Introduction The attributes of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) have a significant influence on the actions of the organization and, ultimately, firm performance (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007; Kashmiri, Nicol, & Arora, 2017). Recently, there has been growing interest in one particular CEO attribute, i.e., narcissism and how this individual characteristic affects actions taken by the firm and the outcomes achieved. Narcissistic CEOs have been described as “having an inflated self-concept that is enacted through a desire for recognition and a high degree of self-reference when interacting with others (Resick, Whitman, Weingarden, & Hiller, 2009: pg. 1367).” Prior research has found that CEOs with a more narcissistic personality make riskier decisions by changing the company’s strategy more often (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007), making acquisitions more frequently and of larger targets (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007), adopting discontinuous technologies (Gerstner, König, Enders, & Hambrick, 2013), and expanding international business activities (Oesterle, Elosge, & Elosge, 2016). The results of previous studies show that by pursuing decisions with greater risk and involving the firm in wide-ranging efforts, the actions of narcissistic CEOs lead to fluctuating firm performance (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007) and diminishes the positive effect of various firm activities. While these prior studies have provided valuable insight, the strong emphasis on the organizational actions taken as a consequence of the narcissistic CEO has not added to our understanding of the relationship between CEOs who seek personal affirmation, admiration, and attention and important intervening variables for firm performance such as corporate brand reputation. Corporate brand reputation signals the status of an organization and influences the actions of capital markets, investors, consumers, and applicants in the job market (Fombrun & Shanley, 1990). Managers actively work to construct favourable corporate brand reputations through the actions the firm takes and the information selectively released to the media and public. Yet, the literature suggests that narcissistic CEOs spend time focusing on how to enhance their own image rather than on achieving organizational goals (Resick et al., 2009). In this regard, the attention-seeking CEO likely becomes a focal point for the corporate brand. However, no research to date has examined the relationship between the narcissistic CEO’s personality and the effects of corporate brand reputation. This study fills the gap in the literature by investigating how CEO narcissism influences the effectiveness of corporate brand reputation on firm performance. Theoretical development The literature on corporate brands noted that corporate brand reputation is a critical intangible asset that affects firm performance (Roberts & Dowling, 2002). Stakeholders use corporate brand reputation as a means to compare and contrast competitors Researchers have noted various advantages for highly reputable firms: customers are willing to pay more for offerings (Roberts & Dowling, 2002) and accept new product innovations (Dowling, 2002); managers accept lower remuneration (Tavassoli, Sorescu, & Chandy, 2014) and receive higher payoff for investments (Benjamin & Podolny, 1999). These types of advantages allow for greater performance. Thus, consistent with prior literature, we argue the following: Hypothesis 1: Corporate brand reputation has a positive effect on future firm performance. Research has shown that CEO narcissism diminishes the effect of the firm’s positive actions. Petrenko, Aime, Ridge, and Hill (2016) argue that narcissistic CEOs pursue Corporate Social Responsibility efforts (CSR) as a means to enhance their own image. Yet, the authors found that the narcissistic CEOs actually reduce the positive affect of CSR initiatives. Likewise, Engelen, Neumann, and Schmidt (2016) examined the effect CEO narcissism had on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance finding that CEO narcissism lessens the positive effect of entrepreneurial orientation. These results are due to the narcissistic CEOs perpetual need for attention and self-affirmation which leads to unconcentrated work initiatives and a lack of attention to the needs of employees. When subordinates’ needs are ignored they develop a sense of powerlessness, incompetence and a lack of desire to present their own ideas. This environment diminishes entrepreneurial engagement (Engelen et al., 2016; Wales, Patel, & Lumpkin, 2013). In line with this view, we believe the attention-seeking narcissistic CEO competes with the development of the corporate brand and will dampen the positive effect of highly reputable brands on firm performance. Thus, we argue the following: Hypothesis 2: CEO narcissism diminishes the positive effect of corporate brand reputation on firm performance. Method We compiled a unique unbalanced panel composed of data from COMPUSTAT, ExecuComp, and Fortune Most Admired Companies listing. Our sample includes 993 firm-year observations consists of 237 CEOs from 144 U.S companies on eight-year period, 2009-2016. Data on CEOs were collected from the ExecuComp databases. Financial performance data were from COMPUSTAT. Firm reputation was obtained from firm’s published score in the Fortune “Most Admired Companies” survey in a given year. The fortune rating is obtained through surveys from executives and directors, and has been widely used in previous research (Love, Lim, & Bednar 2017). Our independent and control variables are measured in the year prior to the one in which the survey ratings are published. CEO narcissism is invariant meaning narcissism is a relatively stable disposition similar to Chatterjee and Hambrick’s (2011) and obtained by averaging data from the second and third years of each CEO’s tenure (t + 1 and t + 2). First year of the CEO’s tenure was not considered because of frequently mentioned anomalies reported at first year. CEO narcissism was measured with the same way as Chatterjee and Hambrick’s (2011). Thus, it combines indicators for (1) the prominence of the CEO’s photograph in the company’s annual report; (2) the CEO’s prominence in the company’s press releases; (3) the CEO’s use of first-person singular pronouns in interviews; (4) the CEO’s cash relative pay where cash compensation divided by that of the second-highest paid executive in the firm; and (5) the CEO’s non-cash relative pay where non-cash compensation divided by that of the second-highest-paid executive in the firm. Dependent variables were measures annually and consider available data after the second-year tenure of CEO (n > 2), yielding a 380 firm-years, 61 CEOs for testing our hypothesis. Firm performance was measured with Tobin’s Q (TQ), calculated by dividing the firm’s market value by firm’s asset replacement costs. We have the CEO, the firm, and the industry level control variables. CEO level control variables are CEO age, CEO tenure, CEO gender, CEO stock ownership as the percentage of company stock owned by the CEO, whether the CEO was also board chairman (duality). Firm-level control variables are firm’s the prior year performance, firm size (natural logarithm of revenues t+n–1), firm age, for each dependent variable, to consider strategy or performance tendencies, we included performance value for the firm in the year prior to the start of the CEO’s tenure (t – 1). Industry control variables are dummies for the industry sector (manufacturing, regulated and services industries), the industry average (for all firms in the sample, always excluding the focal firm) in each year (t + n), for each dependent variable to be able to control for industry tendencies. To control for endogeneity i.e. narcissistic CEOs are drawn to certain situations and/or that some conditions, we followed exactly the same procedure of Chatterjee and Hambrick’s (2011). Thus, we regressed CEO narcissism on firm revenues, age, ROA, and calendar year for the year prior to the CEO’s start, ROA change between first and second years of CEO tenure, measures in t+1, namely power (CEO/chair duality and CEO ownership), CEO age, industry dummies. Using the regression coefficients of the significant variables, we calculated each CEO’s predicted narcissism score and included that value as an endogeneity control in our analyses. We used generalized estimating equations (GEE) (Liang & Zeger, 1986), which derive maximum likelihood estimates and accommodate non-independent observations. Due to multiple observations for almost all firms, there is non-independency in our model. We specified a Gaussian (normal) distribution with an identity link function. The covariance structure of the repeated measurement was autoregressive of order one (AR(1)). We used robust variance estimators in our estimations. We used the xtgee routine in Stata 14.2. Results and conclusions The results provide considerable support for hypotheses 1 and 2. Hypothesis 1 predicted that corporate reputation has a positive effect on firm performance (b = .02, p < .01). CEO narcissism is a moderating effect between corporate brand reputation and firm performance. Specifically, CEO narcissism diminishes the positive effect of corporate reputation on firm performance (b = -.04, p < .05). Besides, CEO narcissism have a negative main effect on firm performance (b = -.14, p < .05). Corporate reputation is an intangible asset for firms and positively associated with firm performance according to our results. Little is known so far about the CEO and corporate brand relationship and the role of CEO brands in creating value for the company (Bendisch, Larsen, & Trueman, 2013). We investigated how CEO narcissism influence the relationship between firm’s reputations and firm performance which have not been investigated so far. Since CEOs are the face of the company and it contributes to corporate brand value, narcissistic CEOs might diminish the effect of corporate brand reputation on firm performance with their actions and messages. We find support for our ideas. As a future research, we suggest investigating this issue for different industry sectors and different firm performance measures. Besides, the process of what type of actions of CEOs might diminish brand value should be investigated further. When narcissistic CEOs reduce corporate brand reputation, another potential topic worth to investigate further.

This research paper examines the role of adaptive capability and absorptive capability in the development of digital marketing capability that, in turn, influences the firm performance. The results reveal that both adaptive and absorptive capabilities have a positive influence on digital marketing capability that positively contributes to customer relationship, new product and financial performance of the firm. The adoption of new digital technologies such as smart products, the Internet of Things (IoT), Artificial Intelligence, and machine learning will change markets, competitive landscapes, business models and consumer behaviors, new thinking about marketing capabilities becoming critical to succeed in today complex environment (Day, 2011; Kannan & Li, 2017). To remain competitive and survive, organizations have to develop new marketing capabilities to harness the potential of these technologies in supporting marketing functions and processes (Trainor, Rapp, Beitelspacher & Schillewaert, 2011). Despite the rapid diffusion of digital technologies in business practice, only few previous researches was focused on theoretical and empirical aspects of marketing capabilities needed in digital-empowered environment. To fill this knowledge gap, we develop the digital marketing capability construct, and explore its antecedents and consequences on performance.

University-industry R&D collaboration is a key driver of participating firms’ technological capability. However, there is still debate on the determinants of a firm’s innovation performance, especially in relation to the characteristics of collaboration and organizational slack. We lay the foundation for our theoretical framework by establishing testable hypotheses on how the characteristics of university-industry collaboration and organizational slack affect participating firms’ innovation performance. Based on a panel data of 2914 firm-year cases for the top 200 U.S. R&D firms, estimates obtained from quantitative techniques produce consistent results and support our predictions. Collaboration breadth, network centrality, unabsorbed slack, collaboration experience and collaboration proactiveness are associated with innovation performance. Moreover, a firm’s higher absorbed slack exerts a negative influence on innovation performance. The managerial implications and future research directions are discussed.

While market orientation is long evident to be a key contributor to firm performance (Narver & Slater, 1990; Jaworski & Kohli, 1993), firms now increasingly find that proactive market orientation (Narver, Slater & Maclachlan, 2004) may be more appropriate for the rapidly changing market. Not only can it contribute to new product development success, it is proposed that it can enhance the ability to market which is labeled marketing exploration (Kyriakopoulos & Moorman, 2004). In this study, we posited proactive market orientation together with the original market orientation named here responsive market orientation as essential to developing a firm’s marketing exploration capability. As marketing competences reside in the everyday routines and practice related to the marketing function, marketing exploration enables one to update the ability to perform various marketing tasks which is essential capability of the firm to get ahead of the competition. Entrepreneurial orientation is also introduced as a mediating factor between the above relationships with the argument that such posture is related to a firm’s propensity to innovate, take risk and be proactive (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996) which is related to a proactive market orientation. A survey was carried out in China and results show that proactive market orientation is positively related to marketing exploration while responsive market orientation has positive impact on marketing exploration only through entrepreneurial orientation. Marketing exploration in turn positively impact firm performance. Results of this study contribute theoretically in revitalizing the market orientation literature which has been research for almost three decades. While leading customers with a proactive market orientation is getting more salient in this rapidly changing market environment, the original market orientation cannot be ignored. Both orientations are essential to enhance firms’ ability to renew their marketing skills and routines. This is definitely more important than just coming up with new products/services as it enables firms to update its marketing knowledge and skills so is crucial to long term performance.

가족임원은 기업의 지배주주일가의 가족구성원이라는 점에서는 가족경영자나 소유경영자와 공통점을 가진다. 지배주주일가의 가족구성원이라는 점은 가족임원이나 가족경영자로 하여금 강력한 소유권파워 를 가지게 한다. 가족경영자는 기업의 최종의사결정권자인 최고경영자라는 점에서 가족임원과는 차이가 있다. 최고경영자가 아님에도 불구하고 가족임원은 보유하고 있는 소유권파워를 바탕으로 기업경영에 상 대적으로 높은 수준의 영향력을 발휘할 수 있다. 이와 같이 기업경영에 미치는 가족임원의 영향력이 높은 수준임에도 불구하고 이에 대한 연구는 거의 이루어지지 않고 있다. 가족임원과 관련 있는 기존의 연구는 주로 가족기업이나 가족경영자에 초점을 맞추고 있다. 비록 가족임원이 가족경영자처럼 최고경영자가 아 니라고 하더라도 지배주주일가와 친인척 관계를 맺고 있기 때문에 기업 의사결정과정에 있어 지배주주일 가의 의견을 대변하는 중요한 기능을 하고 있다. 이에 본 연구는 기업경영에 있어서 중요한 기능을 하는 가족임원의 선정에 영향을 주는 선행요인들에 대하여 탐색적 연구를 시도하였다. 먼저 대리인이론의 측면에서 최고경영자의 유형과 사외이사를 고려하 였다. 최고경영자가 전문경영자인 경우에는 지배주주일가의 이익을 대변하기 위하여 가족임원을 이사회 에 위치시킬 것이라 기대하였다. 또한 사외이사를 바탕으로 이사회의 구조적 독립성이 확보되어 최고경 영자에 대한 감시 및 견제가 가능한 경우에는 굳이 가족임원을 선임하지는 않을 것이라 예상하였다. 다음 으로 기업의 성과를 고려하였는데, 이는 성과가 좋은 기업의 경우 소유경영자로의 최고경영자승계가 이 루어진다는 연구와 같은 맥락이다. 즉, 성과가 좋으면 가족임원을 선정하고자 할 것을 기대하였다. 실증결 과는 전문경영자인 경우일수록, 영업이익률이 높을수록 가족임원을 선임하는 경우가 많았다. 한편 사외이 사비율은 가족임원의 선임여부와 관련이 없는 것으로 확인되었다.

국문초록：본 논문에서는 지역혁신체제 및 혁신클러스터에서 상호작용을 촉진하는 주요 주체로서의 혁신중개인과 기업의 흡수역량 및 성과 간의 연계성을 기업 차원에서 탐구한다. 대덕연구개발특구 내 기업을 대상으로 한 실증연구결과, 기업이 활용하는 혁신중개인과의 관 계는 기업의 흡수역량과 혁신 및 경영성과에 긍정적인 영향을 유의하게 미치며, 흡수역량은 이 과정에서 강력한 매개역할을 하는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 혁신중개인이 기업의 혁신과정 에서 내부 활동을 대신할 수 있는 대체자라기보다는 보완재의 역할이 크다는 증거를 의미한 다. 본 연구는 기업의 혁신과정에서 흡수역량의 선행요인으로서 혁신중개인의 역할과 중요 성에 대한 이해에 기여한다.

본 연구는 항공기 및 자동차 기술의 융합과 파급이 자동차 기업의 성과에 미친 영향을 분석한다. 구체적으로 본 연구는 항공기 관련 기술을 도입한 자동차 기업들의 재무 성과 변화를 측정하여 분석한다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 자동차 기업들이 항공기 기술과 관련 된 특허 변수들을 활용하는 정도와 방식을 측정하고, 이 변수들이 자동차 관련 기업들의 시장가치와 매출액에 미치는 영향을 분석한다. 분석 결과, 자동차 기업이 항공기 관련 기술을 활용할수록 시장가치가 상승하였다. 반면, 항공기 기술의 활용과 자동차 기업의 매출액 간에 는 유의미한 관계가 발견되지 않았다. 이는 항공기 관련 기술의 보유 및 사용이 상품 시장에서 직접적인 매출액 증가 보다는 금융 시장을 통해 기업의 기술력에 대한 신호 기능을 수행 하고 있음을 시사한다.

The advanced information technology leads to network age, making existing competitive advantages such as differentiation and cost leadership powerless in B2B context. The competitiveness of individual firm plays a significant role in enhancing the competitive advantage of a business network that a firm belongs to. The competitiveness of a business network depends on value co-creation, the interaction among firms in a network. Value co-creation has desirable and risky aspects. The increases in profits, brand reputation, and time and cost efficiency, client and supplier learning, etc. are positive aspects. But role conflicts, role ambiguity, and tension, etc. are negative outcomes. How can the industrial firm succeed in value co-creation with its partners in B2B context? The study focuses on the firm’s strategic marketing orientations as an antecedent of value co-creation. Strategic marketing orientations as the values and beliefs of the firm affect the collaboration with other firms during value co-creation. Previous literature assumes that a firm pursues one single strategic orientation. However, the study assumes that an industrial firm has entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation, long-term orientation, and relationship orientation. The study mostly focused on the relationships among those strategic marketing orientations. Based on these inter-relationships, the study proposed a set of value co-creation activity criteria such as information seeking, information sharing, personal interaction, responsible behavior, feedback, helping, advocacy, tolerance. Value co-creation has been evaluated by relationship performance such as trust and commitment. The study examined the relationships between strategic marketing orientations and value co-creation. Data was collected from 159 Korean manufacturers in B2B context and analyzed through structural equation modeling. The study provides evidence that entrepreneurial orientation affects market orientation positively and market orientation has positive effects on long-term orientation and relationship orientation, and long-term orientation and relationship orientation influence value co-creation directly. Value co-creation has a positive effect on relationship performance. The results of the study provide valuable implications to the mangers of industrial firms in B2B context. To succeed the value co-creation, the firm first has to look at the difference between strategic marketing orientations that the value co-creation partners pursue. In terms of selecting value co-creation partner, industrial firm with long-term orientation and relationship orientation will be more effective. Six activities of interactions during value co-creation play an important role in enhancing trust and commitment. The study contributes to the value co-creation literature by identifying strategic marketing orientations as independent variable influencing the value co-creation in B2B context. The study has several limitations that call for future research.

활용(Exploitation)과 탐험(Exploration)은 경영전략, 조직학습, 조직혁신, 경쟁우위 창출 등에 다양한 영향을 미친다고 알려져 있다. 활용과 탐험에 대한 관점은 기업 의사결정의 산물로 보는 것과 조직성과를 위한 투입요소로 보는 두 가지가 있으나, 많은 연구자들이 이를 혼용하여 연구에 사용함으로써 혼재된 연구결과를 보이고 있다. 본 연구에서는 활용과 탐험을 투입요소적인 속성과 성과요소적인 속성으로 나 누어 기업성과에 미치는 영향을 알아보고자 한다. 이는 조직 학습 측면에서 활용과 탐험의 역할을 명확하 게 보여줄 수 있을 것이다. 본 연구는 미국 기업의 1993년에서 1999년 특허데이터를 활용하여 이를 실증 하였다. 에너지(Energy), 원료(Material), 일반 공업(Industrial), 소비재(consumer), 식품 및 주거(Food &Housing), 건강(Health & Medicine), IT, 통신(Telecom)의 총 8개의 산업에 속한 161개의 기업이 대상이 되었으며, 총 632개의 특허 데이터가 사용되었다. 7년간의 자료 분석을 위해 시계열 변화와 횡단적 변화 를 관찰할 수 있는 패널 분석방식을 채택했으며, 횡단면적 이분산성(heteroscedasticity) 문제를 해결하기 위해 일반화 최소자승법(Feasible generalized least squares: FGLS)을 적용하여 분석했다. 분석결과, 투 입요소 측면의 활용과 산출요소 측면의 활용은 단기적 기업성과에 긍정적인 영향을 준다는 점을 확인할 수 있었다. 반면, 투입요소 측면과 산출요소 측면의 탐험은 단기적 기업성과에 유의미한 영향을 미치지 못했다. 본 연구는 활용과 탐험을 각각 투입요소적인 측면과 산출요소적인 측면에서 구분하여 접근한 최 초의 실증연구로서, 향후 연구자들이 탐험과 활용의 개념을 좀 더 명확히 사용할 수 있는 근거를 제시하 고 있다. 본 연구의 결과는 활용과 탐험의 각기 다른 특성을 보여줌으로써, 연구자들에게 활용과 탐험의 원인 및 결과를 연구함에 있어 가이드라인을 제시해 줄 수 있을 것으로 예상된다.

With the fast pace of technological change, the role of innovation on a firm’s survival has received increased scholarly attention. This study investigates the relationship between a firm’s strategic orientations, exploration and exploitation, on innovation activity. Also, the synergy effects of four types of innovation: product, process, marketing, and organizational innovation are examined with the consideration of the level of innovativeness and the firm’s industrial category. The OECD Oslo Manual (2005) and the standard of OECD (2011) classification are used as a main source to define four different types of innovation and the industry category into high-tech and low-tech. This study uses data from 856 firms taken from the Korea Innovation Survey (KIS) 2014 which is the Korean version of the Community Innovation Survey (CIS). Since most of the measures are composed of multiple items, their reliability and the underlying dimensions of each measure are tested by principal component analysis (PCA). Structural equation modeling (SEM) is then used to carry out a simultaneous test the relationships among the constructs. The moderating effects of marketing and organizational innovation are examined through multi group analysis. Results indicate that exploration and exploitation have positive impacts on the product innovation and process innovation respectively. Also, a new process encourages firms to develop radical product innovation. In case of the moderating effect of marketing and organizatioanl innovation, there are some differences between high-tech and low-tech industry. For high-tech firms, the positive relationship between a new product and firm performance is increased with the introduction of marketing innovation. In case of low-tech firms, process innovation has direct and positive impacts on a firm’s performance with organizational innovation. The findings show that the synergy effect of innovation exists and its significance could be changed depending on an industrial category.

Businesses today are looking for new ways to acquire and retain customers, by delivering innovative products and services, which serve each customer's individual demands. Fo- cusing on individual customer needs and addressing each request individually with a ser- vice or product that is perceived as being customized has become the focal point of Inter- action Orientation (IO), a firm-level strategic orientation developed by Ramani and Kumar (2008). Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) is also a firm-level strategic construct, which reflects the "processes, practices, and decision-making activities" that firms use to identify and exploit new business opportunities (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996, p.136). As op- posed to IO, EO is a well-established concept, being one of the most examined topics in entrepreneurship research. However, most studies have focused on cross-sectional de- signs to assess the relationship to firm performance, leading to numerous research calls focusing on the need for more dynamic investigations (Saeed, Yousafzai, & Engelen, 2014). Based on our analysis including 247 S&P500 firms from a variety of industries over a period of three years, this longitudinal study is one of the first to assess the short-term and long-term effects of IO and EO. To establish the firm's levels of IO and EO, we ana- lyze the content of Letters to Shareholders (LtS), as LtS have been widely used to assess different strategic orientations - Market Orientation, Learning Orientation - including EO (Noble et al., 2002; Short, Broberg, Cogliser, & Brigham, 2010; Zachary, McKenny, Short, & Payne, 2011). We relied on multisource secondary data for performance indica- tors and included several control variables: past performance of the firm, firm age, firm size, as well as industry specific effects. Our results confirm that each orientation has a positive impact on the firm's financial suc- cess in the long-term but a combined IO-EO strategy reveals a negative effect on firm performance in the long-term. This study investigates the synergies between IO and EO in a longitudinal setting and using objective financial performance indicators, establish- ing the advantages and disadvantages of implementing a single or combined strategy.

This study examines when high tech firms are better off specializing in either exploration or exploitation learning strategy. Drawing on the organizational learning literature, we hypothesize that a firm’s imbalance between exploration and exploitation (or specialization strategy) has differential impacts on firm performance depending on its structural characteristics and external environment. A survey data of 180 high tech firms in China shows that firm age and scarcity of R&D resources moderate the relationship between specialization and business performance. Moreover, specialization strategy works better when competitive intensity is low.

The benefits of being customer-oriented for building firm innovativeness remain ambiguous among academics, with some scholars claiming a customer-orientation fosters organizational innovation competencies, whereas some others argue that it merely inhibits innovation processes. A review of research on the effect of customer orientation on innovation activities are inconclusive, with some studies supporting a positive relationship, while others reporting mixed results. With many firms investing in activities to get to know their customers and in innovation activities, managers need an understanding of the role of customer-oriented behaviors on firm innovation practices.

This research examines effects of supplying firms’ transaction specific investments on their firm performance through buyers’ trust and commitment. In this process, the research investigates moderating effects that buying firms’ purchasing strategies, which consist of relational strategy (competitive or cooperative purchasing strategy) and cost-reduction strategy (purchase price-based or total cost-based purchasing strategy), have on buyers’ commitment and suppliers’ performance. The study proposes a conceptual model integrating relationship marketing and purchasing strategy researches regarding business-to-business supplier-buyer relationships and test hypotheses derived from the conceptual model. Data were collected through a survey, and 248 purchasing managers participated in the survey.

Our study aims to investigate the mechanisms leading to focal firm’s innovation performance through the coopetitive relationships. Specifically, we argue focal firm’s two capabilities, coopetition capability and NPD capability, play a crucial role as a mediator of interfirm coopetition and its innovation performance. In order to provide new evidence on this subject, we contribute to this stream by developing a conceptual model. We argue that coopetitive behaviors of partners will influence the focal firm’s coopetition capability, which will then influence the focal firm’s NPD capability, although we assume NPD capability will have an impact on coopetition capability as well. We also argue NPD capability will not only lead to new product advantages, NPD process advantages as well, as a result of them, financial performance at the end. This paper reports the development of this model.

Interaction Orientation (IO), a firm-level strategic orientation developed by Ramani and Kumar (2008), consists of four dimensions: (1) Customer concept - a firm-wide belief that sees the individual customer level as the examination unit and starting point of all company’s activities; (2) Interaction response capacity - the firm’s competency to respond to different customers using multiple means in a timely manner; (3) Customer empowerment - the extent to which a firm encourages customers to share information with the firm or with other customers; and (4) Customer value management - the capacity to keep an overview of how much revenue each customer generates, facilitating an efficient resource allocation. Current research states that IO represents a source of competitive advantage and leads to higher financial and non-financial performance. Past studies have only focused on cross-sectional data. However, a strategic orientation is a deeply embedded and gradually progressing organizational characteristic and, in order to establish a cause-effect relationship with performance, a longitudinal design is needed (Noble, Sinha, & Kumar, 2002). This study is the first to analyze the effects of IO longitudinally, including 247 S&P 500 firms from a variety of industries over a period of three years. To establish the firm's level of IO, we analyze the content of Letters to Shareholders (LtS). LtS are widely used to assess different strategic orientations, such as Entrepreneurial Orientation, Market Orientation or Learning Orientation (Noble et al., 2002; Short, Broberg, Cogliser, & Brigham, 2010; Zachary, McKenny, Short, & Payne, 2011). A sentence-by-sentence coding procedure was implemented (Keusch, Bollen, & Hassink, 2012;), where each sentence was examined for evidence of the four IO dimensions. We relied on multisource secondary data for performance indicators and on the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ASCI) for measuring customer satisfaction. We included the effects of competitive intensity and market turbulence, as well as several control variables: past performance of the firm, firm age, firm size, as well as industry specific effects. The results confirm the short and long term benefits of implementing IO, including higher financial performance and increased customer satisfaction, especially in a turbulent market. This study lays the foundation of a new approach for measuring IO in a longitudinal setting and using objective financial performance indicators.

With the impact of globalization, businesses nowadays are searching for new ways to compete more effectively in today’s business marketplace. Companies that have already performed successfully in the external market but cannot perform well with their internal market may find themselves at a disadvantage in the long term (Ralston et al., 2006). Whilst businesses often spend significant amounts on their campaigns to attract external customers, they may also need to consider the internal market place and specifically their internal customers’ needs, i.e. employees, as they often have a significant impact on external market performance and profitability (Lings and Greenley, 2009). In light of fairly extensive literature on the employee management, the idea of viewing employees as internal customers was initiated from the concept of internal marketing and there are an increasing number of studies attempting to develop the concept of internal market orientation (IMO) to further facilitate the internal market exchange feasibility.Whilst employment relationship research has been served as a useful proxy for employee attitude and behavior (Choi & Peng, 2015), the notion that IMO could serve as a predictor of firm performance success has not yet been fully examined in the extant literature. Investigating such relationships combines the adoption of marketing perspectives with strategic human resource management across the organization per se. As such, drawing on data collected from 825 respondents across three different managerial levels in 275 organizations, this study contributes to the pertinent literature by developing a framework to measure the impact of IMO on organizational performance from the internal and external perspective as well as at the individual and the departmental level. Specifically, our findings reveal that IMO, consisting of internal information generation, internal information communication and responsiveness positively enhances employee retention, employee commitment, interdepartmental connectedness and significantly reduces interdepartmental conflict. In turn, given the exception of employee retention, these serve to significantly influence organizational performance. Our study provides several implications for scholars and management, as well as outlining some useful directions for future research.

기업은 지속가능한 발전과 성과를 위하여 교육훈련투자를 지속적으로 수행하고 있다. 일부에서는 교육 훈련투자의 필요성과 효과에 대하여 의문을 제기하고 있다. 이러한 회의론은 교육훈련 투자의 효과를 부 정하지는 않으나, 기업이 인식하고 있듯이 그만큼의 효과를 내지 못하고 있을 수 있다는 문제를 제기하고 있다. 교육훈련투자의 실제적 효과를 추정하기 위하여서는 교육훈련투자와 기업성과간의 관계에 대하여 여러 가지 대안적 설명을 고려하고 이를 반영한 실증 분석 모형을 설정하고자 하였다. 따라서 본 연구는 패널 자료를 활용하여 실증 분석하고자 하며, 역인과관계 설명 등의 대안적 설명을 고려한 동태적 분석 모형을 설정하여, 교육훈련이 기업성과에 미치는 효과를 추정하였다. 동태적 패널 분석의 추정 결과는 다음과 같이 정리되어진다. 우선, 교육훈련은 조직성과인 일인당 매출 에 유의적인 정의 효과를 미치며, 그 크기는 0.05정도로 나타났다. 그 다음으로 교육훈련은 재무적 성과인 일인당 순이익에는 유의적인 영향을 미치지 않는 것으로 분석되었다. 이러한 동태적 패널 분석의 결과는단일연도만을 사용한 회귀분석 결과와는 효과의 크기 면에서나 유의도에서 많은 차이를 보이고 있다는 점 역시 발견하였다. 이러한 연구 결과를 바탕으로 연구의 시사점과 한계점 그리고 향후 연구방향이 논의 되었다.

Quality management system is a systematic quality improvement approach for firm-wide management for the purpose of improving performance in terms of quality, productivity, organizational characteristics, customer satisfaction, and firm’s profitability. Recently, many researchers have examined the relationship between quality management system and firm’s performance. The conclusion from these studies is that effective implementation of quality management system improves firm’s performance. This paper extends the existing research on quality management system and firm’s performance by examining how the impact of quality management system on firm’s performance is moderated by organizational characteristics and customer satisfaction. The paper is organized as follows. Section 1 introduces the necessity and purpose of the research. Section 2 reviews quality management system and summarizes the results of previous studies. Section 3 present the proposed research model, the hypotheses related to the relationship between quality management system and firm’s performance. Section 4 provides results from the data analysis. Section 5 presents discussions, results, further implications, and research limitations. An extensive literature research was designed to identify and retrieve empirical studies relevent to develop the hypotheses. The objectives of this study identify the factors of quality management system on business performance. The results are as follows: First, The management responsibility, resource management and product realization influenced significantly on financial performance. The management responsibility and product realization influenced significantly on non-financial performance. Second, the research showed a fact that organizational characteristics and customer satisfaction effect as a moderated between quality management system and business performance. The implications of our results are that organizational characteristics and customer satisfaction moderate the firm’s performance.