MBA7059 – Marketing and Operations

Assignment 2 – Presentation Script

“Does Market Orientation Enable Sustainable Competitive Advantage?”
11 Slides | 10 Minutes | Simple Language Version

Red italic = timing | Grey italic = delivery note | ~130 words per minute

SLIDE 1 Title Slide

⏱ 0:00 – 0:45
[Stand up straight. Take a breath. Start speaking at a calm, steady pace.]

Hello everyone. Today, I will discuss about market orientation — what it is, where it works, and
where it fails to answer one central question: does being market-oriented actually give a company a
lasting competitive advantage?

SLIDE 2 What Is Market Orientation?

⏱ 0:45 – 2:00
So, what is market orientation? Market orientation is a business approach that a company use to
understand and respond to customer needs, competitors’ actions, and market trends to achieve
superior performance.

it includes three parts:

 The first part is customer orientation — understanding what customers want

 The second part is competitor orientation — understand our competitors

 The third part is inter-functional coordination - understand the internal departments inside
the company.

SLIDE 3 Does the Evidence Support It?

⏱ 2:00 – 3:00
It is important to show that there are many researches strongly supports market orientation. A study
by Kirca and colleagues in 2005 reviewed 114 separate research papers and found that market-
oriented companies consistently make more profit, innovate better, and keep customers more
satisfied.
 SLIDE 4 Two Types of Market Orientation
⏱ 3:00 – 4:15
The first type is reactive market orientation. This is when a company listens to what existing
customers say they want right now and responds to that. It is safe and it works — but it has a serious
weakness. If you only respond to what people ask for today, you can become completely blind to
where the market is going tomorrow.

The second type is proactive market orientation. This goes further — trying to spot needs that
customers have not yet expressed, and building solutions before anyone else does. It is riskier, but it
creates products that change entire markets and advantages that last for a long time.

Think of it simply: reactive keeps you in the game. Proactive lets you change the rules of the game.

SLIDE 5 Reactive vs Proactive — Across All 3 Components

⏱ 4:15 – 5:30
This table shows the difference between reactive and proactive across all three components

On customer orientation: Nokia kept improving its phones based on what users told them they
wanted. But by the time Nokia saw the smartphone trend coming, Apple had already built an entire
ecosystem around it. Apple never asked customers what they wanted. It figured out what they
would need before they knew it themselves, and built the iPhone, the iPad, and the App Store from
scratch.

On competitor orientation: Blockbuster only reacted to Netflix once it was already losing customers.
By that point it was too late — the market had completely moved on. Intel, on the other hand,
constantly monitored AMD’s roadmap ahead of time and launched new products before AMD could
gain ground. Always one step ahead.

On inter-functional coordination: a typical reactive company only shares information after a problem
has already happened — like a product recall that reaches management weeks after customers
started complaining. Toyota does the opposite. Any worker on the factory floor can stop the
production line the moment they spot a defect. Information moves across all teams in real time,
before small problems become big ones.

SLIDE 6 Critical Evaluation: Does It Always Work?

⏱ 5:30 – 6:30
Market orientation does not always work. A good analysis has to look at both sides.

On the positive side: the evidence is strong, as we discuss above with proven researches.
But there are real limits. When a company is too focused on reactive side of market orientation, it
becomes blind to disruptive change. As mentioned above, Nokia and Blockbuster were all genuinely
market-oriented and all failed. If every company in an industry is listening to the same customers,
they all come up with the same answers. Nobody stands out.

So the balanced judgement is this: market orientation is necessary — but it is not enough on its own.
Its real value depends entirely on how it is applied.

SLIDE 8 Comparing the 3 Components

⏱ 7:15 – 7:50
This table puts all three components side by side so the differences are clear.

Customer orientation focuses on the buyer. The key question is: what do our customers really need?
The main risk is relying too much on what customers say out loud — which means you can miss the
needs they have not expressed yet.

Competitor orientation focuses on rivals. The key question is: what are our competitors doing and
planning? The risk is that watching rivals too closely leads to copying rather than innovating.

Inter-functional coordination focuses inside the organisation. The key question is: are all our teams
working together toward the same goal? The risk is coordination breaking down and teams pulling in
different directions.

SLIDE 9 When, Why, and Under What Conditions Does It Work?

⏱ 7:50 – 9:00
Customer orientation works best in mature markets where you already understand your customers
well. For example, in service businesses where loyalty and trust drive repeat purchase, and in B2C
companies with direct access to large numbers of consumers. The reason it works in these situations
is that it creates a clear match between what the company offers and what buyers actually need.

Competitor orientation works best in highly competitive markets where rivals move quickly, when
you are defending your market share against a strong challenger, or when you are entering a new
market and need to understand what you are up against. The reason it works is that it lets you
respond faster and more accurately than rivals, before customers even notice the competitive shift.

Inter-functional coordination works best in large organisations where different departments

naturally work in silos, when you are launching a product that needs everyone to be aligned, or
during major digital transformation. The reason it works is that when all teams act on the same
shared knowledge, it creates company-wide capabilities that competitors find very hard to replicate.
 SLIDE 10 Conclusion
⏱ 9:00 – 10:00
To wrap up.

Throughout the presentation, I have demonstrated about the definition of market orientation, its
components, types, and examples. Market orientation is proven to make a company create lasting
advantages but only when it is applied correctly.

This is the end of the presentation, thank you for listening.