How important is customer orientation for firm performance? A fuzzy set analysis of orientations, strategies, and environments

Prior literature suggests that customer orientation interacts with other strategic factors, but yields mixed effects in terms of performance outcomes. In addition, capturing performance outcomes of complex systems of interdependencies using commonly employed methods, such as regression models, is often difficult. Thus, this study employs a configurational approach, using fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fs/QCA), to analyze the constellations of different strategic orientations, strategy types, and market conditions that yield superior performance. The study finds no evidence of high-performing configurations without customer orientation and shows that highly performing firms configure themselves around their customer orientation in three different ways. The results have implications for market orientation theory as well as for configurational and (marketing) strategy research in general

Visualizing⋅matching⋅generalizing: Case identification hypotheses and case-level data analysis

The traditional and still dominant logic among nearly all empirical positivist researchers in schools of management is to write symmetric (two-directional) variable hypotheses (SVH) even though the same researchers formulate their behavioral theories at the case (typology) identification level. The behavioral theory of the firm, theories of buyer behavior, and Miles and Snow's typology of organization's strategy configurations (e.g., "prospectors, analyzers, and defenders") are iconic examples of formulating theory at the case identification level. When testing such theories, most researchers automatically, unconsciously, switch from building theory of beliefs, attitudes, and behavior at the case identification level to empirically testing of two-directional relationships and additive net-effect influences of variables. Formulating theory focusing on creating case identification hypotheses (CIH) to describe, explain, and predict behavior and then empirically testing at SVH is a mismatch and results in shallow data analysis and frequently inaccurate contributions to theory. This paper describes the mismatch and resulting unattractive outcomes as well as the pervasive practice of examining only fit validity in empirical studies using symmetric tests. The paper reviews studies in the literature showing how matching both case-based theory and empirical positivist research of CIH is possible and produces findings that advance useful theory and critical thinking by executives and researchers

Capturing complexity in how configurations of firm Internal Orientations impact corporate social performance outcomes: Breaking from the dominant logic of symmetric-variable to asymmetric-case-based theory and testing

This study exemplifies how an asymmetric and case based (configurational) research approach (using fuzzy state logic and complexity theory) is useful for conceptualization and explanation of complex topics and heterogeneous outcomes. The study here analyses the recipes (condition combinations) for Internal Orientation constructs (IO: strategic intent, CSP management, strategic orientation and industrial standards) among multi-national companies (MNCs) indicating “high” levels of corporate social performance (CSP) and the “United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment” (UNPRI) ESG factor framework (Environment, Social-human rights, and Governance) – separately and as a whole. The study applies a mixed methods research design and includes comparing ESG with financial performance across a “Top-100 Sustainable Companies Index” (n?=?82 of MNCs trading on the Swedish stock exchange). The study's findings support the core tenets of complexity theory; all four IO constructs affect a high E or S or G outcome but not all three outcomes in combination