Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Resource-based theory in marketing

  • Conceptual/Theoretical Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The use of resource-based theory (RBT) in marketing research has increased by more than 500% in the past decade, which suggests its importance as a framework for explaining and predicting competitive advantages and performance outcomes. This article provides a comprehensive review of RBT, including a contemporary definitional foundation for relevant terms and assumptions and a synthesis of empirical findings from marketing literature. This multidimensional analysis of RBT also evaluates extant marketing research according to four perspectives: the marketing domains that use RBT, the characteristics and uses of market-based resources that differentiate it from other research contexts, the extension of RBT to the “marketing exchange” as a unit of analysis, and the connection of RBT to related theories. This analysis also reveals some common pitfalls associated with prior research, offers tentative guidelines on how to improve the use of RBT in marketing, and suggests research directions to advance the theorization and empirical testing of RBT in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. Early versions of the RBV referred to a VRIN framework: valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable. However, the contemporary version subsumes the non-substitutability requirement of VRIN under the imperfectly imitable condition and adds organizational processes, as means for exploiting the potential of VRI resources (Barney and Clark 2007; Barney and Hesterly 2012). We adopt this updated VRIO framework.

  2. We also include empirical articles using RBT that focused on marketing topics and were written by marketing scholars but were published in non-marketing journals.

References

  • Aaker, D., & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000). The brand relationship spectrum: The key to the brand architecture challenge. California Management Review, 42(4), 8–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alderson, W. (1957). Marketing behavior and executive action. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amaral, J., & Parker, G. (2008). Prevent disasters in design outsourcing. Harvard Business Review, 86(9), 30–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Apelbaum, E., Gerstner, E., & Naik, P. (2003). The effects of expert quality evaluations versus brand name on price premiums. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 12(3), 154–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, G., & Shimizu, K. (2007). A review of approaches to empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of Management, 33(6), 959–986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, T., Fang, E., & Palmatier, R. (2011). The effects of customer acquisition and retention orientations on a firm’s radical and incremental innovation performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(2), 234–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005). Resolving the capability-rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 61–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auh, S., & Menguc, B. (2009). Broadening the scope of the resource-based view in marketing: The contingency role of institutional factors. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(7), 757–768.

    Google Scholar 

  • Badenhausen, K. (2012). Apple tops list of the world’s most powerful brands. Forbes, 10(22). Retrieved November 5, 2010 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2012.

  • Bagozzi, R. (1975). Marketing as exchange. Journal of Marketing, 39(4), 32–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science, 32, 1512–1514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1995). Looking inside for competitive advantage. Academy of Management Executive, 9(4), 49–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (2001). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 41–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., & Arikan, A. (2001). The resource-based view: Origins and implications. In M. Hitt, R. Freeman, & J. Harrison (Eds.), Handbook of strategic management (pp. 124–185). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., & Clark, D. (2007). Resource-based theory: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., & Hesterly, W. (2012). Strategic management and competitive advantage: Concepts and cases (4th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., Ketchen, D., & Wright, M. (2011). The future of resource-based theory: Revitalization or decline? Journal of Management, 37(5), 1299–1315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basu, A., Lal, R., Srinivasan, V., & Staelin, R. (1985). Salesforce compensation plans: An agency theoretic perspective. Marketing Science, 4(4), 267–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, W., & Christen, M. (2003). Sustainable pioneering advantage? Profit implications of market entry order. Marketing Science, 22(3), 371–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cannon, J., & Perreault, W., Jr. (1999). Buyer-seller relationships in business markets. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(4), 439–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capraro, A., & Srivastava, R. (1997). Has the influence of financial performance on reputation measures been overstated? Corporate Reputation Review, 1(1), 86–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capron, L., & Hulland, J. (1999). Redeployment of brands, sales forces, and general marketing management expertise following horizontal acquisitions: A resource-based view. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castanias, R., & Helfat, C. (1991). Managerial resources and rents. Journal of Management, 17(1), 155–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Central Intelligence Agency. (2012). The World Factbook: USA. Retrieved November 18, 2012 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html.

  • Collis, D. J., & Montgomery, C. A. (2008). Competing on resources. Harvard Business Review, 86(7/8), 140–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, T., Ketchen, D., Combs, J., & Todd, S. (2008). Strategic resources and performance: A meta-analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(11), 1141–1154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui, G., & Lui, H. (2005). Order of entry and performance of multinational corporations in an emerging market: A contingent resource perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 13(4), 28–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Das, T., & Teng, B. (2000). A resource-based theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management, 26(1), 31–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. (1994). The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 37–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. (2011). Closing the marketing capabilities gap. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 183–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, S., Narasimhan, O., & Rajiv, S. (1999). Success in high-technology markets: Is marketing capability critical? Marketing Science, 18(4), 547–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K., & Martin, J. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10/11), 1105–1121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evanschitzky, H. (2007). Market orientation of service networks: Direct and indirect effects on sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 15(4), 349–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, E., Palmatier, R., & Grewal, R. (2011). Effects of customer and innovation asset configuration strategies on firm performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 587–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao, G., Yigang, P., Tse, D., & Yim, C. (2006). Market share performance of foreign and domestic brands in China. Journal of International Marketing, 14(2), 32–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golder, P. (2000). Historical method in marketing research with new evidence on long-term market share stability. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), 156–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grönroos, C. (1999). Relationship marketing challenges for the organization. Journal of Business Research, 46(3), 327–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S., Lehmann, D., & Stuart, J. (2004). Valuing customers. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmancioglu, N., Droge, C., & Calantone, R. (2009). Strategic fit to resources versus NPD execution proficiencies: What are their roles in determining success? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(3), 266–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heide, J. (1994). Interorganizational governance in marketing channels. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 71–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heide, J., & Wathne, K. (2006). Friends, businesspeople, and relationship roles: A conceptual framework and a research agenda. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 90–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2003). The dynamic resource–based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 997–1010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., & Bucerius, M. (2005). A marketing perspective on mergers and acquisitions: How marketing integration affects postmerger performance. Journal of Marketing, 69(1), 95–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooley, G., Greenley, G., Fahy, J., & Cadogan, J. (2005). Market-focused resources, competitive positioning and firm performance. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(5/6), 503–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M., Martin, S., Morgan, R., & Robson, M. (2010). Realizing product-market advantage in high-technology international new ventures: The mediating role of ambidextrous innovation. Journal of International Marketing, 18(4), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M., & Ketchen, D. J. (2001). Does market orientation matter?: A test of the relationship between positional advantage and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 22(9), 899–906.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M., Ketchen, D. J., & Slater, S. F. (2005). Market orientation and performance: An integration of disparate approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), 1173–1181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M., Ketchen, D. J., & Arrfelt, M. (2007). Strategic supply chain management: Improving performance through a culture of competitiveness and knowledge development. Strategic Management Journal, 28(10), 1035–1052.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. (1997). Resource-advantage theory: An evolutionary theory of competitive firm behavior? Journal of Economic Issues, 31(1), 59–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. (2002). Foundations of marketing theory: Toward a general theory of marketing. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. (2007). Synthesising resource-based, evolutionary and neoclassical thought. In N. Foss & P. Robertson (Eds.), Resources, Technology, and Strategy (pp. 53-79). London, UK: Routledge.

  • Hunt, S., & Davis, D. (2008). Grounding supply chain management in resource-advantage theory. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 44(1), 10–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S., & Morgan, R. (1995). The comparative advantage theory of competition. Journal of Marketing, 59(4), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hupman, R., & Zaichkowsky, J. (1995). Brand imitation and the consumer: An ethical perspective. European Advances in Consumer Research, 2, 418–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jap, S. (1999). Pie-expansion efforts: Collaboration processes in buyer-supplier relationships. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(4), 461–475.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jap, S. (2001). Perspectives on joint competitive advantages in buyer–supplier relationships. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 18(1), 19–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jap, S., & Ganesan, S. (2000). Control mechanisms and the relationship life cycle: Implications for safeguarding specific investments and developing commitment. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(May), 227–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jean, R., Sinkovics, R., & Kim, D. (2010). Drivers and performance outcomes of relationship learning for suppliers in cross-border customer–supplier relationships: The role of communication culture. Journal of International Marketing, 18(1), 63–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaleka, A. (2011). When exporting manufacturers compete on the basis of service: Resources and marketing capabilities driving service advantage and performance. Journal of International Marketing, 19(1), 40–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, S., & Burgess, T. (2008). Understanding success and failure in customer relationship management. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(4), 421–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P. (1972). A generic concept of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 36(2), 46–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2011). Marketing management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lages, L. F., Silva, G., & Styles, C. (2009). Relationship capabilities, quality, and innovation as determinants of export performance. Journal of International Marketing, 17(4), 47–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landler, M., & Barbaro, M. (2006). International business; No, not always. New York Times, 8(2), A1–A3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, R., & Grewal, R. (2004). Strategic responses to new technologies and their impact on firm performance. Journal of Marketing, 68(4), 157–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, T., & Calantone, R. (1998). The impact of market knowledge competence on new product advantage: Conceptualization and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 13–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, S., & Rumelt, R. (1982). Uncertain imitability: An analysis of interfirm differences in efficiency under competition. Bell Journal of Economics, 13(2), 418–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., & Thompson, S. (2001). The resource-based view and economics. Journal of Management, 27, 723–754.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., Griffith, D., Liu, S., & Shi, Y. (2004). The effects of customer relationships and social capital on firm performance: A Chinese business illustration. Journal of International Marketing, 12(4), 25–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lusch, R., & Harvey, M. (1994). Opinion: the case for and off-balance sheet controller. Sloan Management Review, 35(Winter), 101–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J., & Pandian, R. (1992). The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 13(5), 363–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Makadok, R. (1999). Interfirm differences in scale economies and the evolution of market shares. Strategic Management Journal, 20(10), 935–952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Makadok, R. (2001). Toward a synthesis of the resource–based and dynamic–capability views of rent creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5), 387–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menguc, B., & Auh, S. (2006). Creating a firm-level dynamic capability through capitalizing on market orientation and innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(1), 63–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrilees, B., Rundle-Thiele, S., & Lye, A. (2011). Marketing capabilities: Antecedents and implications for B2B SME performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(3), 368–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, C., & Slotegraaf, R. (1999). The contingency value of complementary capabilities in product development. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(2), 239–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, N., Slotegraaf, R., & Vorhies, D. (2009). Linking marketing capabilities with profit growth. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 26(4), 284–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orr, L., Bush, V., & Vorhies, D. (2011). Leveraging firm-level marketing capabilities with marketing employee development. Journal of Business Research, 64(10), 1074–1081.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouyang, H. (2009). Fundamental issues in capabilities research. European Journal of Management, 9(4), 209–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmatier, R. (2008). Interfirm relational drivers of customer value. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 76–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmatier, R., Dant, R., Grewal, D., & Evans, K. (2006). Factors influencing the effectiveness of relationship marketing: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 136–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmatier, R., Dant, R., & Grewal, D. (2007). A comparative longitudinal analysis of theoretical perspectives of interorganizational relationship performance. Journal of Marketing, 71(4), 172–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmatier, R., Houston, M., Dant, R., & Grewal, D., (2013). Relationship velocity: Toward a theory of relationship dynamics. Journal of Marketing, 77(1), 13–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, A., & Frow, P. (2005). A strategic framework for customer relationship management. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 167–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf, M. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 14(3), 179–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peteraf, M., & Barney, J. (2003). Unraveling the resource-based tangle. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(4), 309–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (1979). How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 57(2), 137–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priem, R., & Butler, J. (2001a). Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 22–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priem, R., & Butler, J. (2001b). Tautology in the resource-based view and the implications of externally determined resource value: Further comments. Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 57–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramaswami, S., Srivastava, R., & Bhargava, M. (2009). Market-based capabilities and financial performance of firms: Insights into marketing’s contribution to firm value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), 97–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinartz, W., & Kumar, V. (2003). The impact of customer relationship characteristics on profitable lifetime duration. Journal of Marketing, 67(1), 77–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richey, G., Tokman, M., & Dalela, V. (2010). Examining collaborative supply chain service technologies: A study of intensity, relationships, and resources. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(1), 71–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ring, P. S., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1994). Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 19(1), 90–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Ortega, M., & García-Villaverde, P. (2008). Capabilities and competitive tactics influences on performance: Implications of the moment of entry. Journal of Business Research, 61(4), 332–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rust, R., Lemon, K., & Zeithaml, V. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 109–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samaha, S., Palmatier, R., & Dant, R. (2011). Poisoning relationships: Perceived unfairness in channels of distribution. Journal of Marketing, 75(3), 99–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmalensee, R. (1985). Do markets differ much? American Economic Review, 75, 341–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slotegraaf, R., & Dickson, P. (2004). The paradox of a marketing planning capability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(4), 371–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slotegraaf, R., Moorman, C., & Inman, J. (2003). The role of firm resources in returns to market deployment. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 295–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, M., Di Benedetto, C., & Mason, R. (2007). Capabilities and financial performance: The moderating effect of strategic type. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 18–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasan, R., Lilien, G., & Rangaswamy, A. (2002). Technological opportunism and radical technology adoption: An application to e-business. Journal of Marketing, 66(3), 47–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, M., & Gnyawali, D. (2011). When do relational resources matter? Leveraging portfolio technological resources for breakthrough innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 54(4), 797–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, R., Shervani, T., & Fahey, L. (1998). Market-based assets and shareholder value: A framework for analysis. Journal of Marketing, 62(1), 2–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava, R., Fahey, L., & Christensen, H. (2001). The resource-based view and marketing: The role of market-based assets in gaining competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 27(6), 777–802.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. (1982). Towards an economic theory of the multi-product firm. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 39–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Riel, A., de Mortanges, P., & Streukens, S. (2005). Marketing antecedents of industrial brand equity: An empirical investigation in specialty chemicals. Industrial Marketing Management, 34(8), 841–847.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoef, P., Franses, P., & Hoekstra, J. (2001). The impact of satisfaction and payment equity on cross-buying: Dynamic model for a multi-service provider. Journal of Retailing, 77(3), 359–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vorhies, D., & Morgan, N. (2005). Benchmarking marketing capabilities for sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Marketing, 69(1), 80–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1975). Markets and hierarchies. Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1991). Strategizing, economizing, and economic organization. Strategic Management Journal, 12(S2), 75–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zou, S., Fang, E., & Zhao, S. (2003). The effect of export marketing capabilities on export performance: An investigation of Chinese exporters. Journal of International Marketing, 11(4), 32–55.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Robert J. Trulaske, Sr. College of Business, University of Missouri, 433 Cornell Hall, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Irina V. Kozlenkova

  2. College of Business and Economics, California State University–Northridge, 18111 Nordhoff St., Northridge, CA, 91330, USA

    Stephen A. Samaha

  3. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, 418 Paccar Hall 353226, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA

    Robert W. Palmatier

Authors
  1. Irina V. Kozlenkova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen A. Samaha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert W. Palmatier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Irina V. Kozlenkova.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kozlenkova, I.V., Samaha, S.A. & Palmatier, R.W. Resource-based theory in marketing. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 42, 1–21 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-013-0336-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-013-0336-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation