WEB APPENDIX
Marketing Performance Measurement Systems: Does Comprehensiveness Really
Improve Performance?
Christian Homburg, Martin Artz, & Jan Wieseke
FINAL SAMPLE FOR TABLE 6
To form the final sample for the analyses appearing in Table 6, we deleted firm values showing abnormal business activities (e.g.,
negative sales) or only marginal marketing activities (e.g., revenues of less than US-$5,000). We further adjust for different (extreme)
sample values of market-to-book ratios covering firms that are not part of our survey sample. To show the non-sensitivity of this
adjustment, we form two different samples (Final Sample 1 and Final Sample 2). All abbreviations refer to COMPUSTAT items as
reported in the database. The table shows the stepwise deletion of cases not meeting the specified requirements.
COMPUSTAT Universe 1998–2010
Firm-years with US-$ Currency
Firm-years without missing values for revenues [revt] or market value of
equity [mkvalt] or book values of equity [ceq] or EBIT [ebit]
Firm-years without revenues [revt] or assets [at] or market value of equity
[mkvalt] < 0 or missing
Firm-years without book values of equity [ceq] < 0
Firm-years without employees [emp] < 100
Firm-years without revenues [rev] < 5,000 US-$
Final Sample 1 (without market-to-book [mkvalt/ceq] > 20)
Final Sample 2 (without market-to-book [mkvalt/ceq] > 3)
Final Sample 3 (without market-to-book [mkvalt/ceq] > 20 and a lagged
value for market-to-book)
Final Sample 4 (without market-to-book [mkvalt/ceq] > 3 and a lagged value
for market-to-book)
# Observations (firm-years)
319,300
288,225
86,047
86,008
75,972
59,620
58,304
58,254
43,066
48,862
36,920
DETAILED MANAGERIAL GUIDELINES
[Mainly Taken from Empirical Results in Figure 2 and Table 5]
Panel A: Moderator Differentiation Strategy
Managerial focus on…
Contingent
Variable
Level
Source
Marketing Alignment
Low
Figure 2, A & D
Table 5, Line (1)
 No overall marginal effects of
CMPMS increase
 No effect of any subdimension
 No implementation of a
comprehensive marketing
performance measurement
system
 Small marginal effects of CMPMS
increase
 Only benefits for increasing
subdimension “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Only increase of subdimension
“cause-and-effect relationships” in
the marketing performance
measurement system
 Very weak
 Implementation
very probably does
not outweigh its
costs
Medium
Figure 2, A & D
Table 5, Line (2)
 Small overall marginal effects
of CMPMS increase
 Small effects of “strategy fit”
and “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Focus on subcomponents
“strategy fit” and “cause-andeffect relationships” in the
marketing performance
measurement system
 Small marginal effects of CMPMS
increase
 Only benefits for increasing the
subdimension “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Strengthen only “cause-and-effect
relationships” in the marketing
performance measurement system
 Medium
 Implementation
might outweigh its
costs
Differentiation
Strategy
Overall Benefits of
CMPMS
 Medium marginal effects of CMPMS  Medium
increase
 Implementation
 Only benefits for increasing the
might outweigh its
subdimension “cause-and-effect
costs
relationships”
 Only increase of “cause-and-effect
relationships” in the marketing
performance measurement system
Note: standardized effects > 0 and ≤ .1 are considered as very small, standardized effects > .1 and ≤ .2 are considered as small, standardized effects > .2 and ≤ .3
are considered as medium, and standardized effects > .3 and ≤ .4 are considered as large.
High
Figure 2, A & D
Table 5, Line (3)
 Large overall marginal effects
of CMPMS increase
 Very small effects of “breadth,”
small effects of “strategy fit”
 Increase CMPMS without
increasing “cause-and-effect
relationships”
Market Knowledge
Panel B: Moderator Marketing Complexity
Managerial focus on…
Contingent
Variable
Level
Source
Low
Figure 2, B & E
Table 5, Line (4)
 No overall marginal effects of
CMPMS increase
 No implementation of a
comprehensive marketing
performance measurement
system
 No overall marginal effects of
CMPMS increase
 No implementation of a
comprehensive marketing
performance measurement
 None
Medium
Figure 2, B & E
Table 5, Line (5)
 Small overall marginal effects
of CMPMS increase
 Small effects of “strategy fit”
and “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Strengthen both “strategy fit”
and “cause-and-effect
relationships” in the marketing
performance measurement
system
 Small marginal effects of CMPMS
increase
 Only benefits for increasing
subdimension “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Strengthen only “cause-and-effect
relationships” in the marketing
performance measurement system
 Medium
 Implementation
might outweigh its
costs
Marketing
Complexity
Marketing Alignment
Overall Benefits of
CMPMS
 Medium overall marginal effects of
 Large
CMPMS increase
 Implementation
 Large effect of “strategy fit” and very
likely outweighs its
large effect of “cause-and-effect
costs
relationships”
 Strengthen both subdimensions in the
marketing performance measurement
system, especially “cause-and-effect
relationships”
Note: standardized effects > 0 and ≤ .1 are considered as very small, standardized effects > .1 and ≤ .2 are considered as small, standardized effects > .2 and ≤ .3
are considered as medium, and standardized effects > .3 and ≤ .4 are considered as large.
High
Figure 2, B & E
Table 5, Line (6)
 Medium overall marginal
effects of CMPMS increase
 Large effects of “strategy fit”
and “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Strengthen both subdimensions
in the marketing performance
measurement system
Market Knowledge
Panel C: Moderator Market Dynamism
Managerial focus on…
Contingent
Variable
Level
Source
Marketing Alignment
Low
Figure 2, C & F
Table 5, Line (7)
 Medium marginal effects of
CMPMS increase
 Only large benefits for
increasing subdimension
“cause-and-effect relationships”
 Strengthen only “cause-andeffect relationships” in the
marketing performance
measurement system
 No overall marginal effects of
CMPMS increase
 No implementation of a
comprehensive marketing
performance measurement system
 Low - medium
 Implementation
might not outweigh
its costs
Medium
Figure 2, C & F
Table 5, Line (8)
 Small overall marginal effects
of CMPMS increase
 Small effects of “strategy fit”
and “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Strengthen only “cause-andeffect relationships” in the
marketing performance
measurement system
 Small marginal effects of CMPMS
increase
 Only benefits for increasing
subdimension “cause-and-effect
relationships”
 Strengthen only “cause-and-effect
relationships” in the marketing
performance measurement system
 Medium
 Implementation
might outweigh its
costs
Market
Dynamism
Overall Benefits of
CMPMS
 Medium marginal effects of CMPMS  Very large
increase
 Implementation
 Only benefits for increasing
very likely
subdimension “cause-and-effect
outweighs its costs
relationships”
 Strengthen only “cause-and-effect
relationships” in the marketing
performance measurement system
Note: standardized effects > 0 and ≤ .1 are considered as very small, standardized effects > .1 and ≤ .2 are considered as small, standardized effects > .2 and ≤ .3
are considered as medium, and standardized effects > .3 and ≤ .4 are considered as large.
High
Figure 2, C & F
Table 5, Line (9)
 Large overall marginal effects
of CMPMS increase
 Medium effects of “breadth,”
small effects of “strategy fit”
 Increase CMPMS without
increasing “cause-and-effect”
relationships
Market Knowledge