The nature of NPD is conducive to SMEs improvising at all stages of the process. This has the potential to create new knowledge, which, if retained and harnessed, can then be applied at higher strategic levels within the firm. This paper examines this phenomenon, through a preliminary qualitative study.

This study is an empirical research to find out the effect on the management performance of hidden champions of food manufacturing companies when using blue ocean strategy for new product development. In order to achieve the purpose of this study, we conducted a questionnaire survey on hidden champions in the domestic food manufacturing industry and proceeded empirical analysis. When small and medium-sized enterprises in food manufacturing industries develop a new product, searching for non-customer, rebuilding the market boundary, and linking the external networks have a significant impact on their management performance. However, the fair procedure did not have a significant effect on the management performance. In terms of relative influence, rebuilding the market boundary was most affecting, followed by searching for non-customer and linking the external networks. On the other hand, this study implicated the management performance of hidden champions of food manufacturing industries when new products is developed by using the blue ocean strategy. Obtained results are as follows. If small and medium-sized enterprises of food manufacturing industries develop new products, it will be able to improve the management performance by utilizing strategies such as searching for non-customer, rebuilding the market boundary, and linking the external networks. In particular, the rebuilding the market boundary among the blue ocean strategies has a relatively high impact on management 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), 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.

China, with its rapid growing wealthy consumers, is increasingly becoming a major market for luxury brands and products. It is believed that the growing consumption of wildlife products in China is one of the key factors in the acceleration of global extinction of endangered species. It is certainly not an easy task to reveal consumers’ true motivations behind their purchase, but is even tougher to change their behavior. In the field of wildlife conservation, despite many efforts so far have been made to de-market the consumption, the results are not encouraging. This study is designed to fill the research gap by treating ivory purchase as a type of luxury product purchase in China. Through studying the behavior and its underlying values and motivations, this research is aimed to identify effective communication strategies to curve the ivory consumption in China. Pretest among small groups was first conducted for the purpose of scale validity evaluation. A random stratified sample was obtained from an online panel in China in January 2018. Total 600 usable samples were obtained. The data analysis showed a strong and positive relationship between power distance and materialism; power distance and negative attitude toward social media. Materialism/collectivism is found a strong predicator of positive attitude toward social media and social media usage. While ivory likely buyers associate uncertainty avoidance with materialism and positive attitude toward social network, ivory purchase rejecters demonstrate a positive relationship between long term orientation and materialism; long term orientation and positive attitude toward social media. Based on the strong relationships between materialism and social media usage we found form this study, it is recommended to design a social media campaign to dissociate ivory products from social status; and to associate social status with healthier, greener alternatives (e.g., Tesla car). Advocating desired behavior (e.g., charitable works to save elephants in Africa) in social media and de-advocating the undesired behaviors by celebrities on TV (e.g., ‘No Trading - No Killing’ campaign by YaoMing) is likely to work for likely ivory buyers.

제조물책임법은 제품의 제조, 설계, 표시상의 결함으로 인해 사용자의 생명이나 신체에 피해나 손실이 발생할 경우 제조물의 결함과 그로 인한 피해 사실이 입증되면 제조업자 등이 손해배상책임을 지게 하는 제도이다. 제조물책임법의 시행으로 기업은 제조물책임 사고로 인한 손실을 예방하고 체계적으로 방어할 수 있는 대응시스템을 구축하여 제품안전사고를 본질적으로 근절하기 위한 책무를 다해야 한다. 그렇지만 최근에 발생한 가습기살균제 사고, 휴대폰 배터리의 결함, 정수기 리콜 등에 의한 피해발생으로 제품의 안전을 근원적으로 확보하고 소비자의 생명과 재산을 보호하는 데 제도적으로 미흡한 점이 발견되어 개선 할 필요성이 대두되었다. 이에 국회에서는 제조물책임법의 실효성을 강조하기 위하여 2017년 3월 제조물책임법의 개정을 통해서 피해액의 최고 3배까지 배상토록 하는 징벌적 배상제도, 소비자에게 피해발생 시 입증책임을 제조업체가 지도록 하는 입증책임의 전환 등을 개정하게 되었다. 이러한 변화는 앞으로 기업 책임의 변화를 예상하게 된다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 개정된 제조물책임법이 기업에 미치는 영향을 살펴보고 기업이 효과적으로 대응할 수 있도록 대응전략을 제시하고자 한다.

The new businesses started by the companies usually results in being unsuccessful. The main reasons for that are either aiming targeting wrong customers, unsatisfaction of customers’ requesting quality standards, or taking wrong actions against the competitors in the market. Therefore, companies should aim the targets for the newly developing products based on the fulfilling values for the customers when they start the new businesses, and should take good cares for risk managements at the each step of the new business to prevent the failure in advance. In addition to that, the companies starting new businesses not only need to take the customers attributes (CA) into account, but they also should apply the new technologies as one system to initiate a new business to satisfy the basic wants of the customers. This article suggests the New Product Development Pursuing Model using the Indicative Planning methodology and the Quality Management tools. The New Product Development Pursuing Model would be completed by the following steps as below; 1. Drawing the CTQ (Critical To Quality) for setting up the new product development objectives by : i) using the VOC (Voice Of Customers) obtained by the QFD (Quality Function Deploypment) if the market is mature, ii) applying AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) to information in the QIS (Quality Information System) if the market is unmature to get enough need information of the customers. 2. Risk Management in NPD : The NPD pursuing model consisted of the IP (indicative planning) is suggested not by the process of top-down-way mandatory planning process, but by the tools used in the administrative science and economic fields, namely by governance. The companies could apply innovative methodology for new products development processes to fulfil the customers satisfaction in the fields, through the CA (Contingency Approach) of the NPD (New Product Development) process.

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.

In this paper, we study the bargaining strategy of a distributor who sells vertically differentiated, i.e. high and low brand products. We derive and analyze the equilibrium solutions for both simultaneous and sequential bargaining games among the distributor, the high brand product manufacturer and the low brand product manufacturer. The result shows that the optimal bargaining strategy for the distributor heavily depends on the relative quality and price level of the low brand product comparing to those of the high brand product. It is also shown that, for more bargaining profit, the distributor has strong motivation to prefer a low brand product which has lower quality level per unit price.

Customers are regarded as the key intangible assets of a company. It is necessary to have the capability to anticipate customer value. The study discusses the relationship among customer value anticipation, product innovativeness, and customer lifetime value from customer perspective. 178 MBA students were surveyed by questionnaire in this study. The results show that customer perceived customer value anticipation can significantly influence product innovativeness. Product innovativeness not only positively affects customer lifetime value, but also plays a partial mediating role between customer value anticipation and customer lifetime value. Both functional and emotional advertising can play a moderating role on the relationship between product innovativeness and customer lifetime value. At the end, managerial implications are discussed.

This paper analyses the importance of innovation for 680 EU multinationals subsidiaries involved in international marketing in China, the period of 1998-2009, using unbalanced panel data analysis. To date, the literature on EU subsidiaries has failed to consider product innovation in the strategy interplay in approaching new markets overseas. Building on the resource-based view of the firm, linked with host economic and political institutions, the authors empirically examine the inferential marketing strategy in an EU-China context, by applying econometric techniques to investigate innovation capabilities and to test the presence of agglomeration effect of past innovation activities. We find that EU innovation in China is influenced by both host country institutions and firm capabilities, rendering support to the theory. Our analysis indicates EU subsidiaries’ innovation is positively related to firm advertisement, labour training and host market size. R&D expenditure has a negative bearing on innovation. However, openness has a negative and significant effect on product innovation in China. The study findings have important implications for research on international marketing, new venture decision making, and overseas innovation expansion strategies.

본 연구는 규모가 작고 역동적인 벤처기업의 성장에 영향을 줄 수 있는 요인들 중에서 기업의 전략적 행동이나 경영자의 경영 역량과 관련된 제품 전략과 CEO(최고경영자) 특성의 효과를 실증적으로 분석하였다. 벤처기업의 표본을 이용하여 FGLS 추정법에 기반한 회귀분석의 결과에 따르면, 제품 전략과 CEO 특성은 기업 성장에 유의한 영향을 주며 추가적인 설명력을 가진다. 일반적으로 제품의 다양화와 마케팅을 강조할수록, 변화혁신을 완화할수록 성장률이 높았다. 그리고 CEO가 경영지배력을 가진 창업자가 아니거나, 현재 사업관련 분야에서 실무경험이 많을수록 성장률이 높았다. 또한, 연구개발 위주 업무경력보다 일반경영 중심의 업무경력을 가진 CEO가 관리하는 기업이 성장률이 더 높았다. 제품 전략과 CEO 특성이 벤처기업의 성장에 미치는 이런 효과들은 조직수명주기 단계에 따라서 달라졌다. 창업기 및 초기 성장기에 있는 기업에서 제품의 마케팅 강조 전략과 CEO의 일반경영 중심 업무경력이 기업 성장에 미치는 긍정적 효과가 상대적으로 강화된 반면, 성숙기 및 정체기에 있는 기업에서 이런 제품 전략과 CEO 특성이 기업 성장에 미치는 효과가 부정적이거나 유의하지 않았다.

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.

Recently, the increasing power of distributors has given them the opportunity of introducing private brand (PB) products. Based on the game theory, this study analyzes the decision making of a distributor regarding the optimal pricing and quality strategi

Kano model offers an effective way to understand customer requirements strategically Thus, the integration of Kano model and QFD can reflect customer requirements more effectively in designing new product. Most of previous studies on the integration have been focused customer attributes, but engineering characteristics are used at the final stage of new product design. It is proposed that how to classify engineering characteristics into Kano's elements and how to use the classified results in new product development process in this thesis. A case example is included to explain the proposed method.

제조업체의 성공은 고객의 요구를 파악하는 능력과 이들 요구를 만족시키면서, 얼마나 최소비용을 투자하여 제품화를 신속히 개발하는가에 달려있다. 기업의 목표를 달성하기 위해서 제조 판매 및 마케팅 그리고 제품 디자인 및 개발기간과 같은 여러 요소들이 복합적으로 적절히 조화를 이루어야만 한다. 이 논문에서는 여러 요소 중 신제품 개발기간에 초점을 맞추어 현재 각 기업에서 많이 사용되고 있는 6시그마 기법을 적용하여 새로운 제품의 개발기간을 단축시키기 위한 방법론을 제시한다.

경영이 생산 효율성을 높이기 위한 관리(Management)의 개념으로 시작되었듯이 제품디자인도 생산 효율성을 높이기 위한 방법으로 모더니즘(Modernism) 디자인으로부터 출발하였다. 기업의 경영의 목적은 이윤의 추구이며 기업의 제품디자인 또한 그렇다. 이러하듯 경영과 제품디자인은 공통점이 많다. 하지만 경영과 디자인의 시대적 발전 과정에 대한 연구는 많지 않다. 본 연구는 시대별 경영 전략에 대하여 살펴보고 같은 시대에 제품디자인 전략이 변화해 온 과정에 대한 비교를 통하여 경영 전략과 디자인 전략과의 연관성을 고찰해 보는 것을 목적으로 진행되었다. 비교 고찰의 결과 경영과 제품디자인은 시대별로, 사회, 경제, 기술, 문화의 변화에 따라서 깊은 연관성을 가지고 변화해 왔음을 인지할 수 있었다.

Purpose - Nowadays, the innovative design concept is being implemented in product design. In order to satisfy market trends and the demand for quality, designers should employ customer satisfaction questionnaires and analyze them with various experimental processes. Research design, data, and methodology - These methodologies would help designers have a better understanding of their customers and judge the market size and clustering validity, by diverse product strategies, for dealing with the rapid change prevailing in the market today. Results - By considering the innovative design with regard to telephones as an experimental case, the study investigates and demonstrates how the product can benefit from market-oriented and customized management concepts, when creative design ability is utilized for developing the product. Conclusions - Along with the benefit of having an innovative product value, the product can stimulate progress inthe development of the enterprise management, which has emerged as the main issue in the area of social and economic development in every developed country.

외환위기 이후 급격한 출점과 성장을 해온 대형마트 점포수가 이미 포화상태에 이르렀다는 우려의 목소리도 있지만 신규 출점은 계속적으로 지속될 전망이고 향후 대형마트 성장세는 둔화되나 점 포수 등 외형적 성장은 계속되는 가운데 상품 차별화 추구, 고객 니즈부응, 고마진획득 등이 지속적으로 가능해져 PB상품 개발이 불황 국면 극복을 위한 저성장 시대의 마케팅 전략의 하나로 자리 잡을 것으로 전망 된다. 또한 국내 3대 대형마트가 의류PB 브랜드 를 계속적으로 출시, 확장하고 있는 상황과 운영전략에 대해 연구 하고 이를 바탕으로 국내 대형마트의 PB의 성공사례와 문제점을 도출하여 PB의 필요성에 대해 차별화와 고이익 창출을 위한 성공 적 전략 방안을 논의 하고자 한다. 본 연구는 대형 마트 PB의 개념과 전략 방안 및 성공사례와 전 망을 살펴보고, 현재 전 세계적으로 빠른 성장을 보이는 PB를 단 순히 유통업체가 상품을 유통시키면 된다는 제한된 역할 수행에서 벗어나, 제조업체가 지닌 유통 채널에 대한 지배력을 얻을 수 있 다는 것을 의미 확장하여 설명하고자 한다. 이미 세계 주요 선진 유통업체들은 자사의 상품차별화와 수익성향상을 위해 PB상품 개 발에 많은 노력을 쏟고 있으며, 이를 통해 다국적전략 및 외형적 확장, 더불어 높은 재무성과를 창출하고 있는 좋은 사례는 쉽게 접할 수 있다. 따라서 본 연구는 국내 할인점의 포화에 따른 새로운 대안을 위해서는 차별화된 PB운영 전략이 필요함을 국내3개 주요할인점 사례를 통해 제시하였다. 특히 의류 PB상품은 철저한 시장분석과 디자인트렌드 및 고객니즈를 반영한 상품개발로 차별화된 상품력 및 고마진 획득을 통해 출점 정체된 대형마트 지속성장에 새로운 돌파구를 마련하는 좋은 계기를 줄 수 있는 시사점을 제공하여 할 인점 출점 한계에 따른 새로운 상품전략 방안을 제시하였다. 본 연구는 할인점 주요 3개사의 경영실적과 세계 몇 개국의 대표적인 PB성공사례를 중심으로 연구하여 국내 전체 소매 산업에 일반화 하기에는 다소 무리가 있다. 향후에는 국내에 입점된 다국적 SPA 브랜드와 국내 할인점 PB를 중심으로 비교분석하여 가치를 극대 화한 의류PB 확대전략에 대한 추가연구가 필요하다.

본 연구는 새롭게 탄생한 온라인 게임 기업이 시장 성장주기(도입기-성장기-성숙기)에 따라 어떻게 다원화 전략을 행하여 왔는가를 자원기반이론과 진화이론의 관점에서 실증적 사례 분석을 통해 그 역사적 진행 과정을 체계적으로 분석하였다. 초기 온라인 게임 기업들은 진입 조건(장르, 기술력, 이용자특성)에 따라 다른 전략(기술역량기반, 서비스역량기반)을 통해 성장하였다. 이후 성장기에 이들 기업들은 제품 다원화를 위해 자원기반(기술기반전략, 서비스기반전략)에 따라 경로의존적 제휴 전략(보완적, 대체적 제휴)을 수행하여왔다. 그러나 성숙기에 이들 기업들은 기존 경로의존적 전략을 뛰어넘어 이용가능한 모든 자원 역량을 동원하는 통합 전략을 자연적으로 선택함으로서 시장 성장주기에 탄력적으로 적응하였다. 이러한 분석 결과는 진화이론과 자원기반이론을 복합적으로 적용하여 새롭게 탄생한 산업에서 시장의 단계별 성장주기에 따라 온라인 게임 기업의 제휴 전략 패턴이 어떻게 자기조직화 하고 있는지 분석함으로써 새로운 산업적, 정책적, 이론적 모델이 요구되고 있음을 제시하고 있다.