Managerial competencies and marketing effectiveness in corporate organizations in Nigeria

Managerial competencies andmarketing effectiveness in

corporate organizations in NigeriaN. Gladson Nwokah

Department of Marketing, Faculty of Management Sciences,Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt, Nigeria, and

Augustine I. AhiauzuDepartment of Management, Rivers State University of Science and Technology,and International Center for Management Research and Training (CIMRAT),

Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to assess the impact of managerial competencies on themarketing effectiveness of the organization. While many empirical works have centered on marketingeffectiveness, the generalizability of its relationship to managerial competencies in the Nigeriancontext has been under-researched.

Design/methodology/approach – A 27-item survey questionnaire was developed and 84 corporateorganizations in Nigeria were selected from the 2005 edition of the Nigerian stock exchange gazette asa sample of this study. A hand-delivered survey was conducted from key informants in theorganizations. Returned instruments were analyzed using non-parametric correlation through the useof the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 10.

Findings – The results of the study reported in this paper validated the earlier instruments and finda strong association between managerial competencies and marketing effectiveness of corporateorganizations in the Nigerian context. The main finding of this study is that managerial competencieslead to marketing effectiveness in corporate organizations in Nigeria.

Research limitations/implications – The implications of the results of this study are clear forscholars and managers. For managers this paper has implications on the investigation of the linkbetween managerial competencies and marketing effectiveness of corporate organizations in Nigeria.In the first place, this paper provides a direct test of the applicability of a western paradigm to theNigerian economic system, which is different from the other culture.

Originality/value – This paper significantly refines the body of knowledge concerning the impact ofmanagerial competency on marketing effectiveness in the Nigerian context. This paper will no doubtcontribute to the body of existing literature on managerial competency and marketing effectiveness.

Keywords Management skills, Marketing strategy, Management effectiveness, Nigeria

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionConsequent on myriad changes, which have beclouded the operations of modernbusiness organizations in recent times, including the fundamental and core changes inthe nature of work and work organization, the dynamic nature of the competitiveenvironment, and the need to ensure a convergence of stakeholders’ interest in the waythe organizations are run, a need for new approaches in human resource managementhas arisen. One of these new and emerging themes is “competency”. The terms

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

JMD27,8

858

Received 10 September 2006Revised 25 April 2007Accepted 30 May 2007

Journal of Management DevelopmentVol. 27 No. 8, 2008pp. 858-878q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0262-1711DOI 10.1108/02621710810895677

“competence” and “competency” became increasingly fashionable in the late 1980s andin the 1990s to express what target of assessment and development initiatives shouldbe, especially relevant to management (Cheng et al., 2003, p. 527). For a number ofyears, the term “competency” has been a catch phrase in organizational literature.Some treat competencies of the corporate as an entity, while others treat competenciesof employees (Abraham et al., 2001, p. 842).

When the competencies possessed by successful managers are discussed, the term“managerial competencies” is frequently used. Recognition that managers should havecompetence in their relevant functional area, particularly in relation to developing andimproving their decisions and performance tasks has been well documented (Gilmore,1998, p. 74). Given that management competencies are concerned with peoples’behavior, identifying and developing the competencies of marketing managers inrelation to their decision-making roles, activities and specific responsibilities will be ofutmost importance in the quest for continually effective marketing performance.

The focus of the competency concept is mainly to help organizations cope with thechanging environment and the need to integrate an organization’s human resourcestrategy and its corporate strategy (Barber and Tietye, 2004, p. 597). Because of thedynamic nature of marketing as a result of changes in business environmentparticularly in less developed nations like Nigeria, the need to study managerialcompetencies and its associated relationship to marketing effectiveness appearsimperative. That is our main area of interest in this paper.

The next section of the paper examines the origin and development of thecompetency concept, the major fundamental elements and issues that embody theconcept.

The concept of competencyIn the early 1970s in the USA, there was a general belief among management scholarsand practitioners, that it was possible to identify and isolate the work behavior veryconsistently exhibited by excellent performing managers and workers (Ahiauzu, 2006,p. 7). It was also believed that such identified behaviors could be transmittedthroughout an organization’s workforce through well-planned and effectivelyadministered training and coaching interventions. It is likely that these beliefsmight have been prompted and energized by the results of McClelland’s (1971) study.His study strongly suggested that there were behavioral variables that successfullypredicted job performance. He called these variables “competencies”. Within the sameperiod, the American Management Association (AMA) sponsored a research with themain objective of finding out what made managers competent. It was intended that theresults of the study would be used to design a program where managers could learnthese competencies and become high performers on the job. Richard Boyatzis wasappointed to head the research. In 1982, Boyatzis published his book entitled: TheCompetent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance, which was based on theresults of the AMA-sponsored research.

On the first page of his book, Boyatzis (1982) emphatically declared that: “it is thecompetence of managers that determines, in large part the return that organizationsrealize from their human capital, or human resources”. There does not seem to be anydoubt that the conceptual formulations underlying Boyatzis study were influenced bythe results of the earlier studies of McClelland, on related themes. Boyatzis (1982)

Managerialcompetencies in

Nigeria

859

therefore, adapting Klemp’s (1980) definition of “competence”, defined “competency”as: “an underlying characteristic of an individual which is causally related to effectiveor superior performance in a job”. According to the author, this could be a “motive,trait, and skill, aspect of one’s self-image or social role, or a body of knowledge whichhe or she uses”. Such an “underlying characteristic”, has been identified and elaboratedupon by Spencer et al. (1990) as cited in Harley (1995, p. 28) to include:

. . . motives, traits, self-concepts, attitudes or values, content knowledge or cognitive orbehavioral skills – any individual characteristic that can be measured or counted reliably andthat can be shown to differentiate significantly between superior and average performers orbetween effective and ineffective performers.

In his 1982 study, Boyatzis identified and grouped managerial competencies into twocategories:

(1) consummate competencies – which include efficiency orientation, productivity,concern with impact, diagnostic use of concepts, conceptualization,self-confidence, use of oral presentations, managing group process, use ofsocialized power, and perceptual objectivity; and

(2) threshold competencies – which include logical thought, accurateself-assessment, positive regard, developing others, spontaneity, use ofunilateral power, self-control, stamina and adaptability, and specializedknowledge.

Because the Boyatzis’ approach or the “input” approach to management competency(Tate, 1995), was driven by the need to make organizations more effective throughselecting, developing and rewarding the right people, it largely concentrated onidentifying the behavioral characteristics of superior performers. But the alternative tothe Boyatzis or US approach to competency is the British approach. The UnitedKingdom Government Employment Department has defined “competence” as focusingmainly on the outcomes expected from a job when it is adequately performed (Ahiauzu,2006). This approach is captured very succinctly by Day’s (1989) definition ofcompetence as “the ability to put skills and knowledge into action”. The Britishapproach therefore, suggests not only skills and knowledge, but also the range ofqualities of personal effectiveness required to get a job done very efficiently (Ashworthand Sexton, 1990). Adopting this approach, Barber and Tietye (2004, p. 96) havedefined competency as:

the specification of knowledge and skill, and the application of that knowledge and skill to thestandard of performance required.

In this approach, the quality and standard of performance is used to define competence.By setting standards, a base level of performance is defined that becomes a benchmarkof quality for individual to achieve (Woodburn, 2004).

It would appear that North American scholars are inclined to using the term“competency”, whereas the British scholars prefer the term “competence”. To avoid theacademic definitional confusion likely to arise from this use of different terms, wesubscribe to Woodruffe’s (1993) suggestion that “competence” should be used to referto areas of work in which the person is competent, while “competency” should be usedto refer to the dimensions of behavior underlying the competent performance.

JMD27,8

860

Nevertheless, our preferred term for the purposes of this paper is “competency”. Weaccept Armstrong’s (2000) view that “competence” or “competency” is all about: whatyou need to know; what you need to do; and how you need to do it. What should benoted therefore, is that there are two main meanings of the term “competency”. Onerefers to the outputs, results or competency performance per se, while the other refersto the inputs or underlying behavioral attributes required of a person, that will enablehim or her achieve competent performance.

In addition to the fundamental “input” and “output” approaches discussed abovewhich are based on the works of North American and British scholars, a survey ofdefinitions of competency management in extant international literature (Van Sluijsand Kluytmans, 1996; Nordhaug and Gronhaug, 1994; Vereecken, 2000; Ban, 1998),suggests that the meaning of competencies and competency management may dependon such factors as:

. “scope” – that is whether at individual or organizational levels;

. “aim” – as to whether one is considering improvement of performance, orgaining market power;

. “human resource management” – that is having to do with the design ofselection instruments, development; and

. “structure of the human resource organization” – as to whether it should becentralized or decentralized.

Reasoning along the lines of these factors, it could be seen that both the “input” and the“output” approaches have always focused on the individual manager or workercharacteristics.

In their critical analysis of the UK and US approaches to competences, Cheng et al.(2003) have pointed out that the UK’s approach to the competence perspective is chieflyconcerned with providing accreditation of experience (i.e. has an individual completeda defined activity?) and is not able to evaluate expertise (i.e. how did the individualcomplete a defined activity?). Citing King (1992) they argue that an effectivedemonstration of a managerial skill does not necessarily demonstrate that the managerhas the necessary expertise to judge when and if the use of that competence isappropriate in another situation.

Citing Burgouyne (1993) they believe that the UK perspective is highly centralizedin determining the push for skill in job performance rather than understanding andfixing the output standards that regulate education and training. Cheng et al. (2003, p.528) believe that one of the problems raised by the UK approach is the word“competence” itself. Some one who is described as “competent” according to them canbe thought to be merely “getting by” thereby creating the potential for delusions ofadequacy. They argue that the word has to be qualified with affixes and adjectivessuch as “incompetent”, “barely competent” or “highly competent”.

In their analysis of the US approach to competency, Cheng et al. (2003) believe thatthe US approach does not suffer from the problems induced by UK’s adherence tomicro competences. They believe that the most common criticism is that it cannot beassured in all organizations that behaviors exhibited by today’s superior performancewill be equally effective in the future. Citing Briscoe and Hall (1999), the authorssuggest that those planning for management’s needs and development should focus on


Nigeria

861

the future and it is vital that a list of competences be flexible and able to reflect changesin the organization’s future direction. The US model focuses on individual managers’characteristics and their links to the context of performance (Cheng et al., 2003). Stuartand Lindsay (1997) point out that the US approach fails to adequately definemanagerial competences in terms of the organization, its culture, its market place andits business environment.

In order to find a way forward from these confusions of UK and US approachesCheng et al. (2003, p. 534) suggested the combination of both US and UK models. Theirargument is that the most appropriate way forward of examining the UK and USmodels would be to combine elements of both models. Adopting Elkin (1990) theauthors believe that human resource management practitioners and professions face adilemma. On the one hand, the underlying macro-competencies approach seemsremoved from the everyday reality of most jobs and the need to demonstrateimmediate benefits from training and development. However, adopting a competence(micro-competencies) approach has to face the task of training in all of the hundreds ofidentified job elements. The UK model is mainly focused on performance requirementsof job positions, rather than the jobholders themselves and the extent of the resultingjob analysis could lead organizations to training paralysis. Those “competences” areexpressed in terms of job purpose and the standards of performance expected to beachieved. Whereas the US model of competencies is input oriented, the UK model ofcompetences is focused on outputs (where the underlying characteristics of theemployee are assumed to exist if the output standards are met). Each model clearly hasits own strengths, but these should not be regarded as being mutually exclusive. Also,as Stuart and Lindsay (1997) suggest, the two models are complementary, each modelis incomplete and therefore a comprehensive framework for understanding andworking with managerial competence is needed.

Elkin (1990) suggests that, in general, the further up the occupational hierarchy inan organization one goes, the more important the underlying macro-competencies(USA approach) and the less important the micro-competencies (UK approach).Different competencies will be important during the different phases of someone’s timein a job. Elkin (1990, p. 24) developed a model that articulated the changing focus ofcompetence development as an individual gains experience in a job and progresses toanother job role. Elkin proposes that “Once the core of micro-competencies has beenachieved and maintained, individuals may aspire to further growth”. This is achievedby the person acquiring additional macro-competencies. Any model that integrates theUK and US approaches has a useful role in the turbulent competitive marketplace andboth approaches have a contribution to make to the future development of humanresource management activities (Cheng et al., 2003). However, they do need to be usedcarefully to focus on key competence/competencies (both specific job tasks andunderlying characteristics. The identification of, and focus on, key competencies mayneed to take into account the type and level of job, the individual’s tenure of jobs, thecurrent needs of the organization and needs of the individual. Let us now brieflyexamine the construct of marketing effectiveness.

The concept of marketing effectivenessThe Wikipedia Free Encyclopedia (Wikipedia, 2006) defines marketing effectiveness asthe function of improving how marketers go to market with the goal of optimizing their

JMD27,8

862

marketing spend to achieve even better results for both the short- and long-termobjectives. There are four basic dimensions of marketing effectiveness (Nwokah, 2006,p. 25). These are:

(1) Corporate. Each company operates within certain bounds. These aredetermined by their size, their budget and their ability to makeorganizational change. Within these bounds marketers operate along the fivefactors described later in this paper.

(2) Competitive. Each company in a category operates within a similar frameworkas described later in this paper. In an ideal world, marketers would have perfectinformation on how they act as well as how their competitors act. In reality, inmany categories have reasonably good information through sources. In manyindustries, competitive marketing information is hard to come by.

(3) Customers. Understanding and taking advantage of how customers makepurchasing decisions can help marketers improve their marketing effectiveness.Groups of consumers act in similar ways leading to the need to segment them.Based on these segments, they make choices based on how they value theattributes of a product and the brand, in return for price paid for the product.Consumers build brand value through information. Information is receivedthrough many sources, such as, advertising, word-of-mouth and in the(distribution) channel often characterized with the purchase funnel.

(4) Exogenous factors. There are many factors outside of our immediate controlthat can impact the effectiveness of our marketing activities. These can includethe weather, interest rates, government regulations and many others.

Understanding the impact these factors can have on our consumers can help us todesign programs that can take advantage of these factors or mitigate the risk of thesefactors if they take place in the middle or our marketing campaigns. There are fivefactors driving the level of marketing effectiveness that marketers can achieve(Nwokah, 2006, p. 26):

(1) Marketing strategy. Improving marketing effectiveness can be achieved byemploying a superior marketing strategy. By positioning the product or brandcorrectly, the product/brand will be more successful in the market thancompetitors’ products/brands. Even with the best strategy, marketers mustexecute their programs properly to achieve extraordinary results.

(2) Marketing creative. Even without a change in strategy, better creative canimprove results. The introduction of new creative concept in an organizationcan increase growth rate.

(3) Marketing execution. By improving how marketers go to market, they canachieve significantly greater results without changing their strategy or theircreative execution. At the marketing mix level, marketers can improve theirexecution by making small changes in any or all of the 4 Ps (product, price,place and promotion) without making changes to the strategic position or thecreative execution marketers can improve their effectiveness and deliverincreased revenue. At the program level marketers can improve theireffectiveness by managing and executing each of their marketing campaignsbetter. Whether it is improving direct mail through a better call-to-action or


Nigeria

863

whether its editing a web site content to improve its organic search results,marketers can improve their marketing effectiveness for each type of program.

(4) Marketing infrastructure. Improving the business of marketing can lead tosignificant gains for the company. Management of agencies, budgeting,motivation and coordination of marketing activities can lead to improvedcompetitiveness and improved results.

(5) Exogenous factors. Generally, out of the control of marketers, external orexogenous factors also influence how marketers can improve their results.Taking advantage of seasonality, interests or the regulatory environment canhelp marketers improve their marketing effectiveness.

The concept of marketing effectiveness has been extensively discussed because of itsstrong association with many valuable organizational outcomes such as stablelong-term growth, enhanced customer satisfaction, a competitive advantage and astrong marketing orientation (Webster, 1995, p. 6). Although, respective researcheshave conducted empirical investigations involving the concept of marketingeffectiveness, a few conceptual measures of the construct exist. Appiah-Adu et al.(2001, p. 20) citing Kotler (1977, 1997) operationalized marketing effectiveness as anamalgam of five components, notably: customer philosophy, integrated marketingorganization, adequate marketing information, strategic orientation, and operationalefficiency. Appiah-Adu et al. (2001) further argued that, first it is imperative to identifythe importance of studying the market, recognizing the numerous opportunities,selecting the most appropriate segments of the market to operate in and endeavoring tooffer superior value to meet the selected customer’s needs and wants. The firm, theyargue must be suitably staffed to enable it to perform marketing analysis, planningand implementation. Sequentially, marketing effectiveness calls for management tohave sufficient information for the purpose of planning and effective resourceallocation to varying markets, products and territories. Marketing effectiveness is alsocontingent upon the adeptness of managers to deliver profitable strategies from itsphilosophy, organization and information resources. Ultimately, marketingeffectiveness depends upon managerial competencies. Effective marketing calls formanagers to have adequate information for planning and allocating resources properlyto different markets, products, territories, and marketing tools, (Webster, 1995, p. 6)Marketing effectiveness depends also on whether management can design a profitablestrategy, and this in itself is a management competence.

Brooksbank and Taylor (2002, p. 456) note that marketing effectiveness is notsynonymous with profitability. The premise is that levels of return on investment,sales and others depend on marketing effectiveness. Therefore our purpose in thispaper as stated earlier is to examine the relationship between managerial competenciesand marketing effectiveness. In doing this specific attention will be focused on therelationship between the two concepts of managerial competencies identified in theliterature (consummate and threshold competencies) and the associated metrics formarketing effectiveness (consumer-philosophy, integrated marketing efforts,marketing information, strategic orientation and operational efficiency. Figure 1illustrates the operational conceptual framework. This is proposed based on the reviewof the relevant literature of the two constructs. It is developed based on Boyatzis’s(1982) conceptualization of managerial competencies and Kotler’s (1977, 1997)

JMD27,8

864

conceptualization of marketing effectiveness. Boyatzis (1982) has conceptualized andgrouped managerial competencies into two: consummate and threshold. Kotler (1997)has also conceptualized and grouped marketing effectiveness into five constructs:consumer-philosophy, integrated marketing efforts, marketing information, strategicorientation and operational efficiency. The hypothesized relationship betweenBoyatzis’ (1982) two managerial competency groups and Kotler’s (1977, 1997) fivemarketing effectiveness constructs are shown in Figure 1.

HypothesisBased on the foregoing and the operational conceptual framework, we hypothesizedthus:

HA1. Consummate competencies influence customer-philosophy.

HA2. Consummate competencies influence integrated marketing efforts.

Figure 1.Operational conceptual

framework


Nigeria

865

HA3. Consummate competencies influence marketing information.

HA4. Consummate competencies influence strategic orientation.

HA5. Consummate competencies influence operational efficiency.

HA6. Threshold competencies influence customer-philosophy.

HA7. Threshold competencies influence integrated marketing efforts.

HA8. Threshold competencies influence marketing information.

HA9. Threshold competences influence strategic orientation.

HA10. Threshold competencies influence operational efficiency

The next section describes the empirical study, which includes the methods of datacollection and operationalization of variables. The section shows that data werecollected from primary and secondary sources. Primary data were collected throughthe use of questionnaire from key informants. The results of the analysis of data arealso presented.

The empirical studyResearch methodologyTwo extreme points of view can be identified in the research methodology namely:quantitative and qualitative (Burell and Morgan, 1978). Those who take the firstapproach argue that there is a similarity between social and natural phenomena andsimilar methods can be used to study both phenomena. They favor the positivisticquantitative methodology in social science research. Burell and Morgan (1978, p. 7)argue that positivist epistemology is in essence based on the traditional approacheswhich dominate the natural sciences. They argue that positivists may differ in terms ofdetailed approach. Some would claim, for example, that hypothesized regularities canbe verified by an adequate experimental research program. Others would maintain thathypotheses can only be falsified and never demonstrated to be true. Burell and Morganconcluded that both verificationists and fasificationists would accept that the growthof knowledge is essentially a cumulative process in which new insights are added tothe existing stock of knowledge and false hypothesis eliminated. Whitley (1996)indicated that this quantitative research approach is characterized by operationaldefinitions, objectivity, hypothesis testing, causality and reliability.

Those who take the second approach believe that social and natural phenomena aredifferent. According to them, a positivistic quantitative approach is inappropriate forstudying social phenomena (Phenomenology). Burell and Morgan (1978, p. 241),Schurtz (1967) and Sartre (1976) have argued that phenomenology is never aninvestigation of external or internal facts. On the contrary, it silences experienceprovisionally, leaves the question of objective reality or of real content aside in order toturn its attention solely and simply on the reality in consciousness, in the objectsinsofar as they are intended by and in consciousness. Whitley (1996) views this worldfrom the actives review point that suggests close involvement between the researcherand respondent. They favor a humanistic, subjective or qualitative approach. Becauseof the nature of this study, we adopted mainly the quantitative paradigm.

JMD27,8

866

Sample selectionA sample frame was compiled from the 2005 edition of Nigerian Stock Exchange Gazette.A total of 84 corporate organizations were systematically selected from the 360 corporateorganizations listed in the Stock Exchange. The choice of the sample is rationalized asfollows. Those listed organizations are indicative of the most progressive organizationsin Nigeria, and have their headquarters in Lagos. The choice of Nigerian Stock Exchangeis based on the fact that companies listed therein are publicly quoted companies withre-challenging responsibility and performance to their corporate stakeholders, includingshareholders and customers. To obtain reliable information for this study, the keyinformant approach was used. Therefore, two key informants in each of the corporateorganizations among the sample size constituted the respondents.

Construction of research instrumentsThe research instruments were designed using measures from the extant literature.Two sets of instruments were designed to test the two constructs. A 12-item five-pointLikert scale anchored by “1” strongly disagree to “5” strongly agree was developed tomeasure managerial competencies. Six items were constructed to measureconsummate competency and six items were also constructed to measure thresholdcompetencies. To measure marketing effectiveness, the Kotler (1997) scale was used. A23-item questionnaire had earlier been proposed by Kotler and used by Appiah-Adu etal. (2001) to operationalize marketing effectiveness. Eight items were eliminated fromthe questionnaire during the factor analysis as will be discussed later in this paper.However a 15-item questionnaire was finally used to operationalise marketingeffectiveness. Three items deal with each of the elements of marketing effectiveness.To be sure that key informants answer the questions, respondents were asked to statetheir status in the organization.

Validity of research instrument and measurement scalesThe validity of an instrument refers to the extent to which it measures what it wasintended to measure. The validity of the scales utilized in this study was assessed forcontent and construct (convergent) validity. A measure can be said to possess contentvalidity if there is general agreement among the subject and researchers thatconstituent items cover all aspects of the variables being measured (Nwokah andMaclayton, 2006). Content validity was enhanced via the conventional process formeasure development. The managerial competencies and marketing effectivenessscales were tested for construct (convergent) validity. A measure can be said to haveconstruct validity if it measures the theoretical construct or trait that it was designed tomeasure. The correlation among the component of managerial competencies and thecorrelation among the components of the marketing effectiveness may provideevidence of convergent validity to the extent that they are high, that is they areconverging on a common underlying construct.

Data collection and analysisA survey questionnaire was developed for this study to measure the study constructs.Given the nature of this study as regards data generation requirements, it wasconsidered that responses should be elicited from sources knowledgeable in theorganization’s human resources and marketing activities so as to limit measurementerror (Bowman and Ambrosini, 1997). In this regard, the head of human resources and


Nigeria

867

head of marketing in each sample organization were treated as the key informants. Apersonal/hand delivery survey with the help of three research assistants was used toadminister research instrument following the principles of the total design methodwith pre-notification correspondence. With the key informants approach data werecollected from a human resources manager on issues relating to managerialcompetencies, and a marketing manager on issues relating to marketing effectiveness.Therefore two questionnaires were distributed to a company making a total of 168copies of questionnaire distributed. It was assumed that such managers have the bestvantage point to provide the most accurate responses. Respondents were assuredanonymity of their responses and also were promised a copy of the research as anincentive for responding to the research instrument. A total of 158 copies of thequestionnaire were returned, out of which 16 were not useful on the basis that therespondents declared no wish to take part in the study for various reasons.

To analyze our data, SPSS for windows version 10.0 was used. A total of 142 copiesof useable questionnaire were returned and used in the study. Raw data were put intothe spreadsheet of the SPSS and were later transformed to obtain the sum of the valuesof managerial competencies and marketing effectiveness. A multiple regression wascarried out to obtain our r 2 value, standard deviation and the sum of managerialcompetencies was regressed to the sum the square of marketing effectiveness to the r 2

values. The analysis, however, reveals that there is a relationship between managerialcompetencies and marketing effectiveness (as shown in Table I).

Research results and findingsScale constructionManagerial competencies. The descriptive findings of the managerial competences arereported in Table II. It can be observed that the mean scores range from 3.12 to 3.81with a reasonable dispersion about this measure of central tendency. It was found thatthe Cronbach alpha coefficient for consummate competencies is 0.7322 and a threshold

Managerialcompetence Marketing effectiveness

Spearmancorrelation Significance

MultipleR 2 values

Consummate Customer philosophy 0.623 0.904 0.691competencies Integration and control of the major

marketing functions0.655 0.904

Gathering adequate marketinginformation

0.654 0.771

Existence of strategic orientation 0.566 0.777Operational efficiency 0.688 0.825

Threshold Customer philosophy 0.661 0.908 0.688competencies Integration and control of the major

marketing functions0.612 0.908

Gathering adequate marketinginformation

0.625 0.586

Existence of strategic orientation 0.612 0.862Operational efficiency 0.622 0.820

Source: SPSS 10.0 output

Table I.Multiple regressions ofmanagerial competencyand marketingeffectiveness

JMD27,8

868

competency is 0.7212. Also item total scale correlation analyses calculated all variablesto be positive and highly statistically significant in their relationship with managerialcompetencies index.

Exploratory factor analysisA preliminary EFA was performed in items from the marketing effectiveness scale toensure that the dimensions intended to reflect each of the different effectivenesscontexts loaded on common factors. A principal factor method with a varimax rotationwas applied to the scale. Based on eigen values greater than one, an evaluation of thescree plot, and minimum factor loadings of 0.6, the analysis indicated a five-factorsolution for marketing effectiveness scale (Moore and Fairhurst, 2003, p. 392). Fivecross-loaded items were eliminated from the full 23-items scale. This preliminary factormodel was subsequently used in the confirmatory factor analysis.

Confirmatory factor analysisConfirmatory factor analysis was performed to evaluate measurement of theexogenous variables (i.e. marketing effectiveness). During the confirmatory factor

S/no. Managerial competence Mean St dev.Item-total scale

correlation

A Consummate competenciesCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7322

1. Work practices are governed by an orientationtowards efficiency 3.12 1.03 0.4615

2. Management lays emphasis on increased staffproductivity 3.45 1.11 0.4868

3. Workers’ actions are judged by the level of impactsuch actions have on the system 3.66 1.21 0.4833

4. Workers are encouraged to develop self-confidencein the performance of their assignments 3.00 0.98 0.4545

5. Management constantly seeks to develop workers’oral presentation abilities 3.50 0.99 0.4852

6. Workers are encouraged to use social skills in theperformance of their jobs 3.80 1.05 0.5004

B Threshold competenciesCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7212

7. Organizational members are systematic in theirwork processes 3.11 0.97 0.4562

8. Organizational members express positive regardtowards clients and customers 3.81 1.06 0.5005

9. There is distinct succession planning program in theorganization 3.52 0.97 0.4925

10. Workers are trained to give spontaneous response tourgent and unanticipated work needs 3.55 0.99 0.4771

11. Organizational member easily adapt to changingwork situations 3.62 0.93 0.4887

12. Organizational members apply specializedknowledge in handling complex work situations 3.70 0.96 0.4781

Source: SPSS output version 10.0

Table II.Managerial competenciesmeasures: scale statistics


Nigeria

869

modeling process several iterations were performed. Three items were eliminated fromthe scale, due to excessive inter-correlation between factors and kurtosis. The finalconfirmatory model indicated very good fit with a non-significant chi-square of 40.278(p , 0:30, 36 df). Indices of both absolute and relative fit also presented support for themeasurement model (CP ¼ 0:7842, IM ¼ 0:7564, MI ¼ 0:7252, SO ¼ 0:7312,OE ¼ 0:7223). The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) associatedwith the confirmatory model produced an acceptable value of 0.03, well below themaximum acceptable value of 0.07 (Byrne, 2001). The scales used to capturedimensions of organization’s marketing effectiveness are displayed in Table III. Itindicates that there are five factors to measure marketing effectiveness.

Principal components analysis was used to assess the underlying relationship ofeach dimension within marketing effectiveness. Table III illustrates that in all cases; asingle factor was extracted, suggesting the homogeneity within each factor. Thedimension most emphasized by organizations in their overall marketing effectivenessappears to be customer philosophy.

Reliability of research instrument and measurement scalesAfter the survey had been completed the reliability of the scales was furtherexamined by computing their coefficient alpha (Cronbach alpha). All scales werefound to exceed a minimum threshold of 0.7 as used in previous studies (Seeman andO’Hara, 2006; Nwokah and Maclayton, 2006). Convergent validity is also suggestedwhen the individual variable scores are combined into a single scale to give aCronbach alpha of 0.7982. The actual results of the scale reliability analysis arereported in Tables IV and V.

Regression analysisManagerial competency and customer philosophyTable I shows the multiple regression results of the managerial competencydimensions on perceived marketing effectiveness. The findings in Table I indicate asignificant and positive association between consummate competencies and customerphilosophy, a significant and positive association between threshold competencies andcustomer philosophy. These results provide strong support for HA1 and HA6.

Managerial competency and integrated marketing effortsThe findings in Table I indicate a significant and positive association betweenmanagerial competency and integrated marketing efforts, and a significant andpositive association between threshold competencies and integrated marketing efforts.These results again provide support for HA2 and HA7.

Managerial competency and information gatheringThe findings in Table I indicate a significant and positive association betweenconsummate competencies and adequate information gathering; a significant andpositive association between threshold competencies and adequate informationgathering these results provide strong support for HA3 and HA8.

JMD27,8

870

Managerial competency and strategic orientationThe findings in Table I indicate a significant and positive association betweenmanagerial competency and strategic orientation, and a significant and positiveassociation between threshold competencies and strategic orientation. These resultsagain provide support for HA4 and HA9.

Scale items

S/no. Marketing effectivenessFactorloading

Item to totalcorrelation Crombach

A Customer philosophy 0.78421. Management recognizes the importance of designing

the company to serve the needs and wants of chosenmarkets 0.992 0.8498

2. Management develops different offerings andmarketing plans for different segments of the market 0.994 0.8477

3. Management takes a whole marketing system view(suppliers, channels, competitors, customer, andenvironment) in planning its business 0.973 0.8039

B Integration and control of the major marketingfunctions 0.7564

4. There is high-level marketing integration and controlof the major marketing functions 0.993 0.8498

5. Marketing management work well withmanagement in research, manufacturing, purchase,physical distribution, and finance 0.993 0.8482

6. New product development process in our company iswell organized 0.944 0.7982

C Gathering adequate marketing information 0.72527. We regularly conduct marketing research to study

customers, buying influences, channels andcompetitors 0.994 0.8498

8. Management usually have full knowledge of thesales potential and profitability of different marketsegments, customers territories, products, channelsand other sizes 0.948 0.8479

9. Effort is expanded to measure the cost-effectivenessof different marketing expenditures 0.914 0.7982

D Existence of strategic orientation 0.731210. Management develops an annual marketing plan

and a careful long-range plan that is updatedannually 0.976 0.8498

11. The quality of current marketing strategy is clear,innovative, data-based and well-reasoned 0.972 0.8459

12. Management formally identifies the most importantcontingencies and develops contingency plans 0.995 0.7907

E Operational efficiency 0.722313. Marketing thinking at the top are communicated and

implemented down the line 0.979 0.849814. Management is doing an effective job with the

marketing resources? 0.993 0.842915. Management show a good capacity to react quickly

and effectively to on-the-spot development 0.995 0.8152


Table III.Principal component

analysis of marketingeffectiveness


Nigeria

871

Managerial competency and operational efficiencyThe findings in Table I indicate a significant and positive association betweenmanagerial competency and operational efficiency, and a significant and positiveassociation between threshold competencies and operational efficiency. These resultsagain provide support for HA5 and HA10.

In the following section of this paper, each of the findings is discussed andconclusions are made based on the findings

DiscussionTable I demonstrates clearly, that where managerial competency is deemed to beeffectively taking place in this exploratory study, there is evidence to suggest that it iscontributing to overall marketing effectiveness of corporate organizations. Moreover,the underpinning hypotheses, as stated earlier are clearly substantiated by the resultsof this study. In general, there is a strong relationship between the managerialcompetencies of a corporate organizations and its marketing effectiveness. Eachmanagerial competencies component contributes to the marketing effectiveness

Scale items

S/no. Managerial competenceItem to totalcorrelation

Scale alpha ifitem deleted

A Consummate competenciesCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7322

1. Work practices are governed by an orientationtowards efficiency 0.4187 0.7953

2. Management lays emphasis on increased staffproductivity 0.4854 0.7717

3. Workers’ actions are judged by the level of impactsuch actions have on the system 0.4740 0.7797

4. Workers are encouraged to develop self-confidencein the performance of their assignments 0.4545 0.7761

5. Management constantly seeks to develop workers’oral presentation abilities 0.3965 0.77436

6. Workers are encouraged to use social skills in theperformance of their jobs. 0.3965 0.77436

B Threshold competenciesCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7212

7. Organizational members are systematic in theirwork processes 0.4126 0.7471

8. Organizational members express positive regardtowards clients and customers 0.4121 0.7412

9. There is distinct succession planning program in theorganization 0.4552 0.7554

10. Workers are trained to give spontaneous response tourgent and unanticipated work needs 0.3900 0.7036

11. Organizational member easily adapt to changingwork situations 0.4690 0.7814

12. Organizational members apply specializedknowledge in handling complex work situations 0.4935 0.7724


Table IV.Scale reliability ofmanagerial competenceelements

JMD27,8

872

Scale items

S/no. Marketing effectivenessItem to totalcorrelation

Scale alpha ifitem deleted

A Customer philosophyCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7842

16. Management recognizes the importance of designingthe company to serve the needs and wants of chosenmarkets. 0.4965 0.77536

17. Management develops different offerings andmarketing plans for different segments of the market 0.4965 0.77436

18. Management takes a whole marketing system view(suppliers, channels, competitors, customer, andenvironment) in planning its business. 0.4138 0.7468

B Integration and control of the major marketingfunctionsCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7564

19. There is high-level marketing integration and controlof the major marketing functions 0.4187 0.7953

20. Marketing management work well withmanagement in research, manufacturing, purchase,physical distribution, and finance 0.4854 0.7717

21. New product development process in our company iswell organized 0.4740 0.7797

C Gathering adequate marketing informationCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7252

22. We regularly conduct marketing research to studycustomers, buying influences, channels andcompetitors 0.3965 0.77436

23. Management usually have full knowledge of thesales potential and profitability of different marketsegments, customers territories, products, channelsand other sizes 0.3965 0.77436

24. Effort is expanded to measure the cost-effectivenessof different marketing expenditures 0.4138 0.7468

D Existence of strategic orientationCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7312

25. Management develops an annual marketing planand a careful long-range plan that is updatedannually 0.4187 0.7953

26. The quality of current marketing strategy is clear,innovative, data-based and well-reasoned 0.4854 0.7717

27. Management formally identifies the most importantcontingencies and develops contingency plans 0.4740 0.7797

E Operational efficiencyCoefficient alpha for scale 0.7223

28. Marketing thinking at the top are communicated andimplemented down the line 0.3965 0.77436

29. Management is doing an effective job with themarketing resources? 0.3965 0.77436

30. Management show a good capacity to react quicklyand effectively to on-the-spot development 0.4138 0.7468


Table V.Scale reliability of

marketing effectivenesselements


Nigeria

873

measure examined, although their relative influences vary according to the specificmarketing effectiveness dimension.

As can be seen from Table I, the most significant predictor of the managerialcompetency-based marketing effectiveness measure is information gathering.Furthermore, from the findings, there are implications regarding possible linkagesamongst the five marketing effectiveness dimensions utilized. These tentative resultslend credence to the propositions advanced by both scholars and practitioners thatthere is a relationship between managerial competencies and organizationalperformance (Ahiauzu, 2006). Customer philosophy is conceived as the keycomponent underlying the relationship between one of the five effectivenessmeasures in this exploratory paper and this is obvious in the marketingeffectiveness dimensions for all the results. In essence this paper reinforces the needfor corporate organizations in Nigeria to emphasis the nurturing of a sound managerialcompetency if they are to benefit fully from increased marketing effectiveness rates.

The implications of the results of this study are clear for scholars and managers. Formanagers this paper has implications on the investigation of the link betweenmanagerial competencies and marketing effectiveness of corporate organizations inNigeria. In the first place, this paper provides a direct test of the applicability of awestern paradigm to Nigerian economic system different from other culture. Themarketing effectiveness rating scales (Kotler, 1977, 1997) were developed in the contextof the Western cultural setting. Even though the continued internationalization ofbusiness operations has led to the conjecture that marketing theories and models mightwell be transportable across national and cultural borders (Sin et al., 2001), the directapplication of these models to subjects from another culture without any validationmight create a “category fallacy”.

Moreover, an uncritical emulation and extrapolation of the experiences of USAmarketing practices to a country with different cultures and economic environmentsmight lead to inefficient and ineffective performances of organizations in thosecountries. Our findings increase our confidence in the cross-cultural applicability ofKotler’s scale and model in studying marketing effectiveness. Of course, this researchmust be replicated in other diverse market environments and overtime to increase thegeneralizability of the theory. For managers, this paper helps to assess theeffectiveness of managerial competencies and marketing effectiveness in thetransitional economy of Nigeria. The inconsistent growth of the Nigeria economy hascaught worldwide attention in recent years. Understanding more about businessstrategies in Nigeria can be enormously helpful for foreign organizations interested incollaborating and/or competing against Nigerian enterprises. This paper representsthe first of a series of studies investigating managerial competencies and marketingeffectiveness in the context of corporate organizations in Nigeria. Given thetheoretical and managerial significance of this research, it will not be the last study ofits type.

Conclusions and recommendationsThe survey results suggest that a valid instrument for measuring the managerialcompetencies and marketing effectiveness of corporate organizations in Nigeria can bedeveloped. Managerial competency seems to consist of two dimensions and bemeasured using 12 questionnaire items. Consummate competency includes: work

JMD27,8

874

practices which are governed by an orientation towards efficiency; management layingemphasis on increased staff productivity; judging workers’ actions by the level ofimpact such actions have on the system; management constantly seeking to developworkers’ oral presentation abilities; and workers being encouraged to use social skillsin the performance of their jobs. Threshold competency includes: organizationalmembers that are systematic in their work processes; organizational membersexpressing positive regard towards clients and customers; there is distinct successionplanning program in the organization; workers are trained to give a spontaneousresponse to urgent and unanticipated work needs; organizational member easily adaptto changing work situations; and organizational members apply specialized knowledgein handling complex work situations.

Marketing effectiveness appears to consist of five dimensions and be measuredusing 15 questionnaire items which demonstrate content, criterion and constructvalidity. A customer philosophy includes management recognition of the importanceof designing the company to serve the needs and wants of chosen markets,management development of different offerings and marketing plans for differentsegments of the market and management decision to take a whole marketing systemview (suppliers, channels, competitors, customer, environment) in planning itsbusiness. An integration and control of the major marketing functions include ahigh-level of marketing integration and control of the major marketing functions,marketing management working well with management in research, manufacturing,purchase, physical distribution, and finance; and Management usually having fullknowledge of the sales potential and profitability of different market segments,customers territories, products, channels and other sizes. Adequate marketinginformation include regularly conducting marketing research to study customers,buying influences, channels and competitors; management having full knowledge ofthe sales potential and profitability of different market segments, customers territories,products, channels and other sizes; effort is expanded to measure the cost-effectivenessof different marketing expenditures. Strategic orientation consists of managementdeveloping an annual marketing plan and a careful long-range plan that is updatedannually; the quality of current marketing strategy is clear, innovative, data-based andwell-reasoned; management formally identifies the most important contingencies anddevelops contingency plans. Operational efficiency include marketing thinking at thetop are communicated and implemented down the line; management doing an effectivejob with the marketing resources; management showing a good capacity to reactquickly and effectively to on-the-spot development.

This paper has sought to contribute further to knowledge concerning managerialcompetency and marketing effectiveness by applying the established marketingeffectiveness model to corporate organizations in Nigeria under somewhat uniquecircumstances. However, in furtherance to the realization of set objectives, we make thefollowing recommendations:

. Nigerian government should ensure a stable economy and make economicpolicies that will enhance existing business development in the country.

. Management must consistently motivate its sales team so that it will analyze thecustomer’s needs, seek to satisfy them, and try to adapt the products to theseneeds, react to competitors’ actions and responses.


Nigeria

875

. Management should also work in collaboration with other workers in thecompany and share information about customers and competitors with theseworkers.

. Research efforts in the future may wish to consider certain themes and issuesthat have emerged from this paper. In line with this, attention could be devoted toexamine the relationship of these constructs in other cultural environments.

References

Abraham, S.E., Kams, L.A., Shaw, K. and Mena, M.A. (2001), “Managerial competencies and themanagerial performance appraisal process”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 20No. 10, pp. 842-52.

Ahiauzu, A.I. (2006), “The nature and fundamental principles of competency- based publicadministration”, a workshop paper on transformational managerial leadership incompetency-based public service administration for senior civil servants of Imo State,Nigeria.

Appiah-Adu, K., Fyall, A. and Singh, S. (2001), “Marketing effectiveness and businessperformance in the financial services industry”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 15No. 1, pp. 18-32.

Armstrong, M. (2000), Performance Management, Key Strategies and Practical Guidelines, KoganPage, London.

Ashworth, P.D. and Sexton, J. (1990), “On competence”, Journal of Further and Higher Education,Vol. 14, pp. 3-25.

Ban, C. (1998), “The changing role of the personnel office”, in Condrey, S.E. (Ed.), Handbook ofHuman Resources Management in Government, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco,CA, pp. 21-7.

Barber, C.S. and Tietye, B.C. (2004), “Competency requirements for managerial development inmanufacturing, assembly, and/or material processing functions”, Journal of ManagementDevelopment, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 596-607.

Bowman, C. and Ambrosini, V. (1997), “Perceptions of strategic parties, consensus and firmperformance”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 41-58.

Boyatzis, R.E. (1982), The Competent Manager A Model for Effective Performance, Wiley, NewYork, NY.

Briscoe, J.P. and Hall, D.T. (1999), “Grooming and picking leaders using competency frameworks:do they work? An alternative approach and new guidelines for practice”, OrganizationalDynamics, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 37-52.

Brooksbank, R. and Taylor, D. (2002), “The adoption of strategic marketing and its contributionto the competitive success of New Zealand companies”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning,Vol. 20 No. 7, pp. 452-61.

Burell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979), Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis,Heinemann Educational Books, London.

Burgouyne, J. (1993), “The competence movement: issues, stakeholders and prospects”, PersonnelReview, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 6-13.

Byrne, B.M. (2001), Structure Equation Modeling with Amos, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Mahwah, NJ.

Cheng, M., Dainty, A.R. and Moore, D.R. (2003), “The differing faces of managerial competency inBritain and America”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 527-37.

JMD27,8

876

Day, M. (1989), “Management competence and the charter initiative”, Personal Management,October 21, pp. 30-4.

Elkin, G. (1990), “Competency-based human resource development”, Industrial and CommercialTraining, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 20-5.

Gilmore, A. (1998), “Service marketing management competencies; a ferry company example”,Internal Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 74-92.

Harley, A.A. (1995), “Window on an alien world: development centres in the context of directorcompetences”, Executive Development, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 28-31.

King, L. (1992), “The reality of management knowledge”, paper presented at the ConferenceReframing Competencies. The Data in Business and Management Learning, BoltonBusiness School, Bolton.

Klemp, G.O. (1980), The Assessment of Occupational Competence, report to the National Instituteof Education, National Institute of Education, Washington DC).

Kotler, P. (1977), “From sales obsession to marketing effectiveness”, Harvard Business Review,Vol. 55, November-December, pp. 67-75.

Kotler, P. (1997), Marketing Management, Analysis Planning, Implementation and Control,Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

McClelland, D.C. (1971), Assessing Human Motivation, General Learning Press, New York, NY.

Moore, M. and Fairhurst, A. (2003), “Marketing capabilities and firm performance in fashionretailing”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 386-97.

Nordhaug, O. and Gronhaug, K. (1994), “Competence as resource”, The International Journal ofHuman Resources Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 89-106.

Nwokah, N.G. (2006), “Marketing effectiveness and business performance”, Nigerian Journal ofBusiness and Society, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 15-26.

Nwokah, N.G. and Maclayton, D.W. (2006), “Customer focus and business performance the studyof food and beverages organizations in Nigeria”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 10No. 4, pp. 65-76.

Sartre, J. (1976), Critique of Dialectical Reason, Vol. 1, New Left Books, London.

Schurtz, A. (1967), trans. by Walsh, G. and Lehnert, F., Northwestern University Press, Evanston,IL.

Seeman, E. and O’Hara, M. (2006), “Customer relationship management in higher education,using information systems to improve the student-school relationship”, Campus-wideInformation Systems, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 24-34.

Sin, Y.M., Ise, C.B., Yan, H.M., Lee, S.Y., Choro, R. and Lau, B.Y. (2001), “Market orientation andbusiness performance: an empirical study of Mainland China”, Journal of GlobalMarketing, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 5-29.

Spencer, L.M., McCleelland, D. and Spencer, S.M. (1990), Competency Assessment Methods,Hay/McBer Research Press, Boston, MA.

Stuart, R. and Lindsay, P. (1997), “Beyond the frame of management competencies: towards acontextually embedded framework of managerial competence in organizations”, Journal ofEuropean Industrial Training, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 26-33.

Tate, W. (1995), Developing Managerial Competence: A Critical Guide to Methods and Materials,Gower, Aldershot.

Van Sluijs, E. and Kluytmans, F. (1996), “Management van competencies”, Mens en Organisatie,No. 3.


Nigeria

877

Vereecken, H. (2000), “Functies en competenties complementair”, Human Resources Magazine,pp. 32-3.

Webster, C. (1995), “Marketing culture and marketing effectiveness in service firms”, Journal ofServices Marketing, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 6-21.

Whitley, B. (1996), Principles of Research in Behavioral Science, Mayfield Publishing, MountainView, CA.

Wikipedia (2006), The Wikipedia Free Encyclopedia, available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/marketing.

Woodburn, D. (2004), “Engaging marketing in performance measurement”, Measuring BusinessExcellence, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 63-72.

Woodruffe, C. (1993), “What is meant by a competency”, Leadership & Organization DevelopmentJournal, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 29-36.

Further reading

Dess, G.G. and Robinson, R. (1984), “Measuring organizational performance in the absence ofobjective measures: the case of the privately-held firms and conglomerate business unit”,Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 265-73.

Webster, F.E. Jr (1988), “The rediscovery of the marketing concept”, Business Horizons, Vol. 31,May-June, pp. 29-39.

About the authorsN. Gladson Nwokah holds a PhD in Marketing from Rivers State University of Science andTechnology, Port Harcourt, Nigeria. He is at present working as a lecturer in the Department ofMarketing, Faculty of Management Sciences, Rivers State University of Science and Technology,Nigeria. He has published in Measuring Business Excellence and has had his papers accepted forpublication in European Journal of Marketing, and Corporate Governance: the internationaljournal of business in society. N.Gladson Nwokah is the corresponding author and can becontacted at [email protected]

Augustine I. Ahiauzu is Professor of Organizational Behavior and Industrial Relations,Department of Management, Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt,Nigeria and Chairman at the International Center for Management Research and Training(CIMRAT), Port Harcourt, Nigeria.

JMD27,8

878

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Documents

Managerial competencies and marketing effectiveness in corporate organizations in Nigeria