Information Application

Fourteen of the reviewed studies relate directly to the use of information (Table 4-4, page 58), each drawing from wide and varied disciplines that include social science research (after Beyer & Trice, 1982), organizational learning (after Weick, 1995) and marketing (like Moorman et al., 1993; Sinkula, 1990) among others. In all cases, information utilization features as a multidimensional construct, with authors

(Deshpandé, 1982; Menon & Varadarajan, 1992; Sinkula, 1994; Zaltman & Deshpandé, 2001) generally aligning with the model introduced by Beyer & Trice (1982) (after Pelz, 1978) on the behaviours involved in the application of market research information.

This typology is distinct from the outcomes approach discussed in Section 4.1 (page 51).

Beyer & Trice (1982) state three types of use behaviours:

1. Instrumental use as involving action on research results in specific direct ways.

Moorman (1995) expands this definition by observing that instrumental utilization processes “entailing the design and implementation of marketing actions that influence external constituencies” (ibid:322) through three sub-processes: making, implementing and evaluating marketing decisions. Maltz & Kohli (1996)

emphasise that instrumental use is about knowledge used “to solve a particular problem or make a particular decision” (ibid:48), as do Diamantopoulos &

Souchon (1996:119-120) who add that instrumental use is related to an

“immediately exploitable opportunity” (italics by author, ibid:128). The latter potentially points at the time relevance of information that is directed to

instrumental use. Timeliness is a key aspect of instrumental utilization, featuring intensified information processes and related to effective new product

performance (Moorman, 1995).

2. Conceptual use as “involving the use of results for general enlightenment; results influence actions, but in less specific, more indirect ways than in instrumental use” (Beyer & Trice, 1982:598). Maltz & Kohli (1996:48) interpret this definition by pointing at the use of “knowledge that changes the thinking processes without leading to relatively immediate concrete action”, while Moorman (1995:320)

How do Clients of Market Research Services Construct Value from their Usage of Market Research Information?

4 Thematic Findings

argues that this “indirect use of information in strategy-related actions” involves behaviours influenced by commitment to the information and information processes through which information is rendered meaningful – or sense-making through interpretation (Huber, 1991). Diamantopoulos & Souchon (1996:120) align with these interpretations, claiming that conceptual use “influence a policy-maker’s thinking about an issue without putting information to any specific, documentable use”. Diamantopoulos & Souchon (1996:129) further this definition by observing that executives may not have the occasion for use immediately upon consumption of market information, particularly if market information flows from “sister” firms within the same global organization, lacking specificity to a specific issue. Here, organizations tend to keep the important parts extracted from any market information received in databases, without “destroying anything… often for the sake of possessing up-to-date information for future decisions” (ibid: 129-130). Here, the time dimension acts as a key stimulus for conceptual use, demarcated with “extraction and storage” phases

(Diamantopoulos & Souchon, 1996:129).

3. Symbolic use as that involving the use of “research results to legitimate and sustain predetermined positions, for example, substituting the action of the research process itself for other action, or using research results selectively or otherwise distorting them to justify actions taken for other reasons” (Beyer &

Trice, 1982:600). Diamantopoulos & Souchon (1996:120) interpret this as distorting “the information so that it may support an opinion, justify a decision already made with retrospectively-acquired information, or simply pretend that he/she uses the information to keep the superiors/subordinates happy”.

Users’ may indeed seek market information after reaching a decision but before implementing (Diamantopoulos & Souchon, 1996:132). With information supporting or otherwise contradicting the validity of decisions, executives may opt for abandonment of implementation. Admitting that no executive interviewed in their study would confess the “distorting” of information so as to confirm decisions based on intuition, the same researchers observe that “distorting” of

information is difficult particularly when this relates to executives who exercise limited levels of discretion as may be the case of subsidiaries within a group.

The above definitions invoke considerations for discussion. Whereas instrumental and symbolic use are discernable (to a certain level), enabling performance (post-hoc) evaluation of decisions made (verification or tracking), conceptual use does not.

Instrumental use aligns with the definition of knowledge use proffered by John &

Martin (1984:173⁴⁵) who relate to “direct” implications on guiding behaviour and making decisions, whereas instrumental and conceptual use together align with the meaning of Patton’s (1978:50⁴⁵) definition of use and resulting reduction in uncertainty.

All three types of use, however, result in behavioural (action-oriented⁴⁶), cognitive (knowledge-enhancing⁴⁷) and affective⁴⁸ changes, aligning with the definition proposed by Anderson, Ciarlo & Brodie (1981:100⁴⁵).

One point that Beyer & Trice (1982:596) make is that the adoption and implementation of information in decision making often does not feature a rational, ordered process (after March & Olsen, 1976; Beyer, 1981). Instead, there may be various “recyclings and truncations” (Beyer & Trice, 1982:596-597). Thus from a practical perspective, the distinction between conceptual and instrumental types of use may be somewhat

superficial (Maltz & Kohli, 1996).

Whilst all three types of uses are not mutually exclusive, a single piece of market information (like a market research report) may feature in all three types of use – initially to address a specific problem and associated decisions (instrumental), then as background information about a separate problem arising after some time (conceptual), and finally as a means to justify other decisions that may or may not be related to the same piece of information (symbolic) (Souchon & Diamantopoulos 1996:55).

Nonetheless, different types of information appear to justify different types of uses, as Souchon & Diamantopoulos (1996) propose.

45 As cited in Menon & Varadarajan (1992:54)

46 linked with instrumental and symbolic use

47 linked with conceptual use

48 Linked with satisfaction levels, confidence and trust as psychological states. Menon & Varadarajan (1992)

How do Clients of Market Research Services Construct Value from their Usage of Market Research Information?

4 Thematic Findings

Use of information mediates the effects of information acquisition and transmission, reflected in new product performance (Moorman, 1995:329) and is influenced by the assessment/evaluation made by users (see Section 4.2.1). Menon & Vardarajan (1992) propose that a favourably evaluated market research information finds itself used in an instrumental way.

While conceptual and instrumental utilization also promote the timeliness⁴⁹ of new products, it is only conceptual use that has an impact on the creativity⁵⁰ of new products as managers engaged in the development of services or products evolve their mind-sets and ways of thinking to better accommodate market needs. Here, Diamantopoulos &

Souchon (1996) disagree, observing that executives rely on instinct rather than conceptual use of market information in creating new products for export markets.

The level and quality of interaction with customers also influences conceptual use of market information (Maltz, Souder, & Kumar, 2001). Customer visits by R&D executives together with marketing executives promote the conceptual use of market information whereas visits conducted without the presence of marketing personnel tend to link with increased instrumental use of market information. Here, Maltz, Souder &

Kumar (2001) see visits together with marketing contacts as a mechanism that reduces any inter-functional rivalry.

Symbolic use of market information may be the result of volatile market situations to which executives have to react in a timely fashion, often without affording time for market research information collation (Diamantopoulos & Souchon, 1996:134). An alternative explanation is the prevailing culture of organizations, particularly if reliant on non-domestic markets (Diamantopoulos & Souchon, 1996).