligence generation
(Jaworski and Kohli 1993) ; rapid reaction to rivals (Jaworski and Kohli 1993) and
business process management (Narver and Slater 1990).
Exploratory/Exploitative innovation:
The innovation of a company has a broad content: the creation of new goods, new
services and new technologies, the implementation of new management systems , new
strategies and new processes (Damanpour 1996).
Exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation are classified according to
degree of innovation and knowledge base. Exploratory technologies are radical
developments intended to follow the new possibility (March 1991). Exploratory
technologies from a company provide new products, build new market segments,
establish new distribution networks and provide services to emerging customers (Benner
2002; Li, Zhou, and Si 2010). Exploratory innovations tend to learn and develop entirely
new knowledge and to distinguish themselves from current knowledge (Benner 2002).
Exploitative innovations are gradual inventions, aimed at changing the current
situation (March 1991). Exploitative innovations from an organisation improve established
designs, develop existing expertise and skills, develop and strengthen the available
product lines, maximise the productivity of existing distribution networks, and offer
improved services to existing clients (Jansen, Van Den Bosch, and Volberda 2006).
Exploitative innovations build on existing expertise and aim to refine, incorporate, expand
and enhance it (Benner 2002).
Exploratory innovations and exploitative innovations enhance various aspects of
firm efficiency. Exploitative innovations increase short-term productivity and add current
incomes, while exploratory innovations improve long-term output and add future incomes
(March 1991). There are close relationships between organisational performance,
productivity and effectiveness over the short and long term, which are mutual
transformations. For this reason, both exploratory innovations and exploitative
innovations have positive effects on the overall success of an organization.
Although there are various ways of dealing with results in empirical studies, the
majority of the conclusions drawn from them are coincidental (Auh and Menguc 2005)
broken down the notion of success into two aspects of efficiency and effectiveness. Their

Muhammad Ali Raza (Roll Number: 15) MS (Innovation and Entrepreneurship)

5

study demonstrates that both exploratory innovations and exploitative innovations have
a substantially positive impact on results when it comes to evaluating efficacy and
productivity.
Even though (Menguc and Auh 2008) use the comprehensive performance
assessment (without separating efficiency from efficacy), their findings still suggest that
the two forms of developments have substantially positive effects on the holistic
performance of a company.
Reference:
Auh, Seigyoung, and Bulent Menguc. 2005. “Balancing Exploration and Exploitation:
The Moderating Role of Competitive Intensity.” Journal of Business Research
58(12):1652–61.
Benner, Julie. 2002. “EXPLOITATION, EXPLORATION, AND PROCESS
MANAGEMENT: THE PRODUCTIVITY DILEMMA REVISITED.” Academy of
Management Review 28(2):238–56.
Bowey, James L., and Geoff Easton. 2007. “Entrepreneurial Social Capital Unplugged:
An Activity-Based Analysis.” International Small Business Journal 25(3):273–306.
Carson, David, Stanley Cromie, Pauric McGowan, and Jimmy Hill. 1995. Marketing and
Entrepreneurship in SMEs: An Innovative Approach. Pearson Education.
Collinson, Elaine, and Eleanor Shaw. 2001. “Entrepreneurial Marketing – a Historical
Perspective on Development and Practice.” Management Decision 39(9):761–66.
Damanpour, Fariborz. 1996. “Organizational Complexity and Innovation: Developing
and Testing Multiple Contingency Models.” Management Science 42(5):693–716.
Deshpandé, Rohit, and John Farley. 1998. “Measuring Market Orientation:
Generalization and Synthesis.” Journal of Market-Focused Management 2(3):213–
32.
Deshpandé, Rohit, John U. Farley, and Frederick E. Webster. 1993. “Corporate Culture,
Customer Orientation, and Innovativeness in Japanese Firms: A Quadrad
Analysis.” Developing a Market Orientation 57(1):79–102.
Freel, Mark S. 2000. “Barriers to Product Innovation in Small Manufacturing Firms.”
International Small Business Journal 18(2):60–80.
Gilmore, Audrey, David Carson, and Ken Grant. 2001. “SME Marketing in Practice.”
Marketing Intelligence & Planning 19(1):6–11.
Hills, Gerald E. 1987. “Marketing and Entrepreneurship Research Issues: Scholarly
Justification.” Research at the Marketing/Entrepreneurship Interface 3–15.
Hills, Gerald E., and Claes M. Hultman. 2006. “Entrepreneurial Marketing.” Cited in:
Lagrosen, S. and Svensson, G.(Eds) Marketing–Broadening the Horizons,
Denmark: University of Studentlitteratur.
Hogarth-Scott, Sandra, Kathryn Watson, and Nicholas Wilson. 1996. “Do Small
Businesses Have to Practise Marketing to Survive and Grow?” Marketing

Muhammad Ali Raza (Roll Number: 15) MS (Innovation and Entrepreneurship)

6

Intelligence & Planning 14(1):6–18.

Jansen, Justin J. P., Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch, and Henk W. Volberda. 2006.
“Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of
Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators.” Management Science
52(11):1661–74.
Jaworski, Bernard J., and Ajay K. Kohli. 1993. “Market Orientation : Antecedents.”
Journal of Marketing 57(July):53–70.
Kirzner, Israel M. 1979. Perception, Opportunity, and Profit: Studies in the Theory of
Entrepreneurship. University of chicago press Chicago.
Kraus, Sascha, Rainer Harms, and Matthias Fink. 2010. “Entrepreneurial Marketing:
Moving beyond Marketing in New Ventures.” International Journal of
Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management 11(1):19–34.
Li, Yi, Nan Zhou, and Youhe Si. 2010. “Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation,
and Performance: Influence of Business Strategies and Environment.” Nankai
Business Review International 1(3):297–316.
Lindberg, Roy A., and Theodore Cohn. 1972. How Management Is Different in Small
Companies: An AMA Management Briefing. American Management Association.
March, James G. 1991. “Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning.”
Organization Science 2(1):71–87.
Menguc, Bulent, and Seigyoung Auh. 2008. “The Asymmetric Moderating Role of
Market Orientation on the Ambidexterity-Firm Performance Relationship for
Prospectors and Defenders.” Industrial Marketing Management 37(4):455–70.
Miles, Morgan P., and Danny R. Arnold. 1991. “The Relationship between Marketing
Orientation and Entrepreneurial Orientation.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice
15(4):49–66.
Morris, Michael H., Minet Schindehutte, and Raymond W. LaForge. 2002.
“Entrepreneurial Marketing: A Construct for Integrating Emerging Entrepreneurship
and Marketing Perspectives.” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 10(4):1–19.
Murray, John A. 1981. “Marketing Is Home for the Entrepreneurial Process.” Industrial
Marketing Management 10(2):93–99.
Narver, John C., and Stanley F. Slater. 1990. “The Effect of a Market Orientation on
Business Profitability.” Journal of Marketing 54(4):20.
Tajeddini, Kayhan, Myfanwy Trueman, and Gretchen Larsen. 2006. “Examining the
Effect of Market Orientation On Innovativeness.” Journal of Marketing Management
22(5–6):529–51.

Muhammad Ali Raza (Roll Number: 15) MS (Innovation and Entrepreneurship)