Measurement items
| Items | Factor loading | CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marketing presence in the TMT (MPTMT) | Objective measurea | ||
| Is there any member of your firm's top management team specifically responsible for either the marketing function or managing relationships with customers? (Yes/No) | – | – | – |
| What is his/her/their title(s)? | – | – | – |
| Cross-functional integration in NPD | 0.71 | 0.55 | |
| We used cross-functional teams (e.g. involving R&D, manufacturing, sales and marketing) in designing new products | 0.67 | ||
| We used trans-organizational teams (e.g. involving suppliers and complementors) while designing new products | 0.81 | ||
| Market uncertainty | 0.83 | 0.55 | |
| Customer needs and product preferences changed quite rapidly | 0.72 | ||
| Customer product demands and preferences were highly uncertain | 0.87 | ||
| It was difficult to predict changes in customer needs and preferences | 0.70 | ||
| Market competitive conditions were highly unpredictable | 0.68 | ||
| Technological turbulence | 0.90 | 0.70 | |
| It was very difficult to forecast technology developments in our industry | 0.60 | ||
| The technology environment was highly uncertain | 0.91 | ||
| Technological developments were highly unpredictable | 0.93 | ||
| Technologically, our industry was a very complex environment | 0.86 | ||
| Competitive intensity | 0.83 | 0.63 | |
| Competition in our industry was intense | 0.95 | ||
| Anything that one competitor offered to the market, others readily matched | 0.80 | ||
| Price competition was a major characteristic of our industry | 0.61 | ||
| In our industry, one heard of a new competitive move almost every dayc | |||
| New product performance (Relative to stated objectives: 1 = Worse, 4 = As planned, 7 = Better) | Formative measureb | ||
| Speed of new product development | – | – | – |
| Product quality | |||
| Value of products to customers (quality/price) | |||
| TMT heterogeneity | Formative measureb | ||
The members of our firm's top management team
| – | – | – |
| Items | Factor loading | CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective measurea | |||
| Is there any member of your firm's top management team specifically responsible for either the marketing function or managing relationships with customers? (Yes/No) | – | – | – |
| What is his/her/their title(s)? | – | – | – |
| 0.71 | 0.55 | ||
| We used cross-functional teams (e.g. involving R&D, manufacturing, sales and marketing) in designing new products | 0.67 | ||
| We used trans-organizational teams (e.g. involving suppliers and complementors) while designing new products | 0.81 | ||
| 0.83 | 0.55 | ||
| Customer needs and product preferences changed quite rapidly | 0.72 | ||
| Customer product demands and preferences were highly uncertain | 0.87 | ||
| It was difficult to predict changes in customer needs and preferences | 0.70 | ||
| Market competitive conditions were highly unpredictable | 0.68 | ||
| 0.90 | 0.70 | ||
| It was very difficult to forecast technology developments in our industry | 0.60 | ||
| The technology environment was highly uncertain | 0.91 | ||
| Technological developments were highly unpredictable | 0.93 | ||
| Technologically, our industry was a very complex environment | 0.86 | ||
| 0.83 | 0.63 | ||
| Competition in our industry was intense | 0.95 | ||
| Anything that one competitor offered to the market, others readily matched | 0.80 | ||
| Price competition was a major characteristic of our industry | 0.61 | ||
| In our industry, one heard of a new competitive move almost every dayc | |||
| Formative measureb | |||
| Speed of new product development | – | – | – |
| Product quality | |||
| Value of products to customers (quality/price) | |||
| Formative measureb | |||
| The members of our firm's top management team Have had a variety of educational backgrounds (e.g. bachelor's degree, master's degree, PhD) Have varied widely in their functional background (e.g. finance, marketing, R&D) Have had a variety of industry backgrounds (e.g. technology, automotive, pharmaceutical) Have varied widely in their years of experience with the firm | – | – | – |
Note(s): All multi-item scales are measured using seven-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) unless otherwise noted
aThis is an objective measure (please refer to the “Measures” section for details of the coding process)
bAssessed using a different approach as described in the “reliability and validity” section
cRemoved from analysis due to loading
CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted; all factor loadings are significant at p < 0.001
Source(s): Authors' own creation