TITLE: Market orientation of universities in MoroccoWhich approach is most suitable? Cultural Approach

or behavioral one?

Abstract— Globalization and the intensification of competition in national and international level are becoming more and more pressure on universities to seek to seek new proactive strategies to achieve organizational performance in the long term. Market orientation has often been positively correlated with the known performance by its founding fathers Narver and Slater (1990), Kohli and Jaworski (1990, 1993). Thus, a market-oriented university could satisfy its stakeholders namely students, teachers, administrative staff and government and gain a real competitive advantage. Nowadays, organizations, what is for profit or nonprofit, including universities, have understood the magnitude of the importance of market orientation. The implementation of this strategy is a major concern, it is first important to know what orientation perspective that universities should adopt in Morocco? Behavioral or cultural perspective?

Index Terms— Orientation market cross, comparative analysis, a mixed approach, a stakeholder orientation, for universities in Morocco.

INTRODUCTION

Globalization and the intensification of competition in national and international level are becoming more and more pressure on universities to seek to seek new proactive strategies to achieve organizational performance in the long term. Market orientation has often been positively correlated with the known performance by its founding fathers Narver and Slater (1990), Kohli and Jaworski (1990, 1993). Thus, a market-oriented university could satisfy its stakeholders namely students, teachers, administrative staff and government and gain a real competitive advantage. Nowadays, organizations, what is for profit or nonprofit, including universities, have understood the magnitude of the importance of market orientation. The implementation of this strategy is a major concern, it is first important to know what orientation perspective that universities should adopt in Morocco? Behavioral or cultural perspective?Hemsley-Brown et al. 2006, argued that many universities seek to apply theoretical concepts of market orientation that normally came for-profit organizations to gain more market share in the local market and internationally. Moreover, according to the principles of new public management, public organizations keen to seek new methods from for-profit organizations including the case of market orientation.

1

Berrada kaoutar, El Abbadi Bouchra

kawtarberrada@yahoo.fr, elabbadib@yahoo.fr

One of the most important contributions to the theory of market orientation is "acquiring information" target universities, namely its stakeholders. Information is power to bring the strategies and tactics necessary to meet the said target universities and realize later known organizational performance in the long term. According to Narver and Slater (1994) and Oplatka and Hemsley-Brown (2007) orientation has the advantage of providing managers Universities standards of behavior in order to adapt to ongoing changes in their environment.

The conceptual framework of market orientation

Market orientation was generally positively related to organizational performance (Despande, Fariey and Webster, 1993; Greenlay, 1995; Kohli and Jaworski, 1993; Narver and Slater, 1990, 1994; Kumar, Subramanian and Yauger, 1998 Pelham and Wilson, 2000).Néamoins some moderators may hinder this positive relationship. Indeed, (and Gra and Hooley, 2002; Langerak, 2003) drew attention to the importance of situational factors that may affect this relationship as cultural context of the study, the measurement scale of market orientation and industry context (Langerak, 2003; Cano et al, 2004; Shohamet al, 2005; Kirca et al, 2005; Ellis, 2006).

A behavioral approachMarket orientation has been defined according to two different perspectives. Indeed, the first was defined by answering the question: what are the behaviors of a market-oriented organization (Gottenalnd, 2005), she was appointed as behavioral perspective. According to this perspective, market orientation has been defined as "the production of information for current and future needs of consumers, dissemination of this information in the various departments of the organization, and the organization's response to this information" (Kohli and Jaworski, 1990, 1993). Kohli and jaworski, 1990 and gave birth to market orientation as a new stream of research in marketing, while defining it as "the implementation of the marketing mindset."Thus, market orientation is no longer the case in the marketing department only, but all departments are working transversely to meet the target of the organization in the long term. All staff organizations find themselves as part-time marketers! That way all staff involved found actually to create added value to the target organization from simple client to all sorts of other stakeholders.'The generation of information' means that all staff involved in the research and production of information on the target of the organization that is the process or even watch all kinds of studies Market and data analysis.The dissemination of information is also between different departments of the organization through information systems such as ERP (enterprise Ressource Planing).Reaction to information is simply organizational response on information generated and disseminated among the various departments of the organization.

A cultural approachNevertheless, according to market orientation perspective seconds was defined by answering the question: how the culture of an organization oriented market? (Gottenald 2005) as follows: "Market orientation is" the culture induced behaviors needed to put a higher value to consumers on an ongoing basis, "Narver and Slater (1990).

2

In their definition of market orientation, Narver and Slater (1990) emphasized the components of market orientation, namely 'customer orientation', 'competitor orientation' and 'cross-functional coordination and two two criteria the decision about the long-term profitability. "Other authors have also adopted a cultural perspective in order to give greater precision in the definition of market orientation. Thus, Desphandé, Farely and Webster (1993) have made a real contribution to the theory of market orientation by referring to the notion of stakeholders far beyond a simple customer orientation. Other definitions may be complementary to the understanding of the orientation for accuracy: "This is a set of beliefs that pose the interests of 'consumer' first, while not excluding those of other 'stakeholders 'as shareholders, managers and employees, in order to develop a profitable business long term. "Schein (1985) defines market orientation as "a set of fundamental beliefs shared by its members and is an unconscious way to build a shared vision of the organization and its environment, considered to be universal."Day (1994) defines his side as "a set of skills in understanding and higher customer satisfaction, which is part of a culture more deeply embedded and distributed in the company."The components of market orientation as the cultural and behavioral perspectiveThe components of market orientation were obtained along long literature from developing measurement scales designed to determine the degree of market orientation of any organization is market or non-market.The behavioral approach Cultural Approachjaworski Kohli (1990) Narver and Slater (1990)

Measuring range: Markor Scale Measure MKTORkohli and Jaworski (1990) emphasize:

1. Components of market orientation:a) the production of informationb) generating informationc) the market response2. Dissemination of information horizontally and vertically=> There is then a need to make a transversal Management.

Kohli (1996):1. proposed two components of market orientation as follows:a. customer orientationb. competitor orientation2. reported that the generation of intelligence also affects the forces that affect customers and competitorsthe generation of information then includes several types of knowledge ensures among others, competitive intelligence, and studies Markets to develop a relationship marketing with customers.

Narver and Slater Mangement (1990) take into account:

1. The components of market orientation as customer orientationa) The competitor orientationb) The cross-functional coordination2. And two decision criteria:a) The long-term visionb) Profitability

3

Table 1: components of market orientation as the cultural approach and the behavioral

The components of market orientation as the cultural and behavioral perspective

The components of market orientation were obtained along long literature from developing

measurement scales designed to determine the degree of market orientation of any organization is

market or non-market.

The various components of market orientation cited evokes a certain complementarity between

the behavioral and cultural perspective. The first perspective emphasizes the process of

generating the information, on the second perspective stresses are oriented towards other

stakeholders other than customers.

The cultural perspective has a second interesting contribution is that it encourages the

organization to take a number of ensures, via the discovery of some components of market

orientation called: Orientation competitor, guidance technology.

As an indication, the two perspectives are mainly based on the current and future needs of

customers. However, they may not know all the things that can satisfy them. And a second

orientation that can be added is: an innovation orientation!

Stakeholders Orientation

Since the first research on market orientation, the cultural perspective has recognized the need to

satisfy a number of stakeholders, such as customers, competitors, suppliers and distributors in

developing guidelines for each stakeholder. The purpose of these guidelines is to understand

these stakeholders in order to meet the long term through the creation of value. However, the

stakeholder management aims to extend the interest of organizations to all those stakeholders

who are by definition, holding strategic resources for the survival of the organization (Clarkson,

1995; Rowley, 1997; Frooman, 1999). Obviously, the latter suffered pressure from the

environment to which it must respond.

Deshpande, Farely and Webster (1993) emphasize the need not to neglect other stakeholders as

"shareholders, managers and employees." Thus, we can see that here evokes internal

4

stakeholders. However, there are stakeholders cited by the literature review from Narver and

Slater as competitors, suppliers and distributors are rather external stakeholders.

However, stakeholders cited the long literature on the cultural perspective are too restrictive.

Henriques and Sadorsky (1999) distinguish four types of stakeholders (organizational Regulative,

civil and Media). Organizational stakeholders are those who have a close relationship with the

organization as: customers, suppliers, employees, suppliers and distributors. Stakeholders are

those that include regulatory systems of government policy (State and Local communities ...),

economic (Central Bank, World Trade Organization ...) and even professional associations before

exercising legislative and regulatory (Kirby, 1988). Stakeholders as civil means any pressure

group with the capacity to mobilize public opinion in a direction favorable or unfavorable to the

goals of the organization such as trade unions and associations. Finally, stakeholders media mean

that the media can also the performance of the organization (Freeman, 1984).

The typology of stakeholders provide a significant number that can be difficult to manage, as

Carroll (1995), Freedman and Miles (2002) emphasize the need to appoint agents may affect the

performance of an organization. Hence the definition of market orientation should include all

strategic stakeholders should be strategic segmentation, targeting and prioritization taking into

account all the constraints of the organization that it is financial, cultural ...

By integrating the concept of stakeholders, the definition of market orientation is "the generation

of information on stakeholders, dissemination of the information collected within the

organization and the organizational response."

Legitimacy of adopting a market orientation for emerging countries

Simple accounting research on market orientation will lead us to notice the large gap between

those for developed countries and those for developing countries. Indeed, models of orientation in

the case of developing countries are much rarer (Zebal, 200; Dwairi and al.2007; Li et al.2008).

 Through a meta-analysis conducted by (Ellis, 2004) it was observed that the positive relationship

between market orientation and organizational performance has been achieved especially in

economies martures (Jaworski and Kohli, 1993; 1994a Slater and Narver), Germany (Homburg

and Pflesser 2000) and the Netherlands (Langerak 2001). It is quite obvious, as long as it is in

economies where it was born this new trend of marketing with Kohli, Jaworski, Narver and Slater

(1990), on the one hand. On the other hand, one can not speak of market orientation that there is a

5

strong competitive intensity and a significant degree of market maturity (Lambin, 2002). It

strongly that characterizes many emerging economies more than developing economies.

Thus, the researchers wanted the reliability and validity of the relationship between market

orientation and performance in the context of less developed countries. To provide meet the

generalizability of this relationship!

Indeed, we can see the enthusiasm of researchers to study this new paradigm in emerging

economies such as Yugoslavia (Shama, 1992) and Ukraine (Akimova 2000), Venezuela (Boyd,

Westfall and Clewett 1958), Russia ( Golden et al. 1995), Puerto Rico (Galbraith and Holton

1955), the Philippines (Huszagh, Roxas, and Keck 1992) and Hungary (Hooley and Beracs 1997)

Unfortunately, they are developed countries but which generally exhibit a non-significant

relationship between market orientation and organizational performance, such as Korea (Yu and

Kwan, 1998), Hong Kong (Chan and Ellis, 1998), the United Kingdom (Greenley, 1995).

To answer this question, with a simple list, we can easily see that the number of searches that

show a positive relationship between the two variables studied are relatively higher than those

that have a non-significant relationship (Gotteland, 2005). But they are not significant wholes!

 In fact, the relationship between market orientation and performance across different

environments studied appears mixed (Subramanian and Gopalakrishna and 2001, Kaynak and

Kara, 2004 Bhuian 1997, Appiah-Adu 1998). In their cross-national study, Deshpande and Farley

(1999) find an interesting result since the impact of market orientation on performance is stronger

in India than in Japan.

To resolve this apparent contradiction on the relationship study we provide a twofold

explanation:

- Generalization of the positivity of the relationship can not be studied directly in other contexts

such as the case of developing countries. Which justifies further research advantage in these

countries (Ellis, 2005)!

- There are variables that alter the relationship studied, we call "variables Moderators" or

"environmental variables".

Moderating variables in developed countries

6

Moderating variables are simply the conditions that influence the nature of the relationship

between market orientation and organizational performance. Indeed, according to the intensity of

the relationship studied Moderator can be strong, weak or non-existent. The study of these

moderating variables will allow us to know under what conditions' over organizational

performance 'will lead to more organizational performance'. Therefore, we can optimize the

relationship studied by strengthening moderators.

We note that the moderating variables consist of environmental moderator variables are difficult

to control, as well as others within the organization that can be mastered easily.

The environmental characteristics The characteristics of the organization

- The market turbulence

- The technological turbulence

- The competitive intensity

- The general state of the economy

- Market growth

- The degree of novelty of behavior

consumers

- The type of the strategy

- The orientation of the organization on

organizational learning

Table 2: moderating variables of market orientation by D. Gotteland, 2005

In order to control its environment, the organization should make all possible types of

intelligence and market research classics.

Moderating variables in emerging

Empirical validation of the relationship between market orientation and organizational

performance can not be generalized without deepening its theoretical framework in developing

countries (Appiah-Adu (1998) and Ellis (2005)). This gives a first moderator of the relationship

studied 'the level of development of countries'!

Indeed, Ellis (2005) highlighted, the moderating role of GNP, the country in the event and the

intensity of the impact of market orientation on business performance.

Furthermore, 'culture' is another obvious moderator who was raised by (Deshpande and Farley

1999, Chelariu et al., 2002, Anwar 2003, Deshpande and Farley, 2004 Kirca et al., 2005 Dwairi

7

et al., 2007, Anwar 2008, and Brettel al.2008). Indeed, different cultural contexts give different

perceptions and applications of market orientation as well as different types of relationships with

organizational performance.

After a comparative study between Germany, Thailand and Indonesia Brettel et al. (2008)

conclude the existence of sensitive relations and other non-sensitive 'national culture

individualistic and masculine' activities in the generation and responsiveness and market

orientation. This correlation was stronger for the German sample compared to sample Thai and

Indonesian collectivist culture and feminine.

For his part, Kirca et al. (2005) who find that managers should consider when implementing

market orientation national cultural sensitivities, mainly in terms of 'hierarchical distance, and

uncertainty avoidance.

Culture can not always be a moderating variable in developing countries. Indeed, Hofstede,

Dwairi (2004) finds the weak moderating role of national culture in the effect of market

orientation on the performance of banks in Jordan. The relationship between market orientation

and organizational performance is influenced by simply 'power distance' in Jordan, which is a

result quite different in developed countries where weary Western literature claims that high

power distance relationships hinder market orientation . This apparent contradiction is explained

by the existence of another explanatory variable is 'the impact of stakeholders'. Indeed, the

management of the banking industry, is strongly connected with social power in Jordan through

social alliances in institutions in emerging markets.

The integration of developing countries becomes imperative to complete the conceptual

framework of market orientation (Burgess and Steenkamp, 2006). It becomes very obvious that it

is not logical to make a simple generalization of empirical results of Western literature in

emerging markets.

The components of market orientation in developing countries

Western literature has two main scales provide measures of market orientation, namely: Markor

which corresponds to the behavioral perspective of jawoski and Kohli (1990) and Mktor on the

Narver and cultural perspective Slater (1990). Markor gave three components: information

generation, dissemination of information and response. Mktor about the components emerged

along the literature adopting a cultural perspective were: customer orientation, competitor

orientation, orientation distributor, supplier orientation and technology orientation. The reliability

8

and validity of these scales will be studied in the context of emerging countries. Chelariu et al.

(2002) examine the validity of the construct of market orientation in Côte d'Ivoire, using Markor

and MKTOR and emit structures quite different from those original. They and sub dimensions of

organizational response and customer orientation. Organizational response, also called,

responsiveness to market intelligence, is divided into two sub-dimensions: design response and

the implementation of reply. Customer orientation and in turn is divided in turn into two sub-

dimensions: awareness and implementation of power if the Ivory Coast. For their part,

Subramanian and Gopalakrishna (2001) tried to validate MKTOR India, and led to a structure

with five dimensions: customer orientation, orientation competitors intefonctionnelle

coordination, focusing on long-term focus on survival, growth and profit. And the authors state

that this scale is reliable and validate the time it was checked in a developing country like India.

Research in these countries were not only content to verify the reliability and validity of the

measurement scales developed as Markor Mkator and there are many authors who have tried to

developed their own scales. This is the case for example of Anwar and Sohail (2003) developed a

scale to measure market orientation dedicated to banking in Brunei. They have developed a built

in six dimensions: customer focus, strategy implementation, use of information, development of

new services, focusing competitors and finally focus environment. They then found that banks in

Brunei have that the average level of market orientation, which can be explained by the lack of

financial resources, unavailability of ICT and the ability of poor marketing personnel. Anwar

(2008) has also tried to develop its own scale of measurement in the health sector in the UAE.

However, it leads to a built in five dimensions: customer focus, focus competitors, environmental

monitoring, implementation strategies and development of new services. Tang (2003) released in

China a two-dimensional structure, the first grouping items of customer orientation and cross-

functional coordination, the second describing the orientation competitors. The elimination of a

number of items from the original scale can influence the perception of market orientation. Thus,

Dwairi (2004) simply duplicates the model Kohli and Jaworski (1990). In addition, he first

mentioned that market orientation in developing countries is strongly influenced by moderating

variables such as economic infrastructure, political, social, and technological. Second, he

emphasized the impact of government support in the development of marketing and management.

Market orientation in the non-profit sector

9

Researchers and practitioners alike have been interested in the study of market orientation in non-

market to verify the existence of a positive relationship between market orientation and

organizational performance and to highlight the antecedents and consequences as well as

moderating variables in order to have a conceptual framework of market orientation fuller on one

side. On the other hand, this new approach could allow these organizations to achieve their

objectives in a more effective and efficient (Balabanis, Ruth, and Hugh, 1997; Caruana,

ramaseshan and Ewing, 1998, Cervera, Molla and Sanchez, 2001 Ignacoi et al., 2002).

Thus, research has affected various organizations, including charities, churches, health (and

Bhuian Abdulghder 1997, Wood, and Bhuian Kiecker, 2000; Tsai, 2003), Culture and the Arts

(Gainer, 2001; Gainer and Padanyi, 2001; 2004) and higher education (and Kenely Heillier, 2001,

webster, Hammond, and Harmon, 2006, Flavian and Lorenzo 2006).

Market orientation in the case of the University

A growing body of research on the management of higher education institutions interested in this

subject. This is Meek and Wood (1997); Wasmer and Bruner (1999), Eurydice (2000), Mook

(2000), De Jonghe and Vloesbeghs (2001), and Flavian Lazano (2006). Researchers opt for

adaptation models Kohli and Jaworski (1990) and Narver and Slater (1990). They adopt this is

usually done as a behavioral perspective (Blabanis, George, Ruth, Hugh, 1997, Caruana et al,

1998; van R. Wood, Shahid, Pamela, 2000, Amparo Cervera, 2001; Horris, michael, Coombres,

susan Schindehutte, minetr Allen, Jeffery, 2007)). Alternatively, other authors have instead

adopted a cultural perspective as (Sargeant, Foreman, and Liao, 2002; gainer and Brenda, 2004)

or even a mixed perspective as (luisIgnacio et al, 2002). Other authors are more interested in

identifying the antecedents and consequences of said orientation in higher education including:

the size of the institution, the source of funding, and innovation capacity of the institution, we cite

here the case of (Wasmer and Bruner, 1999).

Slaughter and Leslie (1999) consider market orientation as a kind of 'academic capitalism'.

According to these authors by allowing market forces affecting higher education, we promote

improvement in the quality of services provided by all institutions of higher education, and to

encourage innovation in the programs.

The context of Universities in Morocco

10

 International rankings of universities, the emergence of competition at National and International

Massification, professionalization Studies, diversification of funding sources, empowerment and

contracts are nowadays a lot of pressure on universities to international level, even for the case of

Morocco to seek new strategies entering the search quality of the educational system in Morocco.

In order to improve its quality, the Moroccan educational system was marked by three major

stations: the front system 'LMD' (1999 to 2001), after the system 'LMD' also known as the reform

of the reform of the higher education and the aftermath of the reform is the 'emergency plan

2009-2012'.

The LMD system

It is simply the charter of education and training in 1999, she had the following objectives: the

establishment of a system of gradual orientation, preparation for integration into the socio-

economic environment the transmission of core cultural values and the development of

methodological skills, language and communication of the student.

A very important contribution of pre LMD system development law 01.00 which aims the

organization of higher education. The latter has generated many benefits to the university as: the

unity of the university, the opening of the university on other training managers or other

educational autonomy, administrative and university financial The opening of the University of

the socio-economic development of a new architecture teaching more effective, the university

students' participation in school management, restructuring and valuation research.

However, this first reform was the subject of much criticism, mention among others: the weak

participation of teachers in the reform as the existence of a weak commitment to reform on the

part of stakeholders, a problem coordination took place between the secondary and higher

education. Adding other critics within the resistance to change on the part of universities,

including his teachers and managers of the university in the first place, second place, the

implementation of the reform has had many critics order organizational and logistics, we cited an

example: lack of awareness of the students to the said reform, a lack of local facilities especially

for mass we add a lack of coordination between the various committees of the reform.

Reform of the reform of higher education:

This is the introduction of the LMD system to align with the European LMD system following

the Bologna process. Indeed, several international reports (UNESCO, World Bank, UNDP) have

placed great emphasis on the deficit in our education system in general, and thus the university.

11

Thus, following an initiative by the Moroccan government, including higher education was

strongly encouraged.

However, the CSE (Council of Higher Education) presented reviews pertaining to this reform are:

the problem of adequacy Training / Employment, Training of teachers and tropism of the

humanities in favor of scientific fields. According to the SSC, the main causes of these failures

are a great reluctance on the part of the government to impose the adoption of an institutional

assessment to Moroccan universities and institutions and a lack of commitment and support for

teachers.

The CSE became interested in the problem of university autonomy and raised some obstacles that

hinder such as: the lack of real autonomy in the management of human resources, the lack of

analytical accounting, the difficulty membership in a joint project between the university and its

various institutions, excessive creation of networks at the expense of core business ..

The emergency plan 2009-2012

The Ministry of National Education, Higher Education, Training and Frameworks for Scientific

Research developed a contingency plan for a four-year period from 2009 to 2012, with the order

to give a new impetus to the Charter of National Education of 1999 for the period 2009-2012.

We note that the state budget devoted a significant emergency program said around 12 projects

organized into three areas.

The first space: aims to stimulate initiative and excellence of the university through three

projects: the promotion of scientific research, promoting excellence and improving the provision

of education higher.

The second space: aims to tackle cross-cutting issues of the system through seven projects:

strengthening oversight mechanisms, capacity building of education staff, optimizing human

resources management, monitoring and evaluation of educational personnel, the completion and

implementation of decentralization and devolution optimization e ministry organization, mastery

of languages, the establishment of a system of information and guidance and efficient planning

and management system Education and Training.

The last space: turn around means that success in turn refers to two projects: the mobilization and

communication around the university and the sustainability of resources.

12

Knowing that the plan is being implemented and its evaluation is done by international and

national bodies we can not judge its relevance now s you its viability. In any case, we can say that

the emergency itself can be a major handicap to the success of the reform itself.

In summary, we can say that the 2009-2012 emergency plan emphasized the professional studies

as a necessary national and international diversity of stakeholders is also a defining characteristic

of the case of the university.

Cultural or behavioral perspective for the case of the university in Morocco?

The behavioral perspective has given three main components of market orientation ie the

generation of market intelligence, dissemination of the intelligence and organizational response.

However, the cultural perspective has mostly focused more on customer orientation different

orientations ie orientation competitor, supplier orientation, orientation Distributor, employee

orientation, orientation shareholders .... In short, this perspective makes us understand that the

organization should manage other targets to ensure its existence and possible organizational

performance. The more stakeholder management has proven the importance of stakeholders who

are by definition, holding strategic resources for the survival of the organization (Clarkson, 1995;

Rowley, 1997; Frooman, 1999).

Universities in Morocco are nowadays facing many stakeholders whose long-term satisfaction

through the creation of value could lead to organizational performance.

Thus, the perspective chosen is a perspective mixed together on one side of the behavioral

components namely: the generation of information on stakeholders, dissemination of this

information between the different departments of the organization and organizational response.

On the other hand, it integrates stakeholders from the cultural approach and the management of

stakeholder management.

Thus, we propose a definition of market orientation by adopting a mixed perspective:

"Market orientation is the generation of information on stakeholders outside the organization,

dissemination of this information through the various departments of the organization and the

organizational response."

Satisfaction of all parts of the organization or a university or any other mission is utopian

moment that the organization has limited financial resources on one side, the other side, the

13

market orientation is a culture to inculcate. Thus, it should commit sufficient time for a proper

organizational learning for the successful implementation of this strategy.

The logical solution would be to adopt a strategy of segmentation and targeting stakeholders are

most important to the organization. Then it is' a Marketing stakeholders to the organization in a

progressive terms of time and according to their degree of impact on the organization. "

Conclusion

Since the 1990s until today the authors of the market orientation are simply 'Marketing the

Marketing mindset "climbing the existence of a positive relationship between the orientation

frequently and Market Performance organization. Over the years, All the literature review seeks

to convince organizations to inculcate a culture of customer satisfaction, and even stakeholders of

the organization in all these departments. The implementation of this marketing mindset will be

realized by integrating the entire staff of the organization, regardless of their level in the

hierarchy, the generation of market intelligence, dissemination at all levels of the organization

and in response to market "in order to create added value on an ongoing basis for internal and

external stakeholders of the organization.

14

Figure 1: proposition of a mixed approach based on stakeholders orientationK; Berrada & B. Elabbadi, 2013 , International Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology )

For a better understanding of the concept in question we recall the salient guepoints are:

OM is the implementation of the marketing mindset within organizations;

Market orientation must be rooted in the culture of the organization;

Members of the organization must be an unconscious way to have a clear vision of the

organization and its environment;

Market orientation is a matter of develop superior skills in understanding the current and

future needs of customers;

This is to say we want to convince organizations to adopt the marketing mindset by

engaging all staff to participate in marketing strategies: that is to say the collection of

information (the generation of intelligence), dissemination of this information across all

departments and response (responsiveness);

15

Generation

of informatio

ns

Dessimination of

informatio

ns

Organisatio

nal Respo

nse

Internal stakehol

ders orientati

on

External

stakeholde

rs orientation

An organization Marke

t oriente

d

Transversal

Management

Satisfaction of stakeholders of the organization is not the case of the marketing function,

but throughout the organization;

That is to inculcate a culture of customer satisfaction and even stakeholders generally

within organizations.

Although the implementation of market orientation is not the subject of this paper, we

propose the following in ca Keys to success of market orientation:

The generation of market intelligence implies more than the collection of current and

future needs of stakeholders and the study of exogenous factors that may affect these

needs as competition, technology and other factors of environment: a monitoring system

must be put in place such as: technological, competitive intelligence, regulatory

monitoring;

cross-functional coordination involves:

use all means possible coordination as regular meetings between departments;

a tranversal management;

the use of information technology and communications, and intelligence (ERP

datawarhouse, datamining ...) to facilitate communication between different departments;

Development Software SRM (stakeholder relationship management) similar to CRM

(Customer relationship Management)

for stakeholders:

Understand their attitude should be in the project organization;

The integrate stakeholders in the board of directors of universities in Morocco, a real

presence, a real focus and a real marketing to convince them to participate effectively in

the decision-making of universities in Morocco.

possible orientations universities are:

Student orientation, guidance teachers, guidance personnel, entrepreneurship orientation

(Anapec, CGEM, ..), a business orientation, an orientation Ministry of Higher Education

and guidance fundraising.

The order of prioritization of external stakeholders is: administrative staff, teachers and

students;

As for the order of priority is internal stakeholders: companies, the Ministry of education

and competition at national level;

16

The university could move on to other stakeholders such as the CGEM, ANAPEC and

international level competition.

Research Perspectives

The definition on the market orientation that we proposed could be generalized to other

organizations even profit, and in developing countries. Indeed, we have emphasized the process

of generalization of intelligence, dissemination of intelligence and organizational response to

internal stakeholders and internal and external organization. However, there should be an

emphasis on 'employees' who are also the most important stakeholders of the organization.

Indeed, these stakeholders will determine the success of the process of intelligence relating to

stakeholders. Efforts will be undertaken to achieve esprit de corps and organizational

commitment on the part of these employees.

The definition that we proposed only affects current and future needs of stakeholders. Of course,

these are not always aware of things that can Meet. However, the integration of innovation should

be included in the definition of market orientation. And another component may be added:

Guidance innovation.

We determined through this research components of market orientation in the case of universities

in Morocco. But we can go further to create our own scale for measuring market orientation that

should ensure its reliability and validity.

And to have a more complete theoretical framework of market orientation in universities, it is

imperative to devote more solid research to the study of moderators of this strategy can meet

either the organization or even the environment!

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY

Berrada kaoutar was born in 1980 in Meknes, Morocco.

17

She is currently pursuing doctoral studies at the National School of Commerce and Management,

Tanger, University Abdelmalek Assadi. I belongs to the "GREFAM" Research Group in Finance

Audit and Marketing.

She received her Masters in Marketing at the National School of Commerce and Management at

Settat, and to deepen her knowledge of Marketing she got a Diploma of Higher Studies in

Marketing Management Deepen in 2008 in Rabat. Currently, she is in the process of preparing a

PhD in Marketing / Management. Her interest focuses on Search Marketing / Management, and

currently on the market orientation, especially its relationship with information systems in order

to find results on the implementation of market orientation.

Email: kawtar berrada@yahoo.fr

Bouchra ELABBADI, teacher-researcher RIODD Member, Member ARIMHE;

Professor of Higher Education;

Doctor of Management Sciences;

Coordinator Educational Research Master in Management Sciences;

Member of the Department of Strategy and Governance Organizations.

ENCGT - UAE Morocco

elabbadi@yahoo.fr

References 

18

. Aboulnasr, K., Narashiman, O., Blair, E., & Chandy R. (2008). Competitive response to radical

product innovations. Journal of Marketing, 72(3), 94-110.

. Aldag, R. J., & Fuller, S. R. (1993). Beyond fiasco: A reappraisal of the groupthink

phenomenon and a new model of group decision processes. Psychological Bulletin, 113(3), 533-

552.

. Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal

of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396.

. Audia, P. G., & Goncalo, J. A. (2007). Past success and creativity over time: A study of

inventors in the hard-drive industry. Management Science, 53(1), 1-15.

. Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the

composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107-124.

. Cano, C. R., Carrillat, F. A., & Jaramillo, F. (2004). A meta-analysis of the relationship between

market orientation and business performance: Evidence from five continents. International

Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(2), 179-200.

. Chow, G. C. (1960). Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions.

Econometrica, 28(3), 591-605.

. Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators:

An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269-277.

. Dougherty, D. (1992). Interpretative barriers to successful product innovation in large firms.

Organization Science, 3(2), 179-202.

. Ellis, P. D. (2006). Market Orientation and Performance: A Meta-Analysis and Cross-National

Comparisons. The Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 1089.

Fariza, H.,& Abdul Rahim,A. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of Market orientation in

non profit organizations : Evidence fraom Malysia. Intarnational Journal of Management and

marketing Research.; 4 (3);95-105.

. Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and

innovativeness terminology: A literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management,

19(2), 110-132.

. Gatignon, H., & Xuereb, J.-M. (1997). Strategic orientation of the firm and new product

performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 77-90.

19

. Gerbing, D. W., & Anderson, J. C. (1988). An updated paradigm for scale development

incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(2), 186-

192.

. Gotteland, D., & Boulé, J.-M. (2006). The market orientation-new product performance

relationship: Redefining the moderating role of environmental conditions. International Journal of

Research in Marketing, 23(2), 171-185.

. Gotteland, D., Haon, C., & Gauthier, C. (2007). L’orientation Marché : synthèse et nouvelles

directions théoriques. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 22(1), 45-59.

. Gotteland, D., Haon, C., & Jolibert, A. (2009).

. Griffin, A., & Page, A. L. (1993). An interim report on measuring product development success

and failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10(4), 291-308.

. Grinstein, A. (2008). The effect of market orientation and its components on innovation

consequences: A meta-analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(2), 166-173.

. Gruenfeld, D. H. (1995). Status, ideology, and integrative complexity on the U.S. Supreme

court: Rethinking the politics of political decision making. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 68(1), 5-20.

. Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham R. L. (2005). Multivariate data

analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pierson Education.

. Haon, C., Gotteland, D., & Fornerino, M. (2009). Familiarity and competence diversity in new

product development teams: Effects on new product performance. Marketing Letters, 20(1), 75-

89

David GOTTELAND & Christophe HAON M@n@gement vol. 13 no. 5, 2010, 366-381

. Henard, D. H., & Szymanski, D. M. (2001). Why some new products are more successful than

others. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(3), 362-375.

Homburg, C., & Pflesser, C. (2000). A multiple-layer model of market-oriented organizational

culture: Measurement issues and performance outcomes. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(4),

449-462.

. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthinking. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

. Joshy, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-

analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 599-627.

20

. Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social

conditions for innovation in organization. In B.M. Slaw & L.L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in

organizational behavior, 10 (pp. 169-211). Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.

. Kearney, E., Gebert, D., & Voelpel, S. C. (2009). When and how diversity benefits teams: The

importance of team members’ need for cognition. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 581-

598.

. Kijkuit, B., & van den Ende, J. (2007). The organizational life of an idea: Integrating social

network creativity and decision-making perspectives. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6),

863-882.

. Kirca, A. H., Jayachandran, S., & Bearden, W. O. (2005). Market orientation: A meta-analytic

review and assessment of its antecedents and impact on performance. Journal of Marketing,

69(2), 24-41.

. Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market orientation: The construct, research propositions,

and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54(2), 1-18.

. Lam, S.K., Kraus, F. and Ahearne, M. (2010). ‘The diffusion of market orientation throughout

the organization: a social learning theory perspective’. Journal of Marketing, 74,

61-79.

Langerak, F., Hultink, E. J., & Robbens, H. S. (2004). The impact of market orientation, product

advantage, and launch proficiency on new product performance and organizational performance.

Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(2), 79-94.

. Larey, T. S., & Paulus, P. B. (1999). Group preference and convergent tendencies in small

groups: A content analysis of group brainstorming performance. Creativity Research Journal,

12(3), 175-184.

. Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-

sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114-121.

. Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Patil, A. (2006). Common method variance in is research: A

comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science,

52(12), 1865-1883.

. McDonough, E. F. (2000).Investigation of factors contributing to the success of cross-functional

teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(3), 221-235.

21

. Montoya-Weiss, M. M., & Calantone, R. (1994). Determinants of new product performance: A

review and meta-analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 11(5), 397-417.

Murray, J. Y., Gao, G. Y. and Kotabe, M. (2011). ‘Market orientation and performance of export

ventures: the process through marketing capabilities and competitive advantages’. Journal of the

Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 252-69.

. Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability.

Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20-35.

. Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. L. (1987). Minority influence, divergent thinking and detection of

correct solutions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17(9), 788-799.

. Rodan, S., & Galunic, C. (2004). More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity

influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 25(6),

541-562.

. Sethi, R. (2000). New product quality and product development teams. Journal of Marketing,

64(2), 1-14.

. Sethi, R., Smith, D. C., & Park, C. W. (2001). Cross-functional product development teams,

creativity, and the innovativeness of new consumer products. Journal of Marketing Research,

38(1), 73-85.

La relation orientation marché-performance d’un nouveau produit : le rôle oublié de la diversité

des équipes de développement M@n@gement vol. 13 no. 5, 2010, 366-381

. Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1994). Does competitive environment moderate the market

orientation-performance relationship? Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 46-55.

. Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. (1997). The determinants of japanese new product successes.

Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 64-76.

. Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making:

Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

48, 1467-1478.

. Troy, L. C., Hirunyawipada, T., & Paswan, A. K. (2008). Cross-functional integration and new

product success: An empirical investigation of the findings. Journal of Marketing, 72(6), 132-

146.

. van Raaij, E. M. (2001). The implementation of a market orientation. University of Twente,

Enschede.

22

. Voss, G. B., & Voss, Z. G. (2000). Strategic orientation and firm performance in an artistic

environment. Journal of Marketing, 64(1), 67-83.

. Watson, W. E., Kumar, K., & Michaelsen, L. K. (1993). Cultural diversity’s impact on

interaction process and performance: Comparing homogeneous and diverse task groups.

Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 590-602.

23

24