Several studies have demonstrated a generally positive association between market share (MS) and business profitability (BP) and that this relationship is dependent on environmental and strategic contexts, but the stability of such results across distinct time periods representing differing business cycles has not yet been demonstrated. This article, employing a comparative static methodology, assesses the stability of the nature of the relationships among strategic resource deployments, market share position, and profitability across two different time periods representing significantly different macroeconomic conditions. The results indicate that the general level of association (i.e., correlation) between MS and BP is stable, but the set of significant strategic factors contributing to both MS and BP is different, indicating variations in strategies for the two different cycles. Some explanations for the observed differences as well as limited generalizations on the market share-profitability relationships are developed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alwin, D.F., & Hauser, R.M.1975. The decomposition of effects in path analysis. American Sociological Review, 40(1):37-47.
2.
Amit, R., & Livnat, J.1988. Diversification strategies, business cycles, and economic performance. Strategic Management Journal, 9:99-110.
3.
Anterasian, C., & Phillips, L.W1988. Discontinuities, value delivery, and the share-returns association: A re-examination of the "share-causes-profits" controversy. MSI Report 88-109, Cambridge, MA.
4.
Bogan, E., & Kiernan, J.1987. Macroeconomics: Theories and applications. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.
5.
Boston Consulting Group. 1972. Perspectives on experience. Boston, MA: Author.
Buzzell, R.D., Gale, B.T., & Sultan, R.M.1975. Market share-a key to profitabilityHarvard Business Review, 53(1): 97-106.
8.
Buzzell, R.D., & Gale, B.T1987. The PIMS principles. New York: The Free Press.
9.
Buzzell, R.D., & Wiersema, ED.1981. Modeling changes in market share: A cross-sectional analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 2:27-42.
10.
Domowitz, I., Hubbard, R.G., & Peterson, B.C.1988. Market structure and cyclical fluctuations in U.S. manufacturing. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 70(1):55-66.
11.
Duncan, O.D.1971. Path analysis: Sociological examples (plus addenda). In H.M. Blalock (Eds.), Causal models in the social sciences: 115-138. Chicago, IL: Aldine-Atherson.
12.
Frantzen, D.J.1986. The cyclical behavior of manufacturing prices in a small open economy. Journal of Industrial Economics, 34(4):389-404.
13.
Gabisch, G., & Lorenz, H.1987. Business cycle theory: A survey of methods and concepts. New York: Springer-Verlag.
14.
Gale, B.T1972. Market share and the rate of return. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 54(4): 412-423.
15.
Gale, B.T., & Branch, B.1982. Concentration vs. market share: Which determines performance and why does it matter?The Antitrust Bulletin, 27 (Spring): 83-106.
16.
Hambrick, D.C.1983. An empirical typology of mature industrial product environments. Academy of Management Journal, 26:213-230.
17.
Henderson, B.D.1979. Henderson on corporate strategyCambridge, MA: Abt Books.
18.
Hofer, C.W1983. ROVA: A new measure for assessing organizational performance. In R. Lamb (Ed.), Advances in strategic management, 2: 43-56. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
19.
Jacobson, R.1988. Distinguishing among competing theories of the market share effect. Journal of Marketing, 52 (October): 68-80.
20.
Jacobson, R., & Aaker, D.A.1985. Is market share all that it's cracked up to be?Journal of Marketing, 49 (Fall): 11-22.
21.
Kohli, A.K., Venkatraman, N., & Grant, J.H. in press. Exploring the relationship between market share and business profitability In J. Sheth (Ed.), Research in Marketing, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
22.
Mascarenhas, B., & Aaker, D.A.1989. Strategy over the business cycle. Strategic Management Journal, 10:199-210.
23.
Marshall, C.T 1987. PIMS and FTC line of business data: A comparison. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Boston.
24.
Phillips, L.W., Chang, D.R., & Buzzell, R.D.1983. Product quality, cost position and business performance: A test of some key hypotheses. Journal of Marketing, 47 (Spring): 26-43.
25.
Prescott, J.E.1986. Environments as moderators of the relationship between strategy and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 29:329-346.
26.
Prescott, J.E., Kohli, A.J., & Venkatraman, N.1986. The market share-profitability relationship: An empirical assessment of major assertions and contradictions. Strategic Management Journal, 7:377-394.
27.
Ramanujam, V., & Venkatraman, N.1984. An inventory and critique of strategy research using the PIMS database. Academy of Management Review, 9:138-152.
28.
Rasheed, A. 1988. Environmental attributes: Their impact on the context of business strategies and performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
29.
Ruefli, T.W., & Wilson, C.L.1987. Ordinal time series methodology for industry and competitive analysis. Management Science, 33: 640-661.
30.
Rumelt, R.P., & Wensley, R.1981. In search of the market share effect. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 41: 2-6.
31.
Schendel, D.E., & Patton, G.R.1978. A simultaneous equation model of corporate strategyManagement Science, 24: 1611-1621.
Zarnowitz, V.1985. Recent work on business cycles in historical perspective: A review of theories and evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 23 (June): 523-580.
41.
Zeithaml, C.Y., & Fry, L.W1984. Contextual and strategic differences among mature businesses in four dynamic performance situations. Academy of Management Journal, 27: 841-860.
