Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

Organizational Resilience from a Marketing Perspective: A Conceptual Framework

Altmetrics

Downloads

305

Views

185

Comments

0

This version is not peer-reviewed

Submitted:

08 June 2023

Posted:

09 June 2023

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
This paper explores the relationships between marketing strategies, social media platforms, the adoption and diffusion of products and services, and organizational resilience to gain an understanding of the ability of organizations to cope with disruptive events (e.g., COVID-19). This can be achieved through effective marketing strategies and the efficient use of social media platforms. In fact, resilience thinking can help organizations maintain their operations by increasing the adoption and diffusion of their products and services through the use of effective marketing strategies. To achieve this article’s objectives, a literature review is conducted to help develop a conceptual framework that highlights a clear relationship between the previously discussed concepts. In addition, the novel nature of the relationship between marketing strategies and organizational resilience is dissected and its significance for organizations is demonstrated. In fact, the findings of this study suggest that effective marketing strategies that consider the "what," "who," and "how" dichotomies and the efficient use of social media to promote the adoption and diffusion of products and services can significantly enhance the resilience of organizations. These relationships can serve as a starting point for further studies examining and empirically analyzing marketing strategies and their positive effect on strengthening organizational resilience.
Keywords: 
Subject: Business, Economics and Management  -   Marketing

1. Introduction

Management researchers are increasingly focused on how organizations adapt and thrive in uncertain and turbulent environments, especially the COVID-19 pandemic which has presented major challenges to businesses globally and caused them to reevaluate their business models, products, and services. One strategy many organizations have utilized to stay competitive during this crisis was developing new products or services coupled with effective marketing plans designed to facilitate their adoption by target groups.
Strategic marketing can speed up adoption of new products or services by shaping buyer behaviors and businesses, which has an effect on commercial success (Gruca and Rego 2005). Social media platforms have become an increasingly popular way for organizations to market their goods or services (de Vries, Gensler, and Leeflang 2012). Businesses now can engage with customers directly while soliciting opinions and suggestions via this medium - creating two-way conversations on these platforms with them and furthering corporate objectives through this powerful instrument of speeding adoption of products or services by their consumers and buyers.
This literature review’s primary goal is to assess the effects of product or service diffusion and adoption on organizational resilience, through marketing strategies and social media platforms. Resilience refers to an organization’s capacity to quickly recover from and even thrive through adversity (Rahi 2021). Our objective is to explore how marketing approaches, social media platforms, product acceptance rates and organizational toughness all interrelate.
This literature review follows an outline to address its purpose. First, we will research how different marketing approaches affect product or service dissemination. Next, we will consider how social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter help spread news of new offerings. Finally, we’ll take a look at existing literature regarding measuring and fostering organizational resilience before applying what we have learned across these four areas to gain a deeper insight into each.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Product/Service Diffusion and Adoption

Diffusion and adoption are two related concepts that are sometimes used interchangeably; however, their meanings differ. Diffusion is the process by which a product or service spreads throughout a social system like a community or industry (Lundblad 2003). On the other hand, adoption refers to when someone decides to utilize this product or service (Rogers 2003). The speed and extent of diffusion is determined by the characteristics of both the product or the service and its adopters, with adoption depending on perceived relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability. For instance, Hwang et al., (2009) discovered that product characteristics such as perceived usefulness and ease of use significantly influence the adoption of mobile payment services. Yi et al. (2019) examined the influence of social influence on online game diffusion, discovering that word-of-mouth communication had a beneficial effect on game adoption.
However, it is essential to recognize that the diffusion and adoption of new products or services can be affected by various factors. According to Bass (1976), products or services adoption rates are determined by two elements: its inherent characteristics as well as those of individuals or organizations who adopt it.
Rogers (2003) identified five factors that influence the rate of adoption: relative advantage (the perceived superiority of the innovation over existing alternatives), compatibility (compatibility between the innovation and potential adopters’ values/needs), complexity (difficulty in understanding and using it), trialability (ability to experiment with it on a limited basis) and observability (how well results from using it can be seen by others).
However, the limited applicability of Rogers’ diffusion theory to various types of products or services and contexts is one of its primary criticisms. Lundblad (2003) argues that the theory is only applicable to products or services that can be easily communicated and diffused, and that it does not account for the complexities of certain types of products or services, such as those in the healthcare industry, which frequently require substantial resources and infrastructure.
Another criticism of the theory is that it does not account for power dynamics and inequality within a society, both of which can influence the adoption of a particular product or service. For instance, marginalized communities may have less access to the information and resources necessary to adopt a product or a service, or face structural barriers that limit their capacity to do so (Dibra 2015).
In addition, the assumption that product or service adoption is a linear process with a distinct beginning and end has been criticized by a number of researchers. This linear view of innovation adoption fails to account for the iterative and ongoing nature of certain products and services, which involves feedback and adjustment throughout the adoption process (Knickel et al. 2009).
These facts lead research to update the perception of diffusion and adoption of products or services. Dearing and Cox (2018) discuss the diffusion concept as a social process that occurs when individuals learn about and adopt products or services. The dependent variable in diffusion research is typically the time of adoption, but implementation can be a more meaningful measure of change in complex organizations. Diffusion can be assessed at the individual, organizational, or collective level, such as cities and states. However, the authors note that not all instances of diffusion follow this pattern, particularly in policy diffusion, where national attention, financial incentives, and positive perceptions of a solution can speed up the adoption process.
(Moore 2014) proposed categorizing the adoption of new products or services into five groups: innovators (the first to adopt), early adopters (second to adopt), early majority (third to adopt), late majority (fourth to adopt) and laggards (last to adopt). Therefore, product or service characteristics are critical in determining its diffusion and adoption. Rogers (2003) notes that factors such as product/service complexity, compatibility with existing offerings and relative advantage over alternatives can all influence diffusion and adoption rates. For instance, products or services that are easy to use and integrate with consumers’ current behaviors and preferences tend to be adopted. Furthermore, the perceived advantage of a particular product or service compared to alternatives may also influence its rate of adoption (Dholakia and Kshetri 2004; Staake, Thiesse, and Fleisch 2012).
In addition, market conditions play a significant role in the diffusion and adoption of products or services. Studies have indicated that market size, structure, competition levels, and regulatory environment can affect adoption (Kim and Garrison 2009). Markets with high competition may make it harder for new items or services to gain footing; conversely, markets with few competitors offer greater chances for adoption (Islam, Meade, and Sood 2022). Furthermore, regulatory environments that promote innovation may encourage their uptake while stringent regulations can hinder it (Kim and Garrison 2009).
Consumer behavior is another influential factor that can impact the diffusion and adoption of products or services. Studies have revealed that consumers’ attitudes towards certain products and services, level of involvement in the product or service, and perceived risk associated with adoption all play a role in their decision to adopt (Valor, Antonetti, and Crisafulli 2022). For example, those with positive attitudes towards the development of novel products or services tend to be more likely to adopt new items while those with negative ones may be less inclined (Rogers 2003). On the other hand, those who perceive high levels of risk associated with adoption may be less inclined (Rangaswamy, Nawaz, and Changzhuang 2022).
In conclusion, product/service diffusion and adoption are driven by several factors such as product or service characteristics, market conditions, and consumer behavior. By understanding these influences, firms can develop effective marketing strategies to promote product/service adoption and thus strengthen their organizational resilience.

2.2. Marketing Strategies

Marketing strategy is an all-inclusive plan that outlines an organization’s overall approach to promote its products or services. It involves decisions related to identifying target customers, creating products or services tailored for them, setting prices, selecting distribution channels and promoting the offering in order to reach and persuade buyers to buy it (Kotler and Keller 2016) .
Morgan et al. (2019), after conducting a thorough literature review on marketing strategies define the latter “as encompassing the strategy decisions and actions (what) and strategy-making and realization processes (how) concerning a firm’s desired goals over a future time-period, and the means through which it intends to achieve them including selecting target markets and customers; identifying required value propositions; and designing and enacting integrated marketing programs to develop, deliver, and communicate the value offerings.” (Morgan et al. 2019:7)
What is interesting about this definition is that it encapsulates two dichotomies; “What” and “how” through three interrelated categories; inputs, outputs and environmental factors. The inputs category encompasses resources like brand portfolios, market knowledge and financial resources as well as capabilities like customer relationship management and new product development. On the other hand, outputs relate to customer behavior, mindset and marketplace/economic performance. Finally, environmental factors cover both internal factors like organizational culture and size as well as external variables like market characteristics or technological instability that may impact marketing strategy phenomena and their connections with other phenomena (Morgan et al. 2019).
In relationship with the “How” dichotomy, organizations have several methods for reaching their desired audience and stimulating interest in their products or services. These include advertising, sales promotion, public relations, and personal selling (Schiavone and Simoni 2019).
Advertising is a widely employed marketing tactic by organizations. It involves using various media channels like television, radio, print and online advertising to reach out to the desired audience. Studies have found that advertising had an impressively positive effect on purchase intention among consumers (Hsiao and Chang 2014).
Sales promotion is another marketing tactic organizations use to draw in customers. This involves offering discounts, coupons and other incentives as an incentive for people to purchase the product or service. Studies have indicated that while sales promotion may increase short-term sales in certain cases, it may not necessarily lead to long-term customer loyalty (Leeflang et al. 2014).
Public relations (PR) are another effective marketing strategy organizations can utilize to promote their products or services. PR entails creating a positive image of the organization and its offerings through various communication channels like press releases, media events, and social media posts. PR not only generates awareness among consumers but it can also improve an organization’s reputation (Choi and Cai 2018). For instance, personal selling is a marketing approach that involves direct communication between the salesperson and their customer. This strategy is often employed for high-value items or services, and can be successful at cultivating customer relationships and generating sales. Nevertheless, it may prove costly and time-consuming to implement (Schiavone and Simoni 2019).
However, the “How” and the “what” dichotomies can’t be completed without the “Who” dichotomy. Therefore, authors suggest that it is essential to understand the consumer decision-making process and its implication on marketing strategies (Stankevich 2017). In fact, the consumer decision-making process is a central concept in marketing, as it describes the steps individuals go through when selecting, purchasing, and using products or services. The process typically involves five stages: problem recognition, information search, evaluation of alternatives, purchase decision, and post-purchase behavior (Panwar et al. 2019).
Marketing strategies can influence each stage of the decision-making process by shaping consumer perceptions, providing information, and creating positive experiences (Stankevich 2017). For example, marketing can help consumers recognize a problem or need that can be addressed by a new technology, provide information about available options, assist in evaluating alternatives, encourage the purchase of the product or service, and foster positive post-purchase experiences that contribute to customer satisfaction and loyalty. By effectively targeting each stage of the decision-making process, marketing strategies can increase the likelihood of technology adoption and encourage the spread of certain products and services (Nasiri and Shokouhyar 2021).
In the context of technology adoption, the consumer decision-making process can be further influenced by factors such as perceived risk, trust, and social influences (Comegys, Hannula, and Väisänen 2009). Marketing strategies can address these factors by reducing perceived risk (e.g., through product demonstrations or warranties), building trust in the innovation and its provider (e.g., through endorsements or testimonials), and leveraging social influences (e.g., through influencer marketing or user-generated content).
(Stankevich 2017) also emphasizes the importance of understanding the "moments that matter" in the consumer decision-making process and the factors that influence them. By focusing on these critical moments, marketers can develop strategies to influence consumer behavior in favor of their company’s offerings. This deeper understanding of consumer behavior and their buying strategies can empower marketing campaigns and contribute to success in the market.
Future research directions suggested by (Stankevich 2017) include exploring the impact of emerging technologies on the consumer decision-making process and investigating the role of emotions in shaping consumer choices. By pursuing these research avenues, marketers can continue to refine their understanding of consumer behavior and develop more effective marketing strategies to drive technology adoption and innovation.
It is also very important to mention that the “who”, the “what”, and the “How” dichotomies when developing marketing strategies converge with the 4Ps of marketing mix developed by McCarthy (1960) and popularized by Kotler and Keller (2016). The authors outline that effective marketing strategies require an in-depth knowledge of the 4Ps: product, price, place and promotion. A company’s product is what they offer to the market while price indicates how much customers are willing to pay for it. Place refers to distribution channels companies use to make their goods or services accessible to customers while promotion refers to various communication tactics used to inform and persuade consumers about these items.
In addition, research has demonstrated that effective management of the 4Ps can be instrumental in the success of marketing strategies and product or service adoption. For example, an optimal combination of product design, pricing strategy, distribution channels, and promotional tactics helps companies differentiate themselves from competitors, target the right market segments, and generate high levels of demand (Goi 2009).
Adding to the 4Ps, Mehta (2019) emphasizes the significance of including "Pace" into the strategic marketing plans - reflecting the speed at which tasks can be completed in today’s technology-driven era. Companies must recognize this new "P" as an essential factor when developing their technology adoption plans. By adopting this "P" mindset, businesses can better adapt to rapidly evolving market environments, promote faster adoption of new technologies, and ultimately achieve greater success within highly competitive marketplaces.
Therefore, having a comprehensive understanding of the 5Ps is essential for organizations to create successful marketing strategies, encourage product or service adoption, and boost their resilience in the face of disruptive events.
The following examples can help illustrate on the importance of how marketing strategies can contribute to the success of the adoption and diffusion of products and services of leading technology firms:
  • Apple’s success can be attributed, in part, to its innovative marketing strategies, which have helped the company create a strong brand image, build customer loyalty, and drive the adoption of its innovative products (Kotler and Keller 2016). Apple’s marketing strategies have focused on creating an emotional connection with consumers, promoting the company’s design and user experience, and fostering a sense of exclusivity and prestige around its products.
  • Tesla is another example of a company that has leveraged marketing strategies to drive technology innovation. The company has used a combination of viral marketing, social media, and public relations to build brand awareness and generate excitement around its innovative electric vehicles (Mangram 2012). Tesla’s marketing strategies have played a crucial role in promoting the company’s mission to accelerate the adoption of sustainable energy and transportation solutions, as well as in driving demand for its products and spurring further innovation.
  • Netflix, a leading online streaming platform, has utilized marketing strategies to drive the adoption of its technology and foster innovation within the entertainment industry (Tellis, Yin, and Niraj 2009). Through a combination of personalized content recommendations, strategic partnerships, and social media engagement, Netflix has been able to create a loyal customer base and disrupt traditional entertainment distribution channels, such as cable television and DVD rentals.
To summarize, marketing strategies are an integral part of organizations’ promotional campaigns, helping to raise awareness, interest and purchase intentions among consumers. The effectiveness of a particular campaign depends on its type and target audience; successful campaigns also increase product or service adoption rates.

2.3. Social Media in Marketing

Social media has become an integral part of daily life, revolutionizing how individuals engage with one another and businesses alike. Business now has new tools to reach and engage customers cost-effectively (Hanna, Rohm, and Crittenden 2011). Social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn enable organizations to target their target audiences more directly while engaging in more personalized ways with them (Dwivedi, Kapoor, and Chen 2015).
Social media refers to an umbrella term covering online platforms and applications that enable individuals to produce, share, exchange, interact with other users and organizations in a virtual social network (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010).
Boyd and Ellison (2007) focuses on social interactions and defines social media as " web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system." (Boyd and Ellison 2007:211)
Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) offer an expansive definition of social media by defining the term from a technological perspective as "a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user generated content" (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010:61). Social media platforms are considered subsets of this larger term since they enable content production, sharing and interaction between users.
Kietzmann et al., (2011) offer another definition of social media: it is defined as an internet-based application which builds upon both the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, allowing for user-generated content creation, distribution and exchange. Their definition also encompasses collaboration, sharing and community building.
Based on these definitions, social media platforms are distinguished primarily by their capacity to facilitate the production and exchange of user-generated content, such as text, images, videos or audio files, among users through social interaction. Moreover, social media enables individuals to collaborate on creating communities centered around shared interests or values through collaboration or social sharing platforms.
From a marketing perspective social media has heralded a revolution in customer behavior, as customers now rely on social networks like Facebook to research products and services as well as engage directly with businesses through more personal interactions, in real time (Hanna et al. 2011). This change has revolutionized marketing strategy: businesses now target specific audiences with targeted content creation while measuring campaign effectiveness more easily than before. According to Tuten and Mintu-Wimsatt (2018), social media has become a cornerstone of many marketing plans, providing access to customers while gathering insight into preferences and needs more easily than before.
In addition, social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram have become an invaluable source of customer research for products and services. Chen and Xie (2008) argue that social media has allowed customers to play an active role in the buying process by providing access to information which was previously not easily available. Customers are also able to interact directly with businesses through this medium by asking questions and receiving instantaneous answers. These interactions create an atmosphere of trust and loyalty among customers, who feel valued and heard. Furthermore, engagement on social media with businesses may impact customer behavior by leading to increased brand loyalty (de Vries et al. 2012).
Research aside, social media is having an influence on purchase decisions as well. Kim and Ko (2012) found that customers were more likely to purchase after seeing positive reviews on social media. Farzin et al. (2022) note the significance of social media influencers as product endorsers. The authors believe these influencers have a tremendous effect on customer behavior, often having followers follow them based on recommendations made by these influencers. Schivinski and Dabrowski (2016) conducted a study which revealed the significant effect of social media endorsement on consumer purchase intentions. Influencers can also help businesses reach specific demographics by teaming up with those with followers in their target areas.
Therefore, social media has dramatically transformed the diffusion and adoption of products and services. Businesses that leverage social media can reach large and varied audiences quickly through viral effects created by sharing of their content among users - this leads to increased awareness, interest, and eventual purchase decisions (Chu and Kim 2011).
In fact, social media provides businesses with a powerful means to engage and communicate with customers, gathering feedback about products or services from customers that will ultimately improve them and increase customer satisfaction (Hajli 2014). Furthermore, customers can share their experiences on social media with others which influences purchasing decisions while creating a sense of community around a brand or product (Gruzd, Paulin, and Haythornthwaite 2016).
Alternatively, social media platforms provide businesses with a rich resource for conducting market research. Social media offers companies access to an abundance of data about consumer interests and behaviors that can be used to identify trends and inform marketing strategies (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Furthermore, businesses can utilize this data to customize marketing efforts and target specific demographics, increasing campaign effectiveness (Hajli 2014).
However, despite the fact of social media platforms providing businesses with many advantages, yet their impact on marketing isn’t always positive. One major challenge faced by businesses when marketing via social media platforms is that their marketing is becoming increasingly cluttered and noisy due to an increase in platforms and content (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Companies must compete with an increasingly wide array of content being shared both by companies as well as individuals, making it harder than ever for them to grab consumers’ attention and stand out.
Businesses must contend with both the saturated social media market, as well as negative feedback and reviews spreading quickly through it. Gruzd et al. (2016) point out how fast negative comments and reviews can damage a company’s reputation if shared widely across social networks; consumers place great weight on others opinions and experiences shared online. Therefore, it is crucial for companies to continuously monitor and respond to feedback quickly if they want to demonstrate commitment to customer service and responsiveness (Kietzmann et al. 2011).
Businesses using social media for marketing face an additional difficulty when utilizing these platforms: the rapid evolution of these platforms makes it hard for companies to keep up with trends and best practices (Tuten and Mintu-Wimsatt 2018). Social media platforms change just like their user’s preferences and behaviors - for instance Instagram’s algorithm updates make it challenging for companies to optimize their posts for maximum reach and engagement - this requires significant resources Thus, smaller businesses with limited budgets find it difficult to compete against larger organizations that invest more heavily in social media marketing strategies.
On the other hand, privacy issues on social media platforms present businesses with additional challenges. Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal highlights the risks posed by misusing user data (Martin and Murphy 2017). As a result, social media platforms have implemented stricter privacy policies, restricting access to user data, limiting interactions with audiences and altering how businesses engage their target market (Tuten and Mintu-Wimsatt 2018).
In conclusion, social media has become an invaluable marketing channel for businesses to connect and engage with customers. It has a positive effect on consumer behavior and can increase product/service diffusion and adoption. However, businesses must be aware of potential drawbacks such as negative feedback or difficulty keeping up with platform changes in order to effectively use social media as a marketing tool.

2.4. Marketing and Organizational Resilience

Organizational resilience is a multidimensional concept that refers to an organization’s capacity for survival and flourishing despite unexpected events, disruptions, or challenges (McManus 2008). Different authors have defined organizational resilience differently, emphasizing its significance as the ability of an organization to respond and recover quickly from disruptive events while maintaining its core functions, structures and identity. All definitions emphasize the need for organizations to take proactive steps and continue building resilience capabilities over time.
However, before elaborating on the definition of organizational resilience, it is important to define a disruptive event. From an organizational perspective, a disruptive event can be a crisis, an incident, a disturbance, a threat, a shock (Price 2012; Sapeciay, Wilkinson, and Costello 2017; Sawalha 2015). It is what “prevents an organization from continuing its normal operations and subsequently failing to accomplish properly its mission and strategic objectives” (Rahi 2019:6). It is an occurrence that has a negative effect on an organization’s operational environment and workflow, preventing it from delivering its products or services as intended (Stephenson 2010).
That being said, Burnard and Bhamra (2011) define organizational resilience by the “ability to withstand systematic discontinuities as well as the capability to adapt to new risk environments” (Burnard and Bhamra 2011:5583), focusing mainly on the adaptive capacity of an organization to cope with risks and being able to retain its core functions and identity even during disruptive events. Organizations that are adaptable can respond to changes in their internal and external environments more effectively, and they are better prepared to handle unexpected events (Rahi and Bourgault 2022).
(Linnenluecke 2017), after an exhaustive literature review, defines organizational resilience as the ability of an organization to adapt and absorb change while remaining true to its purpose and integrity. The author notices that it remains unclear which resources or organizational structures truly foster resilience, without incurring additional costs. In addition, the literature provides diverse recommendations regarding how organizations should build resilience; there may also be tensions between stability and change as well as reliability and innovation within organizations that must be addressed for proper resilience building to take place. Therefore, further research needs to take place into this topic in order to establish optimal strategies to build it.
The same conclusions were drawn by Rahi (2019) noting that authors define organizational resilience differently based on the context and the environmental characteristics of their studies. The author also proposed a definition of organizational resilience that outlines two dimensions; awareness and adaptive capacity. In order to be proactive and successfully address potential disruptive events, businesses need to have awareness of their surroundings and understand any changes occurring or likely to arise in the near future. On the other hand, adaptive capacity refers to an organization’s capacity for adjusting after experiencing disruption. Awareness is an organization’s ability to assess its environment and interpret the changes in its surroundings, while adaptive capacity is the organization’s capacity to transform its structure, processes, culture, etc. to recover after facing a disruptive event (Rahi 2019).
The work of Rahi (2019) aligns with the work of Lee et al. (2013), McManus (2008), and Stephenson (2010) who defines organizational resilience in terms of awareness and adaptive capacity with an emphasize on strong leadership and efficient planning to overcome the negative consequences of disruptions. The planning dimension is also discussed in the context of critical infrastructure mainly using the concept of preparedness (Yannick Hémond and Benoît Robert 2012). In order to better intervene and adapt, various means are implemented during preparation. Although there isn’t a consensus on what exactly "preparedness" is, most people agree that it’s vital to figure out how to respond to disruptions ahead of time. These strategies are typically employed in the aftermath of an event that has severely disrupted the operations of an organization. Therefore, the term "preparation" refers to the steps taken in advance of an event in order to set up structures that facilitate response and adaptation (Paton and Johnston 2001).
Despite the fact that there is no clear consensus on the definition of organizational resilience, the direct link between the establishment of marketing strategies and organizational resilience still unclear in the literature with scarce academic studies that focuses on this relationship (Kumar, Gawande, and Brar 2020).
Scholars have highlighted marketing as a critical driver of organizational resilience, helping firms establish strong customer relationships, create brand equity and diversify revenue streams. Furthermore, effective marketing strategies enable firms to anticipate and respond quickly to changes in the marketplace - giving them greater resilience against uncertainty (Trim and Lee 2008).
But marketing and organizational resilience do not come without their challenges. One key obstacle lies in the tension between short-term and long-term goals: while marketing activities may produce immediate gains like increased sales or revenue, they may divert resources away from resilience-building activities like research & development or strategic planning (Morgan et al. 2019). This could leave firms vulnerable to unexpected shocks like disruptions in supply chains or changes in customer preferences that have long-term repercussions for organizational performance (Ponomarov and Holcomb 2009).
Another challenge lies in finding an optimal balance between marketing and resilience-building activities and other organizational priorities, such as cost control and risk management. Marketing activities may be costly without immediate returns; making it hard for firms to justify allocating resources for these activities (Tkachenko et al. 2019). Furthermore, resilience-building activities may introduce additional risks and costs related to investing in new technologies or retraining employees.
Firms that successfully balance marketing and resilience-building activities will likely experience more long-term success. According to research, firms with strong marketing capabilities tend to achieve higher levels of organizational resilience (Hassan and Hyder 2018). By using marketing strategies to strengthen customer relationships and diversify revenue streams, firms can enhance their ability to respond swiftly and respond efficiently when changes come their way in the marketplace; ultimately increasing resilience and competitiveness overall.
So, based on what has been discussed, the following definition of organizational resilience from a marketing perspective is proposed: It is the ability of an organization to be aware of its surroundings, to be prepared to deal with possible disruptive events, and to adapt if a disruptive event occurs in order to cope with its negative consequences through the effective use of marketing strategies. This definition involves three dimensions of organizational resilience; awareness, preparedness and adaptive capacity.
Awareness is the cornerstone of organizational resilience, meaning an organization’s ability to understand and anticipate potential risks or disruptions within their environment. According to McManus et al., (2008), awareness refers to both recognizing their existence as well as having a comprehensive knowledge of their nature and impact - especially relevant in marketing as consumer behavior, market trends and competition can all pose threats against an organization’s marketing strategies.
In order to increase awareness within an organization, effective monitoring and scanning systems must be in place that enable it to collect information about its environment and identify potential threats (Borekci, Rofcanin, and Sahin 2014). With this knowledge gleaned, marketing strategies may then be adjusted accordingly in order to mitigate risk; monitoring social media conversations provides invaluable insight into customer sentiment as well as enable companies to respond more swiftly when negative comments or complaints surface online.
The Preparedness dimension refers to an organization’s ability to prepare for potential disruptions by creating contingency plans and implementing risk management strategies among other techniques (Kutsch, Hall, and Turner 2015). Within marketing specifically, preparedness involves having marketing plans ready that can quickly adjust in response to disruptions. Preparedness requires organizations to identify potential disruptions and develop plans to limit their effect. A contingency plan could involve finding alternative suppliers or creating new marketing channels in case of supply chain disruption. Furthermore, effective preparation requires clear communication channels as well as clear roles and responsibilities so everyone in an organization understands their role when responding to disruptions.
Adaptive capacity is another dimension of organizational resilience. This refers to an organization’s capacity to adapt quickly to disruptions and adapt their marketing strategies accordingly. Being adaptable involves remaining adaptable when responding to changing market conditions or customer requirements (Rahi 2019). Adaptive capacity requires organizations to embrace a culture of continual learning and improvement. This involves continuously reviewing and revising marketing strategies in response to customer preferences or changing customer needs; for instance, an organization could conduct A/B testing of marketing messages or campaigns and adapt its strategy as necessary.
Organizational resilience is an essential concept that organizations must keep in mind when creating marketing strategies. By cultivating an awareness, preparedness, and adaptive culture within an organization, resilience allows businesses to minimize risks and disruptions as well as adapt rapidly to changing market conditions, maintaining their competitive edge in today’s fast-paced business world.

3. Methodology

Through an exploration of marketing strategies and social media platforms, this article aims to contribute to our understanding of how organizational resilience can be strengthened. To achieve this objective, the theory-building approach originally proposed by Meredith (1993) is utilized, where existing concepts, constructs, and theories are formulated, compared and integrated to arrive at insightful conclusions. Essential to this investigative process is the construction of a conceptual framework that provides a comprehensive overview and serves as a roadmap for future research (Lynham 2002). By conducting a literature review that specifically examines the interplay among marketing strategies, social media platforms, and organizational resilience, the proposed conceptual framework will lay the foundation for future research in this field. The definitions and conceptual framework proposed in this paper serve as a starting point for further studies to test their validity; this process is similar to other authors working in this field (e.g. Kantur and Iseri-Say (2012) and Ponomarov and Holcomb (2009)).

4. Conceptual Framework

In this section, a conceptual framework (Figure 1) that outlines the relationship between the diffusion and adoption of products or services, marketing strategies, social media platforms, and organizational resilience is provided.
Preprints 76121 g001
Figure 1. – Organizational resilience from a marketing perspective’s conceptual framework.
Figure 1. – Organizational resilience from a marketing perspective’s conceptual framework.
Preprints 76121 g001
As previously discussed, effective marketing strategies positively impact the adoption of products or services. The "what" dichotomy refers to the gap between what an organization believes it offers and what its customers perceive it to offer. This dichotomy can arise due to various factors, such as miscommunication, inadequate marketing strategies, and a lack of customer research. The gap can result in confusion among customers and hinder the adoption of products or services. By understanding the "what" dichotomy, organizations can create products and services that align with customer needs and expectations, thereby increasing the chances of adoption (Hsiao and Chang 2014). This understanding can help organizations identify gaps in their offerings and customer perception. By addressing these gaps, organizations can enhance the value proposition of their products or services, making them more appealing to customers. Also, it can help organizations create effective marketing strategies that resonate with customers (Kotler and Keller 2016).
The adoption of products or services by organizations is another critical aspect of business success, and it is influenced by an understanding of the “how” dichotomy, who helps enhance the adoption process’s efficiency. According to Rogers (2003), organizations that understand the "how" dichotomy can streamline the adoption process by identifying potential barriers to adoption and developing effective strategies to overcome them. In addition, organizations that understand the "how" dichotomy can design and develop products or services that meet user needs and preferences. The reputation of an organization plays a crucial role in the adoption and diffusion of its products or services. Organizations that understand the "how" dichotomy can use marketing strategies to build a strong reputation and brand image (Choi and Cai 2018).
The "who" dichotomy, on the other hand refers to the segmentation of the target audience based on demographic, psychographic, and behavioral factors. Demographic factors such as age, gender, income, education, and occupation are the most common variables used in market segmentation. Psychographic variables, on the other hand, include lifestyle, values, personality, and attitudes. Behavioral variables consider the behavior patterns of the target audience, such as usage rate, brand loyalty, and purchase decision-making process (Tuten and Mintu-Wimsatt 2018). A deep understanding of these variables can help organizations identify their target audience (lifestyle, values, attitudes, needs, etc.), and tailor their marketing strategies accordingly, and overcome the barriers to adoption.
That’s being said the following proposition can be proposed between marketing strategies and the adoption of products and services
RP1: Effective marketing strategies positively impact the adoption of products or services through the effective understanding of the “What”, “How”, and “who” dichotomies
The success of a product or service depends not only on its features and benefits but also on how it is marketed and diffused to potential customers. Understanding the “what” dichotomy, that is, what the product or service is and what it offers, is crucial for organizations to effectively communicate their value proposition to their target audience. The perceived value of a product or service, which is based on its “what” features and benefits, positively influences customer satisfaction and loyalty and increases its diffusion (Dearing and Cox 2018). This allows organizations to create a competitive advantage that sets them apart from others in the market. This differentiation can increase the perceived value of the product or service and make it more attractive to potential customers.
It is not enough to create innovative and useful products. Companies must also develop effective marketing strategies and use social media platforms to diffuse their offerings. The “how” dichotomy refers to the pathways through which a product or service can be diffused through many means, such as personal networks (friends, family, colleagues, etc.) and mass media communication that disseminates information through mass media channels, such as television, radio, and newspapers. Therefore, understanding the “how” dichotomy is critical for developing effective marketing strategies that can maximize the diffusion of products and services (Schiavone and Simoni 2019). Therefore, an organization that is aware of this fact can focus on developing interpersonal communication strategies that emphasize the personal experiences and opinions of satisfied customers, and help organizations identify the most effective mass media channels for promoting their products or services. The understanding of the "who" dichotomy, which refers to the identification of target audiences and their characteristics, is an essential element in the development and implementation of successful marketing strategies. It is to be considered that a clear understanding of the target audience can positively impact the diffusion of products or services. By knowing who their target audience is, organizations can create content that is relevant and engaging and anticipate and address potential diffusion barriers increasing the likelihood of diffusion(Yi et al. 2019). Therefore, the following relationship can be proposed between maketing strategies and the diffusion of products and services.
RP2: Effective marketing strategies positively impact the diffusion of products or services through the effective understanding of the “What”, “How”, and “who” dichotomies.
When it comes to marketing strategies, social media platforms offer exceptional perks for organizations. Acquiring feedback from consumers enables organizations to tailor their products or services to match the preferences of those who matter most. Furthermore, social media platforms present undeniable targeting capabilities that traditional marketing channels can’t. Organizations can target specific demographics, interests, and behaviors, constructing personalized content that strongly resonates with consumers. By leveraging these benefits of social media, organizations can foster stronger relationships between their marketing strategies and consumer behavior, leading to greater product or service adoption (Hajli 2014). Social proof, the concept that people are more inclined to use a product or service once they observe others doing so, can be bolstered by social media. Therefore, a correlation exists between the use of social media platforms and the adoption of products or services that can be presented in the following relationship.
RP3: The use of social media platforms as a marketing channel strengthens the relationship between marketing strategies and product or service adoption.
In modern marketing practices, the utilization of social media has become an increasingly widespread occurrence, with the potential to reach a vast audience across many countries worldwide (Schivinski and Dabrowski 2016). This gives organizations the opportunity to connect with their target market and cement the bond between marketing strategies and the spread of their product or service. By building a strong online presence and establishing social proof, companies can raise awareness of their brand among prospective customers and exert influence over their purchasing decisions ultimately resulting in a positive impact on product or service diffusion. Therefore, the following relationship can be established between social media platforms and the diffusion of product or services
RP4: The use of social media platforms as a marketing channel strengthens the relationship between marketing strategies and product or service diffusion.
Due to the constantly shifting and unpredictable business environment, organizational resilience has become an indispensable concept in modern business management. From a marketing perspective, product adoption is one of several factors that influence organizational resilience and its dimensions; awareness, preparedness, and adaptive capacity. High levels of product adoption can enhance the awareness dimension by giving organizations insights into the needs and preferences of their customers. By analysing customer feedback and usage patterns, organizations can gain a clearer picture of customer expectations as well as anticipate changes in the market, helping them be proactive in identifying and responding to any potential threats or dangers that might exist in their marketplace (Kim and Garrison 2009).
In addition, product adoption can positively influence the preparedness dimension by providing organizations with a steady source of revenue that they can invest in contingency plans. Highly adopted products can generate enough revenue for organizations to purchase backup systems, insurance policies, and risk mitigation strategies to prepare themselves against disruptions in business operations.
In addition, product adoption can positively influence the adaptive capacity dimension by providing organizations with the agility needed to adapt quickly to market changes. Companies with widely used products can quickly respond to shifting market conditions by adjusting existing items or expanding their customer base in response to customer input. Therefore, organizations should develop and promote products that are widely adopted by their customers as a strategy to increase resilience. This will allow organizations to better prepare for potential disruptions, anticipate market changes, and respond quickly and effectively when new circumstances arise (Valor et al. 2022). That being said, the following relationship between product or service adoption can be outlined:
RP5: Higher levels of product adoption positively impact the awareness, preparedness, and adaptive capacity dimensions of organizational resilience.
When an organization launches a new product or service, its rate of diffusion can have an enormous effect on its resilience in multiple ways.
First, high product diffusion levels can strengthen organizational resilience by providing organizations with greater market and customer insight. When products reach more people through diffusion, organizations gain insight into different segments’ needs and preferences, which allows them to be proactive when responding to potential threats (Schiavone and Simoni 2019).
Second, product diffusion can positively influence an organization’s preparedness by providing them with a sustainable source of revenue that they can invest in contingency plans. When products diffuse, their revenue is reinvested into backup systems, insurance policies, and other risk management strategies to prepare the organization against disruptions.
Thirdly, product diffusion can have an indirect influence on adaptive capacity by giving organizations the flexibility and agility needed to respond quickly to market changes. By tapping into their customer base to quickly adapt to changing market conditions and develop new products or adapt existing ones quickly enough, organizations may find they are better able to meet customers’ needs more effectively (Gebert et al. 2002).
Therefore, organizations should develop and promote products with high rates of diffusion as a strategy to strengthen their resilience. This can enable organizations to be better prepared for potential disruptions, anticipate market shifts more accurately, and respond swiftly and efficiently when circumstances shift. So, the following relationship can be established between products or services diffusion and organizational resilience.
RP6: Higher levels of product diffusion positively impact the awareness, preparedness, and adaptive capacity dimensions of organizational resilience.

5. Conclusion

In this article, the literature is reviewed on four interrelated concepts: marketing strategies, social media platforms, the adoption and diffusion of products and services, and organizational resilience. The main objective is to instigate a deep understanding of these concepts and their applications to cope with disruptive events that can have severe consequences for the operations of organizations.
As a result of the literature review, a conceptual framework is proposed in this study that holds significant ramifications for the management of disruptive events through marketing in organizational settings and the important role of social media platforms in enhancing the diffusion and adoption of products and services offered by organizations.
However, as the link between marketing strategies and organizational resilience is still relatively novel, additional academic studies should be undertaken in order to strengthen and validate the proposed conceptual framework. Thus, this paper seeks to outline an initial conceptual definition and framework of organizational resilience from a marketing perspective as an avenue for future investigation.
In future research, qualitative and quantitative analysis are required to validate the proposed relationships and solidify the findings of this study. This can be achieved through conceptual exchanges with more advanced research fields, like organizational resilience in other sectors, to tailor and instigate indicators suitable from a marketing perspective.

Data Availability Statement:.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Roger Halaby and Khalil Rahi.; methodology, Khalil Rahi.; software, Hamed M. Hussain.; validation, Khalil Rahi, Nehme Azoury.; investigation, Khalil Rahi and Roger Halaby.; resources, Roger Halaby.; writing—original draft preparation, Roger Halaby; writing—review and editing, Khalil Rahi and Nehme Azoury.; visualization.; supervision, Khalil Rahi and Nehme Azoury; project administration, Roger Halaby and Khalil Rahi.; funding acquisition, Roger Halaby. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study describes no research on humans. It is a conceptual research paper.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bass, Frank M. 1976. “A New Product Growth Model for Consumer Durables.” Pp. 351–53 in Mathematical Models in Marketing. Vol. 132, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  2. Borekci, Dilek Yilmaz, Yasin Rofcanin, and Meral Sahin. 2014. “Effects of Organizational Culture and Organizational Resilience over Subcontractor Riskiness: A Multi-Method Study in Longitudinal Time Setting.” European Business Review 26(1):2–22. doi: 10.1108/EBR-07-2013-0099. [CrossRef]
  3. Boyd, Danah m., and Nicole B. Ellison. 2007. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13(1):210–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x. [CrossRef]
  4. Burnard, Kevin, and Ran Bhamra. 2011. “Organisational Resilience: Development of a Conceptual Framework for Organisational Responses.” International Journal of Production Research 49(18):5581–99. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2011.563827. [CrossRef]
  5. Chen, Yubo, and Jinhong Xie. 2008. “Online Consumer Review: Word-of-Mouth as a New Element of Marketing Communication Mix.” Management Science 54(3):477–91. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1070.0810. [CrossRef]
  6. Choi, Suh-hee, and Liping A. Cai. 2018. “The Role of Relationship Quality in Integrated Destination Marketing.” Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 35(5):541–52. doi: 10.1080/10548408.2017.1403999. [CrossRef]
  7. Chu, Shu-Chuan, and Yoojung Kim. 2011. “Determinants of Consumer Engagement in Electronic Word-of-Mouth (EWOM) in Social Networking Sites.” International Journal of Advertising 30(1):47–75. doi: 10.2501/IJA-30-1-047-075. [CrossRef]
  8. Comegys, Charles, Mika Hannula, and Jaaui Väisänen. 2009. “Effects of Consumer Trust and Risk on Online Purchase Decision-Making: A Comparison of Finnish and United States Students.” International Journal of Management 26(2):295–308.
  9. Dearing, James W., and Jeffrey G. Cox. 2018. “Diffusion Of Innovations Theory, Principles, And Practice.” Health Affairs 37(2):183–90. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1104. [CrossRef]
  10. Dholakia, Ruby Roy, and Nir Kshetri. 2004. “Factors Impacting the Adoption of the Internet among SMEs.” Small Business Economics 23(4):311–22. doi: 10.1023/B:SBEJ.0000032036.90353.1f. [CrossRef]
  11. Dibra, Mirjam. 2015. “Rogers Theory on Diffusion of Innovation-The Most Appropriate Theoretical Model in the Study of Factors Influencing the Integration of Sustainability in Tourism Businesses.” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 195:1453–62. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.443. [CrossRef]
  12. Dwivedi, Yogesh K., Kawaljeet Kaur Kapoor, and Hsin Chen. 2015. “Social Media Marketing and Advertising.” The Marketing Review 15(3):289–309. doi: 10.1362/146934715X14441363377999. [CrossRef]
  13. Farzin, Milad, Marzie Sadeghi, Majid Fattahi, and Mohammad Reza Eghbal. 2022. “Effect of Social Media Marketing and EWOM on Willingness to Pay in the Etailing: Mediating Role of Brand Equity and Brand Identity.” Business Perspectives and Research 10(3):327–43. doi: 10.1177/22785337211024926. [CrossRef]
  14. Gebert, Henning, Malte Geib, Lutz Kolbe, and Gerold Riempp. 2002. “Towards Customer Knowledge Management–Integrating Customer Relationship Management and Knowledge Management Concepts.” Pp. 296–98 in The Second International Conference on Electronic Business (ICEB 2002).
  15. Goi, Chai Lee. 2009. “A Review of Marketing Mix: 4Ps or More?” International Journal of Marketing Studies 1(1):2–15.
  16. Gruca, Thomas S., and Lopo L. Rego. 2005. “Customer Satisfaction, Cash Flow, and Shareholder Value.” Journal of Marketing 69(3):115–30. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.69.3.115.66364. [CrossRef]
  17. Gruzd, Anatoliy, Drew Paulin, and Caroline Haythornthwaite. 2016. “Analyzing Social Media And Learning Through Content And Social Network Analysis: A Faceted Methodological Approach.” Journal of Learning Analytics 3(3):46–71. doi: 10.18608/jla.2016.33.4. [CrossRef]
  18. Hajli, M. Nick. 2014. “A Study of the Impact of Social Media on Consumers.” International Journal of Market Research 56(3):387–404. doi: 10.2501/IJMR-2014-025. [CrossRef]
  19. Hanna, Richard, Andrew Rohm, and Victoria L. Crittenden. 2011. “We’re All Connected: The Power of the Social Media Ecosystem.” Business Horizons 54(3):265–73. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.007. [CrossRef]
  20. Hassan, Masood, and Irfan Hyder. 2018. “Prospecting the Process of Resilience at Work: An Investigation with the Marketing Agency Professionals of Karachi.” Pakistan Business Review 20(2):508–24.
  21. Hsiao, Wei-Hung, and Tsung-Sheng Chang. 2014. “Understanding Consumers’ Continuance Intention towards Mobile Advertising: A Theoretical Framework and Empirical Study.” Behaviour & Information Technology 33(7):730–42. doi: 10.1080/0144929X.2013.789081. [CrossRef]
  22. Hwang, Junseok, Youngsang Cho, and Nguyen Viet Long. 2009. “Investigation of Factors Affecting the Diffusion of Mobile Telephone Services: An Empirical Analysis for Vietnam.” Telecommunications Policy 33(9):534–43. doi: 10.1016/j.telpol.2009.06.003. [CrossRef]
  23. Islam, Towhidul, Nigel Meade, and Ashish Sood. 2022. “Timing Market Entry: The Mediation Effect of Market Potential.” Journal of International Marketing 30(1):40–54. doi: 10.1177/1069031X211068072. [CrossRef]
  24. Kantur, Deniz, and Arzu Iseri-Say. 2012. “Organizational Resilience: A Conceptual Integrative Framework.” Journal of Management and Organization; Lyndfield 18(6):762–73.
  25. Kaplan, Andreas M., and Michael Haenlein. 2010. “Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media.” Business Horizons 53(1):59–68. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003. [CrossRef]
  26. Kietzmann, Jan H., Kristopher Hermkens, Ian P. McCarthy, and Bruno S. Silvestre. 2011. “Social Media? Get Serious! Understanding the Functional Building Blocks of Social Media.” Business Horizons 54(3):241–51. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005. [CrossRef]
  27. Kim, Angella J., and Eunju Ko. 2012. “Do Social Media Marketing Activities Enhance Customer Equity? An Empirical Study of Luxury Fashion Brand.” Journal of Business Research 65(10):1480–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.014. [CrossRef]
  28. Kim, Sanghyun, and Gary Garrison. 2009. “Investigating Mobile Wireless Technology Adoption: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model.” Information Systems Frontiers 11(3):323–33. doi: 10.1007/s10796-008-9073-8. [CrossRef]
  29. Knickel, Karlheinz, Gianluca Brunori, Sigrid Rand, and Jet Proost. 2009. “Towards a Better Conceptual Framework for Innovation Processes in Agriculture and Rural Development: From Linear Models to Systemic Approaches.” The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 15(2):131–46. doi: 10.1080/13892240902909064. [CrossRef]
  30. Kotler, Philip, and Kevin Lane Keller. 2016. Marketing Management. 15th ed. Boston, USA: Pearson.
  31. Kumar, A., A. Gawande, and V. Brar. 2020. “Features of Marketing Resilience.” Vidyabharati International Interdisciplinary Research Journal 11(1):250–53.
  32. Kutsch, Mr Elmar, Mark Hall, and Neil Turner. 2015. Project Resilience: The Art of Noticing, Interpreting, Preparing, Containing and Recovering. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
  33. Lee, Amy V., John Vargo, and Erica Seville. 2013. “Developing a Tool to Measure and Compare Organizations’ Resilience.” Natural Hazards Review 14(1):29–41. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000075. [CrossRef]
  34. Leeflang, Peter S. H., Peter C. Verhoef, Peter Dahlström, and Tjark Freundt. 2014. “Challenges and Solutions for Marketing in a Digital Era.” European Management Journal 32(1):1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2013.12.001. [CrossRef]
  35. Linnenluecke, Martina K. 2017. “Resilience in Business and Management Research: A Review of Influential Publications and a Research Agenda.” International Journal of Management Reviews 19(1):4–30. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12076. [CrossRef]
  36. Lundblad, Jennifer P. 2003. “A Review and Critique of Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation Theory as It Applies to Organizations.” Organization Development Journal 21(4):50.
  37. Lynham, Susan A. 2002. “The General Method of Theory-Building Research in Applied Disciplines.” Advances in Developing Human Resources 4(3):221–41. doi: 10.1177/1523422302043002. [CrossRef]
  38. Mangram, Myles Edwin. 2012. “The Globalization of Tesla Motors: A Strategic Marketing Plan Analysis.” Journal of Strategic Marketing 20(4):289–312. doi: 10.1080/0965254X.2012.657224. [CrossRef]
  39. Martin, Kelly D., and Patrick E. Murphy. 2017. “The Role of Data Privacy in Marketing.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 45(2):135–55. doi: 10.1007/s11747-016-0495-4. [CrossRef]
  40. McCarthy, E. Jerome. 1960. Basic Marketing - A Managerial Approach. Richard D. Irwin, Inc.
  41. McManus, Sonia. 2008. “Organisational Resilience in New Zealand.” Ph.D., University of Canterbury, New Zealand, Christchurch.
  42. McManus, Sonia, Erica Seville, John Vargo, and David Brunsdon. 2008. “Facilitated Process for Improving Organizational Resilience.” Natural Hazards Review 9(2):81–90. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1527-6988(2008)9:2(81). [CrossRef]
  43. Mehta, Bijal. 2019. “Is It Time To Rethink The Marketing Mix?” P. 30 in International Conference on Management and Information Systems September. Vol. 29.
  44. Meredith, Jack. 1993. “Theory Building through Conceptual Methods.” International Journal of Operations & Production Management 13(5):3–11. doi: 10.1108/01443579310028120. [CrossRef]
  45. Moore, Geoffrey A. 2014. Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling Disruptive Products to Mainstream Customers. Third edition. New York, NY: HarperBusiness, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers.
  46. Morgan, Neil A., Kimberly A. Whitler, Hui Feng, and Simos Chari. 2019. “Research in Marketing Strategy.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 47(1):4–29. doi: 10.1007/s11747-018-0598-1. [CrossRef]
  47. Nasiri, Mohammad Sadegh, and Sajjad Shokouhyar. 2021. “Actual Consumers’ Response to Purchase Refurbished Smartphones: Exploring Perceived Value from Product Reviews in Online Retailing.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 62:102652. doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102652. [CrossRef]
  48. Panwar, Diksha, Swati Anand, Farmaan Ali, and Kanika Singal. 2019. “Consumer Decision Making Process Models and Their Applications to Market Strategy.” International Management Review 15(1):36–44.
  49. Paton, Douglas, and David Johnston. 2001. “Disasters and Communities: Vulnerability, Resilience and Preparedness.” Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 10(4):270–77. doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000005930. [CrossRef]
  50. Ponomarov, Serhiy Y., and Mary C. Holcomb. 2009. “Understanding the Concept of Supply Chain Resilience.” The International Journal of Logistics Management 20(1):124–43. doi: 10.1108/09574090910954873. [CrossRef]
  51. Price, Michelle R. 2012. “In Pursuit of Reliability: A District Level Action Research Concerned with Resilience.” Ph.D., Washington State University, United States, Washington.
  52. Rahi, Khalil. 2019. “Indicators to Assess Organizational Resilience – a Review of Empirical Literature.” International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 10(2/3):85–100. doi: 10.1108/IJDRBE-11-2018-0046. [CrossRef]
  53. Rahi, Khalil. 2021. “Do Actual Risk Management Practices Address Temporary Multi-Organizations’IT Projects Complexity?” Journal of Modern Project Management 9(27):57–69.
  54. Rahi, Khalil, and Mario Bourgault. 2022. “Validation of a New Project Resilience Scale in the IT Sector.” Project Management Journal 53(6):567–94. doi: 10.1177/87569728221114321. [CrossRef]
  55. Rangaswamy, Easwaramoorthy, Nishad Nawaz, and Zhou Changzhuang. 2022. “The Impact of Digital Technology on Changing Consumer Behaviours with Special Reference to the Home Furnishing Sector in Singapore.” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 9(1):83. doi: 10.1057/s41599-022-01102-x. [CrossRef]
  56. Rogers, Everett M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press.
  57. Sapeciay, Zulkfli, Suzanne Wilkinson, and Seosamh B. Costello. 2017. “Building Organisational Resilience for the Construction Industry: New Zealand Practitioners’ Perspective.” International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 8(1):98–108. doi: 10.1108/IJDRBE-05-2016-0020. [CrossRef]
  58. Sawalha, Ihab Hanna Salman. 2015. “Managing Adversity: Understanding Some Dimensions of Organizational Resilience.” Management Research Review 38(4):346–66. doi: 10.1108/MRR-01-2014-0010. [CrossRef]
  59. Schiavone, Francesco, and Michele Simoni. 2019. “Strategic Marketing Approaches for the Diffusion of Innovation in Highly Regulated Industrial Markets: The Value of Market Access.” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 34(7):1606–18. doi: 10.1108/JBIM-08-2018-0232. [CrossRef]
  60. Schivinski, Bruno, and Dariusz Dabrowski. 2016. “The Effect of Social Media Communication on Consumer Perceptions of Brands.” Journal of Marketing Communications 22(2):189–214. doi: 10.1080/13527266.2013.871323. [CrossRef]
  61. Staake, Thorsten, Frédéric Thiesse, and Elgar Fleisch. 2012. “Business Strategies in the Counterfeit Market.” Journal of Business Research 65(5):658–65. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.03.008. [CrossRef]
  62. Stankevich, Alina. 2017. “Explaining the Consumer Decision-Making Process: Critical Literature Review.” Journal of International Business Research and Marketing 2(6):7–14. doi: 10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.26.3001. [CrossRef]
  63. Stephenson, Amy Victoria. 2010. “Benchmarking the Resilience of Organisations.” Ph.D., University of Canterbury, New Zealand, Christchurch.
  64. Tellis, Gerard J., Eden Yin, and Rakesh Niraj. 2009. “Does Quality Win? Network Effects versus Quality in High-Tech Markets.” Journal of Marketing Research 46(2):135–49. doi: 10.1509/jmkr.46.2.135. [CrossRef]
  65. Tkachenko, Volodymyr, Aleksy Kwilinski, Iryna Tkachenko, and Polina Puzyrova. 2019. “Theoretical and Methodical Approaches to the Definition of Marketing Risks Management Concept at Industrial Enterprises.” Marketing and Management of Innovations.
  66. Trim, Peter R. J., and Yang-Im Lee. 2008. “A Strategic Marketing Intelligence and Multi-organisational Resilience Framework” edited by J. L. Calof. European Journal of Marketing 42(7/8):731–45. doi: 10.1108/03090560810877123. [CrossRef]
  67. Tuten, Tracy, and Alma Mintu-Wimsatt. 2018. “Advancing Our Understanding of the Theory and Practice of Social Media Marketing: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 26(1–2):1–3. doi: 10.1080/10696679.2018.1393277. [CrossRef]
  68. Valor, Carmen, Paolo Antonetti, and Benedetta Crisafulli. 2022. “Emotions and Consumers’ Adoption of Innovations: An Integrative Review and Research Agenda.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 179:121609. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121609. [CrossRef]
  69. de Vries, Lisette, Sonja Gensler, and Peter S. H. Leeflang. 2012. “Popularity of Brand Posts on Brand Fan Pages: An Investigation of the Effects of Social Media Marketing.” Journal of Interactive Marketing 26(2):83–91. doi: 10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.003. [CrossRef]
  70. Yannick Hémond and Benoît Robert. 2012. “Preparedness: The State of the Art and Future Prospects.” Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 21(4):404–17. doi: 10.1108/09653561211256125. [CrossRef]
  71. Yi, Jisu, Youseok Lee, and Sang-Hoon Kim. 2019. “Determinants of Growth and Decline in Mobile Game Diffusion.” Journal of Business Research 99:363–72. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.09.045. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated