IntroductionSince the late 1980s, marketing scholars have conceptualized market orientation as an organizational culture dedicated toward delivering superior customer value (Narver & Slater, 1990) or organizational-level behavior regarding generating, disseminating, and responding to customer and competitor information (Kohli & Jaworski, 1990). A number of previous studies have empirically examined antecedents and consequences of market orientation, measuring market orientation through the MKTOR (Narver & Slater, 1990) or MARKOR (Kohli, Jaworski, & Kumar, 1993) scales. Consequently, it has been shown that market orientation positively impacts performance (Kirca, Jayachandran, & Bearden, 2005; Kumar, Jones, Venkatesan, & Leone, 2011).One issue that has not been thoroughly addressed in the literature is how market orientation should be captured and measured to examine the market orientation-performance link in the context of service organizations. Through a meta-analysis of the literature, Kirca et al. (2005) indicate that market orientation-performance link is weaker in service firms (r = .26) than in manufacturing firms (r = .37). The authors attribute the variance to the higher levels of customization that service firms require and to the subsequent costs involved. However, note that there has been no consensus regarding the manner in which market orientation should be measured (Gonzalez-Benito, & Gonzalez-Benito, 2005). Particularly in the context of service organizations, a critical issue emerges regarding who should be the respondent. Although some studies reveal that different respondents have different perceptions of market orientation (e.g., Jaworski & Kohli, 1993), only few studies have focused on both managers' and front-line employees' perceptions of market orientation in the context of service organizations (Kosuge, 2007b) . Besides, there has not been a definitive agreement on which type of scale (i.e., MKTOR or MARKOR) is the more appropriate in the context of service organizations. Note that while the MARKOR scale focuses only on the behavioral aspects of market orientation, the MKTOR scale emphasizes some cultural aspects of market orientation as well. In this regard, the choice of the scale affects what aspects of market orientation are highlighted.This study explores the market orientation-performance link by comparing different approaches for measuring market orientation. This is a context-specific study that measures market orientation by focusing on 54 shops of a Japanese automobile dealership firm. Based on the analysis results, a possible mechanism behind the link is discussed.MethodologyAn automobile dealership firm in Japan was chosen because interesting observations were expected. That is, it was shifting toward market orientation from selling orientation that was widely adopted in the industry. The automobile dealer business typically comprises both new car sales and maintenance services. Although the latter are performed by technicians, this study focuses only on salespersons as front-line employees.Data were obtained in 2007 through a questionnaire survey to both shop managers and salespersons belonging to the 54 shops. These respondents were asked to assess their shops using both the MKTOR and MARKOR scales. As for managers, 109 out of 118 questionnaires were returned from 51 shops (average 2.14 per shop). As for salespersons, 482 out of 506 questionnaires were returned from the 54 shops (average 8.93 per shop). By aggregating responses, while checking the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as suggested by James (1982), four different scores of market orientation were obtained for each shop (i.e., Manager-MKTOR, Manager-MARKOR, Salesperson-MKTOR, Salesperson-MARKOR).As for performance, previous studies use either subjective or objective measures without clear guidelines. Although it has become clear that market orientation-performance link is stronger when subjective performance measures are used (Kirca et al. …