Conclusion
Market-based insights are obviously important to corporate strategy practice. Academic researchers who bring market-based insights to corporate strategy research will provide new perspectives on problems that have so far been co-opted by researchers in other fields. They will also face the perils and rewards of innovation. Innovation adoption is uncertain and subject to resistance and skepticism from gatekeepers. Innovation development requires patience, creativity, and persistence. As researchers, if we can overcome the perils of innovation, then our rewards can be large. As a field, if we can bring forth new ideas for corporate thinking and action, then our influence will be large. Perhaps the days of wringing of hands, shaking of heads, and gnashing of teeth will then be no more.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Armstrong, J. Scott, and Fred Collopy. 1996. “Competitor Orientation: Effects of Objectives and Information on Managerial Decisions and Profitability.”Journal of Marketing Research 33 (May): 188–199.
Biggadike, Ralph. 1981. “The Contributions of Marketing to Strategic Management.”Academy of Management Review 6 (4): 621–632.
Brush, Thomas H. and Philip Bromiley. 1999. “What Does a Small Corporate Effect Mean? A Variance Components Simulation of Corporate and Business Effects.”Strategic Management Journal 18 (10): 825–835.
Campbell, Donald T. and D. W. Fiske. 1959. “Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix.”Psychological Bulletin 56:81–105.
Chandy, Rajesh, Jaideep Prabhu, and Kersi Antia. Forthcoming. “What Will the Future Bring? Technology Expectations, Dominance, and Radical Product Innovation.”Journal of Marketing 66 (July).
Day, George S. 1992. “Marketing's Contribution to the Strategy Dialogue.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 20 (4): 323–329.
Day, George S. 2002. “Marketing and the CEO's Growth Imperative.” Paper presented at the meeting of the Marketing Science Institute Trustees, April 25–26, Boston.
— and David B. Montgomery. 1999. “Charting New Directions for Marketing.”Journal of Marketing 63 (Special Issue): 3–13.
Dillman, Don. 2000.Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York: John Wiley.
Gans, Joshua S. and George B. Shepherd. 1994. “How Are the Mighty Fallen: Rejected Classic Articles by Leading Economists.”Journal of Economic Perspectives 8 (1): 165–179.
Gopinath, C. and Richard Hoffman. 1995. “The Relevance of Strategy Research: Practitioner and Academic Viewpoints.”Journal of Management Studies 32 (5): 575–594.
Granger, C. W. J. 1969. “Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Methods and Cross-Spectral Methods.”Econometrica 37:424–438.
Hunt, Shelby and Jay Lambe. 2000. “Marketing's Contribution to Business Strategy: Market Orientation, Relationship Marketing and Resource Advantage Theory.”International Journal of Management Reviews 2 (1): 17–43.
Jick, Todd D. 1979. “Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.”Administrative Science Quarterly 24 (December): 602–611.
Kerin, Roger. 1992. “Marketing's Contribution to the Strategy Dialogue Revisited.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 20 (4): 331–334.
Machiavelli, Niccolò. [1513] 1992.The Prince. Translated by N. H. Thomson. New York: Dover.
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. 1998. 10th ed. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
Meyer, Alan D. 1982. “Adapting to Environmental Jolts.”Administrative Science Quarterly 27:515–537.
Robinson, William T. and Sungwook Min. 2002. “Is the First to Market the First to Fail? Empirical Evidence for Industrial Goods Businesses.”Journal of Marketing Research 39 (1): 120–128.
Rumelt, Richard. 1991. “How Much Does Industry Matter?”Strategic Management Journal 12 (3): 167–185.
Shepherd, George B. 1995.Rejected: Leading Economists Ponder the Publication Process. Sun Lakes, AZ: Thomas Horton.
Shugan, Steven M. Forthcoming. “Editorial: Defining Interesting Research Problems.”Marketing Science.
Sorescu, Alina, Rajesh Chandy, and Jaideep Prabhu. Forthcoming. “Sources and Consequences of Radical Innovation: Insights From Pharmaceuticals.”Journal of Marketing.
Varadarajan, Rajan. 1992. “Marketing's Contribution to Strategy: The View From a Different Looking Glass.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 20 (4): 335–343.
—. 1992. “From the Editor: Reflections on Research and Publishing.”Journal of Marketing 60 (October): 3–6.
— and Terry Clark. 1994. “Delineating the Scope of Corporate, Business, and Marketing Strategy.”Journal of Business Research 31 (2/3): 93–105.
Webster, Frederick E., Jr. 1992. “The Changing Role of Marketing in the Corporation.”Journal of Marketing 56 (October): 1–17.
Wind, Jerry and Vijay Mahajan. 1997. “Issues and Opportunities in New Product Development: An Introduction to the Special Issue.”Journal of Marketing Research 34 (1): 1–12.
Winer, Russell S. 1999. “Experimentation in the 21st Century: The Importance of External Validity.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27 (Summer): 349–358.
Workman, John P. 1993. “Marketing's Limited Role in Product Development in One Computer Systems Firm.”Journal of Marketing Research 30 (November): 405–421.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chandy, R.K. Research as innovation: Rewards, perils, and guideposts for research and reviews in marketing. JAMS 31, 351–355 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070303031003019
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070303031003019