The influence of quality of big data marketing analytics on marketing capabilities: the impact of perceived market performance!
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Big data marketing analytics (BDMA) has been discovered to be a key contributing factor to developing necessary marketing capabilities. This research aims to investigate the impact of the technology and information quality of BDMA on the critical marketing capabilities by differentiating between firms with low and high perceived market performance. Design/methodology/approach The responses were collected from marketing professionals familiar with BDMA in North America ( N = 236). The analysis was done with partial least squares-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). Findings The results indicated positive and significant relationships between the information and technology quality as exogenous constructs and the endogenous constructs of the marketing capabilities of marketing planning, implementation and customer relationship management (CRM) with mainly moderate effect sizes. Differences in the path coefficients in the structural model were detected between firms with low and high perceived market performance. Originality/value This research indicates the critical role of technology and information quality in developing marketing capabilities. The study discovered heterogeneity in the sample population when using the low and high perceived market performance as the source of potential heterogeneity, the presence of which would likely cause a threat to the validity of the results in case heterogeneity is not considered. Thus, this research builds on previous research by considering this issue.
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 | 0.031 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".