Marketing from the micro to the macro: how micro interactions in marketing
initiative implementation lead to changes in macro-level strategy
Introduction
Aside from broad performance implications of matching marketing strategy and business
strategy, little is known about how marketing actually influences organization’s macro-level
strategy. To address this gap, we argue that it is important to move beyond a narrow, functional
view of marketing’s peripheral role in business strategy. Adopting a micro-perspective, we
attempt to uncover how what is actually done by marketing at the micro-level, influences change
in strategy at the macro-level. In particular, we explore the subtle interactions between multiple
actors in the implementation of strategic marketing initiatives to better understand how
marketing influences and shapes strategy. This paper contributes by showing how through a
cycle of manager’s informal, interfacing activities, strategy is continuously shaped through four
micro-level activities: ‘challenging’, ‘sensing’, ‘transmitting’ and ‘action’, which facilitate
responsiveness to the competitive environment. From this analysis, we develop a cyclical
process framework that elucidates the important role of these complex micro implementation
activities in shaping how strategy evolves, showing that marketing is not just an implementer of
strategy, but an important part in integrating macro-level formation and micro-level
implementation. We first briefly discuss the literature on strategy-making to position our
research. We then outline the method adopted for this study. Our main empirical findings are
illustrated through several tables and figures and we conclude with a brief discussion of the main
contribution of our findings which is a better understanding of the micro-level dynamics in
strategy-making and how the marketing function interacts to change organizations strategic
direction.
Theoretical Background
Macro-level strategy formation is traditionally seen as a linear, structured approach by top
management to set-down how the organization will achieve its competitive advantage. Strategymaking is traditionally done through formal talk at senior management meetings (Sminia, 2005),
and then actioned through the implementation of various functional strategies, in particular
marketing strategy implementation (Piercy, 1998). Although research has seen a resurgence of
interest on marketing’s role in strategy, these studies produce divergent views. On one hand,
there are those that claim marketing should be more widely respected for its strategic
contribution to performance (Doyle, 2000) and that marketing plays a pivotal role in influencing
the company’s strategic direction (Park et al., 2012). On the other, there is growing consensus
that marketing’s contribution to strategy is steadily diminishing (Davies and Ardley, 2012,
Palmer and Simmons, 2010, Day, 1992). Still, other’s maintain that marketing has a strategic
role, and that is to support and reinforce business strategy (Slater et al., 2010). Studies adopting
the latter view focus predominantly on the formal links between specific marketing strategy
types with appropriate business strategies, for effective strategy implementation and business
performance (Slater et al., 2010, Thorpe and Morgan, 2007, Slater and Olson, 2001).
Emerging indicators in the marketing and strategic management literatures suggest that
organizational strategy-making involves more than just aligning business level and functional
strategies. Strategy-making is inherently more interactive, complex and chaotic than current
theory allows. Micro-perspectives in strategy emphasize the need to explore the detailed
1
activities that occur at middle and front-line management levels where more people engage and
interact (Johnson et al., 2003) to fully understand influences on strategy-making practice.
Little is known about the complex interactions that unfold once the formally planned macro-level
strategy is sent down to functional departments, specifically to marketing, for implementation.
In complex business networks in particular, confrontations in implementing strategic initiatives
are common and can lead to new knowledge or critical feedback about strategy, which need to be
upwardly exchanged (Johanson and Vahlne, 2011) so that top management can react and adapt
strategy. Top managers are increasingly encouraged to listen to the grass roots, because mid and
lower level managers are more likely to perceive change in the external environment thus
making them strategically influential (Wooldridge et al., 2008). Their knowledge is needed to
achieve the responsiveness required in an increasingly competitive landscape. However, we
don’t know if or how organizations ‘upwardly exchange’ vital market information from the mid
and lower levels up to top management. We suggest that marketing plays a critical role in
achieving this responsiveness, not through structured and formal communications but through
the daily interactions of middle and lower-level management in the process of marketing
initiative implementation. More exploratory research is therefore needed to unpack marketing
micro-level activities (Morgan, 2012, Johanson and Vahlne, 2011, Thorpe and Morgan, 2007),
and how they influence strategy-making at the macro-level.
Methods
A multiple case study design was adopted for this study (Welch et al., 2010, Yin, 2009), to
investigate marketing’s under-explored influence in macro-level strategy-making. Strategy is
implemented through functional initiatives, and marketing initiative implementation in particular
is one of the most complex, vital processes for strategy success (Thorpe and Morgan, 2007). The
unit of analysis selected is the micro-level actions and interactions across several strategic
marketing initiatives, within three case firms. These firms are in the within the highly
competitive grocery retail industry. They operate under a multifaceted independent retailer
business model, conducting their business within a complex network of relationships [between
corporate headquarters, independent retail owners (customers) and end-consumers], making
them suitable research sites for exploring complex, micro-level interactions in strategy-making.
21 semi-structured interviews with senior, middle and front line marketing and sales manager’s
generated data on specific actions taken across 34 different strategic marketing initiatives across
the three firms (see Table 1 below for breakdown). Interview data were triangulated using
archival data from internal memos, strategy documentation and industry reports. Analysis of the
data progressed through multiple iterative phases, facilitated by the qualitative data analysis and
management software NVivo. In total, 208 references to marketing initiative implementation
activity at the micro-level were initially coded. Through cross-case comparison and patternsearching, the 208 coded references were categorized further, revealing an iterative cycle of 4
interfacing activities across the implementation of strategic marketing initiatives. Table 3 below
shows the rigorous analysis process which led to the progression of category building for the four
micro-level interfacing activities.
Findings
Figure 1 below summarizes the findings of this paper. This figure reveals that marketing’s role
in shaping macro-level strategy is played out through four critical interfacing activities at the
2
micro-level of; challenging strategic plans and ideas, sensing potential problems in strategy,
transmitting critical feedback, and taking immediate action to rectify any problems, together
create an informal feedback loop where new, critical knowledge about strategy can be upwardly
exchanged with senior management, resulting in the continuous shaping of macro-level strategy.
Table 2 provides illustrative respondent quotes which support each of the four activities
identified.
Table 1: Breakdown of strategic marketing initiatives identified
Type of
initiative
Reason for initiative
Nature of initiative
Illustrative quote
No. of
cases
Reactive
Developed as a response
to competitor’s moves &
consumer insights
Cyclical, ad-hoc/short
term-promotional offers,
price cut campaigns,
12
Reassurance
Developed as
reassurance/reminder to
consumers of long
standing brand
credentials
Developed to promote a
new strategic message to
consumers
Continuous, long-termquality/value campaign
messages, differentiation
strategies
‘We had to react really
quickly and literally change
totally what we were going to
do’
‘To reassure customers that
we can compete on all levels’
‘We’re hoping that this is
going to help bring that price
perception down’
‘It was new, it was different,
it was us leading the market
stuff…a very big step-change
for us…we’ve bitten the
bullet with this one’
Change
Emergent, pro-active both
short-term and long-termPerception-changing, brand
re-positioning strategies
8
14
34
Figure 1: Cyclical process of micro interactions in marketing initiative implementation
leading to change in macro-level strategy
3
Table 2:
Representative supporting data for 4 micro interfacing activities
Representative supporting data
‘You can’t be afraid to say if you feel something is just not right… the one
thing about our MD is he does go out and about and meets with
departments, meets retailers, and he comes back with all of this feedback.
That’s important, I think, that these people have been listened to, that
they’ve spoken out if they don’t like something…how else will we know that
change is needed?’
‘You always set out to achieve all of your objectives but there are lots of
different stumbling blocks, sometimes it can just be something as simple as
a mood change among retailers and you have to gauge that mood change
and realise that what looked like a good idea, isn’t a good idea anymore.’
‘We get a lot of feedback…there would be a lot of informal conversations
going on with those guys during the year…we speak to consumers... so
problems come in constantly [but] problems don’t see boundaries…you
can’t just delegate downwards all the time and fix it immediately, it has to
be delegated upwards sometimes so things can be done’
‘I wasn’t happy with what I saw on the day, some of it was excellent, but I
was a bit disappointed on some of the aspects that my expectations weren’t
met. So we said fine, let’s treat that...it’s important to acknowledge issues in
that moment and do something about it’
Micro activity
Source
*pseudonym
Shaping strategy
through
challenging
Case 2,
Respondent:
*Cat
Shaping strategy
through sensing
Case 1,
Respondent:
*Adam
Shaping strategy
through
transmitting
Case 2,
Respondent:
*Alex
Shaping strategy
through action
Case 3,
Respondent:
*Cathal
Discussion- This paper makes three main contributions. The first, is to the continuing discussion
on marketing’s strategic relevance and influence (Davies and Ardley, 2012, Slater et al., 2010).
Specifically we show that marketing has a more significant role than passive implementer.
Marketing activities of challenging, sensing, transmitting and action at the micro-level play a key
role in ensuring that the macro-level strategy is continuously adapted so that the organization is
responsive to the competitive environment. Addressing Klingebiel and De Meyer’s (2012: 1)
concern that ‘we have limited knowledge of how managers decide to adapt and how they affect
an efficient middle course between sticking to plans and learning by doing as they implement
strategic initiatives’- our findings demonstrate marketing’s role in strategy, what marketing
actually does (Skalen and Hackley, 2011) to influence strategy. By exploring in-depth the
micro-level activities that happen in strategic marketing initiative implementation, we reveal that
marketing activity plays a prominent, influential role in how macro-level strategy is shaped and
adapted supporting the view that at middle management level, decision making and action are
not separated (Wooldridge et al., 2008), but occur simultaneously through a complex cycle of
activities. Second, our exploratory study looks at the intricate interactions in strategic initiative
implementation and reveals a complex pattern of interfacing micro-level activities which
continuously shape strategy addressing calls for a greater focus on the ‘concrete micro-level
interaction’ in the practice of strategy-making (Mantere and Vaara, 2008: 356). Finally, this
study shows how an exploratory micro-level perspective can advance our knowledge of the
detailed intricacies which make up ‘the doing’ strategy-making, and particularly we advance
knowledge on the specific micro-activities which reflect the dynamic and fluid character of
marketing practice (Harris and Ogbonna, 2003). Too much emphasis is placed on quantitative
methods in marketing research, which produce ‘prescriptive ideologically-driven’ formal
models and typologies of what strategy should be (Whittington and Whipp, 1992, Brownlie and
Saren, 1992). In this paper we focus on understanding the how in marketing strategy-making.
4
Table 3:
Progression of category building for micro-level interfacing activities
First-order (informant) concepts
Second order
Aggregate
Framing of micro-interactions & activities
themes
categories
Interrogating
strategy
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Key forums for challenging each other
Discussing whether things aren’t working
Managing competing priorities
Regular informal check-ups
Always looking towards the next thing
Asking how can we do better
Reacting to things happening
Interrogate things on a weekly basis
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Applying common sense to/ making sense of
insights
Figuring out the useable nugget of information
Asking what’s important to the consumer
Being able to see trends unfolding
On the ground every single day learning
Hearing bits and piecesUnraveling conflicting messages
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Making everybody accessible to everybody
Determining what this information is really saying
Making recommendations for going forward
Getting cut through very quickly
Acting as a funnel for two-way information flow
Take feedback in on an informal, ongoing basis
Going back and forward with messages
Informal chat, canteen talk, coffee talk
Informal engagement and buy-in
Interactive sessions a platform for sharing
•
•
•
•
•
Knowing how your actions affect the whole
Getting it fixed now
Implementing change on the ground
Finding the cause/going to the root of the problem
Pushing and pulling with people to get it over the
line
Distilling down
issues
Shaping
strategy through
challenging
Questioning
ideas and
perspectives
Being agile
Gauging
reactions
Social
learning
Shaping
strategy through
sensing
Market
sensing
Informal
communication
Consultation &
Collaboration
Shaping strategy
through
transmitting
Upwardly
exchanging new
knowledge
Trial and error
Fire-fighting
Shaping
strategy through
action
Solving
blockages
5
References:
BROWNLIE, D. & SAREN, M. (1992) The Four P's of the marketing concept: Prescriptive. polemical,
permanent and problematical. European Journal of Marketing, 26, 34-47.
DAVIES, M. & ARDLEY, B. (2012) Denial at the top table: status attributions and implications for marketing.
Journal of Strategic Marketing, 20, 113-26.
DAY, G. S. (1992) Marketing's contribution to the strategy dialogue Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 20, 323-30.
DOYLE, P. (2000) Valuing marketing's contribution. European Management Journal, 18, 233-45.
HARRIS, L.C. & OGBONNA, E. (2003) The organization of marketing: A study of decentralized, developed
and dispersed marketing activity. Journal of Management Studies, 40 (2), 483-512
JOHANSON, J. & VAHLNE, J. E. (2011) Markets as networks: implications for strategy-making. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 484-91.
JOHNSON, G., MELIN, L. & WHITTINGTON, R. (2003) Micro Strategy and Strategizing: Towards an
Activity-Based View. Journal of Management Studies, 40, 3-22.
KLINGEBIEL, R. & DE MEYER, A. (2012) Becoming Aware of the Unknown: Decision Making During the
Implementation of a Strategic Initiative. Organization Science, 1-21.
MANTERE, S. & VAARA, E. (2008) On the Problem of Participation in Strategy: A Critical Discursive
Perspective. Organization Science, 19, 341-358.
MORGAN, N. A. (2012) Marketing and business performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
40, 102-119.
PALMER, M. & SIMMONS, G. (2010) Strategists' reactions and resistance towards forces of inclusion:
soothing the anxiety of marketing (non-) influence. Journal of Strategic Marketing 18, 317-36.
PARK, H., AUH, S., MAHER, A. A. & SINGHAPAKDI, A. (2012) Marketing's accountability and internal
legitimacy: Implications for firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1576-82.
PIERCY, N.F. (1998) Marketing Implementation: The Implications of Marketing Paradigm Weakness for the
Strategy Execution Process. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26 (3), 222-36
SKALEN, P. & HACKLEY, C. (2011) Marketing-as-practice. Introduction to the special issue. Scandinavian
Journal of Management, 27, 189-95.
SLATER, S. F. & OLSON, E. M. (2001) Marketing's contribution to the implementation of business strategy:
an empirical analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 1055-67.
SLATER, S. F., OLSON, E. M. & HULT, T. M. (2010) Worried about strategy implementation? Don't
overlook marketing's role. Business Horizons, 53, 469-79.
SMINIA, H. (2005) Strategy as layered discussion. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 21, 267-91
THORPE, E. R. & MORGAN, R. E. (2007) In pursuit of the "ideal approach" to successful marketing strategy
implementation. European Journal of Marketing, 41, 659-77.
WELCH, C., PIEKKARI, R., PLAKOYIANNAKI, E. & PAAVILAINEN-MANTYMAKI, E. (2010)
Theorising from case studies: Towards a pluarist future for international business research. Journal of
International Business Studies, 1-23.
WHITTINGTON, R. & WHIPP, R. (1992) Marketing ideology and implementation. Journal of Marketing, 26,
52-63.
WOOLDRIDGE, B., SCHMID, T. & FLOYD, S. W. (2008) The Middle Management Perspective on the
Strategy Process: Contributions, Synthesis and Future Research. Journal of Management, 34, 11901221.
YIN, R. K. (2009) Case Study Research: design and methods, Thousand Oaks, C.A., Sage Publications.
6