Think outside the box: managerial relevance and theoretical developments within B2B marketing

Abstract

Purpose – This article aims to identify methodological openings and barriers for using managerial relevance as a method to further business to business (B2B) marketing theory. Design/methodology/approach – There is currently an imbalance between two research modes; notably, the normative knowledge accumulation mode confers scant space to the solution mode. This negatively affects both the production of managerially relevant research and theoretical developments within B2B marketing which, in turn, hinders the development of marketing as an applied science. Against the background of an upgraded methodological cartography, emphasizing the equal importance of the two research modes, this article illustrates the context of using managerial relevance as a method to forward B2B marketing theory. An aggregate picture of corresponding calls in the literature shows why this is important. Findings – Calls for increased managerial relevance and methodological diversity outside the normative knowledge accumulation mode will face difficulties in terms of changing researcher behavior, as long as the biased relationship between the two research modes persists. For managerially relevant research to increase, and for B2B marketing science to progress, underlying assumptions of different methodological stances have to be uncovered, calling for increased methodological clarity. Research implications – To prevent a relapse, the analysis suggests a further strategy by which to modify schematic models to study organizational change and behavior. Practical implications – A more significant role attributed to managerial relevance for theory development early in the research process, permits to align the perspectives of research with the needs of practice and will decrease the research–practice gap. Originality/value – The article pinpoints two research modes and three epistemological stances – predict, describe and depict – which sharpens methodological clarity beyond traditional qualitative–quantitative, and conceptual–empirical classifications.