How will market orientation and external environmnet influence the performance among SMEs in the agri-food sector in Malaysia?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many researchers have explored the relationship between market orientation and firm performance in manufacturing and services industries but such studies in agri-food SMEs are scarce. Previous research conducted has conceptually and empirically supported the notion that market orientation independently or collectively have positive correlations with the business performance of organization (such as Narver and Slater, 1990; Jaworski and Kohli, 1993; Lee and Peterson, 2000). The aim of this paper is to examine the marketing practices and the marketing orientation-business performance relationship among SMEs in agri-food sector in Malaysia. This study also investigated the role of the external environment in the market orientation-performance linkage. From an analysis of a survey data of 102 agri- food organizations, three dimensions namely customer-competitor orientation, inter-functional coordination and information dissemination extracted from factor analysis result of market orientation. The study revealed that customer-competitor orientation and information dissemination were positively related to business performance. In terms of the role of external environment, two dimensions produced by factor analysis, market-technology turbulence and competitive intensity did not moderate the relationship between market orientation and business performance. Findings are discussed and implications are highlighted. Keywords: Market Orientation, External Environment, Business Performance
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".