Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose a novel hybrid approach to assess marketing-based flexibility with respect to its source factors, enablers and attributes. Design/methodology/approach – The study demonstrates an application of a hybrid principal component analysis (PCA)-analytical hierarchical process (AHP)-multi-grade fuzzy approach (MFA) to measure marketing-based flexibility. Using PCA method, attributes, enablers and source factors of marketing-based flexibility were identified and a conceptual model was developed. AHP and MFA were used to compute marketing-based flexibility index. Findings – The proposed approach measures existing level of marketing-based flexibility and therefore it identifies weak areas that should be taken care to improve flexibility. Research limitations/implications – The scope of the study is limited to plant level. The validity of the proposed approach is shown using a case study. For generalisation point of view, the application of this proposed approach should be investigated in a large number of firms in different industrial settings. Practical implications – The study gives a reliable and valid method, which combines both statistical and MCDM techniques to measure existing level of flexibility and identify weak areas for flexibility improvement. Originality/value – The findings provide insight into factors that should be worked upon to improve flexibility.
5. Discussion
The marketing flexibility index for the case firm X was found 6.10 and key concern areas for flexibility improvement were determined using comparative analysis of flexibility enablers (Figure 2).
5.1 Comparative analysis of enablers and gap analysis
The highest value of index was found for “customer integration” followed by “DMT”, “planning and integration technology”, “product/process technology integration”, “supplier development practices” and “marketing and manufacturing integration”. On the other hand, lowest value of index was observed for “workforce improvement practices” followed by “supply flexibility”, “manufacturing improvement practices” and “purchasing flexibility”. The findings were discussed with experts involved in the study and possible causes of low value of indices were asked. One of the interesting findings of the study is that despite having high value of indices for some of the technological factors, the value of marketingbased flexibility index for the case firm was only 6.10. Contrary to the earlier studies, which suggest that different forms of AMTs enable flexibility in firms (Zhang et al., 2006; Mishra et al., 2014b), an average level of marketing-based flexibility index was mainly due to low indices for “workforce improvement practices” followed by “supply flexibility”, “manufacturing improvement practices” and “purchasing flexibility”.
