You are here

Methodical approaches to the assessment of marketing activities of agricultural enterprises

It is justified that the uncertainty in the agrarian enterprises functioning and  the market dynamism are increasing which requires their management system to ensure continuous accounting of the external and internal environment and the development of effective measures to adapt activities to market conditions. Under such conditions, marketing activities are becoming one of the most important areas of strategic management, since reasonable management actions and measures in marketing can increase the competitiveness of the enterprise and its products on the market, and, consequently, increase market share and expand the boundaries of the target segments as well as create a positive image of the enterprise and maintain a business reputation, which reflects the relevance of the research subject of and the need for further research on the developing a system of indicators of marketing activity effectiveness in enterprises marketing activities.
The paper aims to generalize the methodological tools for evaluating the marketing activities of business institutions and to substantiate the system of indicators for its analysis in agrarian enterprises, which involves the following tasks: to systematize  approaches in foreign practice regarding developing the system of marketing activity indicators; to clarify the definitions of the concepts of "performance" and "effectiveness" of marketing activities; to offer a complex system of indicators for assessing the marketing activities of agrarian enterprises.
The following methods were used in the research: synthesis, systematization and generalization, economic statistical (definition of integral indicator of marketing activity efficiency), logical generalization and system approach (developing the system of measures to increase the efficiency of marketing activities of enterprises).
The article presents the peculiarities of manufacturing activities influencing the marketing complex and its performance. It is pointed out that the foreign practice uses a system of financial and non-financial indicators for assessing the marketing activities effectiveness. The authors systematize a group of marketing indicators, which includes financial indicators, market parameters, customer response indicators; indicators for assessing work with suppliers and intermediaries; innovation activity characteristics.
It is proved that the evaluation of the marketing activity effectiveness allows the agrarian enterprise to determine the current market position and to substantiate reasonable measures to strengthen it. The use of a balanced system of indicators of marketing evaluation allows to do the comparative analysis with competitors in the market. The difficulties in establishing the relation between the marketing results and financial indicators and indicators of the evaluation of the company's overall performance as well as the lack of domestic practice of using marketing indicators, which requires conducting relevant research to create a bank of primary data were  identified.
It is substantiated that full satisfaction of consumers' needs in high quality and safe agricultural products and foodstuffs, subject to the availability of production opportunities, assistance in solving social and environmental problems, as well as establishing business partnership are main criteria for agrarian enterprise marketing activities effectiveness. The analysis of the marketing costs, which is expedient to be carried out in three stages in order to determine their influence on the formation of aggregate income is an important part of agrarian enterprises marketing activities assessment. It was found out that the marketing activity indicators system development should be based on the following principles: use of general indicators; versatility in their use; the unity between generic and partial indicators; combination of quantitative and qualitative assessments.
It is proposed to analyze the results of agrarian enterprises marketing activities in the following areas: analysis of annual sales plans, profitability analysis, marketing effectiveness, inventory. Since the activities of agrarian enterprises are carried out on the agro-food market, it is expedient to use domestic commodity turnover indicators, foreign trade, price indices for the analysis and forecasting of its business environment.
The authors developed a methodical approach to enterprise marketing activities effectiveness assessment and improvement. Particular indicators are defined for the evaluation of the effectiveness of the marketing complex elements; a system of measures for improving the efficiency of enterprises marketing activities was developed. The reasonable proposals concerning the system of indicators of the enterprises marketing activities effectiveness evaluation should be used in the practical activities of agrarian enterprises, authority bodies (for example, for the development of regional development programs for agricultural sector actors, etc). Further research in this area are to focus on the studying the factors influencing the efficiency of marketing strategy development and implementation in the enterprise under the modern economic conditions.
Key words: agrarian marketing, indicators of marketing activity, marketing costs, marketing efficiency.
1. Kottler P. &Keller, K.L. (2007). Marketing Management. 12.vyd. Praha, Grada Publishing, a.s. 792 p.
2. Gaiardelli, P., Saccani, N. &Songini, L. (2007). Performance measure mentof the after-sales service network – Evidence from the automotive industry. In Computersin Industry. Vol. 58 Iss: 7, pp. 698 –708.
3. O´Sullivan, D., &Abela, A.V., &Hutchinson, M. (2009). Marketing performance measure mentandfirm performance. European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43, Issue 5/6, pp. 35-38.
4. Barreta, A. D. (2008). The exclusion of indirect costsfromefficiencybenchmarking. In AnInternational Journal,
Vol. 15 Iss: 4, pp. 345–367.
5. Kottler P., Pfoertsch W. (2007). Beingknownorbeingoneofmany: theneedforbrandmanagementforbusinessto- business (B2B) companies. In Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 22 Iss. 6, pp. 357–362.
6. Town, J.S. (2000). Performance or measurement? In Performance Measurement and Metrics. Vol. 1. Iss: 1, pp. 43–54.
7. Zahay, D., & Griffin, A. (2002). Are customer information systems worth it? Results from B2B services. Marketing Science Institute Report No. 02-113. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
8. Koller, P. & Salzberger, T. (2009). Benchmarking in service marketing – a longitudinal analysis of the customer. In Benchmarking: An International Journal. Vol. 16 Iss: 3, pp. 401 – 414.
9. Barwise, P. & Farley, J.U. (2004). Marketing Metrics: Status of Six Metrics in Five Countries. In European Management Journal. Vol. 22 Iss: 3, pp. 257–262.
10. Bauer, J. & Tanner, S. J. & Neely, A. (2004). Developing a performance measurement audit template – a benchmarking study. In Measuring Business Excellence. Vol. 8 Iss: 4, pp. 17–25.
11. Gaiardelli, P., Saccani, N. & Songini, L. (2007). Performance measurement of the after-sales service network – Evidence from the automotive industry. In Computers in Industry. Vol. 58 Iss: 7, pp. 698–708.
12. Halachmi, A. (2005). Performance measure mentin only on eway of managing performance. In International Journal of productivity and Performance Management. Vol. 54 Iss: 7, pp. 502–516.
13. Seggie, S.H., Cavusgil, E. &Phelan, S.E. (2007). Measure mento freturnon marketingin vesment: A conceptual frame work and the future of marketing metrics. In Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 36 Iss: 6, pp. 834–841.
14. Llonch, J., Eusebio, R. &Ambler, T. (2002). Measure sof Marketing Success: A Comparison Between Spainandthe UK. In European Management Journal. Vol. 20, Iss: 4, pp. 412–422.
15. Druker P.F. (1992). Upravlenie, nacelennoe na rezul'taty [Results-based management]: per. s angl. M., Pro-gress. 199 p.
16. Assel' G. (2001). Marketing: principy i strategija [Marketing: principles and strategy]. M., Infra-M, 804 p.
17. Ojner O.K. (2008). Ocenka rezul'tativnosti marketinga: ot resursnoj jeffektivnosti k integrirovannym podhodam. [Evaluating the effectiveness of marketing: from resource efficiency to integrated approaches]. Marketing v Rossii i za rubezhom. [ Marketing in Russia and abroad], no 1. pp. 3–14.
18. Ojner O.K. (2012). Upravlenie rezul'tativnost'ju marketinga: ucheb. dlja magistrov. [Marketing performance management: Textbook. for masters]. 3-e izd., pererab. i dop. M., Jurajt, 343 p.
19. Kaplan R.S., Norton D.P. (2004). Sbalansirovannaja sistema pokazatelej. [Balanced scorecard. From strategy to action]. M., ZAO «Olimp-Biznes», 320 p.
20. Artimonova I.V. (2010). Metodychni pidhody do ocinky efektyvnosti marketyngovoi' dijal'nosti agrarnyh pidpryjemstv. [Methodical approaches to the evaluation of the efficiency of marketing activities of agrarian enterprises]. Aktual'ni problemy ekonomiky, no 5, pp. 46–51.
21. Dajnovs'kyj Ju.A. (2012). Osoblyvosti ocinjuvannja ekonomichnoi' efektyvnosti pryjomiv upravlinnja i marketyngu. Marketyng i menedzhment innovacij. [Features of evaluation of economic efficiency of methods of management and marketing. Marketing and innovation management], no 4. pp. 143–153.
22. Bobrovnyk V.M. (2010). Kontrol' efektyvnosti realizacii' marketyngovoi' koncepcii' upravlinnja torgovel'nym pidpryjemstvom. [Control over the effectiveness of implementing the marketing concept of a trading company]. Visnyk Hmel'nyc'. nac. un-tu. Ekonomichni nauky. Vol. 4, no 6. pp. 351–354.
23. Radishhuk T.P. (2010). Osoblyvosti prognozuvannja kon’junktury tovarnogo rynku. [Features of forecasting of commodity market conditions].Visnyk nacional'nogo universytetu «L'vivs'ka politehnika» [Bulletin of the National University "Lviv Polytechnic"], no 684. pp. 39–42.
24. Derev’janenko T.Je. (2001). Marketyngovyj analiz kon’junktury tovarnogo rynku. [Marketing analysis of commodity market conditions]. Marketyng v Ukrai'ni. [Marketing in Ukraine], no 3. pp. 35–37.
25. Peshkova E.P. (1996). Marketingovyj analiz v dejatel'nosti firmy. [Marketing analysis in the activities of the firm]. M., FiS, 264 p.
AttachmentSize
PDF icon varchenko_o._shupik_s.1-2018.pdf11.36 MB