تاثیر بازارگرایی بر توسعه قابلیت های ارتباطی و نتایج عملکرد: مورد شرکت های صنعتی روسیه

The article investigates the role of market orientation as an antecedent for the development of relational capabilities and performance in Russian industrial firms. We test the direct role of different aspects of market orientation on business performance in comparison to an indirect and mediated influence via improving a firm's ability to become embedded in relational structures. The results of an empirical study demonstrate the differential impact of components of market orientation – customer orientation, competitor orientation, and interfunctional coordination – as direct and indirect antecedents of relational capabilities and thus subsequently of overall firm performance. It can be shown that in Russian industrial markets competitor orientation directly and positively impacts on performance, while the other two components of market orientation have only a mediated effect on performance via the development of relational capabilities.

Market orientation has been discussed as an important organizational antecedent of business success (Han et al., 1999, Kohli and Jaworski, 1990 and Narver and Slater, 1990), with innumerable studies testing its impact in different industries and countries (Akimova, 2000, Chan and Ellis, 1998, Greenley, 1995 and Kwon and Hu, 2000). However, the mechanisms as to how the different aspects of market orientation (MO) achieve these positive outcomes are less well conceptualized; and virtually no research exists on understanding how MO works in non-Western environments, e.g. the transitional economies of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) (Akimova, 2000, Golden et al., 1995 and Greenley, 1995). This article focuses therefore, firstly, on the potentially mediating effect of the development of relational capabilities which help companies build successful business relationships (Lorenzoni and Lipparini, 1999 and Sivadas and Dwyer, 2000), and secondly, on the specific case of a transitional economy, i.e. Russia. Our objective is to investigate how different aspects of MO in Russian firms contribute towards the systematic development of relational capabilities aimed at supporting and enhancing business interactions and relationships with buying companies (Hallén et al., 1991, Ganesan, 1994 and Araujo and Mouzas, 1997). These business relationships are based on inter-firm cooperation which has become an important means of competing nationally as well as globally (Achrol, 1997, Achrol and Kotler, 1999, Anderson et al., 1994, Håkansson and Ford, 2002 and Uzzi, 1997). The advantages that a firm can gain from being embedded in business relationships and the wider business networks depends significantly on a firm's ability to manage within such complex relationships, i.e. a company's ‘relational capabilities’ (Ford et al., 2003 and Möller and Törrönen, 2003). In business-to-business markets, such relational capabilities not only serve as a guarantee of mutual understanding and benefits in customer relationships, but are also a source of relevant market knowledge, strategic flexibility, and effective process configuration (Webster, 1992, Hitt and Borza, 2000, Jacob, 2006 and Ma et al., 2009). While research on relational capabilities of industrial companies has attracted some serious attention, the field is conceptually rather fragmented and not integrated into the central concept of MO (Dyer & Singh, 1998; Day and Van den Bulte, 2002, Jacob, 2006 and Paulraj et al., 2008). The work of Day (1994) provides a conceptual starting point by emphasizing the link between market sensing capabilities (often linked with MO) and the firm's ability to coordinate customer linking and integration processes (Jacob, 2006). It can be argued that developing relational capabilities requires an understanding of the market in the wider business network, including the nature of stakeholder needs (Narver & Slater, 1990). From the interaction and network perspective, MO can thus be seen as a pre-requisite for the creation of a firm's ability to initiate, develop and maintain successful interactions and relationships with business partners (Farrell et al., 2008, Green et al., 2006, Nasution and Mavondo, 2008, Racela et al., 2007 and Zhao and Cavusgil, 2006). However, the impact of MO on business performance through the development of relational capabilities in industrial markets is so far mostly implied by existing research (Dyer & Singh, 1998), with empirical confirmation being still insufficient (Jacob, 2006 and Lorenzoni and Lipparini, 1999). This issue at hand is even more unclear in relation to firms operating in developing or transitional markets, such as Russia, where the marketing function is more in its infancy (Golden et al., 1995). Managing inter-firm relationships is strongly influenced by the ongoing process of transition, the changing business culture, and the interpersonal relationships that have traditionally dominated the Russian context of business interactions (Jansson et al., 2007, Johanson, 2008 and Salmi, 2004). Thus, business relationships in Russia have been described as being characterized by high levels of instability, lack of information about potential partners, low information disclosure readiness, and the occurrence of opportunistic behavior (Halinen and Salmi, 2001 and Johanson, 2007). However, issues about managing such business relationships in transitional markets have started to attract some attention (Jansson et al., 2007 and Salmi, 2004), but few examples of research exist which analyze antecedents and consequences of relational characteristics in these markets (Hitt & Borza, 2000). Russia provides an appropriate case for examining these questions as it is comparable with other transitional markets in terms of instability, turbulence and unpredictability (Ramström et al., 2006). Based on these issues, the objectives of our study are twofold. Firstly, using empirical data to test a nomological model, the research aims to analyze whether organizational attitudes, routines and practices linked to the MO concept affect building relational capabilities to enhance business relationships (Jacob, 2006 and Möller and Törrönen, 2003), and ultimately drive firm performance (Dyer and Singh, 1998). We thus contribute to clarifying the antecedents of relational capabilities, and the performance impact of MO. Secondly, the importance of MO and relational capabilities is investigated in the context of the Russian economy in which traditionally interpersonal relationships were seen as the most important determinant of business relationship success. Thus, for Russian industrial companies the impact of MO on organization-wide relational capabilities (beyond inter-personal aspects) is clarified (Foley and Fahy, 2009, Hitt and Borza, 2000 and Hooley et al., 2000). As such, our analyses also contribute to the limited existing research on strategic orientations and capabilities of Russian firms (Golden et al., 1995). The article is structured as follows: firstly, we will develop a model of market orientation and its impact on relational capabilities by parsimoniously deriving several hypotheses. As part of this discussion specific emphasis is given to the different concepts within the context of a transitional economy. After introducing our research method we present the empirical analysis and outline the resulting findings. A discussion of limitations, managerial implications, and further research concludes the article.

This study investigated the relationship between different aspects of a market orientation on the one hand, and performance implications for firms on the other. Specifically, the question as to whether MO has direct or indirect effects on business outcomes in the Russian context forms the key contribution. Indirect or mediating effects were tested via including the construct of relational capabilities which represent a company's abilities to foster collaborative business relationships. Therefore, this study contributes to a better understanding of the link between the different components of market orientation and firm performance by identifying that both direct as well as indirect positive influences (via the development of relational capabilities) exist in the case of Russian industrial firms. As such, these findings on the one hand support existing research concerning the positive results of MO for transitional economies (Akimova, 2000, Ellis, 2005, Fahy et al., 2000 and Farley and Deshpandé, 2005). On the other, they also qualify this research by showing that in Russia only MO aspects which are aimed at developing a competitor orientation have direct positive outcomes for the firm. This is in line with findings on transitional economies which emphasize the importance of market-sensing abilities (Appiah-Adu, 1998 and Singh, 2003). However, our results show that positive aspects relating to market sensing in Russia are not so much about developing a customer orientation, but mainly about understanding competitors' actions. This result therefore contributes to our understanding of the specifics of Russian industrial firms which is reflected in adaptation to the characteristics of the Russian transitional economy, specifically by exploiting opportunities via extensive growth strategies vis-à-vis competitors (Gurkov, 2009). However, a customer orientation does also contribute to firm performance in the Russian context, but only in a mediated way via building relational capabilities, i.e. organizational routines and processes which help a company to develop and sustain collaborative business relationships. The ratio between direct and indirect effects of MO on performance is about 2:1 in Russian industrial firms. As such, the clarification of these different direct and indirect effects of MO addresses a research need articulated by, for example, Hooley et al. (2000). Our results specifically qualify the central role that the creation of a customer orientation plays for the success of a firm in building successful business relationships and development of firm's embeddedness in business context (Day and Van den Bulte, 2002, Deshpande et al., 1993 and Rindfleisch and Moorman, 2003) by showing that in case of Russia, this effect is not dominant and only plays a material role via the development of relational capabilities. We also provide evidence for the importance of building capabilities that foster inter-firm relationships and thus contribute to closing a research gap identified by Lorenzoni and Lipparini (1999). The analysis of the role of interfunctional coordination in Russian industrial firms provides us with some counterintuitive results. Existing studies which were mostly tested in Western research settings suggest that interfunctional coordination should be a vital element for improving firm's performance and capabilities. However, the Russian data provides non-significant or only very tentative impact on business performance and relational capabilities, respectively. This finding provides rich potential for further research. Our results may be explained by the sporadic nature of interfunctional coordination in Russian firms, or a lack of systematization of internal interaction and the reactive nature of activities in cases where interaction is needed. Especially older (i.e. established) Russian firms may follow a more formalized approach, based on more traditional hierarchies (Salmi, 2004) and less on horizontal interconnections between functions, while it may be interesting to understand if newer firms might start up with more highly developed interfunctional links with a clearer direct impact on firm performance (Shirokova, 2009).