Sweet persimmons are valuable commodity in the export market. However, present of insect pest such as Asiacornococcus kaki can cause limit to many export markets. In this study, ethyl formate(EF), as alternative to methyl bromide(MB), was used in scale-up commercial trial(20ft reefer). Application of 50 g/m3 of EF for 6 hours at 5 ℃ showed proven efficacy against all developmental stages of A. kaki without LLDPE-packaging fruits and no phytotoxic damage on sweet persimmons. This study demonstrated that EF fumigation can be effectively control to target A. kaki before packaging with LLDPE-film of fruits.

Emerging markets are experiencing immense institutional transformations, which present substantial opportunities and challenges for entrepreneurial firms attempting to grow their businesses. The main challenges arise from the fact that emerging markets are less productive, and uncertainty and risk are high due to less transparency. Consequently, dissimilar to their counterparts in developed markets, entrepreneurial firms in developing economies are characterised by limited internationalisation knowledge and process, which are pivotal for developing export marketing strategy effectively.

본 연구에서는 다양한 한류 문화콘텐츠가 ‘샤인머스켓’의 구매에 미치는 영향을 분석하고, 한류를 활용한 ‘샤인머스켓’ 대중국 수출전략을 제시하였다. 한국의 ‘샤인머스켓’ 재배면적은 빠르게 증가하고 있어 향후 수급불안이 발생할 수 있으 며, 대중국 수출전략을 수립하여 이에 대비할 필요가 있다. 한편, 한류 문화콘텐츠의 중화권 수출액은 지난 10여 년 동안 성장세를 보였지만, 드라마나 영화와 같이 일반적 인기도가 높은 문화콘텐츠는 중국내 반한정서에 취약한 구조로 나타났다. 따라서 한류를 이용한 수출전략 설정 시 이를 충분히 고려해야 한다. 주성분분석을 통해 한류 문화콘텐츠의 특성을 분석한 결과 한류스타 지수와 한류캐릭터 지수가 도출되었다. 한류스타 지수의 경우 드라마, 예능, 음악, 영화와 양의 관계를 보였고, 한류캐릭터 지수의 경우 게임, 도서/웹툰/만화, 애니메이션과 양의 관계를 보였다. 순위로짓모형 분석결과 한류스타 지수와 한류캐릭터 지수가 높은 응답자일수록 한국산 ‘샤인머스켓’ 구매 확률이 더 높았으며, 변수의 중요도는 한류스타 지수보다 한류캐릭터 지수가 더 크게 나타났다. 또한, ‘샤인머스켓’ 선호도가 높고 온라인으로 농산물을 구매하는 응답자는 그렇지 않은 응답자에 비해 한국산 ‘샤인머스켓’을 구매할 확률이 높았으며, 미혼이면서 소득수준이 높을수록 한국산 ‘샤인머스켓’ 구매확률이 높게 나타나는 것으로 분석되었다. 따라서 한류를 이용한 수출전략 중 고객(Customer)관점의 경우는 한류캐릭터 마니아층을 대상으로 추진하는 것이 효과 적이며, 중국에서 인기 있는 한국 게임, 도서/웹툰/만화, 애니메이션 등을 활용하여 홍보활동을 하는 방법과 ‘샤인머스켓’ 캐릭터를 통한 문화콘텐츠 사업으로 홍보효과를 확대하는 방안을 수출전략으로 제시할 수 있다. 가격(Cost)관점의 경우는 고품질의 제품을 수출하고 포장을 고급화하는 고가전략, 유통 (Convenience)관점의 경우는 고급 마트와 온라인 중심의 판로 확보, 커뮤니케이션(Communication)관점의 경우는 SNS를 통한 홍보와 의견수렴 등의 전략을 추진할 수 있다. 본 연구는 한류 마케팅의 방향과 한류 캐릭터를 활용한 ‘샤인머스켓’의 대중 수출전략을 제시하였으며, 향후 ‘샤인머스켓’ 수출전략 수립에 기초자료를 제공하여 국내 ‘샤인머스켓’의 수급불안을 해소하고, 농가소득 증대에 기여 할 것으로 기대된다.

Building on insights from institutional theory and dynamic capabilities, this study investigates the relationships of cross-functional capabilities with export marketing strategy implementation and, ultimately, its influence on export performance. This study utilizes multiple-informant and time-lagged primary data from 218 exporting firms in Nigeria to contribute to an understanding of how export marketing capabilities can be implemented to drive export performance. The results suggest contrasting moderating effects of psychic distance and competitive intensity on the cross-functional capabilities to export marketing strategy implementation relationship. This research contributes to the international business and marketing literature by advancing the knowledge on marketing capabilities and strategy implementation, and highlights managerial implications for international business.

Introduction The trade-off between cost leadership strategy and differentiation strategy is of importance and presents a key challenge to exporters because it is intrinsically related to innovation (Gebauer, 2008; O’Cass et al., 2014). Nevertheless, resources are limited, and firms must make choices in their allocation and determine the extent to which they will emphasize one strategy over another (Danneels, 2007; Lant, Milliken, & Batra, 1992). Although the individual roles of product strategies or innovation capabilities on export performance have attracted considerable attention (e.g., Hortinha, Lages, & Lages, 2011; Lages, Silva, & Styles, 2009), few studies have assessed their integrating impact - that is, the difference in the strengths of the relationships between cost leadership or differentiation strategy and innovation. Drawing on resource based view, we examine how innovation capabilities related with the relationship between cost leadership and differentiation strategies and exporters’ performance. Thus, we consider the moderating role of two distinct capabilities - exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation - on the relationships between product strategies and export performance. Exploratory innovation includes activities aimed to enter new product-market domains, while exploitative innovation activities improve existing product-market domains (He & Wong, 2004). The objectives of this study are to explore (1) impacts of cost leadership strategy and differentiation strategy on export performance, (2) moderating effects of exploitative and exploratory innovation capability on the relationship between product strategy and export performance, and (3) these relationships in the context of a comparison of Korean and Japanese exporters. Most empirical research about product strategy and innovation capability has been conducted in Western-based context. This means that managers operating in non-Western business environments have only Western-based empirical evidence to help them develop strategies for managing levels of market orientation in their international businesses. However, non-Western business cultures may be different from those found in Western firms, and therefore generalizing studies of exporting behavior from Western to non-Western business contexts may be misleading. Indeed, it is noted that there is a need for more studies into the transferability of Western research to the Asian business setting (Ambler, Styles, & Xiucun, 1999). Thus, in order to fill this imbalance, the purpose of this study is to attempt to investigate product strategy and innovation capability of Korean and Japanese firms in international markets. Conceptual background Porter (1980) argues that a firm can achieve a higher level of performance over a rival in one of two ways: either it can supply an identical product or service at a lower cost, or it can supply a product or service that is differentiated in such a way that the customer is willing to pay a price premium that exceeds the additional cost of the differentiation. A cost leadership strategy is designed to produce goods or services more cheaply than competitors by stressing efficient scale of operation. When a firm designs, produces, and sells a comparable product more efficiently than its competitors as well as its market scope is industry-wide, it means that the firm is carrying out the cost leadership strategy successfully (Campbell-Hunt, 2000). Thus, the primary thing for a firm seeking competitively valuable way by reducing cost is to concentrate on maintaining efficiency through all activities in order to effectively control every expense and find new sources of potential cost reduction (Dess & Davis, 1984). The differentiation strategy provides value to customers with the unique attributes or perceptions of uniqueness, and characteristics of a firm’s product other than cost. The firm pursuing differentiation seeks to be unique in its industry along some dimension that is valued by customers, which means investing in product R&D and marketing (Porter, 1980). Rather than cost reduction, a firm using the differentiation needs to concentrate on investing in and developing such things that are distinguishable and customers will perceive (Gebauer, 2008). Overall, the essential success factor of differentiation in terms of strategy implementation is to develop and maintain innovativeness, creativeness, and organizational learning within a firm (Dess & Davis, 1984; O’Cass et al., 2014; Porter, 1985). A firm’s ability to compete in the long term may lie in its ability to integrate product strategy and its existing capabilities, while at the same time developing fundamentally new ones (Lavie & Rosenkopf, 2006). Simultaneous investments in the exploitation of existing product innovation capabilities and the exploration of new ones may help create a competitive advantage (Soosay & Hyland, 2008). Organizational learning represents the development of knowledge that influences behavioral changes and leads to enhanced performance (Crossan, Lane, & White, 1999; Fiol & Lyles, 1985). Product innovation is a tool for organizational learning and, thus, a primary means of achieving its strategic renewal (Danneels, 2002; Dougherty, 1992; O’Cass et al., 2014). Exploration pertains more to new knowledge - such as the search for new products, ideas, markets, or relationships; experimentation; risk taking; and discovery - while exploitation pertains more to using the existing knowledge and refining what already exists; it includes adaptation, efficiency, and execution (March, 1991). Exploration and exploitation compete for the same resources and efforts in the firm. With a focus on exploring potentially valuable future opportunities, the firm decreases activities linked to improving existing competences (Levinthal & March, 1993; March, 1991). In contrast, with a focus on exploiting existing products and processes, the firm reduces development of new opportunities. However, firms must develop both exploratory and exploitative capabilities because returns from exploration are uncertain, often negative, and attained over the long run, while exploitation generates more positive, proximate, and predictable returns (Levinthal & March, 1993; March, 1991; Özsomer & Gençtürk, 2003). Researchers haveshown that both types of learning are essential to enhancing firm performance (Leonard-Barton, 1992; March, 1991). In this study, we use exploration and exploitation to describe two innovation-related capabilities that are critical elements on the relationship between product strategies and export performance. Hypotheses A firm that successfully pursues a cost leadership strategy emphasizes “aggressive construction of efficient-scale facilities, vigorous pursuit of cost reductions from experience, tight cost and overhead control, avoidance of marginal customer accounts, and cost minimization in areas like R&D, service, sales force, advertising, and so on” (Porter, 1980: 35). In addition, with a cost leadership strategy, firms focus on reducing costs through operational efficiency. The associated positional advantage is a cost advantage pertaining to the firms’ value offering and is based on the product’s price–perceived value proposition in the export market. On the other hand, a firm that pursues a differentiation strategy may attempt to create a unique image in the minds of customers that its products are superior to those of its competitors (Miller, 1988). Moreover, a firm may pursue a differentiation strategy by creating a perception in the minds of customers that its products possess characteristics that are unique from those of its competitors in terms of differences in design, physical attributes/features, and durability (Gebauer, 2008). Differentiation strategy aims to generate more outwardly focused product innovations that offer customers product differences that shape a distinctive value offering that is more responsive to their needs (Hughes, Martin, Morgan, & Robson, 2010; O’Cass et al., 2014). The associated positional advantage is a product or market differentiation advantage pertaining to the superior brand, quality, design, and product features that differentiate the firms’ value proposition from its competitors in the export market. Firms that position their products in a manner that co-aligns with their “home country competitive advantages” will, on average, tend to perform better than those that do not. The impact of home-country advantages is lessening over time as firms develop firm-specific global core competencies to replace home-country advantages. The corporate climate in Japanese firms is characterized by worker participation and long term employment. These factors not only tend to increase costs, but also may have a positive effect on product quality through better employee motivation and more knowledgeable workers. Japanese firms have the highest labor and taxation costs and a demand base that is more quality than price sensitive. This creates a home-country environment that favors higher quality. Therefore, Japanese firms most easily achieved a strategic fit with their home country business environment by pursuing a differentiation strategy. On the other hand, Korean firms tend to focus innovation on small, incremental improvements in process and product development, exploiting experience effects. Over time, this focus results in higher quality for Korean products and lower costs, thus creating the potential for Korean firms to use a cost leadership strategy. Moreover, Korea’s capital markets (which offer inexpensive capital below short-term market rates), a demand base that is price sensitive, and the Korean corporate culture’s emphasis on low prices all contribute to an environment favoring lower cost and lower price strategy. Hypothesis 1: Cost leadership strategy pursued by Korean firms is positively associated with export performance, compared to Japanese firms. Hypothesis 2: Differentiation strategy pursued by Japanese firms is positively associated with export performance, compared to Korean firms. From the generation of new ideas through to the launch of a new product, exploration and exploitation play a vital role in product innovation (Rothaermel & Deeds, 2004). Organizations can decide to use existing organizational competences to realize short-term results, or create new competences that may foster the development of innovations in the longer term (Atuahene-Gima, 2005). Both types of capabilities are considered to be dynamic in nature (Winter, 2003), given that their purpose is to transform existing resources into new functional competences that provide a better match for the firm's environment (Voss, Sirdeshmukh, & Voss, 2008). Although both exploitative and exploratory capabilities related to cost leadership and differentiation strategies, because of those different roles of capabilities in innovation process, the effects of those innovation capabilities on the relationship between product strategy and export performance might be different. In case of cost leadership strategy, firms focus on using and developing existing capabilities, promoting improvements in existing components and building on existing technological elements (Benner & Tushman, 2003; Rust et al., 2002). Similarly, exploitative innovation is aimed at improving existing product-market domains. The cost leadership strategy creates value through existing competences or competences that have been slightly modified (Voss et al., 2008). It promotes a routine-based and repetitive approach to organizational changes (Rust et al., 2002). Because exploitative innovation builds on existing knowledge and extends existing products and services for existing customers (Soosay & Hyland, 2008), exploitative capabilities helps firms pursuing cost leadership strategy to reap the benefits of improvement they make to their products and to continue making incremental improvements (Brucks, Zeithaml, & Naylor, 2000), which are designed to allow the firm to continue its superior performance (Griffin, 1997). Compared to cost leadership strategy, differentiation strategy is characterized by radical change, risk and experimentation and that allows for the creation of new methods, relationships, and products. Because exploration focuses mainly on trying to create variety, to adapt and hence exploit ever-decreasing windows of opportunity (Soosay & Hyland, 2008), this capability is more beneficial to the kind of product innovativeness to the firm (Augusto & Coelho, 2009). When exporters pursue differentiation strategy for acquiring new knowledge and developing new products and services, exploratory capability helps to engage new insight into the design of new features and benefits of a given product, that product is guaranteed to contain new ideas (Cho & Pucik, 2005; Yalcinkaya et al., 2007). In contrast with exploitation aimed at improving existing product-market domains, explorative innovation requires fundamental changes in the way an organization operates and represents a clear departure from existing practices (Menguc & Auh, 2006). Hypothesis 3: Exploitative innovation capability moderates the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance positively. Hypothesis 4: Exploratory innovation capability moderates the relationship between differentiation strategy and export performance positively. Results This study conducted survey data from Korean and Japanese exporters, regarding to product strategy, innovation capability, and export performance. 223 usable questionnaires were obtained in Korea, and 124 usable questionnaires were obtained in Japan. With regard to number of years of international experience, international experience averaged 15 (S.D. = 23.54) for Korean samples and 37.95 (S.D. = 21.90) for Japanese samples. In addition, export intensity by total sales over exporting sales averaged 15 (S.D. = 23.54) for Korean samples and 36.91 (S.D. = 26.15) for Japanese samples. Using survey data from Korean and Japanese exporters, the findings indicate that cost leadership strategy enhance export performance for Korean firms. On the other hand, for Japanese firms, differentiation strategy is more related on export performance positively. Moreover, exploitative innovation capability strengthens the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance, while exploratory innovation capability enhances the link between differentiation strategy and export performance for both Korean and Japanese firms. Discussion Focusing on product strategy through the application of the RBV has provided theoretical insights as well as empirical evidence as to which capabilities are required to achieve these critical product strategy outcomes. The support from this study provides further evidence of the usefulness of applying the RBV to the export setting and should encourage researchers to examine the other aspects of export strategy. Based on organizational learning perspective, in addition, this study found that exploratory and exploitative innovation capability are essential to the firm because they act as vehicles for renewing product strategy to achieve superior export performance. By considering product strategy with exploration and exploitation simultaneously, we present a new perspective of the roles of these product strategies in the development of firms’ innovation capabilities. Our results indicate that cost leadership and differentiation strategy are pivotal in ensuring a proper balance between exploratory and exploitative innovations. Furthermore, this study found that different effects of product strategies on export performance in line with home country competitive advantages. Understanding the nature of marketing strategies employed by Korean and Japanese firms as well as its different effects may provide a useful reference point for exporters from other emerging countries in Asia. One of the main implications for managers is that both exploratory and exploitative product competences should consider in parallel when developing product strategy. The findings underscore the need for managers to invest in cost leadership and differentiation strategy to ensure the development of exploration and exploitation. Therefore, resource allocation decisions should, consider the firm's needs for innovation capabilities and, on the other hand, be guided by the firm’s product strategy. Exporters operate in highly complex environments, characterized by high levels of technological and market uncertainties and highly diverse and dispersed customers (Kleinschmidt et al., 2007; Mohr & Sarin, 2009). Therefore, in addition to the product strategy toward the development of innovations using state-of-the-art technologies, managers of these firms need a similarly strong focus on understanding both current and potential exporting markets. By acknowledging the need for product strategy, managers can ensure the balanced innovation capabilities.

This study employs the resource-based view to understand how product strategy influence export performance. According to the organizational learning perspective, moreover, the ability to manage existing assets and capabilities and the development of new capabilities are arguably among the most relevant innovation success factors. Based on these theoretical backgrounds, a model is proposed to analyze the effects of cost leadership and differentiation strategy on export performance, as well as the moderating effects of exploitative and exploratory innovation capability. Using survey data from Korean exporters, the findings indicate that the cost leadership and differentiation strategy enhance export performance. While exploitative innovation capability strengthens the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance, exploratory innovation capability enhances the link between differentiation strategy and export performance. Introduction The trade-off between cost leadership strategy and differentiation strategy is of importance and presents a key challenge to exporters because it is intrinsically related to innovation (Gebauer, 2008; O’Cass et al., 2014). Nevertheless, resources are limited, and firms must make choices in their allocation and determine the extent to which they will emphasize one strategy over another (Danneels, 2007; Lant, Milliken, & Batra, 1992). Although the individual roles of product strategies or innovation capabilities on export performance have attracted considerable attention (e.g., Hortinha, Lages, & Lages, 2011; Lages, Silva, & Styles, 2009; Molina-Castillo, Jimenez-Jimenez, & Munuera-Aleman, 2011), few studies have assessed their integrating impact - that is, the difference in the strengths of the relationships between cost leadership or differentiation strategy and innovation. Drawing on resource based view, we examine how innovation capabilities related with the relationship between cost leadership and differentiation strategies and exporters’ performance. Thus, we consider the moderating role of two distinct capabilities - exploratory innovation and exploitative innovation - on the relationships between product strategies and export performance. Exploratory innovation includes activities aimed to enter new product-market domains, while exploitative innovation activities improve existing product-market domains (He &Wong, 2004). The objectives of this study are to explore (1) impacts of cost leadership strategy and differentiation strategy on export performance, (2) moderating effects of exploitative and exploratory innovation capability on the relationship between product strategy and export performance, and (3) these relationships in the context of Korean exporters. The Korean exporting firms are more concentrated on international markets because of limited size of domestic market (Nugent & Yhee, 2002). These characteristics of Korean exporters are more useful to examine the effect of product strategy and product innovation capability of firms on export performance in international markets. Conceptual Background Product Strategy and Competitive Advantage Porter (1980) argues that a firm can achieve a higher level of performance over a rival in one of two ways: either it can supply an identical product or service at a lower cost, or it can supply a product or service that is differentiated in such a way that the customer is willing to pay a price premium that exceeds the additional cost of the differentiation. A cost leadership strategy is designed to produce goods or services more cheaply than competitors by stressing efficient scale of operation. When a firm designs, produces, and sells a comparable product more efficiently than its competitors as well as its market scope is industry-wide, it means that the firm is carrying out the cost leadership strategy successfully (Campbell-Hunt, 2000). Thus, the primary thing for a firm seeking competitively valuable way by reducing cost is to concentrate on maintaining efficiency through all activities in order to effectively control every expense and find new sources of potential cost reduction (Dess & Davis, 1984). The differentiation strategy provides value to customers with the unique attributes or perceptions of uniqueness, and characteristics of a firm’s product other than cost. The firm pursuing differentiation seeks to be unique in its industry along some dimension that is valued by customers, which means investing in product R&D and marketing (Porter, 1980). Rather than cost reduction, a firm using the differentiation needs to concentrate on investing in and developing such things that are distinguishable and customers will perceive (Gebauer, 2008). Overall, the essential success factor of differentiation in terms of strategy implementation is to develop and maintain innovativeness, creativeness, and organizational learning within a firm (Dess & Davis, 1984; O’Cass et al., 2014; Porter, 1985). Innovation Capability in International Markets A firm’s ability to compete in the long term may lie in its ability to integrate product strategy and its existing capabilities, while at the same time developing fundamentally new ones (Lavie & Rosenkopf, 2006). Simultaneous investments in the exploitation of existing product innovation capabilities and the exploration of new ones may help create a competitive advantage (Soosay & Hyland, 2008). Organizational learning represents the development of knowledge that influences behavioral changes and leads to enhanced performance (Crossan, Lane, & White, 1999; Fiol & Lyles, 1985). Product innovation is a tool for organizational learning and, thus, a primary means of achieving its strategic renewal (Danneels, 2002; Dougherty, 1992; O’Cass et al., 2014). Exploration pertains more to new knowledge - such as the search for new products, ideas, markets, or relationships; experimentation; risk taking; and discovery - while exploitation pertains more to using the existing knowledge and refining what already exists; it includes adaptation, efficiency, and execution (March, 1991). Exploration and exploitation compete for the same resources and efforts in the firm. With a focus on exploring potentially valuable future opportunities, the firm decreases activities linked to improving existing competences (Levinthal & March, 1993; March, 1991). In contrast, with a focus on exploiting existing products and processes, the firm reduces development of new opportunities. However, firms must develop both exploratory and exploitative capabilities because returns from exploration are uncertain, often negative, and attained over the long run, while exploitation generates more positive, proximate, and predictable returns (Levinthal & March, 1993; March, 1991; Özsomer & Gençtürk, 2003). Researchers have shown that both types of learning are essential to enhancing firm performance (Leonard-Barton, 1992; March, 1991). In this study, we use exploration and exploitation to describe two innovation-related capabilities that are critical elements on the relationship between product strategies and export performance. International markets are turbulent and diverse with respect to customer needs, cultures, and competitiveness; therefore, innovation assumes a primary role (Kleinschmidt, De Brentani, & Salomo, 2007). Firms can leverage their innovations by securing business opportunities in those markets and thus increase their innovative capabilities (Knight & Cavusgil, 2004). Through exploratory innovation, firms develop new competences and thus enhance superior export performance by product strategies (Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997). Exploitation activities are also important to exporters because they facilitate the lower-risk extension of export operations. By searching for solutions in the existent competence base, exploitative innovation increases efficiency and productivity. Accordingly, this study based on organizational learning perspective to support the idea that innovation capabilities are a vehicle for a product strategy, and achieving superior export performance. We advance the literature by allowing for a role of product strategies while also considering moderating effects of innovation capabilities. Moreover, we provide insights into how choices about emphasizing one product strategy over another relates the balance between exploration and exploitation. Hypotheses Product Strategy and Export Performance Porter’s cost leadership and differentiation strategies have been linked to the achievement of superior performance by many studies (Campbell-Hunt, 2000; Dess & Davis, 1984). A firm that successfully pursues a cost leadership strategy emphasizes “aggressive construction of efficient-scale facilities, vigorous pursuit of cost reductions from experience, tight cost and overhead control, avoidance of marginal customer accounts, and cost minimization in areas like R&D, service, sales force, advertising, and so on” (Porter, 1980: 35). A firm can, therefore, gain a competitive advantage over its rivals by having significantly lower cost structures in an industry without ignoring other areas such as product and service quality (Amoako-Gyampah & Acquaah, 2008). Thus, the maintenance of a strong competitive position for an organization pursuing a cost leadership strategy places a premium on efficiency of operations and scale economies that enable them to achieve and sustain their performance for a considerable period of time. In addition, with a cost leadership strategy, firms focus on reducing costs through operational efficiency. For example, they might exploit existing facilities and learn how to reduce costs through automation, modernization, capacity utilization, or economies of scale. Efficiency, control, planning, and variance reduction represent the key elements of a cost leadership strategy, and a typical example of a cost leadership strategy involves the implementation of an experience curve, on which cumulative production determines reductions in unit production costs. Firms engage in economies of scale and/or scope when they apply their knowledge and facilities from existing product lines to product line extensions. The associated positional advantage is a cost advantage pertaining to the firms’ value offering and is based on the product’s price–perceived value proposition in the export market. Hypothesis 1: Cost leadership strategy is positively associated with export performance. A firm that pursues a differentiation strategy may attempt to create a unique image in the minds of customers that its products are superior to those of its competitors (Miller, 1988). A firm creates these perceptions through advertising programs, marketing techniques and methods, and charging premium prices. Moreover, a firm may pursue a differentiation strategy by creating a perception in the minds of customers that its products possess characteristics that are unique from those of its competitors in terms of differences in design, physical attributes/features, and durability (Gebauer, 2008). Differentiation strategy aims to generate more outwardly focused product innovations that offer customers product differences that shape a distinctive value offering that is more responsive to their needs (Hughes, Martin, Morgan, & Robson, 2010; O’Cass et al., 2014). The associated positional advantage is a product or market differentiation advantage pertaining to the superior brand, quality, design, and product features that differentiate the firms’ value proposition from its competitors in the export market. Hypothesis 2: Differentiation strategy is positively associated with export performance. Moderating Effects of Innovation Capability From the generation of new ideas through to the launch of a new product, exploration and exploitation play a vital role in product innovation (Rothaermel & Deeds, 2004). Organizations can decide to use existing organizational competences to realize short-term results, or create new competences that may foster the development of innovations in the longer term (Atuahene-Gima, 2005). Both types of capabilities are considered to be dynamic in nature (Winter, 2003), given that their purpose is to transform existing resources into new functional competences that provide a better match for the firm's environment (Voss, Sirdeshmukh, & Voss, 2008). Although both exploitative and exploratory capabilities related to cost leadership and differentiation strategies, because of those different roles of capabilities in innovation process, the effects of those innovation capabilities on the relationship between product strategy and export performance might be different. In case of cost leadership strategy, firms focus on using and developing existing capabilities, promoting improvements in existing components and building on existing technological elements (Benner & Tushman, 2003; Rust et al., 2002). Similarly, exploitative innovation is aimed at improving existing product-market domains. The cost leadership strategy creates value through existing competences or competences that have been slightly modified (Voss et al., 2008). It promotes a routine-based and repetitive approach to organizational changes (Rust et al., 2002). Because exploitative innovation builds on existing knowledge and extends existing products and services for existing customers (Soosay & Hyland, 2008), exploitative capabilities helps firms pursuing cost leadership strategy to reap the benefits of improvement they make to their products and to continue making incremental improvements (Brucks, Zeithaml, & Naylor, 2000), which are designed to allow the firm to continue its superior performance (Griffin, 1997). Hypothesis 3: Exploitative innovation capability moderates the relationship between cost leadership strategy and export performance positively. Compared to cost leadership strategy, differentiation strategy is characterized by radical change, risk and experimentation and that allows for the creation of new methods, relationships, and products. Because exploration focuses mainly on trying to create variety, to adapt and hence exploit ever-decreasing windows of opportunity (Soosay & Hyland, 2008), this capability is more beneficial to the kind of product innovativeness to the firm (Augusto & Coelho, 2009). When exporters pursue differentiation strategy for acquiring new knowledge and developing new products and services, exploratory capability helps to engage new insight into the design of new features and benefits of a given product, that product is guaranteed to contain new ideas (Cho & Pucik, 2005; Yalcinkaya et al., 2007). In contrast with exploitation aimed at improving existing product-market domains, explorative innovation requires fundamental changes in the way an organization operates and represents a clear departure from existing practices (Menguc &Auh, 2006). Hypothesis 4: Exploratory innovation capability moderates the relationship between differentiation strategy and export performance positively. Discussion Focusing on product strategy through the application of the RBV has provided theoretical insights as well as empirical evidence as to which capabilities are required to achieve these critical product strategy outcomes. The support from this study provides further evidence of the usefulness of applying the RBV to the export setting and should encourage researchers to examine the other aspects of export strategy. Based on organizational learning perspective, in addition, this study found that exploratory and exploitative innovation capability are essential to the firm because they act as vehicles for renewing product strategy to achieve superior export performance. By considering product strategy with exploration and exploitation simultaneously, we present a new perspective of the roles of these product strategies in the development of firms’ innovation capabilities. Our results indicate that cost leadership and differentiation strategy are pivotal in ensuring a proper balance between exploratory and exploitative innovations. One of the main implications for managers is that both exploratory and exploitative product competences should consider in parallel when developing product strategy. The findings underscore the need for managers to invest in cost leadership and differentiation strategy to ensure the development of exploration and exploitation. Therefore, resource allocation decisions should, consider the firm's needs for innovation capabilities and, on the other hand, be guided by the firm’s product strategy. Exporters operate in highly complex environments, characterized by high levels of technological and market uncertainties and highly diverse and dispersed customers (Kleinschmidt et al., 2007; Mohr & Sarin, 2009). Therefore, in addition to the product strategy toward the development of innovations using state-of-the-art technologies, managers of these firms need a similarly strong focus on understanding both current and potential exporting markets. By acknowledging the need for product strategy, managers can ensure the balanced innovation capabilities.

The global diffusions of free trade agreements have encouraged an increasing number of companies to participate in foreign markets. However, export firms fall behind big data-based customers in international export markets. The gap between the needs of export markets and the capabilities of export companies is broadening. Marketing capabilities are export firms’ ability to understand what target customers want and develop tactical marketing actions and allocate available resources, and achieve export performance (Day 1994; Vorhies and Morgan, 2003). Export firms have to enhance marketing capabilities to narrow the gap (Day, 2011). This study investigates marketing capabilities, export marketing strategies, and their relationships with export performance of the export companies in an industrial complex in South Korea. This study tries to find how marketing variables impact the performance of export firms through the relationships among them. Marketing literature examined that the suitability between marketing capabilities and export marketing strategy is important because of its impact on export performance. Export marketing literature reviewed that export firms’ characteristics such as international experience, firm size, firm age, and export intensity, firm level of market orientation are considered positively related to export performance. Especially for inexperienced and small and medium-sized firms, which have limited marketing resources to achieve successful export performance, the right choice of export marketing, export marketing strategy, and export performance is indispensable. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the moderating effects of export firms’ characteristics on the interactive linkages within marketing capability, export marketing strategy, and export performance. Our first focus in this study is the relationships between marketing capabilities and export strategies and both export marketing strategy and export performance. We discuss their relationships with each other and with export firms’ performance. We develop testable hypotheses as shown in Fig.1. The final samples we used are 104 manufactured export firms in S. Korea. Next, as a result of testing, based on the relationships of having positive effects, we identify the moderating effects of export firms’ characteristics. Our research model proposes that marketing capabilities affect export marketing strategies and ‘specialized marketing capabilities’. These affect the overall export performance. We therefore hypothesize that H1: Marketing organizational capability is positively related to (a) export marketing strategy and (b) specialized export marketing capability. H2: Marketing human resource capability is positively related to (a) export marketing strategy and (b) specialized export marketing capability. H3: Marketing financial capability is positively related to (a) export marketing strategy and (b) specialized export marketing capability. H4: Marketing infrastructure is positively related to (a) export marketing strategy and (b) specialized export marketing capability. H5: Export marketing strategy is positively related to (a) specialized export marketing capability and (b) export performance. H6: Specialized export marketing capability is positively related to export performance. The results of our PLS-SEM analyses are as follows. Our results support H1b, linking marketing organizational capability and specialized export marketing capability. Marketing infrastructure was found to be positively related to both export marketing strategy and specialized export marketing capability, supporting H4a and H4b, respectively. We also observed that export marketing strategy a positive link with specialized export marketing capability and export performance, supporting H5a and H5b, respectively. However, no support is found for H2, H3, and H6. Moderating Effects of Export firms’ Characteristic Factors We tested how export firms’ characteristics moderate the relationships described in our research model (Hypotheses1-6) We used the moderate factors such as export product (final product vs. parts), customer (domestic vs. overseas, company (manufacturer vs. vendor), employment size (less than 100 person, 100 to300, more than 300), sales(less than $46 million, $46 million to $182 million, more than $182 million), export intensity (less than 50% vs. more than 50%) The moderating effects of export firms’ characteristics on the relationships within our research model are discussed (see Figure 1). Four of 30 moderating hypotheses for export firms’ characteristics were supported. The more number of employees and Greater sales volume strengthened the relationships between marketing infrastructures and export marketing strategies. Higher foreign customer strengthened the relationships between marketing infrastructure and specialized export marketing capability. Greater final products strengthened the relationships between export marketing strategies and export performance. However, the relationships between marketing organizational capability and specialized export marketing capability and between export marketing strategy and specialized export marketing capability were not significantly changed with export firms’ characteristic factors. There are no moderating effects on the types of firm and the types of export intensity. The results of this research suggest that the export companies should consider the choice of export marketing strategies the most important factor to achieve high export performance. This study indicates that policy makers for export companies in S. Korea should develop export assistant programs based on export firms’ characteristic factors such as the number of employee, sales volume, the type of customer, and the type of export product. Following limitations of this research should be noted. First, in addition to the manufacturing industry, more researches should be done in other industries. The findings of this study will ensure more validation. Second, to assess the export performance of export firms, this study uses the subjective opinion of respondent about the degree of export performance because of the difficulties of obtaining financial data. The objective financial data should be used to ensure more objectiveness for this research. Third, this study relies on survey data related to the export companies within an industrial complex area in S. Korea. It should be extended to other regions.

국제 마케팅 분야에서 제품 전략과 수출 성과의 관계에 관한 연구가 활발히 이루어져 왔다. 이러한 제품 전략과 수출 성과의 관계는 기존 역량의 활용뿐만 아니라 지속적인 혁신활동이 뒷받침되어야 한다. 이에 본 연구는 자원기반이론 관점에서 제품 전략이 수출 성과에 미치는 영향에 관해 살펴보고자 하였으며, 나아가 조직학습관점에서 혁신 역량이 제품 전략과 수출 성과의 관계에 미치는 조절효과에 대해 알아보고자 하였다. 한국 수출업체를 대상으로 한 설문조사를 바탕으로 실증분석을 실시한 결과, 제품 품질 전략과 제품 혁신 전략이 수출 성과에 긍정적인 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 활용적 혁신 역량이 제품 품질 전략과 수출 성과의 긍정적인 관계를 강화하는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구는 제품 전략과 혁신 역량 간 적합성을 통해 제품 전략이 수출 성과에 미치는 긍정적인 효과를 높일 수 있음을 시사하며, 향후 이와 관련한 선행요인 및 결과요인에 관한 추가적인 연구가 활발하게 이루어질 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

This paper examines how Japanese exporters were able to retain their market shares in Korea when the yen appreciated sharply beginning from 1985. The limited decrease in Japan`s share resulted from (1) an opportunistic share-holding pricing strategy of Japanese exporters: they reduced yen prices even further to retain their shares in cases where they were otherwise likely to lose large shares, and (2) inelastic Korean demand. This study focuses on the pricing behavior of Japanese exporters, using Korean import data and information from field interviews. Some factors enabled Japanese exporters to reduce yen prices. Yen costs of imported inputs for Japan`s exports fell, and Japanese exporters squeezed profit margins that existed before the yen appreciated. Some of them even subsidized price reductions with part of the windfall profits that they realized at home because they did not pass on the decrease in cost of imported inputs to domestic consumers. Subsidized price reductions, accompanied by cost reduction efforts, were a long-term strategy of preempting the entry of competitors since cost reduction required time. If the yen appreciates further, Japanese exporters are likely to substitute imported inputs for Japanese domestic value-added or shift to foreign production while reducing yen prices to defend their markets. This paper uses data from the author`s doctoral dissertation at the Harvard Business School, “The Appreciation of the Yen and Japan`s Exports to Korea.”The author received valuable comments from Louis T. Wells, Jr., Alice H. Amsden, and Benjamin-Gomes Casseres, and financial support from the Harvard Business School`s Division of Research for the dissertation.

Aquatic products have been exported and exported in large quantities as they provide high-quality protein, promote brain development and maintain cardiovascular health. China’s exports of aquatic products will reach 21. 926billion U. S. dollars in 2021, up 15. 31 percent year-on-year and 23. 03 billion U. S. dollars in 2022, an increase of 5. 04 percent year-on year. Based on this background, this paper will analyze the export structure of Chinese fisheries products based on HS code and analyze the competitiveness of Chinese fisheries products through trade competition index (TC). The paper points out the existing problems in China’s export of fishery products to Korea and puts forward a targeted and effective development strategy.

최근 국경 간 전자상거래 수출은 중국 수출 비즈니스의 중요한 요인으로 성장하고 있다. 정보 기술의 발전과 함께 중국의 국경 간 전자상거래 수출은 급속하게 성장을 하고 있다. 그러나 중국의 국경 간 전자상거래 수출 기업들은 또한 몇 가지 도전에 직면하고 있다. 따라서 중국의 국경간 전자상거래 수출 기업들의 현황 및 당면한 문제들을 분석하는 것은 그 기업들이 딜레마를 벗어나는데 유용할 것이다. 본 연구는 PEST와 4P 전략을 포함한 마케팅 분석 도구를 사용하여 중국의 국경 간 전자상거래 기업들을 둘러싸는 내부 및 외부 환경을 분석하고, 그 마케팅 전략에 존재하는 문제들을 지적한다. 중국의 국경 간 전자상거래 수출 전략을 개선하기 위한 제안들이 본 연구에서 제안된다. 본 연구의 성과는 선행 연구의 갭을 채우는 것뿐만 아니라 또한 중국의 국경 간 전자상거래 수출 기업들로 하여금 그들의 시장을 보다 효과적으로 확대하는데 시사점을 주고자 한다.