The basics of marketing strategy 75
contributions has argued that notions such as
forgetting and foolishness are in fact much
more important.
In a further and more recent commentary
on the whole debate about the Honda study,
Mair (1999) argues that:
The weaker hypothesis is therefore that Honda
seeks ways to make apparent contradictory
polarities in strategic management concepts
mutually compatible. A strong hypothesis is that
Honda has found ways to make the polarities
mutually supportive, so that they are in fact
positively rather than negatively correlated.
This suggest that... an appropriate para-
digm under which the strategy industry could
learn from Honda would be to analyse and
reconstruct how Honda does not choose
between the polar positions of the dichotomies
of strategic management but synthesizes them
in its strategy making. This... would of course
include analysis of the problems that arise
when Honda fails to implement such an
approach, notably the apparent over-domina-
tion of the product led aspects of strategy as
revealed by the crisis in the 1990s.The recourse to processes, people and purpose in marketing as well as strategy as a whole
More recently in marketing strategy, as in
strategy as a whole, there has been a move
away from analysis based on real substantive
recommendations for management action
towards a concern more for processes, people
and purposes rather than structure, strategies
and systems. This change in emphasis was
particularly introduced by Bartlett and Ghoshal
(1995) in their influential Harvard Business
Reviewarticle.
Whilst this shift can be seen as a reasonable
response to our lack of substantive general-
izable knowledge about the nature of success-
ful marketing strategies in a competitive
marketplace, as we have discussed above, it
should also be seen as one which itself has rather
limited evidence to support it. In marketing
strategy in particular, two areas can be identified
where this trend has been very evident and we
will look critically at both of these: the shift
towards a focus on networks and relationship
marketing, and the increased emphasis on
marketing processes within the firm.Markets as networks
It is clear, as Easton (1990) has indicated, that
actual firm relationships must be seen on a
spectrum between outright competition at one
end and collusion at the other. At the very least,
such a self-evident observation raises the issue of
the firm (or business unit) as the basic, and often
only, unit of analysis: in certain circumstances
we might more appropriately consider an infor-
mal coalition of such firms as the key unit:Earlier, the border of the company was seen as
the dividing line between co-operation and
conflict – co-operation within the company and
conflict in relation to all external units. The
corresponding means for co-ordination are hier-
archy and the market mechanism. The existence
of relationships makes this picture much more
diffuse. There are great opportunities for co-
operation with a lot of external units forming,
for example, coalitions. Thus, it is often more
fruitful to see the company as a part of a
network instead of a free and independent actor
in an atomistic market.
(Hakansson, 1987, p. 13)However, the recognition that there is a net-
work of relationships is merely the first step.
Approaches need to be developed for the
analysis of the network. Hakansson has, for
instance, suggested that the key elements of
any network are actors, activities and resources.
He also suggests that the overall network is
bound together by a number of forces, includ-
ing functional interdependence, as well as
power, knowledge and time-related structure.
There is a danger in confusing a detailed
descriptive model with a simple but robust