The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm

EJM
53,10 The interplay between market
intelligence activities and sales
strategy as drivers of performance
2080 in foreign markets
Received 18 June 2017 Evangelia Katsikea
Revised 20 February 2018
4 October 2018
King’s Business School, King’s College London, London, UK
15 January 2019
Accepted 18 January 2019 Marios Theodosiou
Department of Business and Public Administration, University of Cyprus,
Nicosia, Cyprus, and
Katerina Makri
Institute for International Marketing Management, Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien,
Vienna, Austria

Abstract
Purpose – Exporting is a popular foreign market entry mode, especially among small- and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs). The success of SME exporters depends on their ability to establish and maintain
profitable long-term relationships with foreign customers. This study aims to propose that the development of
an effective export sales strategy can contribute greatly toward this aim. The study also demonstrates that
export market intelligence generation and export market intelligence dissemination activities are important
drivers of export sales strategy. Export sales strategy comprises three dimensions, which are expected to
have a positive influence on export performance.
Design/methodology/approach – The study uses survey data obtained from 168 exporting firms
based in Greece, to test a set of research hypotheses. Structural equation modeling procedures are
used.
Findings – Findings indicate that export market intelligence generation and dissemination activities
support and facilitate the development of effective export sales strategies, tailored to serve individual foreign
accounts. Furthermore, all strategic dimensions of export sales strategy demonstrate significant positive
effects on export performance.
Research limitations/implications – The research underlines the importance of incorporating export
sales strategy in studies that aim to investigate the drivers of export performance.
Practical implications – The findings also indicate that exporting firms must actively engage in market
intelligence activities to reinforce their strategic decision-making process.
Originality/value – The study emphasizes the crucial importance of export sales strategy in achieving
superior export performance. The study provides a theory-driven conceptualization and operationalization of
export sales strategy and offers an empirical assessment of a comprehensive model that includes the key
antecedents and performance outcomes of export sales strategy.
Keywords Export performance, Export market intelligence activities, Export sales strategy
Paper type Research paper

European Journal of Marketing

Vol. 53 No. 10, 2019
pp. 2080-2108
© Emerald Publishing Limited The authors thank the Associate Editor and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments
0309-0566
DOI 10.1108/EJM-06-2017-0402 and constructive suggestions.
1. Introduction Drivers of
The determinants of export performance is a primary issue of concern among international performance in
marketing researchers and practitioners (Leonidou et al., 2002). As the field developed,
export marketing strategy emerged as a pivotal determinant of export performance
foreign
(Cavusgil and Zou, 1994; Chen et al., 2016; Morgan et al., 2004). An export marketing markets
strategy provides a firm the means to exploit the strengths and counter the weaknesses that
arise from its internal environment, as well as to seize the opportunities and successfully
confront the threats that emerge in the external environment, to meet its export-related 2081
objectives (Cavusgil and Zou, 1994). While many researchers recognize the importance of
developing effective marketing strategies that offer superior value to foreign customers, few
studies attempted to investigate how firms implement such strategies at the local market
level (Morgan et al., 2012). Previous discussions of export marketing strategy revolved
around the traditional marketing mix (i.e. product, price, promotion and distribution),
focusing on whether firms should standardize or adapt its elements in foreign markets
(Cavusgil and Zou, 1994). A number of review studies/meta-analyses on export performance
confirm that the investigation of strategic issues in exporting focused primarily on the
elements of the marketing mix (Chen et al., 2016; Leonidou et al., 2002; Zou and Stan, 1998;
Katsikeas et al., 2000). In contrast, in none of these studies did export sales management
emerge as a major topic of investigation.
The traditional marketing literature posits that companies develop marketing mixes to
satisfy the needs and preferences of broad customer segments that result from a meticulous
process of market segmentation and targeting (Kotler et al., 2016). However, in the export
marketing strategy literature, market segmentation and targeting stages are commonly
ignored (Leonidou and Katsikeas, 2010), which is quite surprising considering that
segmentation decisions should precede all marketing-mix decisions (Diamantopoulos et al.,
2014). Further research on export segmentation strategies, and particularly the
simultaneous investigation of market segmentation/targeting and the development of
marketing-mix strategies, can contribute toward filling this notable gap in the literature
(Diamantopoulos et al., 2014).
Export market segmentation should be viewed as a two-stage procedure[1]. As part of
the export marketing strategy, export market segmentation should initially focus on the
identification of broader groups of counties that present attractive opportunities for the firm.
Once a decision is made regarding the specific countries to target, the firm should apply a
more fine-grained segmentation within each country, to identify specific groups of
customers (or even individual customers) that should receive marketing effort (Cooper and
Kleinschmidt, 1985). Empirical evidence indicates that this micro-level, within-countries,
segmentation has the strongest impact on export performance (Diamantopoulos et al., 2014).
Drawing a parallel with the (domestic) sales management literature (Panagopoulos and
Avlonitis, 2010), micro-level segmentation should be part of a firm’s export sales strategy,
which must be consistent with but distinct from the firm’s export marketing strategy. In
particular, the mainstream sales management literature asserts that the main difference
between a firm’s sales strategy and its marketing strategy is that sales strategy decisions
pertain to how the firm relates to and interacts with individual customers within a market
segment, whereas marketing strategy has a broader market-level focus (Ingram et al., 2012;
Terho et al., 2015). Thus, exporting firms should emphasize the development of an export
sales strategy to facilitate the establishment of profitable relationships with foreign
customers or independent distributors within each targeted foreign market. Notably, a
significant number of exporting firms, especially small- and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs) of consumer goods, promote their products in foreign markets through partnerships
EJM with independent local distributors (Bello and Lohtia, 1995; Zhang et al., 2003). On the other
53,10 hand, industrial manufacturers whose potential market in a foreign country comprises only
of a small number of industrial customers may choose to sell directly to these customers. In
both cases, exporting manufacturers need to develop an effective export salesforce that will
be able to initiate, develop and expand relationships with foreign end-user customers and
independent distributors (Katsikea et al., 2007). Furthermore, to achieve superior
2082 performance in export markets, firms must ensure that planned export marketing strategy
decisions are effectively executed (Morgan et al., 2012). The present study proposes that
export sales strategy (ESS) provides the proper mechanism for implementing export
marketing strategy, via planning and performing sales activities within each targeted
export market.
As a precursor to this study, the authors conducted an extensive review of the relevant
literature, in the areas of international/export marketing, international business, marketing
and sales management, aiming to identify studies that focused specifically on ESS or in
which ESS was a key topic of investigation. However, despite the anticipated positive
contribution of export sales strategy to export success, no previous study has ever
attempted to examine the underlying elements of ESS, investigate the factors facilitating its
effective development or empirically establish a link between ESS and export performance.
In the broader area of international sales, Panagopoulos et al. (2011) reviewed 97 articles,
aiming to identify the key topics addressed and suggest an agenda for future research.
Moreover, a recent study by Schrock et al. (2018) reviewed 132 articles in the area of
international sales and sales management from a social network analytic perspective,
aiming to examine the most influential topics and understand how they are interconnected.
Both studies conclude that existing knowledge on international sales and sales management
is limited. Furthermore, the findings reported clearly indicate that international sales
strategy issues received scant research attention. Most importantly, however, these studies
provide specific directions for future research, identify critical gaps in current knowledge
that must be filled and emphasize specific sales-related tasks and activities that should be
effectively conducted to lead to successful international sales. Although not explicitly
discussed by Panagopoulos et al. (2011) or Schrock et al. (2018), a reasonable extension of the
theoretical analysis they provide is that an integrated international/export sales strategy is
needed to assist firms in planning, coordinating, directing and controlling their sales
activities in different foreign markets.
In light of these important gaps, the present study aims to contribute to the extant export
marketing literature in three important ways. First, drawing on recent studies on
conceptualization and measurement of sales strategy in a domestic sales context, this
research study proposes a measurement scale for ESS comprising three dimensions: foreign
customer segmentation, foreign customer prioritization and targeting and relationship
objectives and selling models. Second, the study provides an empirical test for the direct
effect of each dimension of ESS on export performance. Finally, the study examines the role
of export market intelligence activities, and particularly export market intelligence
generation, and export market intelligence dissemination in influencing the development of
ESS. In this way, the study also contributes to a growing stream of research in marketing
which attempts to establish the exact nature of the relationship between marketing and
sales, by suggesting that it is the interplay between market-oriented intelligence activities
and ESS effectiveness that drives performance in the exporting context.
The remainder of the article is organized as follows. Section 2 outlines the theoretical
background of the study and develops the research hypotheses. Then, Section 3 describes
the methodological approach of the study, highlighting sampling and data collection
procedures, and construct measurement issues. Section 4 presents hypothesis testing Drivers of
results, whereas Section 5 explores their implications for academic research and managerial performance in
practice. The article concludes with a discussion of study limitations along with suggestions
for future research.
foreign
markets
2. Research background and hypotheses
This study aims to develop and empirically test a comprehensive model of the antecedents 2083
and performance consequences of export sales strategy. Drawing on previous research in
the area of export marketing (Murray et al., 2011), the study examines the role of export
market orientation as a potential driver of the development of ESS. A key proposition is that
the “intelligence” facet of market orientation (Hult et al., 2005; Özturan et al., 2014) is an
important enabler of the internal process that leads to the development of effective ESS. The
study focuses on export market intelligence generation and export market intelligence
dissemination activities, which provide useful insights regarding customers, competitors
and other environmental forces in each targeted foreign market (Cadogan et al., 1999). These
activities provide the knowledge grounds for the development of strategic decisions at the
export customer level, which are incorporated in the firm’s ESS. This is extremely important
for exporting firms whose customer portfolio within each targeted export market may
include a small number of end-user customers or independent distributors (hereafter
referred to as customers) with diverse needs and purchasing behavior.
Finally, the study proposes that the development of an effective ESS which is informed
by the firm’s market intelligence activities will have a positive effect on export performance.
Figure 1 presents the conceptual model that guided the execution of the present study.

2.1 Previous research on export performance

Exporting is the most popular mode for firms aiming to enter international markets, as it
involves low investment requirements and limited financial risks, compared to alternative
options (Katsikea et al., 2007). Exporting offers important benefits to both individual
companies (e.g. spread business risks, achieve sustainable growth) and nations (e.g. enhance

Control variables:
- Export market
Export customer
competitiveness
segmentation
- Psychic distance
- Firm export experience
Export market - Firm size
intelligence - Number of export
generation countries

Export customer Export market

prioritization and performance
targeting

Export market
intelligence
dissemination
Figure 1.
Export relationship
objectives and A conceptual model
selling models of export intelligence
activities, export
Note: Dashed lines represent additional structural paths that were included in testing a sales strategy and
export performance
partial-mediation model
EJM industrialization process, create more job opportunities) (Leonidou and Katsikeas, 2010).
53,10 Naturally, as a field of research, exporting attracted significant research attention over the
past six decades. Recent years have witnessed not only the exponential growth in the
number of published studies on exporting but also a significant improvement in terms of
identifying/developing appropriate theoretical bases for studying export-related phenomena
and adopting robust empirical methods. As expected, the vast majority of these studies
2084 focused on identifying the factors that contribute to export success (Chen et al., 2016).
Overall, three broad groups of factors that influence export performance emerged: internal
variables (e.g. firms’ characteristics, firms’ resources/capabilities, managerial
characteristics), external variables (e.g. environmental factors, industry characteristics) and
strategic factors (e.g. export market segmentation, export marketing-mix standardization/
adaptation).
The large number of published studies on export performance encouraged some authors
to conduct a number of review studies to evaluate and integrate the extant literature (Chen
et al., 2016; Katsikeas et al., 2000; Leonidou and Katsikeas, 2010; Leonidou et al., 2002; Zou
and Stan, 1998). Given the comprehensives of these studies, it would be unfruitful to provide
yet another review, considering that the export sales strategy (the main topic of
investigation in this study) was ignored in previous research. Instead, Appendix provides a
summary of empirical studies which have investigated the determinants of export
performance in the past four years. A key conclusion that can be derived from Appendix is
that no study has attempted to examine the role of export sales strategy in influencing
export performance. Thus, the general neglect of this important topic in the export
marketing literature continues in more recent studies. Another important conclusion is that
the resource-based view of the firm is gaining ground as an appropriate theoretical basis for
investigating export performance, as an increasing number of studies attempt to identify the
important firm resources and capabilities that lead to export success. Issues relating to
export entrepreneurship and innovation are also becoming very popular among export
marketing researchers. On the other hand, less research attention is devoted on the role of
export marketing strategy, which is quite surprising considering that strategy provides the
means for satisfying export customer needs, offering solutions to their problems and adding
value to their businesses (in the case of industrial customers). Overall, the dearth of studies
on export sales strategy is still evident.

2.2 Export sales strategy

Sales strategy is concerned with how a firm accomplishes its marketing objectives by
allocating sales’ resources at the individual customer level (Panagopoulos and Avlonitis,
2010). Despite the great importance of the sales function for the success of business
organizations (Ingram et al., 2002), previous research has devoted limited attention on the
conceptual definition and measurement of this construct, or on identifying the key
antecedents and performance outcomes of sales strategy effectiveness (Cron et al., 2014;
Terho et al., 2015). In contrast, numerous studies have focused on the factors that influence
the work outcomes and performance of individual salespeople (MacKenzie et al., 1998; Rich,
1997; Singh, 1998; Verbeke et al., 2011). The lack of attention on sales strategy is quite
surprising considering that salespeople should direct their efforts toward accomplishing
performance objectives set by upper management, through implementing a thoroughly
designed sales strategy (Terho et al., 2015). Sales strategy drives the customer interaction
process, and defines the types of salespeople needed, as well as the appropriate selling and
sales management processes, activities and technologies (Ingram et al., 2002).
 The field of export marketing management has largely ignored the role of the sales Drivers of
function. Empirical evidence indicates that small- and medium-sized exporters usually performance in
promote their sales through employing travelling salespeople. These individuals are based
in the home country of the exporting firm and travel abroad to visit foreign customers and
foreign
prospects, and perform a broad range of personal selling activities (Katsikea et al., 2007). markets
Therefore, a specific export sales strategy is needed to guide the behavior and efforts of
export salespeople before, during and after their interaction with foreign customers. In the
absence of any available definitions of export sales strategy, the current study draws on 2085
research conducted in a domestic sales context to conceptualize this construct. In particular,
Panagopoulos and Avlonitis (2010, p. 48) proposed a definition of sales strategy which can
be effectively adapted to the context of export sales strategy:
[. . .] export sales strategy is the extent to which a firm engages in a set of activities and decisions
regarding the allocation of scarce export sales resources (i.e. people, selling effort, money) to
manage export customer relationships on the basis of the value of each export customer for the
exporting firm (words in italics added by the authors).
According to Panagopoulos and Avlonitis (2010), sales strategy comprises four dimensions:
customer segmentation, customer prioritization and targeting, relationship objectives and
selling models and use of multiple sales channels. Although no widely accepted
conceptualization of sales strategy exists, prior studies also concur that an effective sales
strategy must address the segmentation and prioritization of customers, different
relationship objectives and selling models and multiple sales channels approaches (Ingram
et al., 2002; Ingram et al., 2012). Consequently, an effective ESS should enable the exporting
firm to identify individual customers with high value potential within each targeted foreign
market, set priorities relating to these customers, develop a specific strategic approach for
selling to individual customers and allocate effectively its available resources to initiate and
develop profitable relationships.
The definition of export sales strategy proposed by Panagopoulos and Avlonitis (2010),
and adapted in this study for the exporting context, draws on various concepts that are well
established in the mainstream marketing and sales literatures. The export customer
segmentation dimension is consistent with the principles of the “interaction orientation”
concept introduced by Ramani and Kumar (2008), and particularly with the “customer
concept” component that these authors define as “the belief that prescribed the unit of
analysis of every marketing action and reaction to be the individual customer” (Ramani and
Kumar, 2008, p. 28). The export customer prioritization and targeting dimension resembles
the “customer prioritization” concept that Homburg et al. (2008, p. 114) define “as the degree
to which customers are treated differently with respect to marketing instruments according
to their importance to the firm.” Finally, the export relationship objectives and selling models
dimension reflects the spectrum for market relationships, which ranges from transactional
to collaborative exchanges (Day, 2000). Notably, the traditional sales management literature
suggests that sales organizations must consider the selling process as a relationship
management process (Ingram et al., 2012).

2.3 Export market intelligence activities and export sales strategy

Previous studies in the field of export marketing have explored the role of market
orientation as a potential determinant of competitive advantage and superior performance in
export markets (Boso et al., 2018; Cadogan et al., 2009; He et al., 2018; Murray et al., 2011;
Rose and Shoham, 2002). Cadogan et al. (1999) define export market orientation as the
generation, dissemination and responsiveness to export market intelligence. Most
EJM researchers expect export market orientation to have a positive impact on export
53,10 performance, as it fosters a thorough knowledge and understanding of foreign customers’
current and future needs and preferences, as well as an effective and systematic firm
response to such idiosyncrasies (Cadogan et al., 2002). However, although there is a
consensus among researchers regarding the central role of market orientation for the field of
marketing, and its potential positive contribution toward achieving marketing objectives,
2086 there is a growing debate in the literature regarding the exact process through which market
orientation influences performance (Murray et al., 2011). Using the resource-based view of
the firm as a theoretical platform, some researchers propose that market orientation is a
valuable and rare firm resource (Day, 1994; Hunt and Morgan, 1995) or capability (Zhou
et al., 2008). However, the mere possession of market orientation is unlikely to generate
competitive advantage and superior performance (Menguc and Auh, 2006). Firms need to
take appropriate strategic actions to capitalize on market orientation (Johnson et al., 2003;
Ketchen et al., 2007; Murray et al., 2011). The present study proposes that export sales
strategy represents such a deployment mechanism that enables exporting firms to exploit
the valuable insights gained from export market intelligence activities and transform them
into specific actions that facilitate the initiation, development and strengthening of
profitable relationships with export customers. In fact, Day (2011) argues that a strategic
perspective in marketing includes capabilities for managing customer service delivery,
customer order fulfillment, sales integration and capitalization on the customer and brand
assets. The sales function plays a pivotal role in developing these capabilities, using them
effectively to perform relevant value-creating tasks, both at a domestic and an export sales
context.
Two approaches in export market orientation and performance research exist in the
literature. The first, and most commonly encountered, adopts an aggregation process in
conceptualizing export market orientation. This approach conceptualizes export market
orientation as a higher-order construct, composed of three dimensions: market intelligence
generation, dissemination and responsiveness (Cadogan et al., 1999; Cadogan et al., 2002;
Kumar et al., 2011). Based on this conceptualization, researchers combine the three
components to form an aggregate score, which they use in further statistical analysis
(Cadogan et al., 2009). Some scholars have criticized this approach, underpinning the
importance of treating export market orientation at a disaggregate level, arguing that only
in this way researchers can obtain a more fine-grained understanding of export market
orientation’s outcomes (Cadogan, 2012). Jaworski et al. (2000) suggest that it is useful to
distinguish between two approaches to being market oriented: the market-drive approach,
as reflected by the intelligence facets, and the driving-markets approach, as reflected by the
responsiveness facet.
In support of scholars criticizing the aggregated conceptualization of export market
orientation, recent empirical evidence has indicated that the components of export market
orientation have varied effects on performance or several antecedents of performance. In
particular, Özturan et al. (2014) distinguish between intelligence and dissemination facets of
market orientation and indicate their opposing roles in predicting advertising spending.
Other studies have also reported that market intelligence activities, generation and
dissemination, have little or no significant effect on export performance (Murray et al., 2007;
Rose and Shoham, 2002). On the contrary, market intelligence responsiveness has
demonstrated a strong and significant impact on export performance (Chung, 2012; Murray
et al., 2007; Rose and Shoham, 2002).
In line with the research stream mentioned above, and addressing calls by scholars to
model the individual components of export market orientation (Cadogan, 2012), the current
study argues that each component has a different mechanism by which it shapes success, Drivers of
and it specifically aims to explore this mechanism by investigating the role of intelligence performance in
activities as an antecedent of export sales strategy. The conceptual framework that this
study develops also proclaims that intelligence generation and dissemination per se are
foreign
unlikely to have a direct effect on performance, unless action is taken by the firm to leverage markets
this knowledge with the adaptation of strategic decisions and implementations.
Market intelligence generation and dissemination are conceptually and empirically
closely related (Chung, 2012; Ketchen et al., 2007; Özturan et al., 2014) and they both form the 2087
intelligence activities of a company. In particular, the intelligence activities of an exporting
company involve the collection and distribution of information it derives from a thorough
analysis of foreign markets. Prior research has shown that market information is highly
associated with a firm’s ability to effectively select and implement marketing strategies
(Noble and Mokwa, 1999) and with the achievement of enhanced performance (Li and
Calantone, 1998). Intelligence generation refers to the collection of information relating to
customers’ habits, needs and wants, factors that influence customers’ behavior (e.g. market
trends, competition forces and socio-cultural trends) and factors that influence a firm’s
ability to satisfy customers (e.g. government regulations) (Baker and Sinkula, 2005). To
collect information, firms employ a number of approaches, such as secondary market data
analysis, customer surveys and focus groups (Li and Calantone, 1998). Within the context of
exporting, the above-mentioned activities are aimed to create export market intelligence
(Racela et al., 2007).
Export market intelligence dissemination involves the dispersal of information across all
levels of the firm. In principle, information collection is conducted either by a specialized
department within the firm or by an external market research firm located either in the home
country or in a foreign country. Disseminating export market intelligence related to
customers and competitors within the firm enables the development of an information-
sharing platform between employees and top managers. This in turn enhances the creation
of greater intelligence through the sharing of collaborative experience across business units,
departments and individuals. In addition, quick and open access to export market
intelligence leads to improved strategic insights (Auh and Menguc, 2005). On the other hand,
lack of access to information within a firm may limit the effectiveness of strategic decision-
making and the development of new courses of action (Harmancioglu et al., 2010).
Both intelligence activities are found to help firms respond in an effective way to
customers’ current and future needs, and to identify and adapt to foreign market trends
more quickly (Chung, 2012; Özturan et al., 2014; Sorensen, 2009). Responsiveness to foreign
market needs, in the form of a customer-focused sales strategy implementation, is of great
importance to firms aiming to enhance their performance. Hence, both export intelligence
activities – information generation and dissemination – are important antecedents of export
sales strategy, as they are expected to facilitate certain sales strategy tasks such as effective
segmentation of foreign customers, identification and targeting of the most profitable ones,
development of successful relationships and effective allocation of resources across foreign
customers of different value. Therefore:

H1. Export market intelligence generation is positively related to (a) export customer
segmentation, (b) export customer prioritization and targeting and (c) export
relationship objectives and selling models.
H2. Export market intelligence dissemination is positively related to (a) export customer
segmentation, (b) export customer prioritization and targeting and (c) export
relationship objectives and selling models.
EJM 2.4 Export sales strategy and export performance
53,10 The export marketing literature posits that to enhance export performance firms should
concentrate their efforts on effectively satisfying the needs and preferences of foreign
distributors and end-user customers (Cavusgil and Zou, 1994). Given the central role of
customer’s satisfaction for the survival and development of any contemporary organization,
the urge to elevate sales strategy to a more strategic component with effects on firm’s
2088 performance is demanding (Albers et al., 2010; Ingram et al., 2002; Vorhies and Morgan,
2005; Zoltners et al., 2009). Cavusglil and Cavusgil (2012) stress out the importance of
creating large segments of homogenous customers, identifying their common needs and
seeking of optimal ways to serve them. Additionally, results from a meta-analysis by
Leonidou et al. (2002) clearly suggest that the firm’s strategy of segmenting the foreign
market and concentration targeting relates positively to export performance, particularly in
terms of export sales growth, intensity and profit level. Recent empirical evidence also
confirms the existence of a direct effect of market segmentation and targeting on customer
satisfaction and strategic export performance (Diamantopoulos et al., 2014). Prioritization of
foreign customers assists export managers in performing activities such as handling
complaints of foreign customers or fulfilling their needs and requirements more efficiently.
Furthermore, prioritization facilitates a firm to successfully allocate its resources across
distinct customer groups and to enhance its performance (Homburg et al., 2008).
Setting relationship objectives and developing tailored selling models enhance customer
loyalty and satisfaction and allow for a long-term relationship with both distributors and
end-users. When a strong relationship exists with foreign customers, firms can attain a high
level of customer awareness and an increased level of before- and after-sales service (Zou
et al., 2003). In cases where strong bonds exist between the exporting firm and foreign
customers or distributors, trust and commitment in the export channel are enhanced and
possible opportunistic behaviors are reduced (Morgan and Hunt, 1994). Furthermore, in-
depth knowledge of signals of trust, opportunism and distributor loyalty result in greater
confidence regarding the future of the relationship, allowing early problem identification
and assisting in activating corrective actions, leading to higher levels of relationship quality
(Mehta et al., 2006) which in turn contribute toward enhanced export market performance.
Thus:

H3. Export customer segmentation is positively related to export market performance.

H4. Export customer prioritization and targeting is positively related to export market
performance.
H5. Export relationship objectives and selling models are positively related to export
market performance.

3. Research method
3.1 Sample and data collection procedure
This study generates data by means of an online survey. The sampling frame consisted of
direct manufacturing exporters operating in Greece. The national export promotion
organization provided a list of 1000 firms, which were randomly selected from their
database, covering multiple industries. The principal investigator contacted each firm by
phone to assess its eligibility for inclusion in the study, identify an appropriate key
informant (i.e. a person who is highly knowledgeable and can provide accurate and reliable
information about all aspects of the firm’s exporting activities), ask for their cooperation and
support and verify contact details. To be eligible for inclusion in our survey, a firm should Drivers of
have been active in direct exporting activities for at least five years and employed less than performance in
250 full-time employees. Of the 1,000 firms that were initially approached, 216 firms had to
be eliminated from the study sample, either because they did not meet the eligibility criteria
foreign
or because they refused to participate, for various reasons. An e-mail message was sent to markets
the remaining 784 firms that qualified for the survey, addressed to an appropriate key
informant, including a cover letter and a URL link that directed potential respondents to the
site that hosted the questionnaire. A cover letter explained the purpose and importance of
2089
the study, assured complete confidentiality of responses, emphasized the crucial need of
obtaining responses from all firms included in the sample and offered a copy of the study’s
findings. A professional website designer developed the site, ensuring that it was visually
appealing, user-friendly and easy for respondents to answer each question. The researchers
instructed respondents to complete the questionnaire with respect to a specific export
venture (of which they had good knowledge), defined as the exporting of a specific product
or product line to a specific export market (Cavusgil and Zou, 1994; Morgan et al., 2004).
Recent evidence that underlines the risks of a potential inconsistency in the level of theory
and the level of data when investigating determinants of export performance (Oliveira et al.,
2012), encouraged the adoption of this measurement approach. By focusing on the export
venture as the unit of analysis, the study avoids possible confounds owing to the
employment of different export marketing and sales strategies across different export
product-markets, as well as variation in performance outcomes.
The data collection process resulted in168 usable questionnaires, for a response rate of
21.4 per cent. To test for nonresponse bias, the study compared a random sample of 50 non-
respondents with respondents in terms of the number of full-time employees, the number of
employees involved in exporting and the export ratio. The results of this test indicated no
significant differences between the two groups, suggesting that nonresponse bias was not
an issue of concern in this research. Responding firms employ on average 113 employees,
have been involved in exporting for 16 years, export to 13 countries and sell their products to
42 foreign customers. In terms of the main product type, 57.4 per cent of respondents are
manufacturers of industrial products and 42.6 per cent are manufacturers of consumer
products. Furthermore, 78 per cent of firms have an export department fully devoted to
export operations.
The study followed Huber and Power’s (1985) guidelines with respect to collecting high-
quality data from key informants. The key informant in this study is the head of exporting
activities (hereafter referred to as export executive). These executives were selected because
they are responsible for developing export sales strategies, as well as for guiding, directing
and supervising the activities of export sales personnel who implement these strategies at
the foreign distributor/customer level. Therefore, they should be knowledgeable about the
organizational culture and the level of market orientation pursued by their firms, the export-
related capabilities possessed and the export performance. A demographic analysis of the
key informants reveals that the response sample included 116 men (mean age = 41) and 52
women (mean age = 37). In terms of job title, the majority of respondents held the position of
international/export manager (35.7 per cent), followed by CEO (23.8 per cent), marketing
manager/director (12.5 per cent) and sales manager/director (7.7 per cent). To further reduce
the possibility of potential bias attributed to the key informant, the last section of our
questionnaire included four statements that assessed respondents’:
(1) knowledge regarding the exporting activities of the firm;
(2) involvement in the exporting activities of the firm;
EJM (3) responsibility for the exporting activities of the firm; and
53,10 (4) confidence in answering the questions of the survey instrument.

The average aggregate score for these statements was 6.08 (on a seven-point scale anchored
by “Low” and “High”), indicating that respondents were highly qualified to provide accurate
information on the issues addressed in the study questionnaire.
2090
3.2 Measures
Measurement of the study constructs involved the employment of preexisting scales,
which were identified after a thorough review of the pertinent literature (Table I). Some
of the constructs examined were empirically assessed in a domestic sales/marketing
context, and therefore, minor wording adaptations helped to improve their compatibility
with the exporting context. The operationalization of the export sales strategy construct
is based on the work of Panagopoulos and Avlonitis (2010). These authors developed a
four-dimensional scale for measuring sales strategy comprising customer segmentation,
customer prioritization and targeting, relationships objectives and selling models and
use of multiple sales channels. However, as the present study focuses on direct exporters
that employ their own export salesforce to approach customers and perform personal
selling activities in export markets, the multiple sales channels dimension was
excluded.
The study measures export market intelligence generation and export market
intelligence dissemination using the scales developed by Jaworski and Kohli (1993) and their
adaptation for use in the export marketing context (Cadogan et al., 2001). The measure of
export market performance employed relevant items from Morgan et al. (2004, 2012). The
study also controls for the effects of two environmental and three firm-specific variables on
export market performance, to account for some of the unobserved heterogeneity in the data.
Competitive intensity is measured using the scale developed by Jaworski and Kohli (1993).
The measure of psychic distance is adopted from Sousa et al. (2010). For the measures of
firm export experience and firm size, the study uses the natural logarithm of the number of
years the firm engaged in exporting activities and the number of full-time employees,
respectively. Finally, the study measures the actual number of foreign countries in which the
firm operates.
The principal investigator conducted a series of personal interviews with export
executives to assess the appropriateness of the instructions and data collection procedures
before administering the questionnaire to the study sample, and to assess the relevance and
appropriateness of measurement scales. Export executives also assisted in rewording and/or
rephrasing certain items to make them suitable for the exporting context. Subsequently, the
questionnaire was administered to four academic experts in the areas of exporting and sales
management, who evaluated its face validity. The final version of the questionnaire was
extensively pre-tested with 20 export executives and no specific problems appeared with
respect to the measures, the clarity of the questions or the length of the questionnaire.

3.3 Common method bias

The present study collects data from a single key informant, which creates the potentials for
common method bias. To control for this issue, the study employs both ex ante and ex post
procedures (Chang et al., 2010). The design and execution of the survey followed several ex
ante procedures recommended in the literature (Podsakoff et al., 2003) to mitigate this
problem. These included:
 Drivers of
Standardized
Constructs and measurement items loadingsa
performance in
foreign
Export market intelligence generation (a = 0.89; CR = 0.89; AVE = 0.67) markets
(seven-point scale, anchored by “Strongly Disagree” and “Strongly Agree”)
In our company, we generate a lot of information concerning trends (e.g. regulations,
technological developments, political, economic) in our export ventures’ markets 0.83b
We constantly monitor our level of commitment and orientation to serving foreign customer 2091
needs 0.81 (11.21)
We periodically review the likely effect of changes in our export environment (e.g. regulation,
technology) 0.75 (10.08)
We generate a lot of information in order to understand the forces which influence our foreign
customers’ needs and preferences 0.88 (12.36)
Export market intelligence dissemination (a = 0.94; CR = 0.94; AVE = 0.76)
(seven-point scale, anchored by “Strongly Disagree” and “Strongly Agree”)
Too much information concerning our export competitors is discarded before it reaches
decision makers (R) 0.78b
Information which can influence the way we serve our foreign customers takes forever to
reach export personnel (R) 0.86 (11.89)
Important information about our foreign customers is often “lost in the system” (R) 0.89 (12.43)
Important information about our export competitors’ activities often reaches relevant
personnel too late to be of any use (R) 0.94 (13.43)
Important information concerning export market trends (regulation, technology) is often
discarded as it makes its way along the communication chain (R) 0.90 (12.76)
Export customer segmentation (a = 0.86; CR = 0.86; AVE = 0.50)
(seven-point scale, anchored by “Not at All” and “To a Great Extent”)
We identify specific foreign customer groups based on the expected lifetime value/
profitability of each customer for our company 0.65b
We identify specific foreign customer groups based on their demographic characteristics (e.g.
size, location, industry) 0.61 (6.48)
We identify specific foreign customer groups based on their buying behavior 0.81 (8.12)
We identify specific foreign customer groups based on the customers’ uses/applications of
our products/product lines 0.71 (7.39)
We identify specific foreign customer groups based on the benefits that they expect from
buying our products/product lines 0.70 (7.33)
We identify specific foreign customer groups based on the value that they expect to receive
from buying our products/product lines 0.76 (7.75)
Export customer prioritization and targeting (a = 0.72; CR = 0.73; AVE = 0.58)
(seven-point scale, anchored by “Not at All” and “To a Great Extent”)
We target our export selling efforts to different foreign customers 0.67b
We develop specific export selling strategies for each targeted foreign customer 0.84 (8.86)
Export relationship objectives and selling models (a = 0.84; CR = 0.84; AVE = 0.63)
(seven-point scale, anchored by “Not at All” and “To a Great Extent”)
We set different relationship objectives for different foreign customers 0.78b
We employ different selling models for selling to different foreign customers 0.85 (10.47) Table I.
When we set relationship objectives and develop selling models for a foreign customer, we Measurement scales,
consider the customer’s preferences 0.76 (9.33) CFA results and
(continued) reliabilities
EJM
53,10 Standardized
Constructs and measurement items loadingsa

Export market performance (a = 0.93; CR = 0.93; AVE = 0.77)

(seven-point scale, anchored by “Much Worse” and “Much Better” than major competitor (s))
Export sales volume 0.85b
2092 Export sales growth 0.89 (14.56)
Export market share 0.88 (14.09)
Export market share growth 0.90 (14.71)
Export market competitiveness (a = 0.84; CR = 0.85; AVE = 0.58)
(seven-point scale, anchored by “Strongly Disagree” and “Strongly Agree”)
Competition in the export venture market is cutthroat 0.86b
There are many “promotion wars” in the export venture market 0.90 (12.20)
Anything that one competitor can offer, others can match readily 0.65 (8.55)
Price competition is a hallmark in the export venture market 0.61 (7.88)
Psychic Distance (a = 0.88; CR = 0.88; AVE = 0.52)
(seven-point scale, anchored by “Very Similar” and “Very Different”)
Lifestyles 0.88b
Consumer preferences 0.73 (10.45)
Climatic conditions 0.72 (10.28)
Cultural values, beliefs, attitudes, and traditions 0.86 (13.51)
Language 0.64 (8.77)
Level of literacy and education 0.60 (8.00)
Purchasing power of customers 0.59 (7.74)
Table I. Notes: at-values are in parentheses; bFixed item

a systematic measure development procedure to ensure clarity of the scale items;

counterbalancing the order of appearance of various measures on respondents’
screen to neutralize carryover effects; and

ensuring anonymity and confidentiality of responses and emphasizing that there
were no right or wrong answers.

With regards to the ex post tests, first, Harman’s one-factor test (Podsakoff and Organ, 1986)
involves the estimation of principal component analysis of all latent constructs examined in
this study. The unrotated solution results in eight factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0,
accounting for 73.15 per cent of the variance. No general factor emerges, whereas the first factor
explains only 25.57 per cent of the variance. Second, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
approach to Harman’s one-factor test (Mossholder et al., 1995) estimates a CFA model in which
all items measuring the eight latent constructs included in the research model are restricted to
load on a single factor. Results obtained from this analysis indicate a poor model fit: [ x 2(594) =
3849.89, p < 0.00; CFI = 0.54, NNFI = 0.52, RMSEA = 0.18]. Although Harman’s single-factor
test has several limitations, these findings suggest that common method bias alone is not likely
to explain the observed relationships among the study constructs.

4. Analysis and results

4.1 Measurement model evaluation
Appropriate scale purification procedures were employed to assess the validity and reliability
of measurement scales. Initially, exploratory factor analysis and item-to-total correlations result
in the elimination of certain poorly performing items that exhibit low factor loadings or item-to- Drivers of
total correlations, or load heavily on more than one factors. The retained items are subjected to performance in
CFA to assess construct convergent and discriminant validity and reliability. Each item loads
foreign
only on its a priori specified factor. Furthermore, all factors are allowed to correlate freely
(Gerbing and Anderson, 1988). Fit statistics indicate a close fit to the data [ x 2(566) = 1021.51, markets
p < 0.00; x 2/df = 1.80; CFI = 0.94, NNFI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.068).
All factor loadings are large and significant, providing evidence of convergent validity
2093
(Table I). Discriminant validity is established using the Fornell and Larcker (1981) test; for
all possible pairs of constructs included in the study, the shared variance (i.e. the squared
intercorrelation) is lower than the average variance extracted for the individual constructs.
Finally, all constructs have alpha values and composite reliabilities scores that exceed 0.7.
Moreover, the average variance extracted for all constructs is equal to or greater than 0.5,
satisfying the recommended thresholds (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Thus, all measurement
scales possess good levels of reliability. Table II presents descriptive statistics and
intercorrelations among the study constructs.

4.2 Structural model estimation

The estimation of the structural model in Figure 1 results in a satisfactory fit [ x 2(654) =
1412.69, p < 0.01; x 2/df = 2.16; CFI = 0.90, NNFI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.082). Standardized
coefficients and corresponding t-values reported in Table III provide support for all research
hypotheses.
In particular, results indicate that export market intelligence generation has a positive
influence on export customer segmentation (H1a: b = 0.50, t = 5.29), export customer
prioritization and targeting (H1b: b = 0.58, t = 5.42) and export relationship objectives and
selling models (H1c: b = 0.49, t = 5.38). Similarly, export market intelligence dissemination
has a positive influence on export customer segmentation (H2a: b = 0.35, t = 4.13), export

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1. Export market intelligence

generation –
2. Export market intelligence
dissemination 0.27 –
3. Export customer segmentation 0.40 0.30 –
4. Export customer prioritization and
targeting 0.40 0.31 0.67 –
5. Export relationship objectives and
selling models 0.37 0.28 0.53 0.66 –
6. Export market performance 0.37 0.29 0.48 0.46 0.45 –
7. Export market competitiveness 0.15 0.07 0.16 0.15 0.20 0.02 –
8. Psychic distance 0.15 0.03 0.13 0.20 0.01 0.13 0.25 –
9. Firm export experiencea 0.17 0.03 0.33 0.15 0.20 0.33 0.15 0.21 –
10. Firm size (number of full time
employees)a 0.21 0.15 0.37 0.23 0.34 0.43 0.14 0.06 0.67 –
11. Number of export countries 0.19 0.15 0.25 0.28 0.35 0.43 0.05 0.04 0.41 0.47 –
Mean 4.72 4.70 4.60 4.91 4.64 4.39 4.97 4.95 2.52 4.00 13.51 Table II.
Standard deviation 1.35 1.58 1.19 1.38 1.45 1.38 1.39 1.30 0.80 1.70 14.46
Descriptive statistics
Notes: aFor these variables the natural logarithm was used; correlations equal to or greater than 0.15 are and correlation
significant at the 0.05 level; correlations equal to or greater than 0.20 are significant at the 0.01 level matrix
EJM Standardized Hypothesis
53,10 Hypothesized paths coefficient t-value test

H1(a) Export market intelligence generation ! Export customer

segmentation 0.50 5.29** Supported
H1(b) Export market intelligence generation ! Export customer
prioritization and targeting 0.58 5.42** Supported
2094 H1(c) Export market intelligence generation ! Export relationship
objectives and selling models 0.49 5.38** Supported
H2(a) Export market intelligence dissemination ! Export customer
segmentation 0.35 4.13** Supported
H2(b) Export market intelligence dissemination ! Export customer
prioritization and targeting 0.37 3.99** Supported
H2(c ) Export market intelligence dissemination ! Export
relationship objectives and selling models 0.31 3.71** Supported
H3 Export customer segmentation ! Export market performance 0.19 2.06* Supported
H4 Export customer prioritization and targeting ! Export market
performance 0.24 2.28* Supported
H5 Export relationship objectives and selling models ! Export
market performance 0.18 2.00* Supported
Control variables
Competitive intensity 0.19 2.48*
Psychic distance 0.07 0.97
Table III. Firm export experience 0.04 0.56
Standardized path Firm size 0.21 3.00**
coefficients and Number of export countries 0.20 2.80**
t-values for the Notes: Fit statistics for structural model: x 2654 = 1412.69, p < 0.01; x 2/df = 2.16; CFI = 0.90; NNFI = 0.90;
structural model RMSEA = 0.082; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05

customer prioritization and targeting (H2b: b = 0.37, t = 3.99) and export relationship
objectives and selling models (H2c: b = 0.31, t = 3.71). In turn, export customer
segmentation (H3: b = 0.19, t = 2.06), export customer prioritization and targeting (H4: b =
0.24, t = 2.28) and export relationship objectives and selling models (H5: b = 0.18, t = 2.00)
have a significant positive effect on export market performance. Finally, our results also
indicate that competitive intensity has a significant negative impact on export market
performance ( b = 0.19, t = 2.48). On the other hand, firm size ( b = 0.21, t = 3.00) and
number of export countries ( b = 0.20, t = 2.80) have a significant positive influence on
export market performance. The levels of explained variances for the dependent variables
are as follows: 38 per cent for export customer segmentation; 47 per cent for export customer
prioritization and targeting; 33 per cent for export relationship objectives and selling
models; and 37 per cent for export performance.

4.3 Estimation of a partial mediation model

The structural model depicted in Figure 1, as represented by the solid lines, is a full
mediation model that captures only the indirect effects of export market intelligence
generation and export market intelligence dissemination on export performance, through
the mediating effects of the three dimensions of export sales strategy. To investigate
whether the two export market intelligence activities have also a direct effect on export
performance, the study compares a full mediation with a partial mediation model[2]. The
dashed lines in Figure 1 represent the direct influence of export market intelligence
generation and export marketing intelligence dissemination on export performance. Results Drivers of
indicate that the partial mediation model has a significantly better fit to the data (D x 2 = performance in
6.30, Ddf = 2, p < 0.05). This is a reasonable result considering that the partial mediation
model includes two additional parameters. Moreover, the correlations matrix presented in
foreign
Table II indicates that both export market intelligence generation and export market markets
intelligence dissemination have significant bivariate correlations with export performance.
However, the results obtained from the estimation of the structural model indicate that the
direct impact of these two constructs on export performance is not statistically significant 2095
(export market intelligence generation ! export market performance: b = 0.17, t = 1.30;
export market intelligence dissemination ! export market performance: b = 0.08, t = 1.07).
Furthermore, the explained variance of export market performance increases only slightly,
from 37 per cent to 38.4 per cent. These results lead to the conclusion that the proposed full-
mediation model reflects more accurately the underlying relationships between export
market intelligence activities, export sales strategy and export market performance.

5. Discussion and implications

The success of exporting firms depends greatly on their ability to effectively manage every
aspect of their operating relationship with foreign distributors and end-user customers (Obadia
et al., 2015). Nonetheless, previous research has devoted limited research on the development of
effective export sales strategies, which represent the key strategic tool for implementing a
firm’s export marketing strategy at the individual account level. Furthermore, while numerous
studies have attempted to identify the main antecedents of export performance, they have
largely ignored the role of export sales strategy. The present study contributes toward filling
this notable gap in the literature by examining the role of export market intelligence activities
in forming sales strategies that drive superior performance outcomes in foreign markets. The
study findings provide clear evidence that export sales strategy, when properly developed and
implemented, can contribute greatly to export success. Some important implications for theory
and managerial practice related to the effective management of long-term profitable
relationships with foreign customers, are outlined in the following.

5.1 Theoretical implications

The interface between marketing units and sales units remains a largely unresolved
issue in the mainstream marketing literature (Homburg and Jensen, 2007; Homburg
et al., 2008; Ernst et al., 2010). From a strategic perspective, however, a wide consensus
exists regarding the nature of the relationship between marketing strategy and sales
strategy. In particular, whereas marketing strategy targets broader customer
segments, sales strategy focuses on small groups of customers or even individual
accounts. Stated differently, sales strategy can be viewed as the implementation of a
firm’s marketing strategy at the individual customer level. Drawing on recent
developments in the generally neglected area of sales strategy, the present study
proposes that ESS provides the most effective strategic framework for identifying and
pursuing opportunities in foreign markets. In particular, ESS corresponds to actual
business practice as it embraces the major tasks performed by exporting firms when
planning their interactions with foreign customers.
Research studies which aim to identify the key drivers of export performance must
acknowledge that SME exporters in particular, use personal selling as a major promotional
tool for expanding their sales in export markets and managing relationships with foreign
customers. Thus, while export strategy and the elements of the export marketing mix are
important determinants of export performance, any empirical investigation will be
EJM incomplete if it does not assess how effectively the export strategy is implemented at the
53,10 individual customer level. Study findings indicate that all three dimensions of the export
sales strategy examined have a significant positive influence on export performance. These
dimensions (i.e. export customer segmentation, export customer prioritization and targeting
and export relationship objectives and selling models) reflect an evolutionary process for
initiating, growing and expanding relationships with foreign customers which is a key
2096 success driver for SME exporters. Thus, scholars in the field should devote more research
attention on export sales strategies, which, by definition, encourage the adoption of an
interaction orientation that “reflects a firm’s ability to interact with its individual customers
and to take advantage of information obtained from them through successive interactions to
achieve profitable customer relationships” (Ramani and Kumar, 2008, p. 27).
The findings of the current study also have important implications for the role of
export market orientation. As originally conceptualized by Kohli and Jaworski (1990),
market orientation behavior involves activities focusing on the generation and
dissemination of and responsiveness to market intelligence. Based on this
conceptualization, the vast majority of researchers have focused on investigating the
integrated effect of a firm’s overall export market orientation on its export performance
(Boso et al., 2012; Boso et al., 2013; Cadogan et al., 2002; Murray et al., 2011). However,
recent studies have emphasized the importance of treating intelligence activities
(generation and dissemination) and responsiveness activities (responding by taking
appropriate actions), as two distinct components of market orientation (Chung, 2012;
Özturan et al., 2014). This study contributes to this stream of research by addressing
explicit calls to treat strategic orientations in a disaggregated manner (Cadogan, 2012)
and asserts that intelligence activities have a separate influence on strategic decision-
making, and can therefore contribute differently toward successful exporting
operations in foreign markets. Export market intelligence generation is required to
provide comprehensive, relevant, accurate and timely information to serve as input in
decision-making. However, the mere gathering of information does not ensure its
effective utilization by relevant decision-makers; appropriate procedures must be in
place to facilitate information dissemination across different levels and departments
within the exporting firm. For this reason, it is important to consider export market
intelligence generation and dissemination as distinct constructs. While quality
information is a valuable resource for every organization, it is extremely important for
exporting firms that operate in diverse and unfamiliar business environments, and need
this input to customize their offerings and selling approaches to the idiosyncrasies of
individual country-markets and foreign customers. Nevertheless, with no proper
responsive strategic action from the company’s side, information collection and
dissemination become futile (Racela et al., 2007).
The findings of this study are also in line with previous research which suggests that
the impact of intelligence activities on performance can only become evident with proper
implementation and action (Cadogan et al., 2002; Kwon and Hu, 2000). Specifically, results
indicate that market intelligence activities enable exporting firms to effectively develop and
implement export sales strategies. Customer segmentation, customer prioritization and
targeting, specification of relationship objectives and adoption of appropriate selling models
require a deep knowledge and thorough understanding of foreign customers’ needs and
purchasing behavior. Therefore, exporting firms that excel in acquiring and processing
information about foreign markets, customers and competitors become accustomed in using
the input obtained from market intelligence to develop successful strategies and translate
them into action, as well as for initiating, developing and maintaining profitable Drivers of
relationships with foreign customers. performance in
foreign
5.2 Managerial implications
Study findings indicate that firms can enhance their export performance by developing and
markets
implementing effective export sales strategies that translate the firm’s export marketing
strategy to specific activities and tasks directed to individual foreign customers. An
effective export sales strategy enables export sales managers to exploit substantial
2097
differences in the characteristics, purchasing behavior and attractiveness of foreign
customers, and adopt an appropriate relationship strategy and selling model that maximizes
the firm’s value. Results also reveal that export intelligence activities – generation and
dissemination of market information – are significant drivers of the development of export
sales strategies. Therefore, upper management in exporting organizations is encouraged to
establish formal procedures for the generation and dissemination of market intelligence
within the export organization, thus ensuring the creation of a knowledge basis with open
access for both the exporting firm and its foreign partners. Upper management in exporting
organizations ought to understand that the acquisition and circulation of export market-
oriented information contribute significantly to customized export sales approaches in the
foreign markets. In particular, relevant direction, guidance and support to export sales
personnel should be provided by setting appropriate goals and objectives, determining
which information is highly valued and rewarded by the organization, delivering training
sessions, assigning clear responsibilities, providing cognitive feedback, encouraging team
work and promoting interfunctional coordination. Even though formal procedures for the
generation and dissemination of market intelligence within the export organization can take
time to establish, upper management should devote time in the design of such mechanisms
to facilitate and enhance customized export sales approaches. In this respect, study findings
might sensitize marketing managers to employ proper leadership skills to facilitate this
process and to assist export managers in delivering customized sales-related service to
foreign customers.

6. Limitations and future research directions

Findings of this study must be interpreted in light of certain limitations. First, this study
investigates only two antecedents of export sales strategy, namely, export market
intelligence generation and export market intelligence dissemination. Future studies should
examine the role of other potential antecedents, including environmental, organizational or
strategic factors.
Second, a notable limitation concerns the measurement scales employed for measuring
export market intelligence generation and export market intelligence dissemination. In
particular, for parsimony reasons mostly, a reduced version of these scales developed by
Cadogan et al. (2001) was employed, which includes only a limited number of items referring
specifically to customers’ needs and preferences. In organizational reality, marketing
executives use detailed data on buying behavior to better understand how and why
products are purchased within specific markets, as well as to segment and target markets
based on the benefits that the buyers seek in purchasing products. Therefore, a more
elaborated assessment of the extent to which exporting firms analyze the buying behavior of
foreign customers would be more enlightening. Third, given the direct effects of export sales
strategy dimensions on export performance, future research should focus on developing a
solid theoretical platform for investigating other factors which might be conducive to more
effective use of segmentation, prioritization and targeting and relationship objectives and
EJM selling models. For instance, a more holistic approach could consider the broader export
53,10 marketing strategy of the firm, and particularly the elements of the export marketing mix:
export product, price, promotion and distribution. In this respect, future research could
examine the influence of export marketing strategy on the development of effective export
sales strategies and attempt to identify differences in orientation between marketing and
sales in the export context. Furthermore, the present study does not specifically examine
2098 how the export sales strategy translates into specific personal selling activities that should
be carried out by export sales personnel during their communications and interactions with
export customers. Thus, future research should devote great attention on this important
issue.
Fourth, a closer investigation of the role of alternative export distribution channel
provides another fruitful direction for further research. For instance, whether a firm enters
foreign markets through collaborations with foreign distributors or by selling directly to
end-user customers, may have a significant influence on other strategic decisions like the
development of the export marketing mix, as well as on more tactical, implementation
decisions. Similarly, future studies should investigate potential differences between B2B and
B2C exporters in terms of important strategic decisions like export market segmentation
and targeting when alternative export distribution channels are employed. Fifth, focusing
on SME exporters originating from a single country is a major limitation of this study that
might hinder the generalizability of the findings. Future studies should try to replicate
findings within different contexts to advance theory building around this topic. Sixth, the
use of a cross-sectional research design inhibits the extraction of causality conclusions
regarding the relationships of the constructs in our research model. Future studies following
a longitudinal design could provide a more dynamic perspective and will further contribute
to this stream of research. Finally, the cross-sectional research design, along with the fact
that data were collected from a single respondent in each participating firm, creates
potentials for common method bias. Even though appropriate controls were applied for
common method variance through both ex ante and ex post procedures, this possibility can
never be completely eliminated.

Notes
1. We thank an anonymous EJM reviewer for assisting us in clarifying the export market
segmentation process, and explain its relevance to the export sales strategy.
2. We thank the Associate Editor for this suggestion.

References
Albers, S., Mantrala, M.K. and Sridhar, S. (2010), “Personal selling elasticities: a meta-analysis”, Journal
of Marketing Research, Vol. 47 No. 5, pp. 840-853.
Auh, S. and Menguc, B. (2005), “The influence of top management team functional diversity on
strategic orientations: the moderating role of environmental turbulence and inter-functional
coordination”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 333-350.
Azar, G. and Ciabuschi, F. (2017), “Organizational innovation, technological innovation, and export
performance: the effects of innovation radicalness and extensiveness”, International Business
Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 324-336.
Baker, W.E. and Sinkula, J.M. (2005), “Environmental marketing strategy and firm performance: effects
on new product performance and market share”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 461-475.
Bello, D.C. and Lohtia, R. (1995), “Export channel design: the use of foreign distributors and agents”, Drivers of
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 83-93.
performance in
Boso, N., Annan, J., Adeleye, I., Iheanachor, N. and Narteh, B. (2018), “Examining the paths from export
strategic orientations to export performance: the mediating role of export resource
foreign
transformation capability”, Thunderbird International Business Review, Vol. 60 No. 2, markets
pp. 207-230.
Boso, N., Cadogan, J.W. and Story, V.M. (2012), “Complementary effect of entrepreneurial and market
orientations on export new product success under differing levels of competitive intensity and 2099
financial capital”, International Business Review, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 667-681.
Boso, N., Story, V.M. and Cadogan, J.W. (2013), “Entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation,
network ties, and performance: study of entrepreneurial firms in a developing economy”, Journal
of Business Venturing, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 708-727.
Cadogan, J.W. (2012), “International marketing, strategic orientations and business success: reflections
on the path ahead”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 340-348.
Cadogan, J.W., Boso, N., Story, V.M. and Adeola, O. (2016), “Export strategic orientation-performance
relationship: examination of its enabling and disenabling boundary conditions”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 11, pp. 5046-5052.
Cadogan, J.W., Diamantopoulos, A. and De Mortanges, C. (1999), “A measure of export market
orientation: scale development and cross-cultural validation”, Journal of International Business
Studies, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 689-707.
Cadogan, J.W., Diamantopoulos, A. and Siguaw, J.A. (2002), “Export market-oriented activities: their
antecedents and performance consequences”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 33
No. 3, pp. 615-626.
Cadogan, J.W., Kuivalainen, O. and Sundqvist, S. (2009), “Export market-oriented behavior and export
performance: quadratic and moderating effects under differing degrees of market dynamism
and internationalization”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 71-89.
Cadogan, J.W., Paul, N., Salminen, R.T., Puumalainen, K. and Sundqvist, S. (2001), “Key antecedents to
export market-oriented behaviors: a cross-national empirical examination”, International Journal
of Research in Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 261-282.
Cavusglil, T.S. and Cavusgil, E. (2012), “Reflections on international marketing: destructive
regeneration and multinational firms”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 40
No. 2, pp. 202-217.
Cavusgil, T.S. and Zou, S. (1994), “Marketing strategy-performance relationship: an investigation of the
empirical link in export market ventures”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 1-21.
Chang, S.J., Van Witteloostuijn, A. and Eden, L. (2010), “From the editors: common method variance in
international business research”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 41 No. 2,
pp. 178-184.
Chen, J., Sousa, C.M. and He, X. (2016), “The determinants of export performance: a review of the
literature 2006-2014”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 626-670.
Chung, H.F. (2012), “Export market orientation, managerial ties, and performance”, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 403-423.
Cooper, R.G. and Kleinschmidt, E.J. (1985), “The impact of export strategy on export sales
performance”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 37-55.
Cron, W.L., Baldauf, A., Leigh, T.W. and Grossenbacher, S. (2014), “The strategic role of the sales force:
perceptions of senior sales executives”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 42
No. 5, pp. 1-19.
Day, G.S. (1994), “The capabilities of market-driven organizations”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4,
pp. 37-52.
EJM Day, G.S. (2000), “Capabilities for forging customer relationships”, Working Paper No. 118, Marketing
Science Institute, Cambridge, Mass.
53,10
Day, G.S. (2011), “Closing the marketing capabilities gap”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 75 No. 4,
pp. 183-195.
Diamantopoulos, A., Ring, A., Schlegelmilch, B.B. and Doberer, E. (2014), “Drivers of export
segmentation effectiveness and their impact on export performance”, Journal of International
2100 Marketing, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 39-61.
Ernst, H., Hoyer, W.D. and Rübsaamen, C. (2010), “Sales, marketing, and research-and-development
cooperation across new product development stages: implications for success”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 74 No. 5, pp. 80-92.
Fernández-Mesa, A. and Alegre, J. (2015), “Entrepreneurial orientation and export intensity: examining
the impact of organizational learning and innovation”, International Business Review, Vol. 24
No. 1, pp. 148-156.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error: algebra and statistics”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 382-388.
Gerbing, D.W. and Anderson, J.C. (1988), “An updated paradigm for scale development incorporating
unidimensionality and its assessment”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 186-192.
Gnizy, I., Cadogan, J.W., Oliveira, J.S. and Nizam, A. (2017), “The empirical link between export
dispersion and export performance: a contingency-based approach”, International Business
Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 239-249.
Harmancioglu, N., Grinstein, A. and Goldman, A. (2010), “Innovation and performance outcomes of
market information collection efforts: the role of top management team involvement”,
International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 33-43.
He, X., Brouthers, K.D. and Filatotchev, I. (2018), “Market orientation and export performance: the
moderation of channel and institutional distance”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 35 No. 2,
pp. 258-279.
Homburg, C., Droll, M. and Totzek, D. (2008), “Customer prioritization: does it pay off, and how should
it be implements?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 72 No. 5, pp. 110-130.
Homburg, C. and Jensen, O. (2007), “The thought worlds of marketing and sales: which differences
make a difference?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 124-142.
Huber, G.P. and Power, D.J. (1985), “Retrospective reports of strategic-level managers: guidelines for
increasing their accuracy”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 171-180.
Hult, G.T.M., Ketchen, D.J. and Slater, S.F. (2005), “Market orientation and performance: an
integration of disparate approaches”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 26 No. 12,
pp. 1173-1181.
Hunt, S.D. and Morgan, R.M. (1995), “The comparative advantage theory of competition”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 59 No. 2, pp. 1-15.
Ingram, T.N., LaForge, R.W., Avila, R.A., Schwepker, C.H., Jr and Williams, M.R. (2012), Sales
Management: Analysis and Decision Making, M.E. Sharpe, New York, NY.
Ingram, T.N., LaForge, R.W. and Leigh, T.W. (2002), “Selling in the new millennium: a joint agenda”,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 31 No. 7, pp. 1-9.
Jaworski, B., Kohli, A.K. and Sahay, A. (2000), “Market-driven versus driving markets”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 45-54.
Jaworski, B.J. and Kohli, A.K. (1993), “Market orientation: antecedents and consequences”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 53-70.
Jin, B. and Cho, H.J. (2018), “Examining the role of international entrepreneurial orientation,
domestic market competition, and technological and marketing capabilities on SME’s
 export performance”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 5, Drivers of
pp. 585-598.
performance in
Johnson, J.L., Lee, R.P., Saini, A. and Grohmann, B. (2003), “Market-focused strategic flexibility:
conceptual advances and an integrative model”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
foreign
Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 74-89. markets
Katsikea, E., Theodosiou, M. and Morgan, R.E. (2007), “Managerial, organizational, and external
drivers of sales effectiveness in export market ventures”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 270-283. 2101
Katsikeas, C.S., Leonidou, L.C. and Morgan, N.A. (2000), “Firm-level export performance assessment:
review, evaluation, and development”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 28
No. 4, pp. 493-511.
Kayabasi, A. and Mtetwa, T. (2016), “Impact of marketing effectiveness and capabilities, and export
market orientation on export performance: evidence from Turkey”, European Business Review,
Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 532-559.
Ketchen, D.J., Hult, G.T.M. and Slater, S.F. (2007), “Toward greater understanding of market orientation
and the resource-based view”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 961-964.
Kim, J. and Hemmert, M. (2016), “What drives the export performance of small and medium-sized
subcontracting firms? A study of Korean manufacturers”, International Business Review, Vol. 25
No. 2, pp. 511-521.
Kohli, A.K. and Jaworski, B.J. (1990), “Market orientation: the construct, research propositions, and
managerial implications”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 1-18.
Kotler, P., Keller, K.L., Brady, M., Goodman, M. and Hanser, T. (2016), Marketing Management,
Pearson Education, ISBN, Harlow, 978-0-13-385646-0.
Kumar, V., Jones, E., Venkatesan, R. and Leone, R.P. (2011), “Is market orientation a source of
sustainable competitive advantage or simply the cost of competing?”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 75 No. 1, pp. 16-30.
Kwon, Y.C. and Hu, M.Y. (2000), “Market orientation among small Korean exporters”, International
Business Review, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 61-75.
Leonidou, L.C. and Katsikeas, C.S. (2010), “Integrative assessment of exporting research articles in
business journals during the period 1960-2007”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 63 No. 8,
pp. 879-887.
Leonidou, L.C., Katsikeas, C.S. and Samiee, S. (2002), “Marketing strategy determinants of export
performance: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 51-67.
Li, E.L., Zhou, L. and Wu, A. (2017), “The supply-side of environmental sustainability and export
performance: the role of knowledge integration and international buyer involvement”,
International Business Review, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 724-735.
Li, T. and Calantone, R.J. (1998), “The impact of market knowledge competence on new product
advantage: conceptualization and empirical examination”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 4,
pp. 13-29.
Mac, L. and Evangelista, F. (2016), “The relative impact of market orientation and entrepreneurship on
export performance: do we really know enough?”, Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 5,
pp. 266-281.
MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M. and Ahearne, M. (1998), “Some possible antecedents and
consequences of in-role and extra-role salesperson performance”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62
No. 3, pp. 87-98.
Makri, K., Theodosiou, M. and Katsikea, E. (2017), “An empirical investigation of the antecedents and
performance outcomes of export innovativeness”, International Business Review, Vol. 26 No. 4,
pp. 628-639.
EJM Mehta, R., Larsen, T., Rosenbloom, B. and Ganitsky, J. (2006), “The impact of cultural differences in US
business-to-business export marketing channel strategic alliances”, Industrial Marketing
53,10 Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 156-165.
Menguc, B. and Auh, S. (2006), “Creating a firm-level dynamic capability through capitalizing on
market orientation and innovativeness”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 34
No. 1, pp. 63-73.
Morgan, N.A., Kaleka, A. and Katsikeas, C.S. (2004), “Antecedents of export venture performance:
2102 a theoretical model and empirical assessment”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1,
pp. 90-108.
Morgan, N.A., Katsikeas, C.S. and Vorhies, D.W. (2012), “Export marketing strategy implementation,
export marketing capabilities, and export venture performance”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 271-289.
Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994), “The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 20-38.
Mossholder, K.W., Settoon, R.P., Harris, S.G. and Armenakis, A.A. (1995), “Measuring emotion in open-
ended survey responses: an application of textual data analysis”, Journal of Management,
Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 335-355.
Murray, J.Y., Gao, G.Y. and Kotabe, M. (2011), “Market orientation and performance of export ventures:
the process through marketing capabilities and competitive advantages”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 252-269.
Murray, J.Y., Gao, G.Y., Kotabe, M. and Zhou, N. (2007), “Assessing measurement invariance of export
market orientation: a study of Chinese and non-Chinese firms in China”, Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 41-62.
Navarro-García, A., Arenas-Gaitán, J., Rondán-Cataluña, F.J. and Rey-Moreno, M. (2016), “Global model
of export performance: moderator role of export department”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 69 No. 5, pp. 1880-1886.
Navarro-García, A., Calvo-Mora Schmidt, A. and Rey-Moreno, M. (2015), “Antecedents and
consequences of export entrepreneurship”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 68 No. 7,
pp. 1532-1538.
Nemkova, E., Souchon, A.L., Hughes, P. and Micevski, M. (2015), “Does improvisation help or hinder
planning in determining export success? Decision theory applied to exporting”, Journal of
International Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 41-65.
Ngo, V.D., Janssen, F., Leonidou, L.C. and Christodoulides, P. (2016), “Domestic institutional attributes
as drivers of export performance in an emerging and transition economy”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 69 No. 8, pp. 2911-2922.
Noble, C.H. and Mokwa, M.P. (1999), “Implementing marketing strategies: developing and testing a
managerial theory”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63 No. 4, pp. 57-73.
Obadia, C., Bello, D.C. and Gilliland, D. (2015), “Effect of exporter’s incentives on foreign distributor’s
role performance”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 46 No. 8, pp. 960-983.
Olabode, O.E., Adeola, O. and Assadinia, S. (2018), “The effect of export market-oriented culture on
export performance: evidence from a Sub-Saharan African economy”, International Marketing
Review, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 637-660.
Oliveira, J.S., Cadogan, J.W. and Souchon, A. (2012), “Level of analysis in export performance research”,
International Marketing Review, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 114-127.
Oura, M.M., Zilber, S.N. and Lopes, E.L. (2016), “Innovation capacity, international experience and
export performance of SMEs in Brazil”, International Business Review, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 921-932.
Özturan, P., Özsomer, A. and Pieters, R. (2014), “The role of market orientation in advertising spending
during economic collapse: the case of Turkey in 2001”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 51
No. 2, pp. 139-152.
Panagopoulos, N.G. and Avlonitis, G.J. (2010), “Performance implications of sales strategy: the Drivers of
moderating effects of leadership and environment”, International Journal of Research in
Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 46-57.
performance in
Panagopoulos, N.G., Lee, N., Pullins, E.B., Avlonitis, G.J., Brassier, P., Guenzi, P., Humenberger, A.,
foreign
Kwiatek, P., Loe, T.W., Oksanen-Ylikoski, E. and Peterson, R.M. (2011), “Internationalizing sales markets
research: current status, opportunities, and challenges”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales
Management, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 219-242.
Pham, T.S.H., Monkhouse, L.L. and Barnes, B.R. (2017), “The influence of relational capability and 2103
marketing capabilities on the export performance of emerging market firms”, International
Marketing Review, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 606-628.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544.
Racela, O.C., Chaikittisilpa, C. and Thoumrungroje, A. (2007), “Market orientation, international
business relationships and perceived export performance”, International Marketing Review,
Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 144-163.
Ramani, G. and Kumar, V. (2008), “Interaction orientation and firm performance”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 72 No. 1, pp. 27-45.
Rich, G.A. (1997), “The sales manager as a role model: effects on trust, job satisfaction, and performance
of salespeople”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 319-328.
Rose, G.M. and Shoham, A. (2002), “Export performance and market orientation: establishing an
empirical link”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp. 217-225.
Schrock, W.A., Zhao, Y., Richards, K.A., Hughes, D.E. and Amin, M.S. (2018), “On the nature of
international sales and sales management research: a social network–analytic
perspective”, Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 56-77.
Singh, J. (1998), “Striking a balance in boundary-spanning positions: an investigation of some
unconventional influences of role stressors and job characteristics on job outcomes of
salespeople”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 3, pp. 69-86.
Sorensen, E.H. (2009), “Why competitors matter for market orientation”, European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 43 Nos 5/6, pp. 735-761.
Sousa, C.M., Ruzo, E. and Losada, F. (2010), “The key role of managers’ values in exporting: Influence
on customer responsiveness and export performance”, Journal of International Marketing,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 1-19.
Terho, H., Eggert, A., Haas, A. and Ulaga, W. (2015), “How sales strategy translates into performance:
the role of salesperson customer orientation and value-based selling”, Industrial Marketing
Management, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 12-21.
Verbeke, W., Dietz, B. and Verwaal, E. (2011), “Drivers of sales performance: a contemporary Meta-
analysis. Have salespeople become knowledge brokers?”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 407-428.
Vorhies, D.W. and Morgan, N.A. (2005), “Benchmarking marketing capabilities for sustainable
competitive advantage”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 80-94.
Westjohn, S.A. and Magnusson, P. (2017), “Export performance: a focus on discretionary adaptation”,
Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 70-88.
Zhang, C., Cavusgil, S.T. and Roath, A.S. (2003), “Manufacturer governance of foreign distributor
relationships: do relational norms enhance competitiveness in the export market?”, Journal of
International Business Studies, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 550-566.
EJM Zhou, K.Z., Li, J.J., Zhou, N. and Su, C. (2008), “Market orientation, job satisfaction, product quality, and
firm performance: evidence from China”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 29 No. 9,
53,10 pp. 985-1000.
Zoltners, A.A., Sinha, P. and Lorimer, S.E. (2009), Building a Winning Sales Force: powerful Strategies
for Driving High Performance, AMACOM, New York, NY.
Zou, S., Fang, E. and Zhao, S. (2003), “The effect of export marketing capabilities on export
performance: an investigation of Chinese exporters”, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 11
2104 No. 4, pp. 32-55.
Zou, S. and Stan, S. (1998), “The determinants of export performance: a review of the empirical
literature between 1987 and 1997”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 15 No. 5,
pp. 333-356.
Appendix Drivers of
performance in
foreign
Antecedent variables markets
Study Empirical setting considered Key empirical findings

1. He et al. (2018) Chinese Market orientation (MO) Firms with stronger MO capabilities 2105
exporters Export channels can improve export performance by
Institutional differences using hierarchical channels and by
exporting to more institutionally
distant markets where MO provides
greater value
2. Olabode et al. Nigerian SME Export market-oriented Export market-oriented culture
(2018) exporters culture positively influences export
Export learning performance
capability Possession of an export market-
oriented culture results in the
development of high export learning
capabilities
Export learning capability mediates the
relationship between export market-
oriented culture and export
performance
Increases in export environment
turbulence weaken the positive effect of
export learning capability on export
performance
3. Boso et al. UK and Nigerian Export entrepreneurial Export resource transformational
(2018) SME exporters orientation (EO) capability partially mediates the
Export market individual effects of EO and MO on
orientation (MO) export performance
Export resource
transformational
capability
4. Jin and Cho Korean SMEs International International entrepreneurial
(2018) entrepreneurial orientation and domestic market
orientation competition have a positive influence
Domestic market on the development of technological
competition and marketing capabilities
Technological Technological and marketing
capabilities capabilities fully mediate the impact of
Marketing capabilities international entrepreneurial
orientation and export performance
5. Li, Zhou, and Chinese SME Market-oriented Knowledge integration mediates the
Wu (2017) exporters environmental impact of market-oriented
sustainability environmental sustainability on export
Knowledge integration performance
6. Azar and Swedish Organizational Organizational innovation enhances Table AI.
Ciabuschi (2017) exporters innovation export performance both directly and Review of recent
Technological innovation indirectly by sustaining technological studies on the
innovation antecedents of export
(continued) performance
EJM
53,10 Antecedent variables
Study Empirical setting considered Key empirical findings

7. Gnizy et al. UK exporters Cross-functional Export dispersion is beneficial for

(2017) dispersion of influence on export performance when: the export
export marketing customer environment is more
2106 activities turbulent and, simultaneously, the
export technological environment is
more stable and the firm has lower
levels of export information sharing
8. Makri, Greek exporting Export innovativeness Export innovativeness has a direct
Theodosiou and firms positive effect on export performance
Katsikea (2017) Export innovativeness is mediating the
relationship between a set of
organization, strategic and
environmental factors and export
performance
9. Pham, Vietnamese Marketing capabilities Relational, marketing intelligence,
Monkhouse, and exporting firms Relational capabilities export pricing, product development
Barnes (2017) and marketing communication
capabilities have a direct impact on
export performance.
The ability to develop relationships is
the most significant predictor of export
performance
10. Westjohn and US SME Discretionary marketing Discretionary marketing adaptation
Magnusson exporters adaptations improves export performance
(2017) Psychic distance, firm international
experience, and product positional
advantage moderate the effect of
discretionary marketing adaptation on
export performance
11. Mac and Chinese Market orientation Commitment to learning mediates the
Evangelista exporters International corporate relationship between market
(2016) entrepreneurship orientation and entrepreneurship
Commitment to learning Market orientation enhances export
satisfaction through entrepreneurship
Market orientation has a negative
impact on export profits
12. Cadogan et al. UK exporters Export market-oriented EOB has a J-shaped relationship with
(2016) behavior (MOB) export performance
Export entrepreneurial- MOB has an inverted U-shaped
oriented behavior (EOB) relationship with export performance
Coordination flexibility when export EOB takes on higher
values
The inverted U-shape relationship
between MOB and performance
becomes more negative when
coordination flexibility increases in
magnitude
The relationship between export EOB
and export performance is
strengthened when firms are
Table AI. (continued)
 Drivers of
Antecedent variables performance in
Study Empirical setting considered Key empirical findings foreign
moderately market-oriented and when markets
levels of coordination flexibility are
high
13. Ngo et al. Vietnamese Domestic institutional All four institutional attributes 2107
(2016) exporters attributes (specificity, positively influence export performance
stability, predictability, The influence of domestic institutional
enforceability) attributes on export performance is
stronger among exporters
characterized by larger size, more
experience, foreign market
concentration, and direct exporting
methods
14. Navarro- Spanish SME Export commitment Export commitment has a direct
García et al. exporters Marketing-mix positive effect on export performance
(2016) adaptation (both strategic and operational)
Marketing-mix adaptation has a direct
positive effect on strategic export
performance but not on operational
export performance
15. Kayabasi and Turkish Marketing capabilities Export market orientation has a
Mtetwa (2016) exporters Marketing effectiveness significant impact on marketing
Export market capabilities and marketing
orientation effectiveness
Marketing effectiveness has a
significant impact on export
performance
Marketing capabilities and export
market orientation have no direct
influence on export performance
16. Kim and Subcontracting Resources and Technological resources and
Hemmert (2016) SME South capabilities executives’ managerial capabilities are
Korean exporters Customer network positively related to export orientation
features and export intensity
There is a negative linear relationship
between the strength of subcontracting
ties and export performance, implying
that high dependence on individual
customers has a negative effect on
export performance
17. Oura et al. Brazilian Innovation capacity Both innovation capacity and
(2016) exporters International experience international experience have a
significant positive impact on export
performance
International experience has a greater
impact on export performance than
innovation capacity
(continued) Table AI.
EJM
53,10 Antecedent variables
Study Empirical setting considered Key empirical findings

18. Nemkova UK exporters Export planning Export planning is negatively related

et al. (2015) Export improvisation to export customer performance and
(spontaneity, creativity, positively related to export economic
2108 action orientation) performance
Export responsiveness There is a strong positive relationship
between action orientation and export
customer performance
The planning–economic performance
relationship is stronger and more
positive at low levels of spontaneity.
There is a positive relationship
between export responsiveness and
export customer performance
19. Fernández- Italian and Innovation performance The relationship between
Mesa and Alegre Spanish SME Organizational learning entrepreneurial orientation and export
(2015) exporters capability intensity is mediated by organizational
Entrepreneurial learning capability and innovation
orientation performance
20. Navarro- Spanish Export entrepreneurship Export entrepreneurship depends on
García et al. exporters various internal (export commitment,
(2015) resources) as well external (competitive
intensity, distance) contingency factors
Export entrepreneurship positively
Table AI. affects export performance

Corresponding author
Katerina Makri can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]