• Stella Zulu-Chisanga University of Leeds Copperbelt University
  • Nathaniel Boso University of Leeds
  • Ogechi Adeola Pan-Atlantic University
  • Pejvak Oghazi Linnaeus University


This resource-based study investigates how a path from firm innovativeness to financial performance is channelled through new product success, and is contingent upon levels of market responsiveness and environment turbulence. Using primary data from small- and medium-sized exporting firms in the United Kingdom, the study finds that new product success partially mediates the path from firm innovativeness to financial performance. The study further finds that while market responsiveness strengthens links between new product success and financial performance, environment turbulence weakens the relationship. The implications of these findings for both researchers and managers of small- and medium-size enterprises are discussed.


Download data is not yet available.


Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411-423.

Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (3), 396-402.

Artz, K. W., Norman, P. M., Hatfield, D. E., & Cardinal, L. B. (2010). A longitudinal study of the impact of R&D, patents, and product innovation on firm performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(5), 725-740.

Atalay, M., Anafarta, N., & Sarvan, F. (2013). The relationship between innovation and firm performance: An empirical evidence from Turkish automotive supplier industry. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75, 226-235.

Atuahene-Gima, K., Slater, S. F., & E. M. Olson. (2005). The contingent value of responsive and proactive market orientations for new product program performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22, 464-82.

Bagozzi, R. & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.

Bagozzi, R. & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 8-34.

Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99.

Baum, J. A. C., Calabrese, T. & Silverman, B. S. (2000). Don't Go It Alone: Alliance Network Composition and Startups' Performance in Canadian Biotechnology. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 267-294.

Blair, E., & Zinkhan, G. M. (2006). Nonresponse and generalizability in academic research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34, 4-7.

Bodlaj, M., Coenders, G. & Zabkar, V. (2012). Responsive and proactive market orientation and innovation success under market and technological turbulence. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13, 666-687.

Boso, N., Story, V. M., Cadogan, J. W., Micevski, M. & Kadić-Maglajlić, S. (2013). Firm innovativeness and export performance: Environmental, networking, and structural contingencies. Journal of International Marketing, 21, 62-87.

Boyne, G. A., & Meier, K. J. (2009). Environmental turbulence, organizational stability, and public service performance. Administration & Society, 40, 799.

Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Cadogan, J. W., Cui, C. C., & Li, E. K. Y. (2003). Export market-oriented behavior and export performance. International Marketing Review, 20, 493-513.

Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T., & Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning orientation, firm innovation capability, and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 515-524.

Deshpande', R., & Farley, J. U. (2004). Organizational culture, market orientation, innovativeness, and firm performance: an international research odyssey. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21, 3-22.

González-Benito, Ó., González-Benito, J., & Muñoz-Gallego, P. A. (2014). On the consequences of market orientation across varied environmental dynamism and competitive intensity levels. Journal of Small Business Management, 52, 1-21.

Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics,133(2), 662-676.

Hawawini, G., Subramanian, V., & Verdin, P. (2003). Is performance driven by industry- or firm-specific factors? A new look at the evidence. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1-16.

Jaworski, B. J., & A. K. Kohli. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57, 53-70.

Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of business research, 64(4), 408-417.

Joshi, A. W., & Campbell, A. J. (2003). Effect of environmental dynamism on relational governance in manufacturer-supplier relationships: A contingency framework and an empirical test. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31, 176-188.

Knight, G. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2004). Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 355, 124-141.

Menguc, B., & S. Auh. (2006). Creating a firm-level dynamic capability through capitalizing on market orientation and innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 341, 63–73.

Morgan, N. A., & Katsikeas, C. S., & Vorhies, D. W. (2012). Export marketing strategy implementation, export marketing capabilities, and export venture performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 271-289.

Narver, J. C., Slater, S. F., & Maclachlan, D. L. (2004). Responsive and proactive market orientation and new-product success. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21, 334-347.

Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.

Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J., & Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26, 441-457.

Rousseau, D. M., & Fried, Y. (2001) Location, location, location: Contextualizing organizational research, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22: 1-13.

Rubera, G., & Kirca, A. H. (2012). Firm innovativeness and its performance outcomes: A Meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Marketing, 76, 130-147.

Story, V. M., Boso, N., & Cadogan, J. W. (2015). The form of relationship between firm-level product innovativeness and new product performance in developed and emerging markets. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32, 45-64.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509-533.

Tellis, G. J., Prabhu, J. C., & Chandy, R. K. (2009). Radical innovation across nations: The preeminence of corporate culture. Journal of Marketing, 73, 3-23.

Wang, C. L., & P. K. Ahmed. (2004). The development and validation of the organizational innovativeness construct using confirmatory factor analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management. 7, 303–13.

Wei, Y. S., Samiee, S., & Lee, R. P. (2014). The influence of organic organizational cultures, market responsiveness, and product strategy on firm performance in an emerging market. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(1), 49-70.

Vermeulen, P. A. M., De Jong, J. P. J., & O'Shaughnessy, K. C. (2005). Identifying key determinants for new product introductions and firm performance in small service firms. Service Industries Journal, 25, 625-640.

Whetten, D. (2009). An examination between context and theory applied to the study of organizations in China, Management and Organization Review, 5(1): 29-55.

Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. A. (2011). Where to from here? EO-as-experimentation, failure, and distribution of outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, September, 925-946.

Yang, T.T., & Li, C.R. (2011). Competence exploration and exploitation in new product development. Management Decision, 49, 1444-1470.