See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259147863

MARKETING EFFECTIVENESS IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS BASED ON SYSTEM

DYNAMICS MODEL

Conference Paper · April 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 1,552

3 authors, including:

Reza Faridyahyaie Amin Faridyahyaei

Payame Noor University Middle East Technical University
2 PUBLICATIONS 8 CITATIONS 2 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Amin Faridyahyaei on 18 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 MARKETING EFFECTIVENESS IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS BASED ON
SYSTEM DYNAMICS MODEL

ABSTRACT
Marketing activities always have been thought to be crucial in the present life and the future
survival of the companies and sometimes impose greatest cost on them. Therefore, the
investigation upon measuring the effectiveness of these activities is an inevitable fact. Regarding
the constant and complex relationships between each of the measures that affect marketing
effectiveness, a methodology of evaluating that cannot cope with these sophisticated interactions
would not be useful. This paper primarily tempts to establish a system dynamic model of
marketing effectiveness that could explain the interactions between factors that effect on
marketing effectiveness by causal loop diagram and then, presets several executable scenarios to
improve marketing effectiveness. The metrics that have been investigated in this Study are totally
applicative and comprehensive which can evaluate marketing effectiveness in various industries.
The metrics of the research were generated from 75 marketing executives in the industrial units
of East Azerbaijan, one of the most important industrial zones in terms of the number of
manufacturing companies in Iran, and an expert panel as well. Results of this study clarify that
applying intensive strategies and improving relationships with customers would lead to optimize
marketing effectiveness of a company.

KEYWORDS
Marketing effectiveness, System dynamics, Causal loop diagram, Flow diagram, Simulation

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of marketing effectiveness is to optimize marketing spend for the short and long
term in support of, and in alignment with, the brand strategy by building a market model using
valid and objective marketing metrics and analytics (Powell, 2008).

Marketing effectiveness calls for managers to have sufficient information for the purposes of
planning and effective resource allocated to varying markets, products and territories. Marketing
effectiveness is also contingent upon the adeptness of managers to deliver profitable strategies
from its philosophy, organization and information resources. Ultimately, marketing effectiveness
depends upon the ability to implement marketing plans successfully at various levels of the
organization (Adu et al, 2001).

In spite of the importance of business performance unfortunately, there are not adequate
researches on metrics used to evaluating marketing effectiveness. First, the complexity of
unraveling marketing short term from long term effects and second, the existence of numerous
components that reflect parts of marketing performance are reasons for the lack of an efficient
model for measuring the effectiveness of marketing. Difficulties in measuring qualitative Metrics
are another reasons for manager`s weak tendency in using different models of evaluating
marketing effectiveness. Given that marketing play major role in company's survival and
sometimes impose greatest cost on them, it makes a fundamental contribution to long term
business success. Therefore, marketing effectiveness and marketing audits are two famous
metrics for monitoring marketing controlling variables (kotler et al, 2006). Although we should
consider that marketing effectiveness is not so simple, good results may be due to a division`s
being in the right place at the right time rather than the consequence of effective management
(kotler, 1977).

Research of marketing effectiveness could be divided into two major viewpoints. In the first
viewpoint, scholars consider the concept of marketing effectiveness and try to determine its
components. This view was among the first consider by Philip Kotler (1977). He mentioned that
the marketing effectiveness of a company, division, or product line depends largely on
combination of five activities: Customer philosophy, Integrated marketing organization,
Adequate marketing information, Strategic orientation and Operational efficiency. The first view
consists many researches in which some scholars examine impacts of various factors on
marketing effectiveness (Dunn et al, 1994; Webster, 1995 and Nwokah and Ahiauzu, 2008,
2009). Also Some others have investigated Kotler`s (1977) an amalgam of five components
notably Table 1 in a certain country or industry (Yoon and Kim, 1999; Cizmar and Weber, 2000
and Adu et al, 2001).

However in the second view, scholars consider the marketing effectiveness metrics and
examine its measures. This view most considers evaluating and measuring marketing
performance. Importance of the view is owing to the reason that Marketing Science Institute
made Accountability and ROI of marketing expenditures as one of its research priorities since
2000. Researches classify in this view attempt to identify and represent various measures and
metrics of evaluating marketing effectiveness. Clark (1999) identifies about 20 measures in
which Ambler and Riley (2000) tested a total of 38 measures and Davidson (1999) considers ten
important measures of marketing effectiveness and Meyer (1998) notes hundreds. Barwise and
Farley (2004) examine six metrics in five industrial counties. However, Clark (1999) suggests
we should make better use of existing measures rather than formulate new ones.

Due to the importance of defining exact metrics for evaluating marketing effectiveness a
research had been carried out by Faridyahyaie (2012) within the industrial units of one of the
most industrial zones of Iran by the name of East Azerbaijan. The research proposes six main
measures that commonly used among them. The measures are as follow: Market share,
Marketing Profitability, Sale growth, Customer volume, Customer satisfaction and Costumer
loyalty. Subsequently the study provides the weight of each measure by using Factor Analyze
and presenting the follow equation:

Marketing Effectiveness= W1×Market Share + W2×Marketing Profitability + W3×Sale Growth +

W4×Customer Number + W5×Customer Satisfaction + W6×Customer Loyalty
Whereas W1 = 0.845, W2= 0.735, W3= 0.709, W4= 0.587, W5= 0.558 and, W6= 0.437

All of the above measures are assessing by various metrics as well (Figure 1).

Market Share

0.845
Profitability
0.735

Sale Growth 0.709

Marketing
0.587 Effectiveness
Customer
Number

Customer 0.558
Satisfaction 0.437

Customer
Loyalty
Figure1

Regarding the constant and complex relationships between each of the measures which
affected the marketing effectiveness, a methodology that cannot cope with these complex
interactions would not be useful. Regrettably, most of the researches in the field of marketing
effectiveness are based on statistical methods which are atomistic and static while due to the
complexity of the interactions between marketing systems we need to apply methods that are
holistic and dynamic. Hence the urgent need for change in the formulation and analysis
techniques of the effectiveness of the marketing system is felt. This method should not only
focus on the analysis of the system itself but also it must take into account the relationships
among metrics. The best technique that had been presented up to now to cover these kinds of
complexities is Systems thinking and particularly System Dynamics (SD) methodology. SD
methodology provides tools to incorporate the interactions between relevant factors of marketing
system. SD uses causal loop diagrams to explain how different factors could affect a system and
how they interact with each other. Also SD method could simulate the system’s behaviors in
future and provide this opportunity to evaluate the effects of modifying one or several factors on
system in the future. By using this facility of SD we could present several scenarios to improve
the system.
 The main purpose of this study is to demonstrate relations between factors that influence
Marketing Effectiveness dynamically with causal loop diagram and to present several scenarios
to improve it by SD simulation.

MODELING
System dynamics (SD) explains and models the problem based on the casual structure of the
feedback loops in the system. Also it could simulate the system to present some scenarios which
can be implemented in reality. Because of various reasons SD methodology was selected in this
research in order to study the Marketing Effectiveness. Firstly, Marketing Effectiveness must be
studied in a long‐term perspective. Secondly, Marketing Effectiveness is affected by many
factors with dynamic and feedback features. System dynamics applies feedback loops to
investigate problems dynamically which can compensate the defects of static models which
might end up at local optimization, not global optimization.

By considering Faridyahayaie’s M.Sc. thesis, literature review, as well as expert panel’s

opinion, all factors which can contribute in the causal loop diagram have been identified. In the
thesis a questionnaire has been filled out by 73 commercial managers of principal and great
factories in East Azerbaijan province, Iran. The questionnaire included all the factors that had
been supposed to be important in calculating the Marketing Effectiveness and the commercial
managers highlighted the most significant ones.

CAUSAL AND FEEDBACK LOOP

As stated above, all important factors in causal loop and the relations between them have been
identified considering the Faridyahyaie’s M.Sc. thesis, literature review and expert panel’s ideas.
Causal loop in surveying Marketing Effectiveness starts with two loops: a Balance loop and a
Reinforcement Loop. Figure 2 shows all the factors which involving the indicated loops, how
they are connected to each other and how they affect the Marketing Effectiveness.
 R&D

+ -

Product Quality B1
-
Customer Lifetime

- Churn rate

+ +
Brand Loyality
Gain new -
customer
Customers number
+
R1
Marketing
Effectiveness
+

+
Market Share
Market Growth +

+
Sales Growth

Figure 2

Most of the important factors in evaluating Marketing Effectiveness are involved in these
Balance and Reinforcement loops. According to the thesis, Marketing Effectiveness could be
measured by Sale Growth, Market share, Customer Number, Customer Satisfaction, Customer
Loyalty, and Marketing Profitability. These two loops include factors related to Customer
Number, Market share, Sale Growth, and Customer Loyalty.

The last two parameters in measuring Marketing Effectiveness, which have been entered in
the causal diagram, are Customer Satisfaction and Marketing Profitability. Figure 3 shows final
causal diagram which has 5 Reinforcement Loops and 4 Balance Loops. There are two delay
relation in this model; the first one describes the impact of Marketing Effectiveness on R&D.
Our findings from literature review and our expert panel team demonstrate that after
improvement of Marketing Effectiveness to desired level our investment in R&D will reduce
because we could reach to our goal so it has negative relation in long term on R&D. The second
delay relation is related to effect of market share on profit in long term. The market share
increases have come at cost in long term because the new customers are not profitable and we
spend more cost to gain new customer than customer retention thus increasing of market share
would increase companies' costs and it would reduce companies' profit.
 Market strategy

+
+
R&D

+ -

Product Quality B1

- R1
Customer Lifetime

- Churn rate
+
R2 Profit
+ -
+
Brand Loyality
Gain new -
customer R3
Customers number B4
+ +
Marketing
Effectiveness
+ +
Customer
Satisfaction
R4
B3
+ B2
Market Share
Market Growth +
-
+
+
Sales Growth Competitors
market share

R5

Advertisement
+

Figure 3

FLOW DIAGRAM

Based on introduced causal loop diagram, stock and flow diagram has been presented in three
parts:

A. Customer Loyalty and Satisfaction

This part describes the changes in Customer Loyalty and Satisfaction and how they affect
Marketing Effectiveness during the simulation time.

For using Marketing Effectiveness formula all of the six major factors that influence
Marketing Effectiveness, pointed in introduction, have to be between 0 and 1. In order to this
purpose, “Max of Customer Satisfaction” should be considered as a fraction for Customer
Satisfaction. Bear in mind that the Customer Loyalty is a number between 0 and 1 automatically,
so there is no need to have a fraction. As shown in figure 4, Customer Loyalty increases by
Regular Customers Increase Rate and decreases by Regular Customers Decrease Rate. Also the
Customer Satisfaction grows by Customer Satisfactory rate variable and declines by Customers
Dissatisfactory rate which is affected by a constant variable named Defect Rate. For example,
not only a company cannot gain new customers if it cannot establish a Customer Relationship
Management (CRM), but also this may leads to decrease in its previous customers as well.

Marketing
Effectiveness
defect rate

Customer
Loyalty Max of Customer
Regular Customers Regular Customers Churn Rate
Increase Rate Satisfaction
Decrease Rate
Lose Customer

Customer Life
Time <price> Product Quality

<Sales of Effect of Price on

<price> Company> Customer Satisfaction

Number of Loyaled Customer

Customers based on Life Relationship
Time
Number of Loyaled
Customers based on Customer Gain New
Satisfaction Satisfaction Customer
Customers Customers
Dissatisfactory Satisfactory

Figure 4

B. Customer Number and Marketing Profitability

In this part, the changes in Marketing Profitability and Customer Number have been
considered as stock variables. Also, this part of the Flow diagram shows how they affect
Marketing Effectiveness. Given that the Marketing Effectiveness would increase Marketing
Income, it should be linked to the Income variable by “Effect of Marketing Effectiveness on
Income” variable.

As shown in Figure 5, all marketing costs have been involved in the model, because they are
so important in measuring Marketing Profitability and Marketing Effectiveness directly. In order
to convert value of Customer Number and Marketing Profitability to a number between 0 and 1,
“Max of Marketing Profitability” and “Max of Customer Number” have been linked to
Marketing Effectiveness.
 warehousing Advertising Costs
delivering costs

Channels costs
Non-price Costs
Costs of place
Costs of
F2 sale of marketing
Promotion
sys
Marketing Staffs

Marketing
Marketing Income Profitabilty Marketing Costs Wage of Staffs per
Effect of Marketing
Product
Max of Marketing Effectiveness on Income Brand Costs
Profitabilty

F interest Warranty Costs

price Costs of product
<Sales of
Marketing Company> Compititors Price Packing Costs
Effectiveness Operational Costs
per Product
Product Designing
Costs
Max of Customer Customer
Number Lose Customer Number Gain New
Customer R&D Cost of Product
Number of New Gained
Quality
Customers based on
Customer Satisfaction
Number of New Gained
Customers based on Product F1
Quality

Product Quality

Figure 5

C. Sale Growth and Market Share

This part of the model displays influence of the Market Share and Sale Growth in the model.
These variables are numbers between 0 and 1 automatically, so they can be used in the
Marketing Effectiveness directly and without any fractions. Figure 6 shows how they affect the
Marketing Effectiveness.
 Sales of Company

Sum of All Sales

Market Share

Sale Growth
sale of marketing
sys

Marketing
Effectiveness

Figure 6

Some of the important variables of the model and the formulas of them are displayed in the
Table 1. The majority of these formulas are based on Professor Davis’ book (Davis, 2007) but
some of them are based on the expert team’s comments.
Table 1

Market Share Sales of Company/Sum of All Sales

Customer Life Time Value (price*Sales of Company)/(Customer Number*Churn Rate)

sale of marketing sys/(sale of marketing sys+ Sales of
Sale Growth
Company)
((Marketing Costs/Sales of Company)+Operational Costs per
Price
Product)*(1+F interest)
Cost of Product Quality+ Brand Costs+ Packing Costs+
Cost of Product
Product Designing Costs+ Warranty Costs

Customer Number Gain New Customer-Lose Customer

Marketing Profit Marketing Income-Marketing Costs

Finally, in Figure 7, the complete follow diagram has been shown.

Sales of Company warehousing

Advertising Costs
Sum of All Sales
delivering costs Non-price Costs

Channels costs
Costs of
Costs of place
Promotion
Market Share sale of marketing
sys
Marketing Staffs

Marketing
Marketing Income Profitabilty Marketing Costs Wage of Staffs per
Effect of Marketing
Product Brand Costs
Max of Marketing Effectiveness on Income
Sale Growth Profitabilty

Warranty Costs
Costs of product
F interest
price
defect rate <Sales of
Marketing Company> Packing Costs
Effectiveness Operational Costs Compititors Price
<Gain New
per Product
Customer Customer> Churn Rate Product Designing
Regular Customers Loyalty Regular Customers Max of Customer Costs
Decrease Rate Increase Rate Satisfaction Max of Customer Customer
Number Number Gain New
Lose Customer
Customer Life <Customer Customer
Time R&D Cost of Product
Number>
Quality
Number of New Gained
Customers based on
<Customer <price> <price> Customer Satisfaction Number of New Gained
Number> <Sales of Customers based on Product
Company> Quality
Effect of Price on
Customer Satisfaction
Number of Loyaled Product Quality F1
Customers based on Life Customer
Time Relationship
Number of Loyaled
Customers based on
Satisfaction Customer
Customers Satisfaction Customers
Dissatisfactory Satisfactory

Figure 7
RESULTS AND POLICY ANALYSIS
In this section the article aims to observe the effects of some of the strategies on improving
marketing effectiveness. To begin with, according to the researches and practices we know that
variation of marketing systems are largely depends on marketing strategies. There are four grand
classifications of strategies: Integration strategies, Intensive strategies, Diversification strategies
and, Defensive strategies.

The paper plans to investigate the engaging of Intensive strategies on the marketing
effectiveness. Without moving outside the organization`s current range of products or services, it
may be possible to attract customers by intensive advertising, and by realigning the product and
market options available to the organization. These strategies are generally refereed to Intensive
Strategies or Concentration Strategies. By intensifying its efforts, the firm will be able to
increase its sales and current market share of the current product-line faster. This is probably the
most successful internal growth strategy for firms whose products or services are in the final
stages of product life cycle. Most of the approaches of Intensive strategies deal with product-
market realignments. Thus, there are three important Intensive Strategies (David, 2010):

A. Market Penetration: Market penetration seeks to increase market share for existing products
in the existing markets through greater marketing efforts.

B. Market Development: Market development seeks to increase the sale by selling the present
products in new markets.

C. Product Development: Product development seeks to increase the sale by developing new or
improved products.

Given that the two strategies of above are engaging in current markets (Market penetration
and Product development) and our model is based on the current market of the companies, the
research illustrates the variation of the marketing effectiveness by altering 2 influential factors
value in the model that strategist use them to carry out the marketing penetration strategy and
product development strategy. The factors are sale of the company in the period of using new
marketing system and investment on Research and Development of the products. Therefore our
first and second scenarios are extracted from these strategies.

First scenario is increasing Market Penetration through enhancing of Market Share. To

operationalize this scenario volume of marketing system’s sale must be increased hence the
fraction of investing on increasing of marketing system’s sale (F2) is increased by 50%.
 sale of marketing sys Market Share
50 0.2

37.5 0.175

Percent
unit

25 0.15

12.5 0.125

0 0.1
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
Time (year) Time (year)
sale of marketing sys : Market Penetration Market Share : Market Penetration
sale of marketing sys : Base Run Market Share : Base Run

Marketing Effectiveness
60

45
Percent

30

15

0
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
Time (year)
Marketing Effectiveness : Market Penetration
Marketing Effectiveness : Base Run

Figure 8

As shown in Figure 8, increasing of F2 causes to enhance of sale of marketing system and

market share. Also it results growing of marketing effectiveness in the medium term but after
2029 it behaves in constant trend. The main causes of this behavior is this fact that over the time
increasing of market share causes decreasing of profit because gaining new customers are not
profitable.

The second scenario is product development through research and development (R&D) of
product. For this purpose fraction of investing in R&D which is named F1 must be increased. In
the second scenario F1 is increased from 0.05% up 0.08%. Because both R&D and customer
satisfaction are qualitative variables so to quantify these variables Likert scale is used. In order to
range these factors; R&D is limited between 0 and 5 and customer satisfaction variable is limited
between 0 and 10.
 R&D Customer Satisfaction
5 7

3.75 5.25

2.5 3.5

1.25 1.75

0 0
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
Time (year) Time (year)
"R&D" : Product Development Customer Satisfaction : Product Development
"R&D" : Base Run Customer Satisfaction : Base Run

Marketing Effectiveness
70

52.5
Percent

35

17.5

0
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
Time (year)
Marketing Effectiveness : Product Development
Marketing Effectiveness : Base Run

Figure 9

As shown in Figure 9, increasing of F2 fraction enhances R&D considerably. Because R&D

effects directly customer satisfaction therefore growing of R&D increases customer satisfaction
rate remarkably. As mentioned in the introduction, customer satisfaction is one of the impotent
metrics of marketing effectiveness hence after rising of F1, marketing effectiveness will increase.

Third scenario is related to company’s relationship with customers (CRM). It is well-

established fact that properly dealing with customers would increase their satisfaction which is
one of the important factors for improving of marketing effectiveness. This scenario explains
effect of meliorating of customer relationship on marketing effectiveness. Customer relationship
is qualitative variable and for quantifying this variable, it is limited between 0 and 10. To
operationalize this scenario, customer relationship variable’s amount is increased from 4 to 6.

Customer Satisfaction Marketing Effectiveness

7 60

5.25 45
Percent

3.5 30

1.75
15

0
0
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
Time (year) 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
Time (year)
Customer Satisfaction : Customer Relationship Marketing Effectiveness : Customer Relationship
Customer Satisfaction : Base Run Marketing Effectiveness : Base Run

Figure 10

As shown in Figure 10, the direct relation between customer relationship and customer
satisfaction causes increasing of customer satisfaction after enhancing of customer relationship.
Also because customer satisfaction effects directly on marketing effectiveness, its amount is
increased up to 55% in 2033.

After describing impacts of these three scenarios on some important factors of marketing
effectiveness system separately, in this section the paper will plots effects of these scenarios on
marketing effectiveness system together to evaluate these scenarios.

Marketing Effectiveness Marketing Profitabilty

70 7,000

52.5 5,250

MDollar
3,500
Percent

35

1,750
17.5
0
0 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 Time (year)
Time (year) Marketing Profitabilty : Customer Relationship
Marketing Effectiveness : Customer Relationship Marketing Profitabilty : Product Development
Marketing Effectiveness : Product Development
Marketing Profitabilty : Market Penetration
Marketing Effectiveness : Market Penetration
Marketing Effectiveness : Base Run Marketing Profitabilty : Base Run

Customer Loyalty Customer Number

0.8 1,000

0.7 750
Person

0.6 500

0.5 250

0.4 0
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032
Time (year) Time (year)
Customer Loyalty : Customer Relationship Customer Number : Customer Relationship
Customer Loyalty : Product Development Customer Number : Product Development
Customer Loyalty : Market Penetration Customer Number : Market Penetration
Customer Loyalty : Base Run Customer Number : Base Run

Figure 11

Figure 11 displays effects of each scenario on different variables of system. As indicated in

this figure market penetration scenario has lowest effect on marketing profitability and product
development has the most effect on it in long term. Before 2022 effect of customer relationship
scenario is more than product development scenario because the impact of customer relationship
cab be seen in long term but over the time the customers become accustomed to this behavior but
R&D could effect in long term too because it causes gaining new customers that increases
customer number and it influence directly marketing effectiveness. Also as shown in this figure
the impact of customer relationship on customer loyalty is very considerable than other scenarios
because it causes increasing of available customers satisfaction and this factor enhances regular
customers number that is very crucial in customer loyalty rate. The other important issue in this
figure is effect of product development on customer loyalty. At first increasing of R&D causes to
customer satisfaction that increases customer loyalty but over the time, enhancing R&D reduces
customer loyalty because the focus of R&D is on gaining new customers not on retention of
available customers so that in the long term, growth of R&D will decrease customer loyalty.
 As described in this section the model could simulate all of the important strategies of
marketing effectiveness and could display desired and reasonable outcomes that are strong
evidences for this model’s validity.

CONCLUSION
Regarding the importance of evaluating marketing effectiveness in the present life and the
future survival of the companies and the complexity of interactions among the measures, this
article attempts to model it by the methodology of System Dynamics (SD). This model is mainly
based on the measures that were gathered from the Industrial units of East Azerbaijan which is
one of the most important industrial zones in terms of the number of manufacturing companies in
Iran, and an expert panel as well. After presenting the model, the paper studies various scenarios
of improving marketing effectiveness and finds the following insights:

The paper presents three scenarios. Two of them are based on the intensive strategies which
are Market Penetration and Product development. And the last one is about the managing
customer relationship (CRM). The article studies these scenarios because of their crucial role on
improving of the marketing effectiveness.

According to the results, the strategy of developing products has the most effect on marketing
effectiveness by concentrating on the Research and Development (R&D) that leads to increase of
customer satisfaction and subsequently marketing effectiveness. The second effective scenario is
about the increasing customer satisfaction that leads to enhancing customer satisfaction and then
marketing effectiveness. Finally, the last scenario is related to the applying market penetration by
increasing the sales based on marketing activities that results in higher market share and
improved marketing effectiveness.

By taking all above-mentioned arguments into consideration the following conclusion can be
drawn about the issue: System Dynamics can be applied as one of the best methodologies of
studying marketing effectiveness and it`s complex interactions among the measures.

The study has various limitations: First, the existence of numerous metrics that could be
mentioned in the model. Second, the various scenarios that could be considered in this research.
Third, the difficulty of gathering information from the companies of the research sample. In
order to accomplish these limitations the paper considers the three major scenarios that greatly
affect marketing effectiveness. For further researches we suggest that applying another metrics
that could evaluate marketing effectiveness and presenting various scenarios as well.
REFERENCES
Adu, K. A., Fyall, A. and Singh, S. 2001. “Marketing effectiveness and Business performance in
the financial services industry.” journal of services marketing, vol. 15 no. 1, pp. 18-34.

Ambler, T. and Riley, D. 2000. “Marketing Metrics: A Review of Performance Measures in Use
in the UK and Spain.” Draft Paper, London Business School, pp. 1-30.

Barwise, P. and Farley, J. U. 2004. “Marketing Metrics: Status of six Metrics in Five Countries.”
European Management Journal, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 257-262.

Cizmar, S. and Weber, S. 2000. “Marketing effectiveness of the hotel industry in Croatia.”
International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 19, pp. 227-240.

Clark, B. H. 1999. “Marketing Performance measures: history and interrelationships.” Journal of

Marketing Management, Vol. 5 No. 15, pp. 711-732.

David, R, Fred. 2010. Strategic Management , Prentice-Hall, Singapore.

Davidson, J.H. 1999. “Transforming the value of company reports through marketing
measurement”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 5 No. 15, pp. 757-77.

Davis, John. 2007. Measuring Marketing: 103 Key Metrics Every Marketer Needs, John Wiley
& Sons, Singapore, First edition.

Dunn, M. G., Norburn, D. and Birley, S. 1994, “The Impact of Organizational Values, Goals and
Climate on Marketing effectiveness.” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 30, pp. 131-141.

Faridyahyaie, R. 2011. Identifying Marketing Effectiveness Metrics (Case of study: East

Azerbaijan`s industrial units).Unpublished MS.c dissertation, Aras Institute of Higher Education,
Tabriz, Iran.

Faridyahyaie, R. Faryabi, M. Bodaghi, K, N, H. 2012. “Identifying Marketing Effectiveness

Metrics – Case of study: East Azerbaijan`s Industrial Units.” Journal of Business Excelence, Vol.
6 No. 2, pp. 47-58.

Kotler, P. 1977. “From sale obsession to marketing effectiveness.” Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 55, November-December, pp. 67-75.

Kotler, P., Keller, K., Ang, H., Leong, S, and Tan, Ch. 2006. “Marketing Management an Asian
Perspective.” Prentice-Hall, Singapore, Forth edition.

Meyer, M.W. 1998. “Finding performance: the new discipline in management.” performance
Measurement – Theory and Practice, Centre for Business Performance, Cambridge, pp. 14-21.
 Nwokah, N. G., Ahiauzu, A. I. 2008. “Managerial competencies and marketing effectiveness in
corporate organizations in Nigeria.” Journal of Management Development, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp.
858-878.

Powell, Guy, R. 2008. Marketing Calculator: measuring and managing return on marketing
investment, John Wiley & Sons, Singapore, First edition.

Webster, Cynthia. 1995, “Marketing culture and marketing effectiveness in service firms.”
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 6-21.
Yoon, S. J. and Kim, J. H. 1999. “The new approach to assessing the marketing effectiveness of
Korean firms.” Asia Pacific Journal of Management, VOL 16, pp. 193-212.

View publication stats