Home / Market Development

Building a Scale of Research Concepts

Market development is shown in Table 4 – the original scale and the adjusted scale in Appendix 4B .

The results of the first qualitative interview helped confirm the appropriateness of the research concept to the research context, perfecting the appropriate wording for the research concept. Then, the second draft scale was completed to form a survey sheet in preparation for the pretest phase.

3.2.4 Second qualitative interview

After adjusting the draft scale ( Appendix 4 - Original scale and wording correction after the first in-depth interview ), the preliminary questionnaire was formed ( Appendix 5).

– Preliminary survey ). The questionnaire was further determined through a preliminary survey of 50 enterprises ( Appendix 9 – List of 50 enterprises for preliminary interviews ) and a second in-depth interview. The second in-depth interview was conducted using the group interview method. The author organized a meeting with 9 experts to get feedback on the appropriateness of the scale from the preliminary research results to complete the official scale and complete the questionnaire for the official research. Similar to the first interview, the criteria for selecting 9 experts are still based on their professional qualifications, understanding, research and practical experience in the field of construction economics, construction materials and technological innovation, of which 2 experts are both scientists and have practical experience in construction (Lecturers), who attach importance to the development of the construction materials industry, 2 experts understand and implement policies and legal documents of the Government and localities in the development of the construction materials industry and 4 experts operate construction enterprises related to construction materials. The experts are currently working at reputable production facilities, enterprises, educational institutions under the management level including Directors, Deputy Directors of enterprises or in-depth researchers, have practical experience related to the research topic, have experience from 5 to 15 years in the fields of construction, economics and management. The list of experts consulted for the second qualitative interview is presented in Appendix 8 – List of 9 experts for the second in-depth interview .

Firstly, the experts agreed with the preliminary survey results with a sample size of 50 with all scales meeting the criteria for Cronbach's Alpha reliability assessment and EFA factor analysis. Secondly, the experts generally agreed with the preliminary quantitative analysis results ( Appendix 6 - Cronbach's Alpha reliability test results and Appendix 7 - EFA factor analysis ). Regarding the observed variables eliminated after Cronbach's Alpha and EFA testing, the experts agreed with the elimination of indicators including MIG3, MIG5r, MID3, MID4 that did not meet the requirements due to the total item correlation coefficient being less than 0.3. The expert also suggested that “MIG3 - Collecting information through informal means from friends in the industry, talking to business partners” and “MIG5r - The company is slow to detect fundamental changes in the industry (competition, technology, regulation) (R)” and “MID4 - Marketing staff in the company’s business unit spend time discussing future customer needs with other functional departments” could be retained for testing in a larger sample. Therefore, the eliminated indicators should be retained in the research concept scale when forming the formal questionnaire.

67

In summary, most experts affirm that the development of construction materials is inevitable, there is a relationship between market orientation and innovation capacity for the existence and development of the construction materials industry. The role of government support is important, and the market orientation activities from manufacturers to the main customers of the manufacturers that are currently taking place are necessary, sometimes decisive for the innovation of the manufacturers in developing the construction materials market in the Mekong Delta. The qualitative research results also help eliminate unclear observation variables in the translation process from English to Vietnamese, the duplication of observation variables that cause confusion for interviewees, and adjust the wording to ensure that the observation variables in the scale accurately reflect the nature of the research problem. Thus, through in-depth interviews with experts and pretesting the draft scale two in this study included 14 indicators for the concept of market orientation (independent variable), 10 indicators for the concept of innovation capacity (independent variable), 4 indicators for the concept of government support (regulatory variable), and 6 indicators for the concept of market development (dependent variable).

3.3 Quantitative research methods

The results of qualitative research are the basis for the author to conduct quantitative research. The quantitative research process is carried out in two stages including preliminary research to test the scale of factors and official research to test the model and research hypothesis. To ensure the appropriateness of the research model, the author performs the following steps: (1) Building a scale of research concepts, (2) Selecting samples and collecting data for quantitative research, (3) Analyzing data.

3.3.1 Building a scale for measuring research concepts

Research on market development of a product through the market-oriented research model of the enterprise focusing on the enterprise customers, affecting the innovation capacity of the manufacturer is a content that has not been done in Vietnam, especially new products (VLXKN) in the construction industry. The studies and related scales that have been summarized are mostly from studies in the world, the context is completely different. Therefore, to explore and build a scale suitable for the context of Vietnam, the author referred to scales from many different theoretical sources. Then, conduct qualitative and quantitative research to build a suitable set of scales. Along with the results of the first qualitative research (Section 3.2.3) , the author proposed an official research model. A total of 4 groups of research concepts used in the thesis including market orientation, innovation capacity, government support and market development have been adjusted to suit the context ( Original English scale - Appendix 4A, Original scale translated into Vietnamese and Scale of wording adjustment of these concepts to suit the research context have been presented in Appendix 4B ). The following is a set of scales of the concepts that have been built.

3.3.1.1. Market orientation

The concept of market orientation originates from the resource-based theory, first proposed from the behavioral perspective by Jaworski and Kohli (1990,1993) as the original scale with 21 indicators . Later, this scale was used by Morgan et al. (2009).

was adapted and used with 16 indicators. Aljanabi & Mohd (2015); Gligor et al. (2019) also applied the adapted scale of Morgan et al. (2009) (see Original Market Orientation Scale in the original scale and adapted after in-depth interviews Table 1 in Appendix 4B).

Research on market orientation has made important contributions nearly three decades ago from the research of Kohli and Jaworski (1990) and Narver and Slater (1990). However, Kohli and Jaworski (1990) considered market orientation (MO) as a marketing implementation concept while Narver and Slater (1990) considered market orientation as an organizational culture. There is much evidence that market orientation (MO) has a direct and positive impact on business results (!!! INVALID CITATION !!! (Langerak et al., 2004; Murray et al., 2011; Powers et al., 2020)). In this study, the author uses the definition of market orientation (MO) according to Jaworski and Kohli (1993) from the perspective of consumption channels. Jaworski & Kohli (1993) used 21 observed variables in 3 aspects to define market orientation including the creation of market information throughout the organization, the dissemination of that information across departments, and the organization's ability to respond to market information.

Market intelligence is the process of collecting necessary information related to customer desires from the business environment with 10 original indicators. Later, the study of NA Morgan et al. (2009) tested this scale with 6 indicators with 230 surveys in the goods and services industry. Aljanabi and Mohd (2015) used 4 indicators of Jaworski and Kohli (1993) and NA Morgan et al. (2009) to test the impact of market orientation on technological innovation capability of small and medium-sized construction enterprises (249 surveys). Gligor et al. (2019) extended and tested market orientation from the company to their supply chain with 241 pairs of focal companies and their suppliers/distributors in the US market. Gligor et al.'s (2019) MO research variable with Jaworski and Kohli's (1993) and NA Morgan et al.'s (2009) 6-indicator Market Information Generation to test the impact of the focal firm's market orientation on the market orientation of their suppliers/distributors.

Similarly, Information dissemination involves sharing knowledge, market information among different departments and members of the company. NA Morgan et al. (2009) used 5 observed variables from the original scale of Jaworski & Kohli (1993). The author also inherited from the indicators of NA Morgan et al. (2009) in his study and used 5/6 observed variables of NA Morgan et al. (2009) and Jaworski and Kohli (1993).

Responsiveness is the ability to take necessary actions, the speed and coordination of the implementation of those necessary activities of the company from receiving, creating, sharing market information. NA Morgan et al. (2009) used 5 observed variables from the original scale of Jaworski & Kohli (1993). The author also inherited from the observed variables of NA Morgan et al. (2009) in his study and used 4/6 observed variables of

NA Morgan et al. (2009) and Jaworski & Kohli (1993). The specific scales are in Table 3.1 below:

Table 3.1: Market orientation concept scale

Encryption

Research variables

Observation variable

Source

Featured Company

Corporate customers


Employees from the production department interact directly with customers.

customers to know how to serve better

Jaworski and Kohli (1993)

MIGF1

MIGC1


Businesses often talk to or survey people who can influence the purchases of their customers.

me

Jaworski and Kohli (1993)

MIGF2

MIGC2

Create market intelligence

Generation)

In this business unit, the business meets with customers to find out about upcoming products/services at least once a month.

once a year

Jaworski and Kohli (1993)

MIGF3

MIGC3


Gather information through informal means from industry friends, talk to your audience

business partnership

Jaworski and Kohli (1993)

MIGF4

MIGC4


Businesses are slow to detect fundamental changes in the industry (competition, technology,

(R)

Jaworski and Kohli (1993)

MIGF5r

MIGC5r


Enterprises provide information documents related to construction materials for

my customers


MIDF1

MIDC1

Application of the original scale of Jaworski and Kohli (1993);

Morgan et al. (2009) incorporated qualitative research to adapt the terminology to the research context.

c




Businesses disseminate customer satisfaction information to all department managers regularly.

through

MIDF2

MIDC2

Market intelligence

dissemination)

Enterprises organize and participate in meetings and seminars on disseminating and developing market trends (at least once a year).

year)

MIDF3

MIDC3


Marketing staff within a company's business units spend time discussing future customer needs with

other functional parts

MIDF4

MIDC4


When something is important

happens to a customer or

MIDF5

MIDC5

Maybe you are interested!

Building a Scale of Research Concepts



Encryption

Research variables

Observation variable

Source

Consumer company

point

Client

DN


large market, whole business unit

business all know about it in short time





Businesses spend a lot of time deciding how to react to competitors' price changes.

competitor (R)

Application of the original scale of Jaworski and Kohli (1993);

Morgan and

fortifications

(2009) combined qualitative research to adapt terminology to the research context.

RMIF1r

RMIC1r


Businesses do not (little) care about customer complaints related to

VLXKN (R)

RMIF2r

RMIC2r

Responsiveness to market intelligence



For various reasons, businesses tend to ignore changes in product demand.

customer product/service (R)

RMIF3r

RMID3r


Businesses periodically review their product/service development efforts to ensure that they are consistent with what

customer desire

RMIF4

RMIC4

Source: Author's synthesis

3.3.1.2. Innovation capacity

Innovation capability is considered an intangible resource in the resource-based theory. The innovation capability scale is measured according to the perspective of OECD Oslo Manual (2005), Jiménez-Jiménez and Sanz-Valle (2011) and Karabulut (2015) with 14 indicators. The scale has been adjusted in terms of wording to suit the requirements of the construction industry context in the Mekong Delta ( See the original scale and the adjustment after in-depth interviews in Table 2 in Appendix 4B ). The innovation capability scale (IC) was developed by previous studies including (OECD Oslo Manual, 2005, pp. 46-47); Karabulut (2015). According to the Oslo Manual, innovation is defined as “the implementation of a significant improvement or renewal of a product, service, or process, marketing method, or new organizational method in business practices, workplace organization, or external relations” (OECD Oslo Manual, 2005, pp. 46-47). Innovation has also been classified as product innovation, process innovation, marketing innovation, and organizational innovation (OECD Oslo Manual, 2005, p. 47). Innovation can help improve a company’s performance by increasing market demand or reducing costs (OECD Oslo Manual, 2005, p. 29). Karabulut (2015) inherited the classification of the OECD Oslo Manual (2005) using 20 observed variables of 4 types of innovation capabilities including product innovation, process innovation, technological innovation, and organizational innovation to consider the positive impact on

performance of 197 companies in Türkiye. The thesis will inherit the scale of Karabulut (2015) with 3 types of innovation including product, process and marketing; at the same time; there are some adjustments to suit the context of the construction industry in Vietnam after qualitative research.

Product innovation: A company that implements product innovation can use new technologies and knowledge in introducing new products and services, improving features or usage characteristics for existing products and services (OECD Oslo Manual, 2005, p. 48). Karabulut (2015) pointed out that implementing product innovation increases market share and business results. The thesis inherits the Product Innovation scale in Karabulut's study (2015) with 3 indicators.

Process innovation is “the implementation of new or improved methods of producing or distributing products and services”, “including changes in techniques, equipment, or even software used to reduce unit production costs, increase quality, or to produce and distribute new or improved products” (OECD Oslo Manual, 2005, p. 49). The author uses 4 indicators in Karabulut’s Process Innovation scale (2015).

Marketing innovation is the implementation of new marketing methods that involve significant changes in product design or packaging, product placement, advertising, or product pricing (OECD Oslo Manual, 2005, p. 49). This method can open up new markets, address customer needs, and reposition products in the market to increase sales. The author adjusted and used 3 observed variables for this study, instead of 5 indicators as in Karabulut (2015).

Table 3.2: Scale of innovation capacity concept


Research variables (Constructs)


Observation variable

Original scale and supplementary scale

Encryption


The business has improved an existing product, produced and sold a new model and

more than before;

Using the original scale of OECD Oslo Manual (2005);

Karabulut (2015) combines qualitative research to refine the term

language appropriate to the research context

PUI1


The tools and equipment used for manufacturing products in modern enterprises are more

PUI2

Product Innovation


The effect of regular efforts to train the company's staff on innovation of construction materials products

Applying the original OECD scale (2005); Jiménez- Jiménez, D. and Sanz- Valle, R. (2011) combined qualitative research to adjust the word

language appropriate to the research context

PUI3


Research variables (Constructs)


Observation variable


Original scale and supplementary scale


Encryption


Businesses have changed the way they do business.

production/business compared to before

Scale application

OECD (2005) original; Karabulut

(2015) combined qualitative research to adapt terminology to the research context.

PSI1


Businesses produce faster than before thanks to the application of additional tools and techniques.

new technique

PSI2

Process Innovation


The cost of the production process at the enterprise is more controlled and saved thanks to the elimination of unnecessary activities and stages.

design

PSI3


The enterprise keeps records of purchasing production materials until the completion of production and delivery of products to customers.

row


PSI4


There are changes in packaging, product design, and prices of construction materials to increase sales.

business

Applying the original scale of OECD (2005); Karabulut

(2015); Shu, C.,

Zhou, KZ, Xiao, Y. and Gao, S. (2016) Combining qualitative research to adapt terminology to research context

MI1

Marketing innovation

When introducing VLXKN to new customers, the company should show pictures of projects that have used VLXKN of the company and used them for the purpose.

other purpose

MI2


There are new methods in marketing other companies' products.

than the previous method

MI3

Source: Author's synthesis

3.3.1.3 Government Support

The Government Support scale is derived from institutional theory, following the original scale of Li and Atuahene-Gima (2001) with 4 indicators (see the original scale and the adjusted scale after in-depth interviews Table 3 in Appendix 4B) . The Government Support scale is considered in this thesis as a catalytic role (moderating variable role) affecting the market orientation and innovation capacity of the focal company in the production and consumption of construction materials. Government support is the extent to which administrative agencies (including central or local government agencies) provide assistance (including policies and programs) to firms within a country or region to promote the innovation activities of those firms (H. Li & Atuahene-Gima, 2001; Martin & Scott, 2000; Sheng et al., 2011; Shu et al., 2015; Shu et al., 2016).

In line with the view of H. Li and Atuahene-Gima (2001), Government support is initiated and implemented by the central and local governments with the aim of

The purpose of promoting innovation and change for enterprises in a region or country. In this thesis, the author examines the role and influence of formal institutions outside the law in the context of innovation of a company that produces construction materials. The Government Institutional Support scale has 4 indicators according to H. Li and Atuahene-Gima (2001).

Table 3.3: Scale of the concept of Government Support

Research variables (Constructs)

Observation variable

Original scale and supplementary scale

Encryption


To increase innovation in the production and use of construction materials, central and local governments and other agencies

theirs has:




Implement policies and programs that mandate and encourage their use

Construction Materials

Application of the original scale of

H. Li and Atuahene-Gima (2001) and Sheng et al. (2011) combined qualitative research to adapt wording to context.

study

GS1

Government Support

(Government Support)



Provided to us

information and necessary technology support

H. Li and Atuahene-Gima

(2001); Sheng et al. (2011)

GS2


Assisted businesses in finding financial resources

H. Li and Atuahene-Gima (2001); Sheng et al.

(2011)

GS3


Supported businesses in importing technology, production and other equipment when

need

H. Li and Atuahene-Gima (2001); Sheng et al. (2011)

GS4

Source: Author's synthesis

3.3.1.4 Market development

Market development is a performance component in the resource-based theoretical framework (Figure 2.3) . In the field of strategic management and marketing, market development is considered as the destination in the stage where a business achieves increased revenue by using marketing efforts (FR David et al., 2017). This is one of the measures of success and performance of a product or a company (Kotler & Armstrong, 2018). Market development emphasizes the criteria achieved from market results such as market share, total revenue, customer satisfaction (Kafetzopoulos & Psomas, 2015; Lakhal et al., 2006; Shaukat et al., 2013). Kafetzopoulos & Psomas (2015) also considers product quality as an additional factor in market results. Some authors when evaluating market development also consider each aspect suitable for their research context, such as considering only one aspect of marketing results (Psomas et al., 2018) or business results (Cheng et al., 2014; Najib & Kiminami, 2011; Prajogo, 2006, 2016). Recently, Dang et al. (2019) research in the construction sector argued that construction companies

74

Comment


Agree Privacy Policy *