Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Facing a complex and changeable business environment, enterprises are constantly looking for specific paths to improve their marketing performance, which may ultimately lead to a sustainable competitive advantage. Based on the Technology, Organization, and Environment (TOE) framework, this study uses a sample of 258 listed science and technology enterprises in China and applies the Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) method to examine the relationship between six conditions, namely, R&D capability, information technology application capability, marketing level, enterprise scale, government support, market competition, and marketing performance of science and technology enterprises from a configurational perspective. The results show that no single condition qualifies as necessary for high marketing performance, but the role of high enterprise scale is prominent. Four paths generate high marketing performance of science and technology enterprises and four paths generate not-high marketing performance. These paths have an asymmetric causal relationship between high and not-high marketing performance. This study provides a new perspective for research on enterprise marketing performance and implications for enhancing the marketing performance of science and technology enterprises.

Plain language summary

In this study, 258 listed S&T enterprises in China are selected as research samples, and based on the TOE framework, the fsQCA method is applied to investigate the relationship between six antecedent variables, namely, R&D capability, IT application capability, marketing level, enterprise scale, governmental support, market competition, and the marketing performance of S&T enterprises. It is found that a single condition does not constitute a necessary condition for the generation of high or not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises, and there are four configurations that generate high and not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises, respectively. This study reveals the path of the marketing performance of S&T enterprises and provides a new perspective for the study of enterprise marketing performance. In the future, further research will be carried out in terms of expanding the research sample, considering the time dimension, and incorporating more antecedent conditions in order to make the implications more targeted.

Keywords

TOE framework science and technology enterprises marketing performance fsQCA

Introduction

An innovation-driven development strategy is important for China’s economy in its new development stage (Qiu & Yu, 2021; Xu et al., 2022), but such a strategy cannot succeed without the subjectivity-driving role of enterprises. Science and technology (S&T) enterprises have unique advantages in terms of independent innovation efficiency and play an important role in promoting social progress and high-quality economic development. Currently, dealing with a complex and changeable business environment is a challenge for S&T enterprises. Marketing, as an important means for enterprises to survive and develop in a complex and changeable business environment, has been emphasized by many enterprises. Improving marketing performance has become a core demand and important method for the long term development of S&T enterprises. Taking the example of a typical S&T enterprise, UCloud achieved good marketing performance in 2020, with a revenue of 2.455 billion yuan and a year-on-year rise of 62.06%, which not only made it a leading enterprise in the cloud-computing software industry but also contributed to China’s economic development. Improved marketing performance of S&T enterprises benefits both them and the country, and it is critical to analyze the factors that influence their marketing performance and clarify the growth paths of marketing performance.

Scholars have explored the factors, both internal and external, influencing enterprise marketing performance. Some studies have explored the impact of information technology (IT) (Borisavljevic, 2016), marketing capability (H. Khan & Khan, 2021), big data application (S. Gupta et al., 2021; Wibowo et al., 2021), entrepreneurship, and strategic orientation of enterprises (Heng & Afifah, 2020) on marketing performance. Some others argue that enterprises’ use of resources is context-dependent, and they often carry out marketing activities in a specific external context, and external environmental factors have a direct or indirect impact on their marketing performance. Based on this perspective, they have explored the impact of external macro-environmental characteristics of enterprises (A. O’Cass & Julian, 2003; Ziyadat, 2019), environmental turbulence (Chong et al., 2016), and other factors on marketing performance.

However, gaps in existing studies limit our understanding of the specific paths for enterprises to generate high marketing performance. Existing studies have two key theoretical and methodological limitations. Firstly, there is a lack of studies based on an integrative framework that can incorporate influencing factors at different levels. Although substantive, current studies on factors influencing enterprise marketing performance focus on the exploration of marketing performance antecedents from a single theoretical perspective, neglecting the study of synergistic integration between various theoretical perspectives. It has been mostly conducted independently based on the resource-based view, capability view, and other perspectives, lacks an investigation based on an integrative framework, and provides inconsistent conclusions. The Technology, Organization, and Environment (TOE) framework incorporates technical, organizational, and environmental dimensions into a system and is effective in identifying factors that influence complex phenomena. This study uses the TOE framework as theoretical foundation and constructs a configuration model to clarify the interactive ways in which factors at different levels, thus providing a more detailed analytical framework for exploring enterprise marketing performance.

Secondly, there has been an insufficient exploration of the interactions between the factors that influence enterprise marketing performance. Based on the contingency theory, existing studies focus on the net effect of relevant factors on enterprise marketing performance, neglecting the synergistic pattern of relationships between the conditions such as organizational and environmental behind the differences of enterprise marketing performance. For traditional regression analysis, the triple interaction is the upper limit of explanation, but often more than three factors impact enterprise marketing performance and its improvement. Hence, traditional regression analysis is no longer applicable, and a “configurational perspective” is needed to enable scholars to better theorize and empirically examine causal complexity (Misangyi et al., 2017), thereby addressing the gap in exploring the synergies between influencing factors.

Therefore, this study is conducted based on the TOE framework and the fsQCA method. The main objectives of this study are as follows: Firstly, this study aims to construct an integrated research framework that incorporates factors at different levels to examine the antecedents of marketing performance of S&T enterprises with the goal of broadening the theoretical perspective on analyzing marketing performance. Secondly, this study attempts to answer the question of whether there is a single condition that is a necessary condition for the generation of high/not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. By answering this question, this study aims to examine whether there is a single optimal solution for the generation of high/not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. Thirdly, this study attempts to answer the question of which configurations generate high/not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. By answering this question, this study aims to clarify the multiple paths through which R&D capability, IT application capability, marketing level, enterprise scale, government support, and market competition influence the marketing performance of S&T enterprises, and to reveal the complex mechanism of the synergistic promotion or suppression of performance by these factors to enrich the understanding of the antecedents of the marketing performance of S&T enterprises and to provide references to formulate a strategy for enhancing the marketing performance of S&T enterprises.

The remaining sections are arranged as follows. Section 2 reviews the relevant literatures and constructs a configuration model. Sections 3 and 4 describe the research process and the empirical results, respectively. Section 5 discusses the conclusions, highlights theoretical contributions and implications, and addresses limitations as well as directions for future research.

Literature Review and Model Construction

The TOE Framework

The TOE framework, first proposed by Tornatzky et al. (1990), is adopted relatively late in China. Here, technology context denotes the characteristics of a technology that influence its adoption process, organization context describes the impact of an organization’s features and resources on innovation adoption decisions, and environment context denotes the impact of the external and interorganizational environment in which an organization operates (Malik et al., 2021). The TOE framework delivers a holistic assessment of the factors that determine adoption (Chittipaka et al., 2023). Currently, the application of the TOE framework in China has not been extended to the marketing field. The improvement of enterprise marketing performance is a complex issue that is influenced by multiple factors. Facing a complex environment, enterprises need a comprehensive understanding of the internal and external factors influencing marketing performance to gain competitive advantages and obtain the long term benefits.

Existing studies about the factors influencing marketing performance focus on the institutional, organizational, and technological perspectives. From an institutional perspective, studies have explored the role of the environment (Chong et al., 2016) and institutional policy (A. O’Cass & Julian, 2003; Ziyadat, 2019) in supporting marketing performance, with a focus on factors such as the government and the market. From an organizational perspective, studies have explored the internal mechanisms influencing enterprise marketing performance around the internal conditions of the organization, such as marketing capability (H. Khan & Khan, 2021) and enterprise strategic orientation (Heng & Afifah, 2020). From a technological perspective, some studies have explored the impact of big data application (S. Gupta et al, 2021; Wibowo et al, 2021) and IT application (Borisavljevic, 2016) on marketing performance. The TOE framework is selected as the theoretical framework for this study as it considers all three levels (Ullah et al., 2021), and has been acknowledged as a model that provides a more holistic assessment of the factors determining adoption (Chittipaka et al., 2023) and a better understanding of enterprise behavior based on internal and external dynamics (Tornatzky et al., 1990). Its three levels fit in well with the three perspectives of the study and provide a strong theoretical basis for explaining the complexity of improving marketing performance.

The TOE framework contains factors related to structural complexity and uncertainty (Bosch-Rekveldt et al., 2011), and is highly compatible with causal complexity studies and the fsQCA method from the configuration perspective. In addition, it provides a systematic theoretical framework for this study and further extends the research scope.

Factors Influencing the Marketing Performance of S&T Enterprises

Based on the TOE framework, this study explores the antecedents that influence the marketing performance of S&T enterprises at three levels, namely the technological, organizational, and environmental levels. There are numerous factors influencing enterprise marketing performance at these three levels that cannot all be included in this study, and therefore, further screening is required. Ketchen et al. (1993) suggested that inductive and deductive methods were effective for identifying configuration conditions. For specific condition selection, this study integrates the inductive and deductive methods to identify the key conditions influencing the marketing performance of S&T enterprises at all three levels. At the technological level, based on the whole process of enterprise production and operation, this study selects two conditions, namely, R&D capability and IT application capability, from the perspective of R&D and application of technology. At the organizational level, scale and capacity are important influencing factors for the development of marketing activities; hence, two conditions, marketing level and enterprise scale, are chosen as organizational factors. Finally, from the perspective of the “two hands” of the government and the market, the two conditions of government support and market competition are chosen at the environmental level.

Technological Factors and Marketing Performance

The TOE framework has been used to explain the uptake of emerging technologies (Chittipaka et al., 2023). Technologies that provide advantages are a driving force in many organizations (Stone et al., 2007) and a key factor in economic growth. R&D capability, a key aspect of enterprises’ technological innovation, plays an important role in performance improvement. The rapid development of IT requires enterprises to adopt digital and smart technologies in the entire production, office functions, and other aspects, in response to increasing demands for IT application capability. R&D and IT applications are located at the front and back ends of enterprises’ innovation activities. They are important links in the production and operation activities of enterprises and play an important role in improving marketing performance. Therefore, this study selects R&D and IT application capabilities as technological factors.

R&D Capability and Marketing Performance

Different enterprises possess different bundles of resources and capabilities, and some enterprises within the same industry may perform certain activities better than others based on these resource differences (Wan et al., 2011). R&D capability is a key capability of S&T enterprises. For one thing, it plays an important role in absorbing knowledge generated elsewhere, that is, in accumulating an initially developed understanding of given technologies. For another thing, R&D capability also refers to the capability to undertake frontier technology activities (Szalavetz, 2019), and may facilitate exploitation at an accelerating rate (K. Z. Zhou & Wu, 2010). It is an important driving force for enterprises to gain a competitive advantage. R&D capability is difficult to surpass as a heterogeneous resource in the short term. To achieve a long term competitive advantage in a turbulent market, S&T enterprises must pay attention to scientific and technological innovation, and R&D capability is the key for enterprises to achieve innovation. Weak R&D capability can lead to a low rate of new product development and high development costs, hindering improvements in marketing performance. Improved R&D capability helps enterprises further enhance output and the level of product innovation, which helps them provide customers with higher value than other enterprises do, gain a higher market share, increase profitability, and ultimately improve marketing performance.

IT Application Capability and Marketing Performance

Although resources are important to enterprises, the key to their success lies in their ability to utilize them (Grant, 1991). Compared to R&D capability, the IT owned by enterprises can be easily copied by other enterprises, which can also obtain more IT resources. Therefore, it is important to use IT to maintain business value and develop a competitive advantage (Y. Lu & Ramamurthy, 2011). If the utilization of IT applications is less efficient, enterprises’ response to the market is slower and the cost of management is higher, resulting in a negative impact on marketing performance (Peng et al., 2019). The development of IT has influenced production modes; its extensive application has dramatically changed traditional business modes of production, services, and operation management (Peng et al., 2019). Organizations can now leverage their investments by effectively deploying, absorbing, and using IT to create unique, hard-to-copy, non-substitutable, and immobile organizational capabilities, gaining a differential value over their competitors (Radhakrishnan et al., 2008). This allows them to transform their innovation and market responsiveness into a competitive advantage (Q. Lu et al., 2020), thereby enhancing marketing performance. However, in the marketing process, the management of customer resources is very important, and enterprises that are good at using IT have a more accurate grasp of customer needs and preferences, to promote marketing activities that go on wheels and improve marketing performance.

Organizational Factors and Marketing Performance

According to the resource-based view, enterprises have unique resources and capabilities that are valuable, rare, non-replaceable, and capable of delivering a sustainable competitive advantage (Afriyie et al., 2020). Studies on the resource-based view reveal that marketing capability is one of the factors most closely related to marketing performance, which signicantly influences the effectiveness of the marketing strategy implementation (Najafi-Tavani et al., 2016). Enterprises’ marketing capability can influence their financial market performance, leading to considerable marketing performance. Moreover, enterprises need to allocate their existing resources appropriately to carry out marketing activities; in general, large enterprises are good at orchestrating resources, whereas small ones often rely on a patchwork of resources. Enterprise scale influences the way of enterprises use resources and it is a heterogeneous resource that is difficult for enterprises to change in the short term. In view of this, this study selects marketing level and enterprise scale as organizational factors.

Marketing Level and Marketing Performance

Enterprises’ capability to maximize their resources through specific operational capabilities is critical to their market success (A. O’Cass et al., 2015). Marketing level reflects the management’s capability to utilize the resources available and is the key to survival. Studies have found a positive correlation between marketing and performance (Bocconcelli et al., 2018). A high marketing level facilitates the development and completion of enterprises’ marketing activities as it is a catalyst for production and operations, enabling them to better allocate limited resources and improve the efficiency of internal and external resource utilization. Also, marketing capability enhances the value relevance of product and service (Patel & Feng, 2021), which in turn increases consumer satisfaction and improves marketing performance. When enterprises’ marketing level is high, the visibility of the performance brought about by marketing investment increases. When S&T enterprises conduct marketing activities, they cannot do so without a high marketing level. When enterprises have a good marketing level, it can significantly improve marketing performance. The successful implementation of marketing activities of S&T enterprises cannot be separated from the support of the high marketing level of enterprises, and marketing level has a direct impact on enterprise marketing performance.

Enterprise Scale and Marketing Performance

Enterprise scale plays a central role in explaining overall enterprise behavior and performance (Karlsson, 2021). For a large-scale enterprise, marketing activities can generate economies of scale, which will reduce the cost of marketing activities to a certain extent. For S&T enterprises, the return on investment in technology can be shared among different departments and R&D projects. As enterprise scale increases, unit costs of production and operations can be reduced, allowing enterprises to acheive higher returns with relatively low inputs, thereby gaining cost advantages. At the same time, large enterprises are better equipped to internalize external economies (Silveira, 2022). Enterprise scale also reflects enterprises’ strengths. When enterprises have a complete industrial chain and a wider scope of operation, it is more convenient to obtain the required resources and achieve optimal resource allocation. Large enterprises tend to have more sophisticated technology systems, distribution channels, and marketing tools to promote, and distribute their products to consumers (Noone et al., 2024). When enterprise scale is limited, marketing activities are limited in terms of human, material, and financial resources. In addition, due to limited capability and reputation, enterprises may face challenges in acquiring customers and may find it difficult to gain their trust and support in marketing activities. Such enterprises may encounter situations where their motivation is strong but their operational capabilities are constrained.

Environmental Factors and Marketing Performance

The state and changes in the external environment influence enterprise development. China’s unique transition economy embeds enterprise where state and market logic coexist (Qiao, 2013). The 14th Five-Year Plan of China seeks to promote the combination of an effective market and an effective government. The relationship between the government and the market is crucial in economic development, and both “hands” must be used properly and accurately to allocate limited resources. Neither should the “visible hand” of the government interfere excessively with the “invisible hand” of the market, nor should the role of the government be underutilized. It is because of the complexity of the relationship between the government and the market that the relationship between the “visible hand” of the government and the “invisible hand” of the market has been explored for many years and continues to receive widespread attention. The survival and development of enterprises is inevitably shaped and regulated by the “two hands.” The government helps to improve enterprise marketing performance through policy support. And the competitive behavior of enterprises keeps them vibrant and active that ultimately improves enterprise performance (Pantano et al., 2020). Therefore, government support and market competition are chosen as environmental factors.

Government Support and Marketing Performance

Government support plays an important role in promoting the sustainable competitiveness of enterprises (R. U. Khan et al., 2022). For S&T enterprises, government support is crucial. The government can provide financial support for enterprises (L. Liu et al., 2020) and introduce incentive policies, such as tax breaks and special subsidies, to create a supportive environment for marketing activities and R&D. These mearsures stimulate innovation and motivation, reduce operating costs, and ultimately improve marketing performance. The government can also build communication platforms (H. Zhou et al., 2023) that help enterprises access more resources by fostering a supportive environment for communication.

Market Competition and Marketing Performance

Market competition is common in all industries, and the growing number of S&T enterprises has made market competition particularly fierce. There is a significant effect of competition on enterprise performance (Mubeen et al., 2022; Sheikh, 2018). The marketization shifts power towards economic actors, intensities competition among enterprises, creates new entrepreneurial opportunities, and stimulates innovation. The competition drives enterprises to improve productivity (Leong & Yang, 2020). S&T enterprises, spurred by fierce market competition, must proactively pursue technological innovation and product upgrading to gain advantages. In addition, markets not only generate competitive pressure on enterprises but also sustain self-reinforcing institutional changes that enable and motivate innovative activities (Nee et al., 2010). To avoid elimination, enterprises facing intense competition must continuously improve management standards, enhance efficiency, reduce costs, and maximize value (C. Liu et al., 2023) to maintain their competitive advantages. Thus, market competition motivates enterprises to pursue high marketing performance.

Technological, Organizational, and Environmental Factors and Marketing Performance from a Configurational Perspective

Thus, this study finds that R&D capability and IT application capability, enterprise scale and marketing level, and government support and market competition in the TOE framework play important roles in enhancing enterprise marketing performance. In fact, marketing performance is influenced by a number of interdependent factors, and its enhancement is a complex systemic issue. However, existing studies have certain limitations in terms of theoretical framework and research methodology. There is a lack of integrative framework that incorporates multidimensional factors. Additionally, traditional linear theoretical models are unable to adequately interpret interactions between antecedents. Existing studies tend to focus on the average effects of factors at each of the three levels, with limited exploration of the synergistic effects among these factors. Overall, there is a shortage of studies that adopt an integrative perspective. Therefore, a more suitable theoretical model needs to be constructed from configurational perspective based on a holistic analytical framework. Also, the synergistic effect of the “chemical reaction” between the different levels of factors on the marketing performance of S&T enterprises needs to be considered. In view of this, this study holistically analyzes the relationship between conditions and outcome from a configuration perspective based on the TOE framework. It takes into account six factors, namely, R&D capability, IT application capability, marketing level, enterprise scale, government support, and market competition, as the conditions of marketing performance of S&T enterprises. Furthermore, it explores the specific paths through which these factors combine to influence the marketing performance of S&T enterprises. The configuration model is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Configuration model.

Observing the configuration model constructed in this study, in the process of marketing performance enhancement, enterprises’ R&D and IT application capabilities provide the capability base for products and services required in marketing activities. High enterprise R&D capability is conducive to the formation of new products with unique technological advantages by S&T enterprises; at the same time, high IT application capability provides advanced technological means for S&T enterprises to accurately identify market demand. On this basis, S&T enterprises are able to develop new products in line with consumer preferences, thus enhancing marketing performance. Marketing level and enterprise scale can guarantee the successful implementation of marketing activities. High marketing level of S&T enterprises can formulate scientific and reasonable marketing plan for product sales, and high enterprise scale can enhance enterprises’ credibility, and attract more resources. Based on this, S&T enterprises can better implement their marketing plans, deliver products to consumers more smoothly, so as to achieve high marketing performance. At the same time, enterprises continuously draw resources from the external environment in implementing their marketing activities and adapt their marketing behaviors according to the external environment. Government support and market competition can create a differentiated external environment for enterprises. Government support can provide more highly qualified talents, capital and other resources for enterprises’ R&D activities, which is conducive to the amplification of the role of enterprises’ original resources and capabilities, so as to generate the high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. Market competition can point out the direction for the R&D and marketing activities of S&T enterprises, and influence the enthusiasm of their marketing activities, which will have an impact on marketing performance. Under the continuous interaction of these factors, enterprises allocate their resources reasonably according to their capabilities and environment, choose appropriate strategies, optimize marketing behavior, and generate high marketing performance.

Research Design

Research Method

The fsQCA method aims to identify sufficient or necessary subset relations (Ragin, 2009) and conceptualizes cases as different types of attribute configurations (P. C. Fiss, 2007). This methodology obtains linguistic summarizations from the data associated with cases (Mendel & Korjani, 2013). This study adopts the fsQCA method for the following reasons. Firstly, unlike traditional regression methods, which investigate the “net effect” of the independent variable on the dependent variable from independent perspective, the fsQCA method can reveal the complex causal relationship between influencing factors and marketing performance. In this study, the TOE framework is used as the basis for model construction, incorporating six factors at technological, organizational, and environmental levels. As the conditions may interact with each other in complex way, the use of the fsQCA method can help reveal the complexity of the relationships.

Secondly, the fsQCA method can handle the complexity of case study analyses by combining the strengths of quantitative and qualitative analyses with small- or large-sample case studies (Chen et al., 2021). The fsQCA method is employed in this study, allowing for both statistical analysis of the research object and an overall analysis. Through cross-case comparative analysis, this study explores in depth which configurations of conditions lead to the occurrence of the desired outcome, as well as which configurations lead to its non-occurrence, thereby clarifying the multiple equivalent configurations that result in relevant outcomes.

Thirdly, the improvement of marketing performance of S&T enterprises is influenced by different levels of technology, organization, and environment. The fsQCA method based on set theory can overcome the limitations between different levels by considering them as a set (Crilly et al, 2012; Greckhamer et al., 2008). It is suitable for dealing with complex multilevel problems.

Finally, one of the objectives of this study is to find combinations that generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. Regression analysis based on correlation cannot determine the core combinations of the antecedents. In contrast, the fsQCA method can analyze parsimonious and intermediate solutions to derive the core and peripheral conditions in the configurations (Rihoux & Ragin, 2009).

Sample Selection and Data Collection

Sample Selection

The sample selection needs to be integrated with the specific research questions, and the number should cover all possible scenarios of the results. The listed S&T enterprises are the research object. The annual reports of enterprises in 2021 are not available at the time of data collection, and this study conducts research on the data in 2020 to ensure the completeness and availability of the collected data. Using CSMAR, 484 listed S&T enterprises on Shanghai and Shenzhen A-shares for three consecutive years from 2018 to 2020 are screened. It is based on the following principles: enterprises must disclose complete financial reports for three consecutive years; enterprises must not have significant events during the three years, with no delisting notice pending; and enterprises marked with ST and *ST in the data are excluded. Based on the above, 287 listed S&T enterprises meet the requirements. After excluding some enterprises with incomplete data disclosure, 258 listed S&T enterprises in the Chinese mainland are ultimately chosen as the research sample for this study.

Data Collection

All the data is secondary data disclosed in the 2020 annual reports of enterprises, and can be obtained from the CSMAR and RESSET databases. The data on marketing performance, R&D capability, marketing level, enterprise scale, government support, and market competition can be obtained from the “Company Research” sub-database of CSMAR and that on IT application capability can be obtained from the RESSET database.

Variable Measurements

Outcome Variable

The outcome variable is marketing performance, which is the business result obtained by enterprises through marketing activities. It directly reflects the operational status and performance of enterprises over time and plays an important role in determining the development status of enterprises. In the past, the most common output measures in firm-level marketing performance studies were profit, sales, market share, and cash flow (O’Sullivan & Abela, 2007). This study measures enterprise marketing performance in financial and marketing aspects, that is, operating revenue and market share. This study uses the entropy method to measure the weight of the sub-indicators. For intuitive readability and stability of the data and to avoid data extremes, the obtained data is processed by taking the natural logarithm according to the literatures (Ren et al., 2015; Wang & Mogi, 2017).

Independent Variables

R&D capability describes enterprises’ capability to develop new products and reflects the level of product innovation. The most frequently used measure of R&D capability is R&D investment, often standardized relative to industry expenditures and expressed as R&D intensity (Jiang et al, 2018; Yao et al., 2016). Following the view of Filatotchev and Piesse (2009), R&D intensity is measured by R&D expenditure as a percentage of sales.

IT application capability refers to the capability of enterprises to apply existing IT resources to office operations and production processes. Following the view of Hempell and Zwick (2008), this study measures IT application capability with IT investment. IT input is measured by summing enterprise IT hardware assets and software assets with reference to the view of Ho et al. (2011). This indicator is then processed by applying a natural logarithmic transformation.

Marketing level reflects the effectiveness enterprises can achieve in conducting and managing marketing activities to generate performance. Numerous studies have measured enterprises’ marketing capability through sales expenses and sales force ratios (Anand & Delios, 2002; Ren et al., 2015). Accordingly, this study also selects two indicators. The two indicators are processed using the entropy method, with the results transformed by taking their natural logarithm.

Enterprise scale reflects the business scope of enterprises and, to a certain extent, represents their strength. It also plays an important role in the development of enterprises’ marketing activities. This study refers to the view of Ferrier and Lyon (2004) and uses the indicator of the logarithm of total enterprise assets.

Government support is the help provided by the government to enterprises in terms of policies and funds and is an important external force for marketing performance. Following the view of Sung et al. (2022), this study measures government support from the perspective of government subsidies and takes the natural logarithm of the data for this indicator.

Market competition reflects the competition in the industry and region in which enterprises are located and is used to describe the intensity of competition in the market it serves. The greater the number of similar enterprises in a region, the more intense the market competition they face. Referring to the study of Fisman and Raturi (2004), the natural logarithm of the number of regional listed S&T enterprises are used to measure the degree of market competition in the region.

Calibrations for Variables

Calibration refers to the transformation of a set of membership scores from 0 to 1. The relative positions and specific meaning of certain data can be clarified through calibration. In this study, direct calibration method is used. Following the study of P. C. Fiss (2011), the three key breakpoints for the conditions and outcome variable are set at 75%, 50%, and 25% of the quantile, as listed in Table 1.

Table 1.

Calibrations of Variables.

Variables	Full membership	Crossover point	Full non-membership
Marketing performance	0.013	0.005	0.002
R&D capability	0.122	0.078	0.043
IT application capability	9.966	8.651	7.746
Marketing level	0.045	0.028	0.014
Enterprise scale	13.388	12.616	12.029
Government support	8.436	7.589	6.746
Market competition	4.522	4.078	3.135

Data Analysis and Empirical Results

Necessary Condition Analysis

Necessary condition analysis can clarify the conditions that must exist when generating the results. This study analyzes whether the six conditions of R&D capability, IT application capability, marketing level, enterprise scale, government support, and market competition are necessary for high or not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. The fsQCA 3.0 software is used to conduct the necessary condition analysis, and the results are presented in Table 2.

Table 2.

Analysis of Necessary Conditions Under the fsQCA.

Sets of conditions	High marketing performance		Not-high marketing performance
Sets of conditions	Consistency	Coverage	Consistency	Coverage
R&D capability	0.427	0.423	0.651	0.663
~R&D capability	0.660	0.647	0.434	0.438
IT application capability	0.730	0.732	0.357	0.369
~IT application capability	0.370	0.359	0.740	0.738
Marketing level	0.524	0.537	0.520	0.549
~Marketing level	0.560	0.531	0.560	0.548
Enterprise scale	0.830	0.823	0.306	0.313
~Enterprise scale	0.307	0.300	0.827	0.834
Government support	0.735	0.716	0.387	0.389
~Government support	0.373	0.372	0.717	0.736
Market competition	0.565	0.512	0.597	0.558
~Market competition	0.513	0.553	0.478	0.531

When the consistency result is greater than 0.9, a condition is necessary for the result to arise (Ragin, 2009). As shown in Table 2, the consistency results of all conditions are less than 0.9; therefore, there is no single necessary condition that leads to the generation of high/not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. It can be seen that it is important to explore the impact of configuration on marketing performance.

Sufficiency Analysis

The fsQCA method is used to identify configurations that lead to high/not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. In general, the raw consistency benchmark should be above 0.75. Combining existing studies and the natural truncation of sample data, 0.85 is chosen as the raw consistency benchmark in this study (K. Gupta et al., 2020). The size of the frequency benchmark is related to the sample size. For small and medium samples, the frequency benchmark is 1 (Rihoux & Ragin, 2009), and for large samples, the frequency benchmark should be greater than 1. The frequency benchmark should be set to retain at least 75% of the total number of cases (Rihoux & Ragin, 2009). As the total number of samples is 258, the frequency benchmark is set to 2, at which time the number of samples included in the analysis is more than 75%. The proportional reduction in inconsistency (PRI) reflects the possibility of a certain configuration simultaneously generating high/not-high outcomes; the lower the PRI, the more likely it is to occur. Following the view of Du and Kim (2021), this study adopts 0.7 as the PRI criterion.

The fsQCA method outputs three types of solutions, that is, complex, intermediate, and parsimonious solusions. Based on the view of Rihoux and Ragin (2009), this study takes the intermediate solution as the main solution and the parsimonious solution as the supplement. It derives four configurational solutions each for high and not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises, labeled HM1 to HM4 and NHM1 to NHM4, with the results are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

Configurations for Marketing Performance.

Note. ● = Core causal condition present, = core causal condition absent, • = peripheral causal condition present, = peripheral causal condition absent.

The results show that four configurational solutions generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises, with the raw consistency benchmark of 0.884, 0.933, 0.931 and 0.883 respectively. Another four configurational solutions generate not-high marketing performance, with the raw consistency benchmark of 0.943, 0.934, 0.940 and 0.970 respectively; all are more than the generally accepted standard of 0.75.

Configurations for High Marketing Performance of Science and Technology Enterprises

HM1 proposes that high IT application capability, high enterprise scale, and high government support are the core conditions that can generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. HM1 mainly relies on IT application capability, and enterprises’ high IT level can have a more positive impact on marketing performance. This type of enterprise has adequate strength and a large enterprise scale. The government also creates a favorable external environment for such enterprises and provides them with positive support, which in turn generates high marketing performance.

HM2 shows that high marketing level, high enterprise scale, and high government support are the core conditions, and not-high R&D capability is the peripheral condition, which can also generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. Such enterprises can attract external high-quality resources based on their large enterprise scale and a high marketing level to carry out efficient, precise, and successful marketing activities. Simultaneously, enterprises rely on their strengths to attract consumers while taking the initiative to actively promote their products and services. Government support also greatly enhances the credibility and reliability of enterprises from a third-party perspective. Although R&D capability of enterprises with this solution is not high, it can combine with other factors to generate high marketing performance.

HM3 shows that not-high R&D capability, high IT application capability, and high enterprise scale are the core conditions and high market competition is the peripheral condition, which can generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. This type of enterprise has a high enterprise scale and may have a wide range of businesses with a certain customer base, while a high IT application capability allows enterprises to increase the efficiency of marketing activities. Stimulated by market competition, high enterprise scale offers advantages for the smooth implementation of marketing activities, enabling enterprises to retain their vested position in the market and generate high marketing performance.

HM4 shows that the high marketing performance of S&T enterprises can be generated with not-high marketing level, high enterprise scale, and not-high market competition as the core conditions, not-high R&D capability and not-high government support as the peripheral conditions. With limited R&D capability, marketing level, and government support, marketing performance is driven mainly by a pre-existing high enterprise scale, implying a high requirement for enterprise scale. Owing to enterprises’ high scale, such enterprises benefit from a mature industrial chain and established partnerships, a significant market share, and relatively few competitive rivals. A high enterprise scale can bring in many established customers and attract high-quality resources, to easily generate high marketing performance.

Further analysis of each configurational path reveals that all four paths to high marketing performance include the core condition of a high enterprise scale. Thus, the condition of a high enterprise scale plays a prominent role and easily combines with other factors to generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. To a certain extent, enterprise scale can endorse enterprises’ reputation, which not only helps them gain consumers’ trust but also attract high-quality partners and enhances their competitiveness in the market, thus generating high marketing performance.

Configurations for Not-High Marketing Performance of Science and Technology Enterprises

NHM1 shows that when enterprises have not-high IT application capability and not-high enterprise scale, they will still generate not-high marketing performance even with high R&D capability. In this path, enterprises are not highly competitive in the market and does not have high technology application capability. The results generated by high R&D capability cannot be applied well within enterprises and are difficult to sell in the market, and the advantages of enterprises’ R&D capability cannot be fully exploited to generate high marketing performance.

NHM2 shows that enterprises will still generate not-high marketing performance, even with a high marketing level, when enterprises have not-high IT application capability, not-high enterprise scale and not-high government support. Enterprises’ marketing level has not much role to play, and any investment in marketing is limited by a not-high enterprise scale and not-high government support for generating high marketing performance.

NHM3 shows that regardless of the IT application capability of enterprises, they will still generate not-high marketing performance when they have not-high scale and not-high competition in the market, despite having high R&D capability, high marketing level, and high government support. Enterprises with a not-high scale, not-high market competition tends to make them comfortable, while their investments in R&D and marketing and government support are not fully utilized, resulting in a waste of resources and making it difficult for them to generate high marketing performance.

NHM4 shows that regardless of enterprises’ IT application capability, when enterprise are in a highly competitive market environment with not-high enterprise scale and not-high government support, even with high R&D capability and high marketing level, they still generate not-high marketing performance. For not-high-scale enterprises, gaining advantages in a highly competitive market environment is challenging. Additionally, not-high government support hinders these enterprises from surviving and developing. In such enterprises, relying solely on their high R&D capability and high marketing level is insufficient to generate high marketing performance.

A comparison of the four configurations reveals that each configuration contains the condition of a not-high enterprise scale, which suggests that such a scale is a key inhibitor in improving the marketing performance of S&T enterprises. This corresponds to the finding that a high enterprise scale is a key condition for the high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. Thus, enterprise scale can significantly influence whether S&T enterprises can generate high marketing performance.

Robustness Tests

In this study, three methods are used for robustness testing. Firstly, referring to the view of Ordanini et al. (2014), the test is conducted by increasing the raw consistency benchmark from 0.85 to 0.9. The test results are presented in Table 4. Secondly, following the view of Waldkirch et al. (2021), the test is conducted by increasing the PRI criterion. In this study, the PRI criterion is increased from 0.7 to 0.8, and the test results are shown in Table 5. Finally, with reference to the study of Wu et al. (2021), the frequency benchmark is increased from two to three for the robustness test. The results are presented in Table 6. The results obtained by increasing the raw consistency benchmark, PRI criterion, and frequency benchmark are subsets of the previous configuration results and indicate that results are robust.

Table 4.

Results of the Robustness Test of Increasing the Raw Consistency Benchmark.

Note. ● = Core causal condition present, = core causal condition absent, • = peripheral causal condition present, = peripheral causal condition absent.

Table 5.

Results of the Robustness Test for Increasing the PRI Criterion.

Note. ● = core causal condition present, = core causal condition absent, • = peripheral causal condition present.

Table 6.

Results of the Robustness Test for Increasing Frequency Benchmark.

Note. ● = core causal condition present, = core causal condition absent, • = peripheral causal condition present, = peripheral causal condition absent.

Conclusions and Implications

Conclusions

This study analyzes the linkage effect of the factors that impact the marketing performance of S&T enterprises from the configurational perspective and based on the TOE framework, and provides three main findings.

Firstly, there is no single necessary condition that leads to either high/not-high marketing performance in enterprises; however, a high enterprise scale significantly influences the generation of high marketing performance. This conclusion addresses the research objective of determining whether a single factor is necessary for high/not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. It examines the impact of a single factor on marketing performance from the perspective of necessity, enhancing the understanding of the antecedents involved and providing new evidence that supports the view that enterprise scale is a critical influencing factor.

Secondly, based on the TOE framework, the conditions at the three levels of technology, organization, and environment can generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises through a variety of permutations. Four paths drive high marketing performance of S&T enterprises. This conclusion addresses the research objectives of developing an integrative framework that incorporates diverse influencing factors and identifying which configuration leads to high marketing performance. Specifically, it shifts the focus from isolated antecedents to the collective effects of multiple factors in technology, organization, and environment. This conclusion not only aids in systematically identifying the factors affecting marketing performance of S&T enterprises but also broadens the applicability of the TOE framework. Additionally, it enriches research on the impacts of R&D capability, IT application capability, marketing level, enterprise scale, government support, and market competition on marketing performance, providing evidence that these factors significantly influence performance. This finding illustrates that high marketing performance is driven by a combination of concurrent factors, which embodies the concept of “different paths leading to the same goal,” thus supplementing traditional linear research conclusions.

Thirdly, four paths generate not-high marketing performance of S&T enterprises, which exhibits an asymmetric relationship with the mechanisms driving high marketing performance. This conclusion addresses the research objective of identifying which configurations generate not-high marketing performance, reveals both conditional and causal asymmetries in these configurations. It affirms the complexity and dynamism of enhancing marketing performance, addressing the limitations of symmetry assumptions in traditional regression analyses and enriching research on the mechanisms influencing marketing performance of S&T enterprises. This provides new insights into issues related to non-causal symmetry.

Theoretical Contributions

This study makes two theoretical contributions that can inform researchers in the field of marketing:

Firstly, it expands and deepens the application of the TOE framework in marketing. The TOE framework is introduced to provide an integrated theoretical framework for the study of the influencing factors of enterprise marketing performance. It is conducive to the organic integration of the factors at technical, organizational, and environmental levels, and provides a more comprehensive analysis of these factors, laying the foundation for subsequent research from a configurational perspective. The TOE framework is further enriched and refined in this study, broadening the scope of its application.

Secondly, the fsQCA method is introduced to investigate the driving path of marketing performance, which is beneficial for clarifying the relational mechanism between the factors that impact enterprise marketing performance. Most studies have analyzed the relationship between single condition and marketing performance through moderating and mediating methods. This study applies the fsQCA method based on the configurational perspective to analyze the coupling effects of each condition on the marketing performance improvement of S&T enterprises. Compared with traditional regression analysis, this study clarifies the multiple interactions and complex causal relationships using fsQCA, confirms the diversity of paths to generate high marketing performance of S&T enterprises, and enriches the theoretical results on the factors driving marketing performance.

Implications

Policy Implications

The proposed configurations inform policy as follows.

The Results Indicate the Need to Provide Differentiated Support to S&T Enterprises

According to HM1, relevant departments should help high-scale enterprises enhance their IT application capability. Relevant departments can formulate policies to support IT application of S&T enterprises through tax incentives and measures, set up special funds for training talents in IT applications, import overseas professionals to provide better technical support and assistance to enterprises, promote exchange, collaboration, and sharing of information among S&T enterprises, and set up specialized platforms to enhance the exchange of experience in IT applications among enterprises.

According to HM2, relevant departments must help high-scale enterprises with not-high R&D capability improve their marketing level in the following ways. Relevant departments can provide market-related data and research support for S&T enterprises, including information on consumer demand, industry trends, and market changes to provide a basis for enterprises to formulate marketing strategies, and help S&T enterprises with branding by providing brand consultation, brand evaluation, brand marketing training, and other services to build a reputable brand image.

The Results Targeted and Focused Efforts to Improve Marketing Performance

Government support for improved the marketing performance of S&T enterprises should promote the synergistic effect of the factors of S&T enterprises. For example, in HM1, government support exists as a core condition along with IT application capability and enterprise scale, and relevant departments should formulate policies to help enterprises understand and master new technologies and stimulate their IT application enthusiasm. At the same time, relevant departments should also provide support and guidance for enterprise scale expansion. In HM2, government support appears as a core condition along with marketing level and enterprise scale. Relevant departments can implement a project to improve marketing level of S&T enterprises to meet the digital needs of enterprises in marketing. Simultaneously, relevant departments can provide financial and policy support to enterprises willing to expand their scale, help them assess their expansion plans, reduce the risks that may arise in the process of scale expansion, and give full play to the synergistic linkage between government support, marketing level, and enterprise scale.

Industry Implications

Firstly, S&T enterprises with high government support and high enterprise scale can generate high marketing performance by improving their IT application capability or marketing level. According to HM1, in such cases, enterprises can improve marketing performance by utilizing strong IT application capability for innovation and change, increase their IT investment to ensure that the systems are updated and equipment is maintained and renewed, and equip their employees with the latest IT knowledge and skills by providing them with high-quality technological training to be applied practically. According to HM2, if the not-high R&D capability of S&T enterprises with high government support and high enterprise scale, enterprises can compensate by improving their marketing level. S&T enterprises should formulate long, medium and short term marketing strategies and plans according to their development needs. At the same time, they should actively collect, analyze, and mine user data to understand their needs, purchasing habits, feedback, and other information, and adjust marketing strategies in time to improve user satisfaction, loyalty, and marketing performance.

Secondly, enterprises facing high market competition and with not-high R&D capability should strive to improve their IT application capability and enterprise scale. When enterprises are in an environment of high external competition and have not-high R&D capability, they should improve their IT application capability and adhere to independent innovation and external market expansion to increase the scale of enterprises, improve the marketing performance of S&T enterprises, and make them invincible in fierce market competition. S&T enterprises should increase their investment in cutting-edge technologies, such as cloud computing, big data, and the Internet of Things, and select and utilize information technologies suitable for their own development to take advantage of market competition. Simultaneously, S&T enterprises should correctly expand their enterprise scale and market share by increasing capital investment and finding new financing channels, and promote the generation of high marketing performance with the cooperation of IT application capability and enterprise scale.

Thirdly, this study emphasizes the importance of enterprise scale and appropriately increase it to compensate for shortcomings in other areas. When S&T enterprises face unfavorable external environment and have relatively limited R&D capability and marketing level, they should pay special attention to the important role of enterprise scale in marketing performance, and determine the scale of the enterprise based on their actual situation. They can increase product competitiveness and attract more users and customers through continuous innovation, product iteration, and continuous optimization, and increase the expansion of each market and broaden the distribution channels to increase sales and coverage.

Fourthly, the allocation of internal resources by enterprises should adapt to the external environment. In HM1, enterprises are in an external environment with high government support and needs to expand their scale to improve their status in the market, also needs to work on improving their IT application capability, thereby generating high marketing performance. In HM2, enterprises are in an external environment with high government support and need to focus on their own scale when carrying out marketing activities to improve their marketing level, and simultaneously carry out marketing activities according to government policies to obtain high marketing performance. In HM3, enterprises are in an external environment with high market competition, where they need to use IT to improve their marketing efficiency and expand their scale to increase market share, thus gaining advantages in market competition and generating high marketing performance.

Finally, choosing the right marketing performance improvement path is crucial. Enterprises should fully comprehend the various marketing performance improvement paths and select the best for themselves. In this study, four paths to improve enterprise marketing performance are derived from the research; however, not every path is suitable for all enterprises. When focusing on improving marketing performance, enterprises should fully consider their own factor endowments, evaluate the external environment, allocate resources reasonably, and choose the most suitable path for marketing performance improvement.

Limitations and Future Research

This study has the following limitations, which can be further explored in future research. Firstly, it screens a sample of 258 listed S&T enterprises but does not take into account non-listed ones, which influences the generalizability of the findings. More comprehensive sample data could be used to further explore the configurations influencing the marketing performance of all S&T enterprises. The second limitation concerns the time dimension; instead of only one year, 2020 in this study, future research can be conducted using time series data and methods such as TQCA and TSQCA to reveal the change trajectories of paths. Finally, this study selects six factors based on the TOE framework. However, as there are numerous factors influencing marketing performance, future research could broaden the theoretical perspective by incorporating more conditions into the framework to examine their combined impact on marketing performance.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by the Philosophy and Social Science Special Program of Shanxi Province “Countermeasure for the Deep Integration of the Digital Economy and the Real Economy in Shanxi” (2022YD040); Postgraduate Education Teaching Reform Project of Shanxi Province “A Study on Exploring the Ecological Construction of First-class Disciplines” (2023JG032); Socio-economic Statistical Research Project of Shanxi Province (Key Project in Statistics) “Study on the Mechanism and Path of Digital Economy on the Carbon Productivity in Shanxi Province” (KYTJ[2022]007); Graduate Student Research Innovation Project of Shanxi Province “A Configuration Study on the Impact of Knowledge Characteristics and Network Embeddedness on Regional Innovation Potential Energy” (2023KY263).

ORCID iD

Jianhong Fan

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing was not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

Afriyie

Musah

A. A. I.

(2020). The nexus among innovation types, knowledge sharing, transformational leadership, and marketing performance in an emerging economy: An empirical study. Journal of Indian Business Research, 12(4), 529–548. http://doi.org/10.1108/JIBR-03-2019-0082

Anand

Delios

(2002). Absolute and relative resources as determinants of international acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 23(2), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.215

Bocconcelli

Cioppi

Fortezza

Francioni

Pagano

Savelli

Splendiani

(2018). SMEs and marketing: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(2), 227–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12128

Borisavljevic

(2016). The influence of information technology on marketing performances of tourist agencies. Economic Horizons, 18(3), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.5937/ekonhor1603277B

Bosch-Rekveldt

Jongkind

Mooi

Bakker

Verbraeck

(2011). Grasping project complexity in large engineering projects: The TOE (Technical, Organizational and Environmental) framework. International Journal of Project Management, 29(6), 728–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2010.07.008

Chen

Lei

Wang

(2021). Configurational analysis of the driving paths of Chinese digital economy based on the technology–organization–environment framework. Sage Open, 11(4), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211054500

Chittipaka

Kumar

Sivarajah

Bowden

J. L. H.

Baral

M. M.

(2023). Blockchain technology for supply chains operating in emerging markets: An empirical examination of technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework. Annals of Operations Research, 327, 465–492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04801-5

Chong

W. K.

Bian

Zhang

(2016). E-marketing services and e-marketing performance: The roles of innovation, knowledge complexity and environmental turbulence in influencing the relationship. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(1-2), 149–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2015.1102758

Crilly

Zollo

Hansen

M. T.

(2012). Faking it or muddling through? Understanding decoupling in response to stakeholder pressures. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1429–1448. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0697

10.

Kim

P. H.

(2021). One size does not fit all: Strategy configurations, complex environments, and new venture performance in emerging economies. Journal of Business Research, 124, 272–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.059

11.

Ferrier

W. J.

Lyon

D. W.

(2004). Competitive repertoire simplicity and firm performance: The moderating role of top management team heterogeneity. Managerial and Decision Economics, 25(6-7), 317–327. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.1193

12.

Filatotchev

Piesse

(2009). R&D, internationalization and growth of newly listed firms: European evidence. Journal of International Business Studies, 40, 1260–1276. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.18

13.

Fisman

Raturi

(2004). Does competition encourage credit provision? Evidence from African trade credit relationships. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 345–352. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465304323023859

14.

Fiss

P. C.

(2007). A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1180–1198. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.26586092

15.

Fiss

P. C.

(2011). Building better causal theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 393–420. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.60263120

16.

Grant

R. M.

(1991). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage: Implications for strategy formulation. California Management Review, 33(3), 114–135. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166664

17.

Greckhamer

Misangyi

V. F.

Elms

Lacey

(2008). Using qualitative comparative analysis in strategic management research: An examination of combinations of industry, corporate, and business-unit effects. Organizational Research Methods, 11(4), 695–726. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107302907

18.

Gupta

Crilly

Greckhamer

(2020). Stakeholder engagement strategies, national institutions, and firm performance: A configurational perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 41(10), 1869–1900. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3204

19.

Gupta

Justy

Kamboj

Kumar

Kristoffersen

(2021). Big data and firm marketing performance: Findings from knowledge-based view. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 171, 120986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120986

20.

Hempell

Zwick

(2008). New technology, work organisation, and innovation. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 17(4), 331–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438590701279649

21.

Heng

Afifah

(2020). Entrepreneurial orientation for enhancement of marketing performance. International Review of Management and Marketing, 10(3), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.32479/irmm.9670

22.

J. L. Y.

S. X.

(2011). Corporate governance and returns on information technology investment: Evidence from an emerging market. Strategic Management Journal, 32(6), 595–623. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.886

23.

Jiang

Wei

Yang

Subramanian

(2018). Does stronger R&D capability always promote better innovation? The moderating role of knowledge boundary spanning of R&D network. International Journal of Innovation Management, 22(7), 1850059. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919618500597

24.

Karlsson

(2021). Firm size and growth barriers: A data-driven approach. Small Business Economics, 57, 1319–1338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00350-y

25.

Ketchen

J. D. J.

Thomas

J. B.

Snow

C. C.

(1993). Organizational configurations and performance: A comparison of theoretical approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1278–1313. https://doi.org/10.5465/256812

26.

Khan

(2021). The efficacy of marketing skills and market responsiveness in marketing performance of emerging market exporting firms in advanced markets: The moderating role of competitive intensity. International Business Review, 30(6), 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101860

27.

Khan

R. U.

Mahmood

Ahmed

M. G.

Mustafa

M. J.

Alshamsi

M. K.

Iqbal

Salamzadeh

(2022). Impact of network structure on sustainable competitive performance among Pakistani small and medium enterprises: Does government financial support matter? Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 12, 45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40497-022-00305-5

28.

Leong

C. K.

Yang

Y. C.

(2020). Market competition and firms’ social performance. Economic Modelling, 91, 601–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2019.12.002

29.

Liu

Lin

Y. E.

(2023). Corporate transparency and firm value: Does market competition play an external governance role? Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 19(1), 100334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcae.2022.100334

30.

Liu

Zhang

(2020). Coupling coordination degree of government support, financial support and innovation and its impact on economic development. IEEE Access, 8, 104039–104051. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2999501

31.

Liu

Song

(2020). How can SMEs acquire supply chain financing: The capabilities and information perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(4), 784–809. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-02-2019-0072

32.

Ramamurthy

(2011). Understanding the link between information technology capability and organizational agility: An empirical examination. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 931–954. https://doi.org/10.2307/41409967

33.

Malik

Chadhar

Vatanasakdakul

Chetty

(2021). Factors affecting the organizational adoption of blockchain technology: Extending the technology–organization–environment (TOE) framework in the Australian context. Sustainability, 13(16), 9404. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169404

34.

Mendel

J. M.

Korjani

M. M.

(2013). Theoretical aspects of fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Information Sciences, 237, 137–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2013.02.048

35.

Misangyi

V. F.

Greckhamer

Furnari

Fiss

P. C.

Crilly

Aguilera

(2017). Embracing causal complexity: The emergence of a neo-configurational perspective. Journal of Management, 43(1), 255–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316679252

36.

Mubeen

Han

Abbas

Raza

Bodian

(2022). Examining the relationship between product market competition and Chinese firms performance: The mediating impact of capital structure and moderating influence of firm size. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 709678. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.709678

37.

Najafi-Tavani

Sharifi

Najafi-Tavani

(2016). Market orientation, marketing capability, and new product performance: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5059–5064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.080

38.

Nee

Kang

Opper

(2010). A theory of innovation market transition, property rights, and innovative activity. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 166(3), 397–425. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20798602

39.

Noone

B. M.

Lin

M. S.

Sharma

(2024). Firm performance during a crisis: Effects of adhocracy culture, incremental product innovation, and firm size. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 48(1), 153–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480221086846

40.

O’Cass

Julian

(2003). Modelling the effects of firm-specific and environmental characteristics on export marketing performance. Journal of Global Marketing, 16(3), 53–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J042v16n03_04

41.

O’Cass

Ngo

L. V.

Siahtiri

(2015). Marketing resource-capability complementarity and firm performance in B2B firms. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 30(2), 194–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-05-2012-0087

42.

Ordanini

Parasuraman

Rubera

(2014). When the recipe is more important than the ingredients: A qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) of service innovation configurations. Journal of Service Research, 17(2), 134–149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670513513337

43.

O’Sullivan

Abela

A. V.

(2007). Marketing performance measurement ability and firm performance. Journal of Marketing, 71(2), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.2.079

44.

Pantano

Pizzi

Scarpi

Dennis

(2020). Competing during a pandemic? Retailers’ ups and downs during the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of Business Research, 116, 209–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.036

45.

Patel

P. C.

Feng

(2021). LGBT workplace equality policy and customer satisfaction: The roles of marketing capability and demand instability. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 40(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915620945259

46.

Peng

Quan

Peng

(2019). It application maturity, management institutional capability and process management capability. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 31(1), 61–85. https://doi.org/10.4018/JOEUC.2019010104

47.

Qiao

(2013). Institutional logics and corporate finance in China. Chinese Management Studies, 7(4), 631–646. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-09-2013-0170

48.

Qiu

(2021). The impacts of CEO’s knowledge structure on corporate innovation strategy. Kybernetes, 50(9), 2597–2618. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-03-2020-0131

49.

Radhakrishnan

Grover

(2008). A process-oriented perspective on differential business value creation by information technology: An empirical investigation. Omega, 36(6), 1105–1125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2006.06.003

50.

Ragin

C. C.

(2009). Redesigning social inquiry: Fuzzy sets and beyond. University of Chicago Press.

51.

Ren

Eisingerich

A. B.

Tsai

H. T.

(2015). How do marketing, research and development capabilities, and degree of internationalization synergistically affect the innovation performance of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)? A panel data study of Chinese SMEs. International Business Review, 24(4), 642–651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2014.11.006

52.

Rihoux

Ragin

C. C.

(2009). Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques. Sage.

53.

Sheikh

(2018). CEO power, product market competition and firm value. Research in International Business and Finance, 46, 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2018.04.009

54.

Silveira

(2022). Firm size distribution and growth: An empirical investigation. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 63, 422–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.strueco.2022.06.012

55.

Stone

R. W.

Good

D. J.

Baker-Eveleth

(2007). The impact of information technology on individual and firm marketing performance. Behaviour & Information Technology, 26(6), 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449290600571610

56.

Sung

Soh

J. Y.

Park

C. G.

(2022). Comparing government support, firm heterogeneity, and inter-firm spillovers for productivity enhancement: Evidence from the Korean solar energy technology industry. Energy, 246, 123250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.123250

57.

Szalavetz

(2019). Industry 4.0 and capability development in manufacturing subsidiaries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 145, 384–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.06.027

58.

Tornatzky

L. G.

Fleischer

Chakrabarti

A. K.

(1990). Processes of technological innovation. Lexington Books.

59.

Ullah

Qayyum

Thaheem

M. J.

Al-Turjman

Sepasgozar

S. M.

(2021). Risk management in sustainable smart cities governance: A TOE framework. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 167, 120743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120743

60.

Waldkirch

Kammerlander

Wiedeler

(2021). Configurations for corporate venture innovation: Investigating the role of the dominant coalition. Journal of Business Venturing, 36(5), 106137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2021.106137

61.

Wan

W. P.

Hoskisson

R. E.

Short

J. C.

Yiu

D. W.

(2011). Resource-based theory and corporate diversification: Accomplishments and opportunities. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1335–1368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310391804

62.

Wang

Mogi

(2017). Deregulation, market competition, and innovation of utilities: Evidence from Japanese electric sector. Energy Policy, 111, 403–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.09.044

63.

Wibowo

Suryana

Diana

Kaltum

(2021). Marketing performance and big data use during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study of SMEs in Indonesia. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(7), 571–578. https://doi.org/10.13106/JAFEB.2021.VOL8.NO7.0571

64.

Zheng

Zhang

(2021). How business model designs influence firm growth in a transforming economy: A configurational perspective. Management and Organization Review, 17(2), 226–253. https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2020.54

65.

Yue

(2022). Grey correlation analysis on the synergistic development between innovation-driven strategy and marine industrial agglomeration: Based on China’s coastal provinces. Grey Systems: Theory and Application, 12(1), 269–289. https://doi.org/10.1108/GS-08-2020-0103

66.

Yao

Jiang

(2016). Technological innovation and performance of agribusinesses in China. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 16(2), 128–148. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTPM.2016.076314

67.

Zhou

Wang

Zhao

Feng

(2023). Digitalization and third-party logistics performance: Exploring the roles of customer collaboration and government support. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 53(4), 467–488. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM-12-2021-0532

68.

Zhou

K. Z.

(2010). Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 547–561. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.830

69.

Ziyadat

A. Y.

(2019). The effect of external environment on marketing performance of retail stores: Applied study on Amman city of Jordan. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 11(3), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v11n3p36

Research on Configurations for Marketing Performance of Science and Technology Enterprises in China Based on the TOE Framework

Abstract

Plain language summary

Keywords

Introduction

Literature Review and Model Construction

The TOE Framework

Factors Influencing the Marketing Performance of S&T Enterprises

Technological Factors and Marketing Performance

R&D Capability and Marketing Performance

IT Application Capability and Marketing Performance

Organizational Factors and Marketing Performance

Marketing Level and Marketing Performance

Enterprise Scale and Marketing Performance

Environmental Factors and Marketing Performance

Government Support and Marketing Performance

Market Competition and Marketing Performance

Technological, Organizational, and Environmental Factors and Marketing Performance from a Configurational Perspective

Research Design

Research Method

Sample Selection and Data Collection

Sample Selection

Data Collection

Variable Measurements

Outcome Variable

Independent Variables

Calibrations for Variables

Data Analysis and Empirical Results

Necessary Condition Analysis

Sufficiency Analysis

Configurations for High Marketing Performance of Science and Technology Enterprises

Configurations for Not-High Marketing Performance of Science and Technology Enterprises

Robustness Tests

Conclusions and Implications

Conclusions

Theoretical Contributions

Implications

Policy Implications

The Results Indicate the Need to Provide Differentiated Support to S&T Enterprises

The Results Targeted and Focused Efforts to Improve Marketing Performance

Industry Implications

Limitations and Future Research

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Data Availability Statement

References