Essays on supplier responsiveness and buyer firm value - Nyenrode ...

iii)
iv)
Indeed, there may not be much difference between objective and
subjective measurement indicators at the same level throughout the
organization.
We based our analysis on the assumption that the purchase manager had
the most influence. However, as Gordon, Calatone, and Di Bennetto
(1993) predicted, the most influential is not necessarily the most senior
person in a buying center. Future researchers could examine whether the
most influential person has greater accuracy in predicting objective
measures.
Another interesting avenue for future studies could be investigating why
some employees are better than others at providing perceptions that
reinforce objective measures. Could this possibly be because of a better
understanding of firm processes, or is it because of a relevant educational
background?
4.10 Conclusions
The litmus test for marketing metrics is the insights they generate. Do the insights
matter and can the findings be replicated by similar metrics?
——Fasi Zaka, Marketing Director at the British
Council (personal communication, 2011)
In many B2B markets, strategic suppliers can differentiate their offerings by
customer-centric strategies such as market orientation. But market orientation involves
substantial investment and effort by the supplier and the buyer. Therefore, measuring the
buyers' returns on such investments is of interest for the suppliers to gauge how
successful they have been. We examined two broad categories of measurement metrics,
namely objective and subjective performance metrics. Consequently, we identified an
important flaw in current management assumptions: Despite managements' assumptions
that their heuristic or subjective judgments should reinforce objective performance
measurements of key supplier relationships, they do not. Qualitative data showed that this
was not because of a problem with the logic of the Chapter 2 model. Rather, it was
because of the limitations of managers and current metrics.
We proposed the following steps to overcome this problem: first, instituting
programs for marketing managers to equip them with the skills needed for conducting
heuristic evaluations that are more in line with accounting evaluations; second, educating
finance managers about the intangible value that marketing creates; third, creating new
hybrid measures that represent both the marketing and accounting perspectives; and
fourth, simplifying existing objective measurement procedures and methods so managers
can comprehend what the core elements are in calculating market returns. Once such
measures have been instituted, we believe that the measurement gap between objective
and subjective performance measures for key supplier relationships will diminish.
113