Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Market-scanning and market-shaping: why are firms blindsided by market-shaping acts?

Diaz Ruiz, Carlos A.; Baker, Jonathan J.; Mason, Katy; Tierney, Kieran

Authors

Carlos A. Diaz Ruiz

Jonathan J. Baker

Profile image of Katy Mason

Prof Katy Mason K.J.Mason2@salford.ac.uk
PVC & Dean of Salford Business School

Kieran Tierney



Abstract

Purpose: This paper aims to investigate two seminal market-scanning frameworks – the five-forces analysis and PESTEL environmental scanning tool – to assess their readiness for anticipating market-shaping acts.

Design/methodology/approach: Drawing on the market-shaping literature that conceptualizes markets as complex adaptive systems, this conceptual paper interrogates the underlying assumptions and “blind spots” in two seminal market-scanning frameworks. The paper showcases three illustrative vignettes in which non-industry actors catalyzed market change in ways that these market-scanning frameworks would not be able to anticipate.

Findings: Marketing strategists can be “blindsided” as seminal market-scanning frameworks have either too narrow an interpretation of market change or are too broad to anticipate specific types of market-shaping acts. The assumptions about markets that underpin these market-scanning frameworks contribute to incumbents being slow to realize market-shaping acts are taking place.

Research limitations/implications: The authors extend market-scanning to include a type of managerial myopia that fails to register the socially embedded, systemic nature of complex contemporary markets. Furthermore, the paper provides an “actors-agendas-outcomes” scanning framework that offers awareness of market-shaping acts.

Originality/value: This paper is the first to consider market-scanning frameworks from a market-shaping perspective.

Journal Article Type Article
Publication Date Jun 15, 2020
Deposit Date Jan 31, 2025
Journal Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Print ISSN 0885-8624
Publisher Emerald
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 35
Issue 9
Pages 1389-1401
DOI https://doi.org/10.1108/jbim-03-2019-0130