Marketing Effectiveness: Metrics for Effective Strategic Marketing

-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.