-211-
Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 2015, 26(2), 211–219
Ma ke ing E ec i eness: Me ics o E ec i e S a egic Ma ke ing
F an isek Milicho sky, I e a Simbe o a
B no Uni e si y o Technology
Kolejni 2906/4, 612 00 B no, Czech Republic
E-mail. milicho s[email p o ec ed]u b .cz, simbe o a@ bm. u b .cz
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.5755/j01.ee.26.2.3826
The opic o ma ke ing e ec i eness is conside ed o be a e y up- o-da e subjec in he highly compe i i e en i onmen .
Ma ke ing e ec i eness may be cha ac e ized as he unc ion o imp o ing he p ocess whe e ma ke e s go o ma ke wi h
he goal o op imizing hei own ma ke ing esou ces spen o achie e e en be e esul s o bo h o he sho - and long-
e m s a egic ma ke ing objec i es. No only he imp o ed isibili y in o ma ke ing e ec i eness has helped companies o
be e p io i ize hei e o s, bu i also has imp o ed he quali y and p ecision o he ma ke ing esou ces demanded by
he sales o ce. Finding he app op ia e key me ics should con ibu e o he e alua ion o ma ke ing e ec i eness.
S a egic ma ke ing is included in s a egic managemen , which helps o imp o e he company’s ma ke sha e. Howe e ,
he e is an inc easing end o c ea ion e ec i eness in companies and i is necessa y o check e u ns o inance and
sea ch o e iciency o he unds pu in o ma ke ing. Pe o mance managemen can be de ined as a sys em u ilizing he
in o ma ion o in oduce app op ia e changes in he o ganiza ional cul u e, sys ems and p ocesses o achie e op imal
pe o mance ag eemen a ge s, and he alloca ion o esou ce and in o ma ion managemen on possible modi ica ions o
business s a egy. The scien i ic objec i e o he pape is o look o he se o me ics, which is impo an om he
ma ke ing s a egic poin o iew, and includes he speci ic pe o mance g oup. Da a om p ima y esea ch was used.
The en i e p ima y esea ch ocused on he e alua ion o en e p ises in he a ea o business and ma ke ing ac i i ies (and
hei pe o mance) in he Czech Republic due a ques ionnai e su ey.
Keywo ds: Ma ke ing e iciency, ma ke ing me ics, e ec i eness, pe o mance, s a egy ma ke ing.
In oduc ion
P essu es on compe i i eness om global sou ces and
he addi ional p oblems imposed by a slow economic
g ow h, add u gency o he impe a i e o sea ching ou
g ea e e ec i eness and supe io pe o mance o a
company. The co po a e en i onmen has become mo e
di icul han in he pas . I is impo an o ha e all s a egic
ac i i ies mo e in e ac i e o inc ease hei own
comp ehensi eness (Neil e al., 2007). Planning he s a egic
ma ke ing as a pa o co po a e complexi y akes simila
app oaches o de ining a s a egic plan o he whole
business uni (Kocmano a & Simbe o a, 2012).
(Gok & Hacioglu, 2010, p. 296–297) no e e y
p ecisely in hei pape ha co po a e inancial goals o
ma ke ing ha e b oadened o include hose who in es in,
bene i om, and ake esponsibili y o pe o mance. Thus,
he challenge o he ma ke ing unc ion is o documen how
indi idual ma ke ing ac i i ies could be comp ehensi ely
measu ed in condi ion o hei con ibu ion o he company’s
inancial pe o mance (She h & Sisodia, 2002; Rus e al.,
2004; Gok & Hacioglu, 2010, p. 296).
On he o he hand, hese co po a e ac i i ies a e
speci ic by he complexi y o all ma ke ing ac i i ies,
compounded by limi ed and poo -quali y da a ela ed o he
ma ke ing e o s in company inancial s a emen s (Kahn
& Mye s, 2005; Gok & Hacioglu, 2010, p. 296).
In many indus ies, inc easing inancial p essu es ha e
led o ocusing on sho - e m measu es, which has
in luenced u u e pe o mance and has o ced educ ions in
ma ke ing expenses. A he same ime, de ined ma ke ing
expendi u es a e mainly long- e m ma ke in es men s
wi h a inancial e u n, op managemen has gene ally seen
sho - e m cos s wi h no documen able inancial e ec
(Rus e al., 2004; G onhold & Ma ensen, 2006; Gok &
Hacioglu, 2010, p. 296). Consequen ly, he ma ke ing
unc ion has been o dec easing in e es o op managemen
and has ecei ed commensu a ely dec easing budge a y
suppo . I he e u n on ma ke ing in es men could be
documen ed, he ole o ma ke ing would be signi ican ly
ele a ed h oughou he o ganiza ion. Ba ing such
documen a ion, ma ke ing will con inue o be ma ginalized
(Lehmann, 2004; Webs e e al., 2005; Bake & Hol ,
2004; Gok & Hacioglu, 2010, p. 297), and ma ke e s will
become me e ac icians ca ying ou speci ic ac i i ies han
pe sons in o he ields ha e planned (S ewa , 2009; Gok
& Hacioglu, 2010, p. 296).
The de ini ion o s a egic managemen is an
excessi ely gene al and la ge ool which needs o be
sepa a ed o indi idual and mo e ope a i e pa s. All
ac i i ies a e closely connec ed oge he . S a egic
managemen should be di ided in o (Doyle, 2008):
 Ma ke ing s a egy;
 Pa icipa ion s a egy;
 Ope a ions s a egy;
 Global s a egy;
 O ganiza ional s a egy.
S a egic ma ke ing (as a pa o s a egic managemen )
p ocesses in o ma ion abou he ma ke and compe i o s
and p o ides op managemen wi h backg ound o s a egic
decisions. S a egic ma ke ing is one o he de elopmen
F an isek Milicho sky, I e a Simbe o a. Ma ke ing E ec i eness: Me ics o E ec i e S a egic Ma ke ing
- 212 -
s ages o ma ke ing. (Tikkanen e al., 2007) de ine s a egic
ma ke ing as a sys ema ic app oach which leads o
inc easing he managemen liabili y o adop ed decisions,
needing he localiza ion o he o ganiza ion in he ma ke .
The basic assump ion consis s in ensu ing he inc easing
success wi hou any su p ise.
S a egic ma ke ing is a pa o company’s s a egy,
which should be de ined in di e en ways. (Jakubiko a,
2008) gi es h ee di e en iews: (a) S a egic ma ke ing
is ocused on planning u u e ac i i ies o de ine po en ial
cus ome s and hei needs; (b) S a egic ma ke ing is a
p ocess o combina ions o s eng hs wi h po en ial
cus ome segmen s; (c) S a egic ma ke ing is a complex
ma ke ing, which c ea es long- ime and use ul ela ions
be ween he company and public.
Acco ding o (Ko le & Kelle , 2007), s a egic
ma ke ing ensu es op imal alue choice wi h he help o
ma ke segmen a ion, a ge ing, o posi ioning.
The undamen al domain o s a egic ma ke ing
consis s in i s own p ecise na u e o all co po a e
ques ions, decisions and p oblems ouching ma ke ing
ac i i ies in a company (Va ada ajan, 2010). I is necessa y
o con inue assessing indi idual elemen s o s a egic
ma ke ing, especially in he global ma ke , whe e i is
necessa y o ha e an app op ia e ma ke ing s a egy
(Vi ilai e e al., 2011; T udgen & F eeman, 2014). Tha
explains he impo ance o co po a e pe o mance and
ele an impac s o non- inancial implica ions (Milicho sky
e al., 2011).
The inal ou pu o co po a e s a egic ma ke ing
should include he c ea ion and ixa ion o ac ual co po a e
ela ions o making s onge ela ions (Simbe o a, 2010).
These ela ions p o ide success o he whole co po a e
s a egy wi h i s pe o mance.
Ma ke ing e ec i eness is ope a ionalized as me ge o
i e componen s designed by Ko le (1977; 1997). These
i e componen s a e (1) cus ome philosophy, (2) in eg a ed
ma ke ing o ganiza ion, (3) adequa e ma ke ing in o ma ion,
(4) s a egic o ien a ion, and (5) ope a ional e iciency.
Appiah-Adu e al., (2001) u he a gued ha i s , i is
impe a i e o iden i y he impo ance o s udying he
ma ke , ecognizing he nume ous oppo uni ies, selec ing
he mos app op ia e segmen s o he ma ke o ope a e in
and endea o ing o o e supe io alue o mee he
selec ed cus ome ’s needs and wan s. The i m, hey a gue,
mus be sui ably s a ed o enable i pe o m ma ke ing
analysis, planning and implemen a ion. The company mus
de ine i s own ma ke ing e ec i eness o ind i s own
pe o mance and success.
The a icle ocuses on he impo ance o ma ke ing
e ec i eness ela ed o he s a egic ma ke ing wi hin he
amewo k o pe o mance measu emen and esea ch se
h ough he iden i ica ion o key me ics. The scien i ic
objec i e o he pape is o iden i y a se o me ics which
is impo an om he pe spec i e o ma ke ing s a egy and
is included in he speci ic pe o mance g oup.
Ma e ials and me hods: da a om p ima y esea ch
and seconda y esea ch was used o achie e he p e iously
es ablished objec i es. The pape is based on p ima y
esea ch conduc ed by means o a ques ionnai e su ey,
which ook place in 2012 in Czech companies. 300
companies we e andomly selec ed o pa icipa e in his
su ey. In o al, 115 ques ionnai es we e e u ned. The
ou pu o he p ima y esea ch was pu unde s a is ical
p ocessing. The seconda y esea ch me hod consis ed in
sys ema ic analysis o scien i ic li e a u e.
Con ibu ion: Two indexes we e de ined by he said
p ima y esea ch, including key me ics o measu ing he
ma ke ing e ec i eness – (1) p o i index, (2) cus ome
index. Howe e , because o he C onbach alpha indica o ,
i was only he p o i index ha eached an accep able
le el.
Co po a e Pe o mance Sys ems
Business pe o mance is becoming an impo an pa
o co po a e budge ing and pe o mance compensa ion and
p omo ion (Cla k e al., 2006).
The co po a e e ec i eness depends on he adop ed
ules o economic e iciency. This concep includes bo h
incu ed e iciency o p oduc ion ac o s as well as
use ulness. F om he ma ke ing s andpoin , i is impo an o
look a all he ac ions om he pe spec i e o hei impac on
he business alone and he co po a e pe o mance.
Measu ing he inancial impac o ma ke ing is one o he
highes p io i ies (Williams & Naumann, 2011; Ru kauskas
e al., 2011).
(Lambe i & Noci, 2010) desc ibe h ee main
speci ica ions o pe o mance sys ems on which companies
ha e o ocus. These speci ica ions a e based on he
app oach how manage s each hei goals (checking he
s a egy implemen a ion; in e nal communica ion;
alida ion o ul illing s a egy; imp o ing s a egy). These
cha ac e is ics a e:
1. Typology o pe o mance assessed;
2. Typology o measu es adop ed;
3. Con ol sys em o assessing pe o mance.
The key pe o mance indica o s (KPI) a e a g oup o
me ics ha ocuses on he mos c i ical a eas o cu en and
u u e de elopmen o he company. KPI ep esen s a ool
ha allows measu ing he pe o mance in an app op ia e
manne o de e mine igh alues and hen in e p e such
alues co ec ly. The pu pose o KPI lies in he desc ip ion
o he way o inc easing pe o mance and imp o ing
ob aining esul s (Pa men e , 2010; Zahe awa i e al., 2011;
Ke zne , 2011; H ebicek e al., 2011; Ho nungo a, 2014).
The KPI sys em could be c ucial o small and
medium en e p ises (SMEs), which ha e o ocus on
esul s and sus ainable de elopmen . SMEs use especially
inancial and accoun ing indica o s along he whole
co po a e cycle. In addi ion o inancial indica o s, i is
ecommended o use non- inancial indica o s (Ciemleja &
Lace, 2011).
Ma ke ing E ec i eness
Ma ke ing e ec i eness as concep has been s ong
associa ed wi h many aluable o ganiza ional ou come,
which should be long- e m g ow h, s able, enhanced
cus ome sa is ac ion, a compe i i e ad an age and a
s ong ma ke ing o ien a ion (Webs e , 1995, p. 6).
Manage s a e unde p essu e. The e o e, hey pu no
only ma ke ing in es men s unde examina ion. Main
esul s o he examina ion a e e lec ed in inancial
Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 2015, 26(2), 211–219
- 213 -
exp essions (e.g., p o i , sales o u no e ) as he e ec o
ealized ma ke ing ac i i ies (Gijsenbe g, 2014; Lambe i
& Noci, 2010).
Ma ke ing e ec i eness depends on he co po a e
objec i es. Due o he g owing demand o ma ke e ’s
knowledge, i is necessa y o ocus on he amewo k
whe e i is possible o measu e bo h sho - and long- e m
inancial impac s on en e p ise ma ke ing in es men .
Measu ing ma ke ing pe o mance is a business p ocess ha
p o ides pe o mance eedback on he esul s o ma ke ing
ac i i ies. The e ec i eness o ma ke ing ac i i ies should
be de ined as a e u n o unds in es ed in hese ac i i ies.
As o he e alua ion, he e a e many a ious me hods how
o measu e hese ac i i ies (Fa is e al., 2010).
Measu ing applies se e al g oups o ma ke ing
indica o s which help o quan i y a possible end,
dynamics o cha ac e is ics (Fa is e al., 2010). Measu ing
he pe o mance o ma ke ing ac i i ies becomes he
business p ocess ha p o ides pe o mance eedback on
he esul s o deli e ed ma ke ing ac i i ies. Business
pe o mance becomes an impo an pa o co po a e
budge ing and pe o mance compensa ion and p omo ion
(Cla k e al., 2006; Gine icius e al., 2013; Kozena &
Chladek, 2012).
The me ic has become a measu eable indica o o
imp o e quali y le el, quan i y o inancial ca ego ies.
(Ke zne , 2011) desc ibes he me ic as a nume ical measu
(usually in inancial uni s) ep esen ing a pa o business
da a in a speci ic a ea. As an indica o , he dis inguishes a
measu e ha p o ides an insigh o in o ma ion
equi emen and decision making suppo .
Ma ke ing e ec i eness, acco ding o KPI, uses many
kinds o me ics, di ided in o inancial and non- inancial
g oups. F om he inancial poin o iew, ma ke ing
e ec i eness could be de ined as a e u n on in es men in
ma ke ing ac i i ies in he company (Milicho sky &
Simbe o a, 2011; Kocmano a e al., 2010).
The e is an a ini y be ween co po a e objec i es,
me ics and a pe o mance sys em. The me ics and
pe o mance sys em could be aken as subo dina e o
co po a e objec i es. In gene al, me ics is impo an in
p ojec managemen p o iding app op ia e in o ma ion.
Me ics can be measu ed and eco ded in a ious ways: in
numbe s, pe cen ages, coun s, o a ings (Ke zne , 2011).
Me ics e e s o a di ec nume ical measu e in he
ela ionship o one o mo e dimensions (e.g. g oss sales pe
week). A pe o mance measu emen sys em (PMS) can be
de ined as he sys em which manage s use in o de o
(Mo gan e al., 2002; Lambe i & Noci, 2010):
1) check whe he he in ended s a egy is being
implemen ed;
2) communica e o hei employees he goals hey
a e expec ed o achie e and whe he hey a e achie ing
hose expec ed goals;
3) alida e whe he he in ended s a egy is s ill
alid;
4) acili a e indi idual and o ganiza ional lea ning
and imp o emen .
(Lambe i & Noci, 2010) designed h ee main a iables
o Ma ke ing Pe o mance Measu emen Sys em:
(1) Typology o pe o mances assessed speci y wha
a e he co po a e pe o mances unde he esponsibili y o
he ma ke ing uni s;
(2) Typology o measu es adop ed;
(3) Con ol sys em p o ides in o ma ion, how
manage s assess pe o mances and manage he ecei ed
in o ma ion om he MPM sys em.
Simila ly o he analysis o he ypology o
pe o mances assessed, li e a u e has p o ided a e y
he e ogeneous se o con ibu ions abou he ypologies o
ma ke ing measu es adop ed by companies. Howe e ,
unlike he p e ious issue, i was possible o de ec a widely
accep ed uni ying axonomy in Cla k’s heo y (Cla k,
1999; Lambe i & Noci, 2010). The au ho di ides
ma ke ing measu es in o ou main ca ego ies:
 Single inancial ou pu measu es, ep esen ing he
i s e o o e alua e ma ke ing pe o mances by
compa ing he ou comes o ma ke ing ac i i ies wi h he
cos s a o ded o implemen hem;
 Non- inancial measu es assess ou pu s h ough
non- inancial o quali a i e me ics, such as ma ke sha e,
cus ome sa is ac ion, o b and equi y;
 Inpu measu es a ge a e alua ion o ma ke ing
pe o mances by analyzing hei esou ce abso p ion such
ma ke ing budge , o he ma ke ing uni s’ beha io (e.g.
ma ke ing audi s and con ols);
 Mul iple measu es me ge measu es o mac o-
dimensions o e iciency, e ec i eness and adap i eness o
he in e dependency be ween he di e en dimensions.
These measu es di ec ly depend on he ypology o he
ma ke ing s a egy which each company could use: (1)
p ospec o , (2) de ende , and (3) analyse . This ypology
e lec s he co po a e posi ion on he ma ke due o an
inno a i e le el and using compe i i e ad an ages (Valos
& Vocino, 2006).
Ma ke ing Me ic
The ma ke ing me ic has become a measu emen
sys em, quan i ying dynamic and/o s a ic cha ac e is ics.
In bo h business and esea ch, ma ke ing me ics include
de ining objec i es, measu ing he deg ee o comple ion and
p o iding he eedback on p ocesses subjec o change. In
gene al, me ics a e conside ed as a s anda d o
measu emen and hey a e used as a co esponding
benchma k (Fa is e al., 2010; Pe e s e al., 2013; Ahi &
Sea cy, 2015).
The ma ke ing me ics (as a ool how o ind
e ec i eness) could each he highes le el o p io i y in
he whole business en i onmen because o c ea ing a
compe i i e ad an age. The eason may include
dissa is ac ion wi h he adi ional way o measu ing
ma ke ing ac i i ies, associa ed wi h accoun ing, co po a e
cos - ends, o apid IT de elopmen .
Nowadays, he e a e a numbe o di e en me hods
ha may be used as ma ke ing indica o s. These me hods
help o ack business pe o mance h ough da a collec ion
om indi idual ma ke ing ac i i ies, such as ma ke ing
campaigns, ma ke ing channels o cus ome esponsi eness
(Li, 2011).
The e alua ion o impac s o ma ke ing ac i i ies is a
sys ema ic app oach, which begins wi h he de ini ion o
F an isek Milicho sky, I e a Simbe o a. Ma ke ing E ec i eness: Me ics o E ec i e S a egic Ma ke ing
- 214 -
he ma ke ing s a egy. Howe e , he ma ke ing s a egy is
usually gene ally de ined owing o he a ious ac i i ies
pe o med. Acco ding o he speci ica ion o pe o mance
sys ems, he mos equen ly used ma ke ing me ics may
be di ided in se e al g oups (see Table 1).
Table 1
Summa y o App oaches in Classi ica ion o Ma ke ing Me ics
Au ho s
Desc ip ion
Examples
F om he poin o
iew o esul s
Ex e nal ma ke
me ics
Amble , 2000; Valos & Vocino,
2006
Ex e nal me ics measu es inancial changes
o he b and in a sho pe iod.
To al numbe o cus ome s;
Cus ome sa is ac ion;
Pe cei ed quali y;
Loyal y.
In e nal ma ke
me ics
Amble , 2000; Valos & Vocino,
2006
In e nal me ics measu es inancial changes
o he b and in a sho pe iod.
Awa eness o goals ( ision);
Appe i e o lea ning;
Numbe o ini ia i es in
p ocess.
F om he poin o
iew o inancial
exp ession
Financial me ics
Gaia delli e al., 2007; G eenye ,
2006; O´Sulli an e al., 2009;
Lambe i & Noci, 2010; Valos
& Vocino, 2006
Financial me ics help o de ine he accu a e
inancial amoun o use o inancial alues o
ob ain exac alues.
P o i ;
Tu no e ;
Ma ke ing expenses;
ROI, ROMI;
EVA.
Non- inancial
me ics
G eiling, 2006; Ba wise &
Fa ley 2004; Zahay & G i in,
2010; Lambe i & Noci, 2010;
Valos & Vocino, 2006
Non- inancial me ics could no help o
de ine he exac inancial amoun .
Cus ome sa is ac ion;
Numbe o isi o s;
Loyal y.
F om he poin o
iew o ma ke
subjec s
Cus ome
me ics
Llonch e al., 2002; Ba wise &
Fa ley, 2004; Zahay & G i in,
2010
Cus ome me ics in oduces cus ome ’s
mo emen on he ma ke and hei beha io .
Cus ome li e ime alue;
Cus ome e en ion;
Sha e o walle .
Ma ke me ics
Llonch e al., 2002; Amble ,
2000
Ma ke me ics desc ibes he sha e le els o
indi idual ma ke ac i i ies, compe i o s o
inno a ions.
Ma ke sha e;
Ad e ising a e;
Losses owa ds compe i o s.
F om he poin o
iew o
pe o mance
esul s
KPI
Zahe awa i e al., 2011;
Pa men e , 2010; Ho nungo a,
2014
I has become a g oup o me ics, which
shows di ec ion o u u e inc easing o
pe o mance.
Visi s o manage s nex
week;
Cus ome sa is ac ion
a ings;
Ne ope a ing ma gins.
KRI
Pa men e , 2010
KRI is a g oup o indica o s, which in o ms
abou ealized ac i i ies.
Ne p o i be o e ax;
Re u n on capi al employed;
P o i abili y pe cus ome .
F om he poin o
iew o ma ke ing
a iables’ con ol
Con ollable
a iables
Sampaio e al., 2011
All ools o ma ke ing mix a e conside ed as
con ollable a iables.
P ice;
P oduc ;
Place;
P omo ion.
Uncon ollable
a iables
Sampaio e al., 2011
Uncon ollable a iables ha e impac s on
indi idual ma ke ing decisions and ma ke ing
ou pu s.
Legal en i onmen ;
Economic en i onmen ;
Demand luc ua ion.
A numbe o au ho s look a ma ke ing me ics om
di e en poin s o iew. Some au ho s a e in e es ed in he
inancial exp ession o ma ke ing mix elemen s, which
could be labeled as a adi ional classi ica ion. Mode n
classi ica ions may include non- inancial me ics which a e
commonly used in he ma ke a ea o he cus ome a ea. The
g oups, de ined in he Table 1, ep esen he mos equen ly
used me ics o measu ing ma ke ing e ec i eness in
companies.
Me hodology o he Pape
The main aim o he pape is o de ine a se o me ics,
which is impo an om he ma ke ing s a egic poin o
iew, and is included in o he speci ic pe o mance g oup.
The i s pa o he pape p esen s he key seconda y
in o ma ion aken om a numbe o scien i ic a icles and
li e a u e sou ces. This is ollowed by he main pa o he
pape , in oducing he selec ed esea ch da a ob ained om
he p ima y esea ch.
The conduc ed p ima y esea ch was designed on wo
pilla s: (1) he analysis o ecen li e a u e sou ces, (2)
in e nal p ojec a he Facul y o Business and
Managemen , B no Uni e si y o Technology, eg. No. FP-
S-12-1764. This in e nal p ojec ocused on he heo e ical
analysis o de elopmen app oaches o ma ke ing and
business ac i i ies and hei e ec i eness.
The en i e p ima y esea ch ocused on he e alua ion
o en e p ises in he a ea o business and ma ke ing
ac i i ies (and hei pe o mance) in he Czech Republic.
The p ima y esea ch was conduc ed in he o m o a
ques ionnai e su ey. The ques ionnai e was compiled on
he basis o he collec ed heo e ical knowledge, de ined
a eas o issues a hand, and speci ic objec i es so ha he
Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 2015, 26(2), 211–219
- 215 -
ob ained esul s may con ibu e o he se up o KPI o he
companies.
Fo he pu pose o his a icle only one pa was
selec ed, a ge ed on using me ics in he company.
The p esen ed pape is based on he p ima y esea ch
in he o m o a ques ionnai e su ey, conduc ed in 2013 in
Czech companies. 300 companies we e andomly selec ed
o pa icipa e in his su ey. In o al, 115 ques ionnai es
we e e u ned ( ela i e amoun 38,3 %). The la ges g oup
o companies which e u ned he ques ionnai e belonged o
he, manu ac u ing indus y (34 % o companies). The
second g oup was consis ed o he business and ade
sphe e (21 % o companies).
P ocessing he esul s o he ques ionnai e su ey
made use o bo h he desc ip i e s a is ics and ac o
analysis. These me hods we e applied on he selec ed da a
se ela ed o measu ing he pe o mance o Czech
companies.. The da a was p ocessed using he s a is ical
so wa e IBM SPSS S a is ics 22. The conclusions p o ide
he cha ac e is ics o he limi a ions o ou esea ch and i s
po en ial u he di ec ion.
Fo he pu pose o he a icle, he da a was p ocessed
using he ac o analysis me hod. In ac , his me hod
ocuses on he mul idimensional obse a ions.
The ac o analysis is based on he selec ion o
co ela ion and pa ial co ela ion coe icien s.
Resul s
The discussion and conclusions d awn in his pape a e
based on he analysis o seconda y sou ces and selec ed
da a ob ained h ough a ques ionnai e su ey o ma ke ing
managemen o he Czech companies.
Fo he pu pose o his pape , only selec ed da a,
ob ained in 2013 and conce ning he choice and in ensi y
o he u iliza ion o ma ke ing ac i i ies wi h a iew o he
company size in he Czech en i onmen , was used (see
Table 2).
The esul s o he ques ionnai e su ey we e p ocessed
by means o basic ypes o desc ip i e s a is ics analyses
using a selec ed da a se . The da a was p ocessed using
s a is ical so wa e IBM SPSS S a is ics 22.
The esea ch sample consis ed o 300 companies
andomly selec ed om he s a is ical egis e o business
ac i i ies – NACE-CZ, and om 115 ecei ed
ques ionnai es, 112 o hem we e ully comple ed wi h all
he a iables. The ques ionnai es we e used o s a is ical
p ocessing. The esponden s we e manage s o he
companies unde examina ion who we e in cha ge o
ma ke ing and business ac i i ies. The esponden s o he
ques ionnai e we e mainly he owne s and manage s o
enginee ing companies in he Czech Republic in 2013. The
selec ion c i e ia included as ollows:
1. Geog aphical loca ion (Czech Republic);
2. The classi ica ion o economic ac i i ies acco ding
o CZ-NACE, limi ed o he enginee ing indus y.
 28 – Manu ac u e o machine y and equipmen ;
 29 – Manu ac u e o mo o ehicles, aile s
and semi- aile s;
 30 – Manu ac u e o o he anspo equipmen .
The e a e many impac s upon single ma ke ing
ac i i ies o he company. In he ques ionnai e, he
esponden s we e asked o ma ke ing me ics which hey
used in hei own co po a e measu emen .
I is di icul o co po a e managemen o decide
which me ic is he bes o measu ing. The e o e, only six
me ics we e chosen om he ques ionnai e su ey, as
shown in Table 3. The selec ion was based on he o al
equencies.
Table 3 includes udimen a y da a displaying ha in
he pe o mance measu emen sys em, companies use
e u n indica o s (ROI and ROMI), cus ome ’s indica o s
(loyal y and cus ome sa is ac ion) and cos s indica o s
(EVA and PPC). The conclusions a e ela ed o he
cha ac e is ics o he esea ch limi a ions and i s possible
u u e di ec ion.
The alues o he a ia ion coe icien o up o 0,10
indica e low a iabili y; he a i hme ic mean may be
conside ed as a ypical alue o he da a ile. Fo his
eason, i is app op ia e o ocus on highe alues (see
Table 2).
The le els o con idence in Pea son co ela ion a e 99
% o se e al ela ions men ioned in Table 4.
F om he alues lis ed in Table 4, i is possible o say
ha co ela ions we e ound only in he case o wo me ics
ha a e highligh ed. These me ics a e Re u n on
In es men (0,427) and Economic Value Added (0,588).
The o al a iance o he pe o mance indica o s is
explained by means o eigen alues, which ep esen he
o al a iance explained by each ac o . The eigen alues
show ha only wo i ems eached he minimum alue o 1.
The esul s o he six- ac o model (wi h all
componen s) show a high and signi ican loading only in
wo ac o s. The obse ed wo ac o s had eigen alues
highe han 1, explaining 54,98 % o he a iance oge he
(see Table 5).
Table 2
S uc u e o he Resea ch Sample wi h a View o Company Size (Numbe o Employees)
Company size
F equency
Pe cen
Valid Pe cen
Cumula i e Pe cen
Valid
No esponse
3
2,6
2,6
2,6
Mic o en e p ise (1–9)
26
22,6
22,6
25,2
Small en e p ise (10–50)
34
29,6
29,6
54,8
Medium-sized en e p ise (51–249)
42
36,5
36,5
91,3
La ge en e p ise (>250)
10
8,7
8,7
100,0
To al
115
100,0
100,0

F an isek Milicho sky, I e a Simbe o a. Ma ke ing E ec i eness: Me ics o E ec i e S a egic Ma ke ing
- 216 -
Table 3
Basic Desc ip i e S a is ics o he Da a Unde Examina ion
ROMI
ROI
Loyal y
Cus ome sa is ac ion
EVA
Pay pe click
Mean
,10
,21
,16
,54
,25
,11
S d. De ia ion
,298
,409
,366
,501
,437
,309
Va iance
,089
,168
,184
,251
,191
,096
Coe icien o a ia ion
,3356
,5134
,4372
1,0778
,5721
,356
Table 4
Co ela ion Ma ix o he Chosen Me ics
ROMI
ROI
Loyal y
Cus ome
sa is ac ion
EVA
Pay pe click
ROMI
Pea son Co ela ion
1
,427**
,029
,010
,365**
,274**
Sig. (2- ailed)
,000
,762
,920
,000
,003
ROI
Pea son Co ela ion
,427**
1
,012
-,079
,588**
,111
Sig. (2- ailed)
,000
,896
,401
,000
,241
Loyal y
Pea son Co ela ion
,029
,012
1
,259**
-,032
,096
Sig. (2- ailed)
,762
,896
,005
,736
,312
Cus ome
sa is ac ion
Pea son Co ela ion
,010
-,079
,259**
1
-,061
-,021
Sig. (2- ailed)
,920
,401
,005
,517
,822
EVA
Pea son Co ela ion
,365**
,588**
-,032
-,061
1
,135
Sig. (2- ailed)
.000
,000
,736
,517
,154
Pay pe click
Pea son Co ela ion
,274**
,111
,096
-,021
,135
1
Sig. (2- ailed)
,003
,241
,312
,822
,154
**. Co ela ion is signi ican a he 0.01 le el (2- ailed).
Table 5
To al a iance o Chosen Me ics
Componen
Ini ial Eigen alues
Ex ac ion Sums o Squa ed Loadings
Ro a ion Sums o Squa ed Loadings
To al
% o Va iance
Cumula i e %
To al
% o Va iance
Cumula i e %
To al
% o Va iance
Cumula i e %
1
2,015
33,580
33,580
2,015
33,580
33,580
2,007
33,450
33,450
2
1,284
21,400
54,980
1,284
21,400
54,980
1,292
21,530
54,980
3
,951
15,854
70,834
4
,743
12,386
83,220
5
,597
9,950
93,170
6
,410
6,830
100,000
Ex ac ion Me hod: P incipal Componen Analysis.
Table 6
Ro a ed Componen Ma ix
Componen
P o i
Cus ome
ROMI
,750
,130
ROI
,806
-,152
Pay pe click
,424
,297
Loyal y
,024
,783
Cus ome sa is ac ion
-,080
,721
EVA
,780
-,176
C onbach’s alpha
,713
,396
Ex ac ion Me hod: P incipal Componen Analysis.
Ro a ion Me hod: Va imax wi h Kaise No maliza ion.
a. Ro a ion con e ged in 3 i e a ions.
In he ex ac ion, all componen s we e di ided in o
new wo s onges componen g oups. These new
componen g oups ha e a di e se dep h wi h p e ious i e
componen s (see Table 6).
Acco ding o he esul s, he alues o C onbach’s
alpha we e on an accep able le el o he inancial g oup,
while o he cus ome ’s g oup, imp o emen is equi ed in
o de o each a leas a good le el.
The i s g oup includes especially “Re u n on
Ma ke ing In es men ”, “Re u n on In es men ” and
“Economic Value Added”. The second g oup in ol es
p ima ily “Loyal y” and “Cus ome sa is ac ion”. This
means he in o ma i e alue o he indica o is e y c edible.
These wo g oups de ine wo syn he ic dimensions o he
iew on measu ing pe o mance wi h an impac on
manage ial decision-making.
In o de o assess whe he i is possible o use he
ac o analysis, Kaise -Meye -Olkin me hod (KMO) and
Ba le 's es o sphe ici y we e used. The KMO me hod is
based on selec i e co ela ion and pa ial co ela ion
coe icien s.
Discussion
The KMO alue ange is be ween 0 and 1. Each
a iable co ela es pe ec ly o i sel (app oxima e o 1),
bu has no co ela ion o he o he a iables (app oxima e
o 0). In ou case, he KMO eached alue o 0.6, which
means ha he pe o med le el o use ulness o he ac o
analysis has an a e age alue.
Ba le ’s es o sphe ici y is a s a is ic es used o
examine he hypo hesis ha he a iables a e co ela ed o
unco ela ed. Acco ding o he KMO, no co ela ion was
ound wi h o he a iables (Sig = 0).
Acco ding o ou esul s, he alues o C onbach’s
alpha we e on an accep able le el o he P o i g oup, and
on nea ly a good le el o he g oup o Value added.
The p o i ac o (as a g oup) could be pu in o he
inancial g oup and KRI, because indi idual indica o s
show esul s o ealized ac i i ies (acco ding o Table 1).
Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 2015, 26(2), 211–219
- 217 -
A simila app oach is used o he abo e-men ioned
Cus ome Fac o . The indica o s in his ac o should be
included in he Non- inancial g oup, Cus ome g oup and
Ex e nal g oup (acco ding o Table 1).
Acco ding o ou esul s, he alues o C onbach’s
alpha we e:
 The P o i Fac o is a a good le el;
 The Cus ome Fac o is unaccep able.
Chosen P o i ac o includes key indica o s which
companies could use o ind own ma ke ing e ec i eness.
Conclusions
The co ec choice o pe o mance indica o s is an
impo an pa o he co po a e s a egic p ocess. The
de ini ion o pe o mance indica o s is qui e di icul
because o he complexi y o measu eable a eas.
A s a egic plan de ines a basis o e ec i e
measu emen in he pe o mance sys em. Fo he pu poses
o p ope measu emen , i is essen ial o ocus on
app op ia e ac o s and indica o s.
I is possible o de i e quali y in o ma ion and
a ailabili y o he exis ing elemen s om he s a egic plan
measu emen . To achie e he goal o inding he accu a e
elemen s, i is necessa y o ind egula answe s on i e
a eas:
 Choice o in o ma ion o publica ion,
 Liabili y o collec ing in o ma ion,
 Way and pe iod o publica ion measu emen ,
 Way o publica ion in o ma ion,
 Fo who is measu emen dedica ed.
The in o ma ion ob ained on men ioned ields is a
undamen o achie ing he equi ed pe o mance and
e ec i eness – no only ma ke ing ac i i ies, bu in he
whole company.
(Zahay & G i in, 2010) pe cei e as he main p oblem
ha companies do no measu e pe o mance on he cus ome
le el. I may ha e an implica ion on misunde s anding he
esul s o ma ke e s. The measu emen o cus ome
pe o mance usually depends on ields o co po a e
ac i i ies, i he company ope a es in he indus y ma ke o
in he se ices ma ke .
The objec i e o each company should consis in
di iding all cus ome s only in o wo highe le els (pa ne
and ad oca e) because hey c ea e he highes alue o he
company. These cus ome s a e au oma ically aken as
sa is ied cus ome s (Simbe o a, 2008).
S a egic ma ke ing is one o he mos impo an pa s
o complex co po a e s a egies on which each company
has o ocus. Fo he pu poses o measu ing he ma ke ing
e ec i eness, i is necessa y o ocus on cus ome s, and he
po en ial beha io end o a selec ed ma ke segmen . Fo
his eason, i is impo an o choose he app op ia e me ic
co esponding o he cu en ma ke posi ion and c ea ing
a o able ma ke ing backg ound o po en ial expansion.
Ou esea ch showed ha he e is a la ge space o
imp o emen . This imp o emen will o e new
oppo uni ies o companies o inc ease hei compe i i eness
in co po a e managemen in he Czech en i onmen .
Acco ding o he esul s o he ac o analysis and
C onbach’s alpha measu e, i is ecommended o use only
he p o i ac o , which enginee ing companies should
apply when measu ing ma ke ing e ec i eness. I is hus
becoming he p ima y ac o .
The limi a ion o his pape consis s in i s ocus on
domes ic companies. The e o e, u he esea ch should
make use o he knowledge no only o he domes ic
en i onmen , bu also he in e na ional en i onmen o
asce ain he in luence o he co po a e pe o mance
measu emen sys em.
Re e ences
Ahi, P., & Sea cy, C. (2015). An analysis o me ics used o measu e pe o mance in g een and sus ainable supply chain.
Jou nal o Cleane P oduc ion, 86(1), 360–377. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.jclep o.2014.08.005
Amble , T. (2000). Ma ke ing me ics. Business S a egy Re iew, 11(2), 59–66. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1111/1467-8616.
00138
Appiah-Adu, K., Fyall, A., & Singh, S. (2001). Ma ke ing e ec i eness and business pe o mance in he inancial se ices
indus y. Jou nal o Se ices Ma ke ing, 15(1), 18–32. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/08876040110381346
Bake , S., & Hol , S. (2004). Making ma ke e s accoun able: a ailu e o ma ke ing educa ion? Ma ke ing In elligence &
Planning, 22(5), 557–567. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/02634500410551932
Ba wise, P., & Fa ley, J. U. (2004). Ma ke ing me ics: S a us o six me ics in i e coun ies. Eu opean Managemen
Jou nal, 22(3), 257–262. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.emj.2004.04.012
Ciemleja, G., & Lace, N. (2011). The Model o Sus ainable Pe o mance o Small and Medium-sized En e p ise.
Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 22(5), 501–509. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.5755/j01.ee.22.5.968
Cla k, B. H. (1999). Ma ke ing pe o mance measu es: His o y and in e ela ionships. Jou nal o Ma ke ing Managemen ,
15, 711–732. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1362/026725799784772594
Cla k, B. H., Abela, A. V., & Amble , T. (2006). An in o ma ion p ocessing model o ma ke ing pe o mance
measu emen . Jou nal o Ma ke ing Theo y and P ac ice, 14(3), 191–208. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.2753/MTP1069-667
9140302
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale De elopmen : Theo y and Applica ion. Sage Publica ions, London.
Doyle, P. (2008). Value-based ma ke ing. Chiches e : John Wiley & Sons. 380 p.
Fa is, P. W., Bendle, N. T., P ei e , P. E., & Reibs ei, D. J. (2010). Ma ke ing me ics: The De ini i e guide o measu ing
ma ke ing pe o mance. 2.ed. New Je sey: Pea son Educa ion, p. 414.
F an isek Milicho sky, I e a Simbe o a. Ma ke ing E ec i eness: Me ics o E ec i e S a egic Ma ke ing
- 218 -
Gaia delli, P., Saccani, N., & Songini, L. (2007). Pe o mance Measu emen o he A e -sales Se ice Ne wo k –
E idence om he Au omo i e Indus y. Compu e s in Indus y, 58(7), 698–708. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.
1016/j.compind.2007.05.008
Gijsnbe g, M. J. (2014). Commen : Measu ing ma ke ing e ec i eness a ound majo spo s e en s: A compa ison o wo
s udies and a call o ac ion. In e na ional Jou nal o Resea ch in Ma ke ing, 31(1), 30–32. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.
1016/j.ij esma .2014.02.001
Gine icius, R., Pod ezko, V., & Gine icious, A. (2013). Quan i a i e e alua ion o en e p ise ma ke ing ac i i ies.
Jou nal o Business Economics and Managemen , 14(1), 200–212. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.3846/16111699.2012.731143
Gok, O., & Hacioglu, G. (2010). The o ganiza ional oles o ma ke ing and ma ke ing manage s. Ma ke ing In elligence &
Planning, 28(3), 291–309. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/02634501011041435
G eenye , A. (2006). Measu able ma ke ing: A Re iew o de elopmen in ma ke ing´s measu abili y. Jou nal o Business
& Indus ial Ma ke ing, 21(4), 239–242. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/08858620610672605
G eiling, D. (2006). Pe o mance measu emen : A emedy o Inc easing he E iciency o Public Se ices? In e na ional
Jou nal o P oduc i i y and Pe o mance Managemen , 55(6), 448–465. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/17410400610
682488
G onhold , L., & Ma ensen, A. (2006). Key ma ke ing pe o mance measu es. The Ma ke ing Re iew, 6(6), 243–52.
Ho nungo a, J. (2014). Fac o Analysis: An Ins umen o Selec ion o Social Pe o mance Fac o s. Re is a de Me odos
Cuan i a i os pa a la Economia y la Emp esa, 17(6), 121–136. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1362/146934706778605287
H ebicek, J., Soukopo a, J., S encl, M., & T enz, O. (2011). In eg a ion o economic, en i onmen al, social and co po a e
go e nance pe o mance and epo ing in en e p ises. Ac a Uni e si a is Ag icul u ae e Sil icul u ae Mendelianae
B unensis, 59(7), 157–166. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.11118/ac aun201159070157
Jakubiko a, D. (2008). S a egicky ma ke ing: S a egie a endy. P aha: G ada Publishing. 269.
Kahn, K. B., & Mye s, M. B. (2005). F aming ma ke ing e ec i eness as a p ocess and ou come. Ma ke ing Theo y, 5(4),
457–469. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1177/1470593105058825
Ke zne , H. (2011). P ojec Managemen Me ics, KPIs and Dashboa ds: A Guide o measu ing and moni o ing p ojec
pe o mance. New Je sey: John Wiley & Sons. 372. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1002/9781118086254
Kocmano a, A., Ho nungo a, J., & Klimko a, M. (2010). Ud zi elnos : In eg ace en i onmen alni, socialni a ekonomicke
ykonnos i podniku. B no: Akademicke naklada els i CERM, 125.
Kocmano a, A., & Simbe o a, I. (2012). Modelling o Co po a e Go e nance Pe o mance Indica o s. Inzine ine
Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 23(5), 485–495.
Ko le , P. (1977). F om sales obsession o ma ke ing e ec i eness. Ha a d Business Re iew, 55, 67–75.
Ko le , P. (1997). Ma ke ing Managemen , Analysis Planning, Implemen a ion and Con ol, New Je sey: P en ice-Hall.
Ko le , P., & Kelle , K. L. (2007). Ma ke ing Managemen . P aha: G ada Publishing. 788.
Kozena, M., Chladek, T. (2012). Company Compe i i eness Measu emen Depending on i s Size and Field o Ac i i ies.
P ocedia - Social and Beha io al Sciences, 58(12), 1085–1090. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.sbsp o.2012.09.1089
Lambe i, L., & Noci, G. (2010). Ma ke ing s a egy and ma ke ing pe o mance measu emen sys em: Explo ing he
ela ionship. Eu opean Managemen Jou nal, 28(2), 139–152. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.emj.2009.04.007
Lehmann, D. R. (2004). Me ics o making ma ke ing ma e . Jou nal o Ma ke ing, 68(4), 73–75.
Li, L. Y. (2011). Ma ke ing me ics’ usage: I s p edic o s and implica ions o cus ome ela ionship managemen .
Indus ial Ma ke ing Managemen , 40(1), 139–148. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1509/jmkg.68.4.73.42727
Llonch, J., Eusebio, R., & Amble , T. (2002). Measu es o ma ke ing success: A Compa ison be ween Spain and he UK.
Eu opean Managemen Jou nal, 20(4), 414–422. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/S0263-2373(02)00064-6
Milicho sky, F., Solcansky, M., & Sych o a, L. (2011). P is upy k me eni e ek i nos i ma ke ingo ych cinnos i. T endy
ekonomiky a managemen u. 5(8), 131–138.
Milicho sky, F., & Simbe o a, I. (2011). Signi ica ion o ma ke ing e ec i eness in indus y. In In e na ional Scien i ic
Con e ence Whi he Ou Economies, 1(1), 98–103.
Mo gan, N. A., Cla k, B. H., & Goone , R. (2002). Ma ke ing p oduc i i y, ma ke ing audi s, and sys ems o ma ke ing
pe o mance assessmen : In eg a ing mul iple pe spec i es. Jou nal o Business Resea ch, 55(5), 363–375.
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00162-4
Neil, S., McKee. D., & Rose, G. (2007). De eloping he o ganiza ion´s sense making capabili y: P ecu so o an adap i e
s a egic ma ke ing esponse. Indus ial Ma ke ing Managemen , 36(6), 731–744. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/
j.indma man.2006.05.008
O’Sulli an, D., Abela, A. V., & Hu chinson, M. (2009). Ma ke ing pe o mance measu emen and i m pe o mance:
E idence om he Eu opean high- echnology sec o . Eu opean Jou nal o Ma ke ing, 43(5/6), 843–862.
h p://dx.doi.o g/10. 1108/03090560910947070
Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 2015, 26(2), 211–219
- 219 -
Pa men e , D. (2010). Key pe o mance indica o : De eloping, implemen ing and using winning KPIs. New Je sey: John
Wiley & sons, 299.
Pe e s, K., Chen, Y., Kaplan, A. M., Ognibeni, B., & Pauwels, K. (2013). Social media me ics - A amewo k and
guidelines o managing social media. Jou nal o In e ac i e Ma ke ing, 27(4), 281–298. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.
1016/j.in ma .2013.09.007
Rus , R. T., Amble , T., Ca pen e , G. S., Kuma , V., & S i as a a, R. K. (2004). Measu ing ma ke ing p oduc i i y:
cu en knowledge and u u e di ec ions. Jou nal o Ma ke ing, 68(3), 76–89. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1509/jmkg.68.4.
76.42721
Ru kauskas, A. V., Lapinskai e-V ohl ah , I., & S asy y e, V. (2011). Ma ke ing Po olio Managemen in a Spec um o
Ma ke ing Asse s In e ac ion o Maximize Holde ’s U ili y. Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 22(5),
485–493. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.5755/j01.ee.22.5.967
Sampaio, C. H., Simoes, C., Pe in, M. G., & Almeida, A. (2011). Ma ke ing me ics: Insigh s om B azilian manage s.
Indus ial Ma ke ing Managemen , 40(1), 8–16. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.indma man.2010.09.005
Se in, C. H. (1965). Ma ke ing p oduc i i y analysis. McG aw-Hill, New Yo k Ci y, NY.
She h, J. N., & Sisodia, R. S. (2002). Ma ke ing p oduc i i y: issues and analysis. Jou nal o Business Resea ch, 55(5),
349–62. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/S0148-2963(00)00164-8
S ewa , D. W. (2009). Ma ke ing accoun abili y: linking ma ke ing ac ions o inancial esul s. Jou nal o Business
Resea ch, 62(6), 636–43. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.jbus es.2008.02.005
Simbe o a, I. (2010). Company s a egic ma ke ing managemen – syne gic app oach and alue c ea ing. Ac a uni . ag ic.
e sil ic. Mendel. B un., 58(6), 543–552. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.11118/ac aun201058060543
Simbe o a, I. (2008). Vz ahy se s akeholde y soudobych ma ke ingo ych koncepcich. T endy ekonomiky a
managemen u, 2(2), 71–80.
Tikkanen, H., Kujala, J., & A o, K. (2007). The ma ke ing s a egy o a p ojec -based i m: The ou po olio
amewo k. Indus ial Ma ke ing Managemen , 36(2), 194–205. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.indma man.2006.03.006
T udgen, R., & F eeman, S. (2014). Measu ing he pe o mance o bo n-global i ms h oughou hei de elopmen
p ocess: The oles o ini ial ma ke selec ion and in e na ionaliza ion speed. Managemen In e na ional Re iew,
54(4), 551–579. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1007/s11575-014-0210-y
Valos, M. J., & Vocino, A. (2006). An in eg a i e ma ke ing channel pe o mance measu emen amewo k. Jou nal o
Da abase Ma ke ing & Cus ome S a egy Managemen , 14(1), 17–28. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1057/palg a e.
dbm.3250037
Va ada ajan, R. (2010). S a egic ma ke ing and ma ke ing s a egy: domain, de ini i e, undamen al issues and
ounda ional p emises. Jou nal o he Academic Ma ke ing Science, 38, 119–140. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1007/s11747-
009-0176-7
Vi ilai e, R., Seinauskiene, B., & Ses okiene, G. (2011). The link be ween s anda diza ion/adap a ion o in e na ional
ma ke ing s a egy and company pe o mance. Inzine ine Ekonomika-Enginee ing Economics, 22(1), 106–117.
h p://dx.doi.o g/10.5755/j01.ee.22.1.223
Webs e , C. (1995). Ma ke ing cul u e and ma ke ing e ec i eness in se ice i ms. Jou nal o Se ices Ma ke ing, 9(2),
6–21. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/08876049510085973
Webs e , F. E. J , Mal e , A. J., & Ganesan, S. (2005). The decline and dispe sion o ma ke ing compe ence. MIT Sloan
Managemen Re iew, 46(4), 35–43.
Williams, P., & Naumann, E. (2011). Cus ome Sa is ac ion and Business Pe o mance: a Fi m-le el Analysis. Jou nal o
Se ice Ma ke ing, 25(1), 20–32. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/08876041111107032
Zahay, D., & G i in, A. (2010). Ma ke ing s a egy selec ion, ma ke ing me ics and i m pe o mance. Jou nal o
Business & Indus ial Ma ke ing, 25(2), 84–93. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1108/08858621011017714
Zahe awa i, Z., Z, Mahaz il, A. Y., Zu aini, Y., Nazni, N., Mohd Zool Hilmie, M. S., & Zu iawa i, Z. (2011). Key
Pe o mance Indica o s (KPIs) in he Public Sec o : A S udy in Malaysia. Asian Social Science. 7(7), 102–107.
The a icle has been e iewed.
Recei ed in Ma ch, 2013; accep ed in Ap il, 2015.