The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1460-1060.

htm

An exploratory study of marketing, logistics, and ethics in packaging innovation

Maria Vernuccio and Alessandra Cozzolino
Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy, and

Packaging innovation

333

Laura Michelini
LUMSA University of Rome, Rome, Italy
Abstract
Purpose Packaging is a strategic tool that merits holistic management. Three managerial disciplines have the potential to signicantly inuence packaging strategy: marketing, logistics, and ethics. Despite the multidimensional nature of packaging, the academic literature tends to analyse these three dimensions separately. To address this shortcoming of a more integrated approach, the aim of this paper is to identify the main integration areas among marketing, logistics, and ethics in packaging innovation projects, in the retail grocery sector. Design/methodology/approach In total, 186 cases of packaging design were selected and the data collected were analysed by quantitative content analysis (cross-tabulation). Findings The results show that simultaneous integration among marketing, logistics and ethics recurs in only one third of the cases. The main area of integration is between marketing and ethics. To a lesser extent, there is a signicant degree of integration between marketing and logistics as well as between logistics and ethics. Nevertheless, the ndings of this initial analysis suggest that the potential in terms of integration has yet to be exploited. Practical implications Taking a holistic view of innovation in packaging, the study can assist managers participating in packaging management by providing a conceptual instrument for the integrated evaluation of the multidimensional relationships among the three perspectives. Originality/value The paper provides the rst empirical exploration in this eld and an original conceptual framework that could serve as a theoretical reference point for future research and as a managerial tool, recognising the urgent need for a careful understanding of how marketing, logistics and ethics may be integrated in innovation projects. Keywords Packaging, Innovation, Retailing, Competitive strategy, Integration Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction The intense level of innovation in packaging, which is particularly noticeable in the retail grocery sector, has focused on a continuous search for competitive advantage. Many external forces are driving businesses to make more serious efforts in this direction for example: changes in patterns of consumption behaviour; lengthening distribution chains; new materials and technologies; environmentalism; regulation; and the obligations of corporate responsibility. The best possible management response to this complex operating environment is produced through the interaction of many functional areas within the rm, with their diverse perspectives, that combine and integrate in different ways at different times. This complex management discipline is furthermore a highly and increasingly signicant element in the production, distribution and consumption systems of the worlds developed and developing economies, themselves the subject of specialised study.

European Journal of Innovation Management Vol. 13 No. 3, 2010 pp. 333-354 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1460-1060 DOI 10.1108/14601061011060157

EJIM 13,3

334

Among the variety of management activities associated with innovation in packaging, this study focuses on the perspectives of the marketing, logistics and ethics disciplines, which are considered some of the most relevant components of strategic packaging planning. Over recent decades, some researchers have emphasised that packaging is a highly versatile marketing tool (Nickels and Jolson, 1976; Schoormans and Robben, 1997; Nancarrow et al., 1998; Underwood and Ozanne, 1998; Underwood et al., 2001; Lambin, 2002; Lee and Lye, 2003; Underwood, 2003; Ampuero and Vila, 2006; Kotler, 2006), while others have considered it mainly as an integral element of the logistics system as a whole (Twede, 1992; Coles et al., 2003; Rundh, 2005; Hellstrom and Saghir, 2006), and a few others have analysed its ethical implications specically (Bone and Corey, 1992a, b; Prendergast and Pitt, 1996; Bone and Corey, 2000). Despite the multidimensional nature of packaging, the academic literature tends to analyse these three dimensions separately. In view of the lack of a more integrative approach, our study takes a systematic and holistic vision of innovation in packaging. Thus, the key research question was formulated as follows: RQ. Which are the main areas of integration among marketing, logistics, and ethics in packaging innovation in the retail grocery sector? In pursuit of this aim, we propose an original multidisciplinary analytical framework from the diversity that characterises this eld. This framework is applied to case study evidence considering the specic areas in which marketing, logistics, and ethics are integrated in packaging innovation projects. In so doing, we take a company perspective (Cooper, 1979; More, 1982; Cooper and De Brentani, 1991; Green et al., 1995; Olson et al., 1995; Colarelli OConnor, 1998; Goldenberg et al., 1999). In dening packaging innovation, we rst took into consideration a variety of implied denitions of innovation in the literature. Garcia and Calantone (2002, p. 112) speak of discontinuity in marketing and/or technological factors, which may precipitate new product design (Lawton and Parasuraman, 1980; Kleinschmidt and Cooper, 1991; Kessler and Chakrabarti, 1999), new product features (Cooper, 1979; Ali et al., 1995), new benets in terms of quality (Cooper and De Brentani, 1991), and new processes (Cooper, 1979; More, 1982; Yoon and Lilien, 1985; Cooper and De Brentani, 1991; Schmidt and Calantone, 1998). With respect to innovation in packaging, specically, we are concerned with an initiative that, whether really new (Garcia and Calantone, 2002) or incremental, is bound to have an impact on both the physical aspects of delivery along the packaging chain and the ways in which it communicates specic messages to selected target groups by various means. Our research study examines such nal outcomes of the innovation process as improvements in both the physical and communicative functions of the packaging. The rst of these (physical) concerns the containment, protection and conservation of goods, physical handling and storage, retailing, and the facilitation of use and re-use. In the case of the second (communicative) function, strategic objectives such as information, visibility, persuasion, dialogue and social involvement, are conveyed to such targets as consumers, distributors and logistics contractors by means of various informative and symbolic forms of communication. In the next section we present a conceptual framework that integrates marketing, logistics, and ethics perspectives arising from the literature. Despite the limits of an analysis that covers such diverse disciplines, it is necessary a rst step in the exploration

of integration areas. It could serve both as theoretical reference point for future research and as a practical tool for practitioners responsible for packaging development. Such a tool can enable practitioners to manage the process of innovation in a more integrated way and hence to control its impact on both the physical and communicative functions of packaging. A research methodology that applies this framework to empirical evidence is then described: 186 cases of packaging design were selected in the retail grocery sector and the data collected were analysed by quantitative content analysis (cross-tabulation). Afterwards, the main research results are explained and, in the nal sections, these results are discussed and conclusions are drawn, including some important managerial implications, limitations, and future directions. 2. Background: perspectives on innovativeness in packaging The analysis of physical and communicative innovation in packaging could be undertaken and organized on the basis of the three components of strategic packaging planning (marketing, logistics, and ethics). In fact, we have noted research interest in packaging as an integral element, on the one hand, of the product system (Lambin, 2002) or the marketing process (Kotler, 2006), and, on the other hand, of logistical system (Twede, 1992; Hellstrom and Saghir, 2006; Chan et al., 2006). Considering also the ethical perspective, it has further been shown that it can have a signicant impact on the personnel working in the logistics function, and on the physical environment (Bone and Corey, 1992, 2000; Prendergast and Pitt, 1996; Thgersen, 1999). Studies have shown that, in response to the growing importance of logistics, the evolution of intermediate and nal markets, and an emerging sensitivity to ethical issues, packaging has become a key interface in the working relationships among suppliers, producers, distributors and end-users, and in their interaction with the physical environment (Coles et al., 2003). 2.1 Packaging and marketing One fundamental tenet of our study is that packaging is a multidimensional construct. In pursuit of value creation, innovation projects need to take into account the multiple roles of packaging with respect to the numerous actors operating in the production, distribution, consumption, and post-consumption phases of the marketing process. Moreover, packaging should be designed and executed with a sense of responsibility towards the physical environment and in compliance with social regulations. This means, in turn, that inter-functional teams responsible for the planning of innovation strategy must have an in-depth understanding of more than just consumers needs and wants. They must also concern themselves with the intrinsic characteristics of the products, the expectations of retailers, the logistics of transport and delivery, the packaging materials available, the machinery, and production processes, the environmental performance of the proposed packaging, and many other intervening variables (Coles et al., 2003). Such an evolutionary approach to the management of packaging innovation will be best able to realise its value-added potential in this complex operational setting if the rm adopting it is market-oriented (Kohli and Jaworski, 1990; Jaworski and Kohli, 1993; Narver and Slater, 1990; Slater and Narver, 1995; Li and Calantone, 1998; Deshpande, 1999; Narver et al., 2004). According Gatignon and Xuereb (1997, p. 77): Although being market-driven may lead to general benets for the rms marketing

Packaging innovation

335

EJIM 13,3

336

activities, the ability to bring to market new products, which present the characteristics necessary to be successful, may be critical. Atuahene-Gima (1995) found a strong positive relationship between market orientation and a new products market performance. This greater inuence on new product performance is observed primarily when the product represents an incremental change for both the customers and the rm, and also when the perceived intensity of market competition and industry hostility are high. Market orientation includes not only the concept of customer orientation, but also that of competitive orientation (Day, 1990, 1994). Competitive effects play an important role in the formulation and execution of innovation strategies (Robertson and Gatignon, 1986; Gatignon and Robertson, 1993). Clearly, market-orientation demands management that is fully aware of the complex web of relationships within which packaging is the prime mover if the proposed innovations in the physical and communicative aspects of packaging are to be effective. Notwithstanding the fact that the relevance of packaging to marketing has long been recognised in the literature (Twedt, 1968; Sara, 1990; Stewart, 1996), and indeed spoken of as the fth P (Nickels and Jolson, 1976), the prevalent studies have until now collected only specic details of packaging as a part of the marketing process, without broadening the perspective to market orientation. For example, packaging has been analysed as a marketing instrument that can inuence such specic aspects as product positioning (Gershman, 1987), consumer attention, categorization and evaluation (Schoormans and Robben, 1997, Folkes and Matta, 2004; Ampuero and Vila, 2006), usage behavior (Wansink, 1996), intention-to-purchase (Raghubir and Greenleaf, 2006) or brand communication (Nancarrow et al., 1998; Underwood and Ozanne, 1998; Underwood et al., 2001; Van den Berg-Weitzel and van de Laar, 2001; Underwood and Klein, 2002; Underwood, 2003). Here, we postpone future extensions of our study into these unexplored links between market orientation and the multidimensionality of packaging in favour of providing a primary identication of the aspects of marketing expected to feature most prominently in the choice of packaging innovations. We therefore concentrate our attention on the main objective and outcome: the perceived value to the buyer or consumer, as the nal phase of innovative intervention in the packaging process. Drawing on studies of semiotics in marketing, and in particular the celebrated semiotic square (Greimas, 1966; Floch, 1990), it is possible to identify the principal dimensions of the value of packaging to the consumer in the physical and communicative terms dened in the introduction to this paper. As Table I shows, those are distinguished as practical, ideal, emotional and critical. These categorisations combine and interpret Flochs French descriptions of four axiologies of consumption pratique, utopique, ludique and critique (Floch, 1990) and the English translations utilitarian, utopian, hedonic and critical proposed by Pinson (1998). These distinct values, conveyed to the consumer by physical and communicative dimensions of packaging on various occasions and at various locations during the process of acquisition and the experience of consumption, can clearly be inuenced by innovations in packaging design. To summarise, marketing-led innovation in packaging is concerned with the practical, ideal, emotional and critical value that innovative packaging can deliver to users of the packaged offering.

Dimensions Practical Here, innovation inuences the customers perception of functional value. In the case of physical innovation, we observe an improvement in the user-friendliness of goods (transportability, re-sealability, ease of handling, etc.). Practical communicative innovations relate to verbal and iconic cues for the consumer, to facilitate use and repeat usage (e.g. the directions for use) These concern the symbolic value of the packaging, the signicance that it can take on for the customer, created through communicative innovations and, to a lesser extent, physical innovations These relate to aesthetic and emotional values (e.g. diversion, stimulation, feeling) conveyed by the physical and communicative elements These relate to the critical cost/benet evaluation of the offering. In communicative terms, it can be inuenced by the provision of critical information (e.g. about nutritional attributes) and/or by the development of transparent packs. From the physical point of view, it concerns features that improve convenience or conservability (e.g. intelligent packaging, or active packs)

Packaging innovation

337

Ideal

Emotional Critical

Table I. Principal marketing dimensions of innovation in packaging

2.2 Packaging and logistics In the contemporary competitive scene, increasing attention is accorded to the strategic role of logistics in delivering competitive leverage (Stock and Lambert, 1987; Fawcett et al., 1993; Cooper et al., 1997; Lambert et al., 1998; Coyle et al., 2003; Neef, 2004; Christopher, 2005; Bowersox et al., 2006; Melnyk et al., 2007; Guide and Van Wassenhove, 2009). It is particularly evident with respect to the logistical functions of packaging or rather to its specic physical aspects yielding increasingly valuable and important innovations, and heralding other interesting developments (Lockamy, 1995; Twede and Parsons, 1997; Johnsson, 1998; Twede et al., 2000; Hellstrom and Saghir, 2003; Jahre and Hatteland, 2003; Jonson and Johnsson, 2004; Saghir, 2004; Engelseth, 2005; Chan et al., 2006; Hellstrom and Saghir, 2006; Sci, 2006; Bramklev, 2009). In fact, the capacity to speed products through the downstream segment of the chain of production and distribution (where packaged goods are especially often found) by means of efcient and integrated service-oriented operations, has immediately signicant implications for initiatives linked to those changes in the end-market and in the productive context that can recongure inter-rm competition (Christopher and Peck, 2003; Lemoine and Dagnaes, 2003; Hakansson and Persson, 2004). The packaging system (Twede, 1992), in its entirety, fulls in logistics a fundamental role in assuring the availability of the right product, in the right quantity, in the right condition, in the right place, at the right time, to the right customer, at the right price (Shapiro and Heskett, 1985). Such rules of availability lead, in todays competitive landscape, to the formulation of original packaging complete solutions (Chapman et al., 2003), for ever-changing market conditions, so that three levels of packaging can be distinguished (intimately related to logistics): primary packaging (or sales packaging, or consumer packaging), secondary packaging (or group packaging, or distribution packaging), and tertiary packaging (or transport packaging). This explicitly recognises packaging as a hierarchical system, the performance of which is affected by the interactions between levels (Hellstrom and Saghir, 2006).

EJIM 13,3

338

Many scholars have highlighted that the principal logistical functions required of the packaging system, in pursuit of optimum efciency and qualitative performance, are: protection and conservation; handling and transport; manipulation and storage; and information (Friedman and Kipnees, 1977; Paine, 1981 1991; Harkham, 1989; Ebeling, 1990; Paine and Paine, 1992; Twede, 1992; Twede and Parsons, 1997; Saghir and Jonson, 2001; Soroka, 2002; Hellstrom and Saghir, 2006; Robertson, 2006; Williams et al., 2008; Yam, 2009). These specic roles are linked to the physical and communicative meta-functions. Moreover they are considered to be necessary prerequisites within the total compass of packaging planning, given their intrinsic importance. Arising from the previously mentioned authors, Table II summarises the most common objectives for logistical innovation in packaging, in practice, classied by these specic macro-functions or dimensions. In concert, these can simultaneously deliver optimum efciency, in terms of cost reduction and time saving, and improved service quality (Lambert et al., 1998). Protection and conservation. The key function of primary packaging is to safeguard the physical, thermal and chemical-bacteriological integrity of the product. If the contents are hazardous or potentially polluting, it prevents injury to the user or damage to the external environment in which the product is used. Primary packaging can furthermore conserve the product and thereby lengthen its life with respect to the cycle of obsolescence or natural perishability. Handling and transport manipulation and storage. Primary, secondary, and tertiary packaging, collectively facilitate various operations within the long chain of handling and transport, and manipulation and storage, across the product range and throughout all the phases of the production, distributive and consumption processes. The controlled dimensions of space-saving primary packaging, for example, can optimise load saturation and thereby reduce the number of delivery vehicles required to be on the road, on the rails or in the air. The reduction of packaged weight will also have direct positive effects on transport costs. Rationalisation of secondary packaging
Dimensions Protection and conservation Better protection of the product; better protection for users and the environment; extension of shelf life; reduction of the risk of voluntary or accidental tampering; reduction of harmful materials; utilization of materials of certied quality Weight reduction; facilitation of supply; facilitation of re-use and recycling; stackability, and space saving; optimization of loads and storage space; reduction of materials used; simplication and/or reduction of operations Weight reduction; facilitation of supply; facilitation of re-use and recycling; stackability and space-saving; reduction in stockout; reduction of materials; simplication and/or reduction of operations Clarity and simplicity in Instructions for Use on the package; better information on the components of the packaging; facilitation of product identication and traceability

Handling and transport

Manipulation and storage Table II. Principal logistical dimensions of innovation in packaging

Information

can deliver clear benets in the warehousing and picking and packing operations. Furthermore, initiatives in tertiary packaging have addressed a critical logistical problem in practice by homologating the standards relating to the pallet, the most widely adopted unit of load in international distribution logistics. Information. Moving from the physical aspects of packaging to its communicative function, messages incorporated into the materials used can deliver practical instructions to those involved in the movement of goods through the distribution chain (for example, this way up or fragile, and associated symbols) or information about the contents (such as descriptions of the contained materials and recommendations about disposal, reclamation or recycling). The use of barcodes on packaging is by now well-established practice, for delivery tracking and the upstream communication of market information. In response to the urgent need to be able to trace the progress of a product along the entire supply chain radio frequency identication technology (RFID) is steadily replacing bar codes with radio-frequency. 2.3 Packaging and ethics In the current operational environment, the planning of packaging innovations must take into account not only marketing and logistics, but also a factor that is emerging as increasingly important: the ethical dimension. Recent studies suggest that an increasing number of companies are choosing to take an ethically sound approach to innovation in packaging (Business Insights, 2008; Datamonitor, 2008). This trend, can be detected, among both the producers of the materials involved, and the users; improved environmental sustainability is a case in point. There seems to be an increasing awareness among decision-makers of the strategic value of this ethical dimension. A strong impetus towards consumer consciousness and corporate responsibility is provided by numerous standards and norms imposed by public regulatory institutions, as well as by the many industry bodies and consortia that offer guidelines for best practices and advice on reclamation and recycling of packaging. Although the theme of ethical planning of packaging is very well developed and highly topical, the academic literature on the subject so far remains sparse. Studies have concentrated on the analysis of related consumption behaviour (Thgersen, 1999) and on differences in the perception of issues connected with packaging among packaging professionals, marketing managers and end-consumers (Bone and Corey, 2000), always with specic reference to environmental questions (Prendergast and Pitt, 1996). Interesting points of departure for further reection emerge from two studies by Bone and Corey (1992a, b), who propose a classication of ethical questions relating to packaging decisions and show how the ethical dimension is made explicit in labelling, graphics, safety, pricing, and environmental issues. Table III summarizes the ethical dimensions of packaging innovation that are potentially useful to planners of packaging strategy, identifying appropriate guidelines for an improvement in the overall level of ethical responsiveness. The denitions of the ve dimensions, and their origins, are as follows: (1) Eco-compatibility: minimising the environmental impact of packing materials (Prendergast and Pitt, 1996; Bone and Corey, 1992a). (2) Information: conveying information that is honest, truthful, sincere, comprehensible and complete (Underwood and Ozanne, 1998).

Packaging innovation

339

EJIM 13,3

340

(3) Societal orientation: placing the consumer-individual at the centre of the packaging design process, guaranteeing high levels of user-friendliness for all categories of user, and maximum advantage from an economic point of view (Institute of Grocery Distribution, 1995). (4) Safety: guaranteeing maximum levels of safety in use (Laczniak, 1983; Bone and Corey, 1992a). (5) Social solidarity: using packaging for initiatives that sustain the community (Till and Nowak, 2000). The importance of the eco-compatibility dimension is self-evident. With particular reference to the information dimension, Underwood and Ozanne (1998) take their lead from the theory of communication competence (Habermas, 1984) in asserting that all information communicated via packaging should be: honest, in that it tells the truth; truthful, in that it withholds no facts essential to the proper and safe use of the product; sincere, in that it does not deliberately confuse the issue; comprehensible, in that it does not use vocabulary that is too specialised or too vague; and complete, in that it explains everything a typical consumer would nd useful to an evaluation of the product and its performance. Societal orientation means that design packaging considers the disparate needs of several categories of potential consumer, as follows: . Children: designing a package that is either particularly easy for them to use, or has child-resistant closures if it is potentially harmful. . Elderly people: taking into account age-related difculties, for example, by handling the product or reading the label. . Disabled people: diminishing obstacles to proper use of packaging, for example by ensuring that the package conveys information in Braille or by other suitable means in the case of potential users who are partially sighted. . Other categories: such as immigrants or economically disadvantaged citizens. In general, the value of user-friendliness is clear. Designing packaging from a user-centred perspective means paying attention to consumer-individuals. In this case, consumer well-being is placed at the heart of the process, and the aim is to deliver high levels of comfort and convenience in use.
Dimensions Eco-compatibility Facilitation of recycling activity; reduction of waste; reduction of harmful materials; reduced use of materials; reduction of the risk of environmental damage; energy savings in the production process; re-use of packaging; use of ecological or certicated materials; use of recycled materials Is honest, truthful, sincere, comprehensible and complete Focus on special-needs customers; maximisation of user-friendliness; reduction of costs Reduction of risk of damage to the person beyond the legal obligations Communication; social responsibility; social engagement

Information Societal orientation Table III. Principal ethical dimensions of innovation in packaging Safety Social solidarity

If a rm plans in parallel for improved cost-effectiveness in the production or purchasing of its packaging, then the advantage to the consumer can be reinforced by an affordable nal product price. As well as adopting a societal orientation, packaging strategy can serve the broader social interest. In this sense, it can form part of a channel of social communication or be an instrument of social marketing, used for the diffusion of messages intended to sensitise consumers to specic social issues, social causes or public initiatives, and stimulate their support or participation. It thus becomes one of many contributors to the promotion of social solidarity. As for the safety dimension, it is an unarguable objective of packaging strategy. In ethical terms, it is imperative to safeguard the personal safety of the user, even beyond the legal constraints and regulatory obligations. 2.4 Towards an integrated approach In the previous analysis, we have identied and discussed the particular aspects of marketing, logistics and ethics that are signicant in the planning and management of innovation in packaging. It is therefore now possible to introduce some preliminary thoughts about the potential for integration among them as the point of departure for the empirical analysis. There is a strong potential, in theory at least, for integrating marketing, logistics and ethics in the planning of innovative packaging initiatives. In fact, all three corresponding managerial functions are potentially linked to the essential physical and communicative meta-functions of packaging, and can be involved, to a greater or a lesser degree, in their implementation. The degree of crossover of a given dimension between the two meta-functions will determine its capacity for integration with the others. For example, in the case of marketing, the fact that the practical, ideal, emotional and critical user-values exhibit a high degree of parallel involvement in the two meta-functions suggests that it will, generally speaking, have a high potential for integration with logistics and ethics on both fronts. From a theoretical standpoint again, the logistical dimensions have a strong potential for integration with marketing and ethics, but only in the physical meta-function. Ethical innovations in packaging, since they can affect both the physical and communicative functions, potentially integrate well with both marketing and logistics, though more substantially with the former. The matrix in Figure 1 integrates the many multidisciplinary elements discussed. 3. Methodology To apply the conceptual framework set out in Figure 1 to the identication of the main areas of integration among marketing, logistics and ethics, an exploratory research design was based on desk research and case studies. The context was innovation in consumer-product primary packaging, with a subsidiary focus on secondary packaging. In the rst phase of data collection, 300 separate cases of packaging innovation were assembled from a variety of published secondary sources: research reports, white papers, industry publications, the web sites of leading companies in the eld, and winning entries in international competitions. The criteria for inclusion in this data pool were:

Packaging innovation

341

EJIM 13,3

342

Figure 1. Conceptual framework: potential for physical and communicative integration among marketing, logistics, and ethics dimensions
. . . . .

relevance to the objectives of the study; use of primary and secondary packaging; reporting period 2005-2008; focus on consumer goods; and international recognition.

In the second phase, 186 cases were selected from the pool on the basis of two further criteria: (1) Richness of the relevant information, in that each case had to describe, as a minimum, the objectives of the innovation project, details of its development, results, and usable visual material. (2) Homogeneity within the sample, in terms of level of detail in the project descriptions. The large size of the nal sample and the diversity of the sampled units reect the aim of covering the full international range of packaging innovation. Data were collected from 27 countries across ve consumer-goods categories: foods and beverages, consumer electronics, cosmetics and toiletries, household care products, and pharmaceuticals. The data were reduced and organised by quantitative content analysis (Holsti, 1969; Kassarjian, 1977; Rourke and Anderson, 2004). This research method appears appropriate for the systematic, objective, and quantitative description of manifest content (Berelson, 1952). In this context, description is a process that includes providing tallies for each category, segmenting text content into single assertion about a subject (Kassarjian, 1977, p. 12), and assigning the segments to a category (coding process). Thus, we considered any single assertion about the specic subjects (categories) of this study as the unit of analysis. Table IV shows the 16 coding variables employed in the analysis, as derived from the conceptual framework

presented in Figure 1: three macro-variables (marketing, logistics, and ethics) and 13 micro-variables relating to such attributes as practical value, protection-conservation or societal orientation. These categories of analysis were dened based on the principle that different analysts may apply them to the same body of content and secure the same results (Berelson, 1952). In order to construct the most parsimonious model of data collection, and since this is a rst exploration of this eld, the coding process did not distinguish between the physical and communicative functions. For each descriptive case, the presence or absence of the 16 analytical variables was noted and recorded. Interjudge reliability was measured by the ratio of coding agreements to the total number of coding decisions (Kassarjian, 1977). In this study, two academic judges were involved in the coding process. The coefcient of reliability was 96 per cent. The outcome was then quantied through multivariate analysis based on a frequency measurement produced by SPSS software. To identify the frequency of the co-occurrences of categories (variables), a cross-tabulation based on the Pearsons chi-square test was used. A three-way analysis allowed us to identify the integration among marketing, logistics, and ethics in packaging innovation projects. Bivariate cross-tabulation made it possible to identify the integration between each pair of macro-variable and micro-variables belonging to different managerial elds, e.g. between practical value (marketing) and eco-compatibility (ethics). 4. Findings This section presents the principal empirical ndings, as they relate to the three key management perspectives of marketing, logistics and ethics, and with a focus on their application in the integrated projects of innovation in packaging. 4.1 Preliminary analysis Table V shows the absolute and percentage frequencies for each of the 16 variables.
Macro-categories Marketing Micro-categories Practical value Ideal value Emotional value Critical value Protection and conservation Handling and transport Manipulation and storage Information Eco-compatibility Information Safety Societal orientation Social solidarity

Packaging innovation

343

Logistics

Ethics

Table IV. Variables used for the coding process

EJIM 13,3

Macrocategories Marketing

Absolute frequency (A) 177

Frequency percentage (A/186) 95.2

Micro-categories Practical value Ideal value Emotional value Critical value Protection and conservation Handling and transport Manipulation and storage Information Eco-compatibility Information Safety Societal orientation Social solidarity

Absolute frequency (B) 132 65 37 17 48 40 48 2 61 5 25 62 4

Frequency percentage (B/A) 74.6 36.7 20.9 9.6 57.8 48.2 57.8 2.4 54.5 4.5 22.3 55.3 3.5

344
Logistics 83 44.6

Ethics Table V. Frequency analysis of macro- and micro-variables (from SPSS output)

112

60.2

Note: Base 186

The base for the three macro-categories was all 186 cases analysed. For the micro-categories, the percentages were calculated by dividing the absolute frequency by that of the corresponding macro-variable. Item totals can exceed 100 per cent because two or more items could occur simultaneously in the same project. The presence of marketing aspects was found in 95.2 per cent (n 177) of the cases. Less than two thirds explicitly involved ethical factors (60.2 per cent), and less than half, were judged, to be related, to logistics (44.6 per cent). Marketing. Among the four fundamental kinds of value deliverable by marketing innovation in packaging, practical dominated, being present in three quarters of all cases (74.6 per cent; total 177). The ideal, emotional and critical variants together accounted for only two thirds of all observations (67.2 per cent). Logistics. Protection and conservation (57.8 per cent), handling and transport (48.2 per cent), and manipulation and storage (57.8 per cent) were all identied as key factors in roughly half of all the case histories where the logistics dimension occurs (total 83). Only the information dimension of logistics was less represented in the analysis (2.4 per cent). Ethics. Societal orientation considerations were a factor in more than half of all cases (54.5 per cent of 112 cases). Table V also shows that eco-compatibility had an equally strong role in the ethical dimensions of packing innovation (55.3 per cent). 4.2 Integration of marketing, logistics, and ethics The research question asks which are the most relevant integration areas in packaging innovation. Cross-tabulation of the data suggested a denite tendency to signicant integration among marketing, logistics and ethics. Table VI shows that integration included all three dimensions in just 33 per cent (n 62) of the case histories

( p-value , 0.05). In a slightly smaller proportion (31 per cent), innovation was exclusively marketing-led (n 57), but in only two cases (2 per cent) was it found to be solely ethics-led. In no case was logistics the only dimension of innovation. Most of the cases, presented an integration between at least two variables. Pair-wise comparisons were conducted to investigate the degree of integration among the three-macro variables and their sub-dimensions. Table VII shows the

Packaging innovation

345

Marketing innovation No Ethical innovation Total Yes Ethical innovation Total Note: Pearson chi-square signicant at p-value # 0.05 No Yes 4 No Yes 99

No 1 3 5 57 42 78

Logistics innovation Yes Total 0 5 9 16 62 * 177 1 8 73 104 Table VI. Integration of the three macro-variables of innovation (three-way analysis from SPSS output)

Integration between macrocategories Marketing and logistics

Absolute frequency (A) 78 *

Frequency percentage (A/186) 41.9

Integration between micro-categories Practical value and protection and conservation Practical value and manipulation and storage Practical value and societal orientation Practical value and ecocompatibility Practical value and safety Manipulation and storage and ecocompatibility Handling and transport and eco-compatibility Protection and conservation and societal orientation Protection and conservation and safety

Absolute frequency (B) 45 * * 41 *

Frequency percentage (B/A) 57.7 52.6

Marketing and ethics

104 *

55.9

60 * * 51 * 25 * * 34 * * 33 * * 24 * 20 * *

57.7 49.0 24.0 50.7 49.2 35.8 29.8 Table VII. Integration between pairs of variables (cross-tabulation from SPSS)

Logistics and ethics

67 * *

36.0

Notes: *Pearson chi-square signicant at p-value # 0.05; * * Pearson chi-square signicant at p-value # 0.001

EJIM 13,3

346

absolute and percentage frequencies of pairs of macro-variables for micro-variable intersections that are more frequent and statistically signicant. Marketing and logistics. Association between the marketing and logistics dimensions occurs in 42 per cent of all 186 cases, and is shown to be acceptably signicant by the Pearsons chi-square value of p 0.049. The main areas of overlap were between practical value and protection and conservation ( p 0.000) and manipulation and storage ( p 0.010). Marketing and ethics. Cross-tabulation output showed a very frequent and signicant association between marketing and ethics (56 per cent with p 0.03), within which this supplementary analysis indicated a high level of integration between innovations that have an impact on practical value from the users perspective and those that related to the ethical sub-dimensions of societal orientation ( p 0.000), eco-compatibility ( p 0.008), and safety ( p 0.001). Logistics and ethics. Furthermore, there was a signicant degree of integration ( p 0.000) even if less frequent between the logistical and ethical dimensions (36 per cent). Here, the principal area of overlap referred to environmental aspects; the handling-and-transport ( p 0.000) and manipulation-and-storage ( p 0.000) functions were strongly associated with eco-compatibility. Moreover, signicant integration occurred between protection-and-conservation and societal orientation ( p 0.004) and safety ( p 0.000). 5. Conclusion Based on the conceptual framework, this rst exploratory study analysed empirical evidence about the specic areas in which the three key management perspectives (marketing, logistics, and ethics) were integrated in packaging innovation projects. Before discussing the issue of integration, it is useful to provide some notes on each single dimension of packaging innovation. Empirical ndings show that the planning and execution of packaging innovations were guided largely by marketing considerations. In fact, marketing was not only the variable that occurred most frequently, but also the one that occurred by itself most often. In the context of consumer goods, marketing-related innovations had a largely functional purpose, with a specic impact on the practical value dimension. In other terms, we observed an improvement in the user-friendliness of goods (transportability, re-sealability, ease of handling, etc.) or in the verbal and iconic cues to the consumer, facilitating use and repeat usage (e.g. the directions for use) more frequently than other improvements. Second, innovation that referred to the shape of the container or the verbal and iconic signs conveyed by the packaging was frequently driven by the aim of having a positive impact mainly on the ideal value dimension. Logistics-related innovation was more strongly linked to the process than to the product, and packaging was managed as a system of services along the forward and reverse supply chains. In fact, the very balanced frequency distribution of protection and conservation, handling and transport, and manipulation and storage seems consistent with the concept of logistical innovation, which manifests itself as an initiative that is systemic and narrowly focused on the logic of the process. By contrast, the very low frequency relating to the information function of logistics seems inconsistent with that concept, but that result could be explained in two ways. First, it was not always easy to identify information elements in the case histories;

second, the phenomenon could be attributable to the fact that primary packaging was the focus in 90 per cent of cases. Ethical innovation in packaging design refers primarily to two aspects: eco-compatibility and societal orientation. Specically, with respect to innovations aimed at reducing the impact of packaging on the environment, it was found that initiatives were directed at reducing the amount or variety of materials used, facilitating recycling, and generally reducing waste. Referring to societal orientation, the greater part of innovation was related to ease of use. Despite gradually increasing levels of attention to the needs of special categories of end-user as disabled or elderly adults and children, such a commitment was found only rarely in our research. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that some signicant examples of such initiatives have recently begun to appear, for instance, in the form of Braille labelling and typography adapted to the needs of the blind, which suggest possible future developments. Our study found that simultaneous integration of marketing, logistics and ethics occurred in only about a third of all cases. Regarding the combination between marketing and logistics, the cross tabulation analysis conrmed in practice what was expected theoretically in terms of a strong potential for integration. This was evident when the practical value for the customer occurred simultaneously with logistical innovations, such as protection and conservation, and manipulation and storage. In the former, case innovation referred to the nal product, whereas in the latter case it referred to the logistical process. This result suggests that logistical packaging innovation could have a strong impact on customer value creation. It seems that innovation initiatives may be based on considerable effort in pursuit of the proper equilibrium between the need to optimise logistical performance and the priority of creating value for the end-user. Integration of marketing and ethics was the most common combination, but was focused almost exclusively on practical improvements in societal orientation and eco-compatibility. In particular, referring to the integration between societal orientation and practical value, ndings show that innovation was primarily linked to the user-friendliness of packaging. This aspect could be considered ethical to the extent that it presupposed a customer-oriented stance. Although the empirical evidence indicated a strong connection between these ethically-driven innovations and the practical value of the packaging, as perceived by the consumer, innovations with more demanding ethical content (e.g. directed at special user needs) were only rarely associated with marketing in practice. Furthermore, unexpectedly, the combination between the ethics aspects and the ideal value (symbolic) was found only seldom. This evidence highlights the propensity of rms not to communicate the ethical component of an innovation. One possible reason may be the difculty of communicating the ethical value of packaging effectively. Consumers may fail to grasp the benet, misconstrue the message when the packaged product seems to them to be ethically dubious, or be unconvinced if the rms commitment is not consistent. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that exceptions do occur, when the ethical dimension gures prominently in the corporate mission and marketing strategy of a rm. In the end, logistics and ethics displayed a signicant degree of integration, even if this integration was less frequent in comparison with the other two combinations. The

Packaging innovation

347

EJIM 13,3

348

main integration area was that of eco-efciency, which refers to both eco-nomic and eco-logical efciency, typically achieved by savings in the amount and variety of materials employed. In this case, benets were felt both internally, by logistics managers, and externally, in the broader environment. This consideration arose from the high level of overlap found in the environmental aspect between handling-and-transport and manipulation-and-storage and eco-compatibility. Overall, even though integration among all three elements of marketing, logistics and ethics is theoretically-foreseeable, and reasonable, we can conclude that part of the potential benets of integration remains to be realised in practice. This analysis of the main areas and the specic gaps of integration emerging in practice could serve as a point of departure for fully understanding and properly utilising innovation. Consequently, our conceptual framework is useful not only for academics involved in this eld of research, but also for planners and managers with responsibility for packaging strategy and management. This framework could be a useful conceptual instrument for the integrated evaluation of the multidimensional relationships among the three perspectives. 6. Limitations and future directions This study has certain limitations that can be addressed in future research. Even though this broad exploratory study has allowed for a rst signicant step in taking a holistic view of packaging innovation, further research should strive to extend the analysis. First, it might be useful to focus an empirical analysis on specic product categories. Second, further investigation might consider integration specically within the two meta-functions of packaging (physical and communicative). Moreover, it might be interesting to develop studies that consider separately primary and secondary packaging, or that delve further into understanding integration between sets of two macro-variables. Finally, the quantitative analysis presented here in followed a desk approach. It might also be valuable to employ a qualitative eld approach. Through such additional studies that examine the process of innovation (with the direct involvement of managers), it will be possible to create a deeper understanding of the determinants and consequences of integration choices in packaging innovation.
References Ali, A., Krapfel, R. and LaBahn, D. (1995), Product innovativeness and entry strategy: impact on cycle time and break-even time, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 54-69. Ampuero, O. and Vila, N. (2006), Consumer perception of product packaging, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 100-12. Atuahene-Gima, K. (1995), An exploratory analysis of the impact of market orientation on new product performance: a contingency approach, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 12, Sptember, pp. 275-93. Berelson, B. (1952), Content Analysis in Communication Research, The Free Press, New York, NY. Bone, P.F. and Corey, R.J. (1992a), Ethical dilemmas in packaging: beliefs of packaging professionals, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 45-54. Bone, P.F. and Corey, R.J. (1992b), Ethical packaging: a call for research, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 44-54.

Bone, P.F. and Corey, R.J. (2000), Packaging ethics: perceptual differences among packaging professionals, brand managers and ethically interested consumers, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 199-213. Bowersox, D.J., Closs, D.J. and Cooper, M.B. (2006), Supply Chain Logistics Management, McGraw-Hill Irwin, Boston, MA. Bramklev, C. (2009), On a proposal for a generic package development process, Packaging Technology and Science, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 171-86. Business Insights (2008), Trends in ethical and sustainable packaging, available at: www. globalbusinessinsights.com (accessed 15 October 2009). Chan, F.T.S., Chan, H.K. and Choy, K.L. (2006), A systematic approach to manufacturing packaging logistics, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 1088-101. Chapman, R.L., Soosay, C. and Kandampully, M. (2003), Innovation in logistic services and the new business model. A conceptual framework, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 33 No. 7, pp. 630-7. Christopher, M. (2005), Supply Chain Management: Creating Value-adding Networks, Prentice-Hall/Financial Times, Harlow. Christopher, M. and Peck, H. (2003), Marketing Logistics, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Colarelli OConnor, G. (1998), Market learning and radical innovation: a cross case comparison of eight radical innovation projects, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 151-66. Coles, R., McDowell, D. and Kirwan, M.J. (2003), Food Packaging Technology, Blackwell, Oxford. Cooper, M.C., Lambert, D.M. and Pagh, J.D. (1997), Supply chain management more than a new name for logistics, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 1-13. Cooper, R.G. (1979), The dimensions of industrial new product success and failure, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 93-103. Cooper, R.G. and De Brentani, U. (1991), New industrial nancial services: what distinguishes the winners, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 75-90. Coyle, J.J., Bardi, E.J. and Langley, J. Jr (2003), The Management of Business Logistics: a Supply Chain Perspective, Thomson Learning, Toronto. Datamonitor (2008), Containers and Packaging in Europe, Datamonitor, London, available at: www.datamonitor.com (accessed 15 October 2009). Day, G.S. (1990), Market Driven Strategy: Processes for Creating Value, The Free Press, New York, NY. Day, G.S. (1994), The capabilities of market-driven organizations, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 37-52. Deshpande, R. (1999), Developing a Market Orientation, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Ebeling, C.W. (1990), Integrated Packaging Systems for Transportation and Distribution, CRC. Engelseth, P. (2005), The core role of packages in a logistics networks, paper presented at the 21st IMP Conference, Rotterdam, available at: http://impgroup.org/uploads/papers/4685. pdf (accessed 2 February 2009). Fawcett, S.E., Birou, L. and Taylor, B.C. (1993), Supporting global operations through logistics and purchasing, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 3-11. Floch, J.M. (1990), Semiotique, marketing et communication, Puf, Paris.

Packaging innovation

349

EJIM 13,3

350

Folkes, V. and Matta, S. (2004), The effect of packaging shape on consumers judgments of product volume: attention as a mental contaminant, Journal of Consumer Research, 31 September, pp. 390-401. Friedman, W.F. and Kipnees, J.J. (1977), Distribution Packaging, Krieger, Malabar, FL. Garcia, R. and Calantone, R. (2002), A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 110-32. Gatignon, H. and Robertson, T.S. (1993), The impact of risk and competition on choice of innovations, Marketing Letters, 4 July, pp. 191-204. Gatignon, H. and Xuereb, J.M. (1997), Strategic orientation of the rm and new product performance, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. XXXIV, February, pp. 77-90. Gershman, M. (1987), Packaging: positioning tool of the 80s, Management Review, Vol. 6 No. 8, pp. 33-41. Goldenberg, J., Lehmann, D.R. and Mazursky, D. (1999), The primacy of the idea itself as a predictor of new product success, working paper, Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA. Green, S.G., Gavin, M.B. and Aiman-Smith, L. (1995), Assessing a multidimensional measure of radical technological innovation, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 203-14. Greimas, A.J. (1966), Semantique physicale, Larousse, Paris. Guide, V.D.R. Jr and Van Wassenhove, L.N. (2009), The evolution of closed-loop supply chain, Operations Research, Vol. 57 No. 1, pp. 10-18. Habermas, J. (1984), The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1, Beacon Press, Boston, MA. Hakansson, H. and Persson, G. (2004), Supply chain management: the logic of supply chains and networks, International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 11-26. Harkham, A. (1989), Packaging Strategy, CRC Press (Technomic), Boca Raton, FL. Hellstrom, D. and Saghir, M. (2003), Framework of packaging logistics activities in retail supply chains, Proceedings of the IPSERA 2003 Conference, 12-16 April, Budapest. Hellstrom, D. and Saghir, M. (2006), Packaging and logistics interactions in retail supply chains packaging, Packaging Technology and Science, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 197-216. Holsti, O.R. (1969), Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Institute of Grocery Distribution (1995), IDG Tactile Information. Recommendations for Packaging Improvements, available at: www.igd.com (accessed 25 January 2009). Jahre, M. and Hatteland, C.J. (2003), Packages and physical distribution, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 123-39. Jaworski, J.B. and Kohli, A.K. (1993), Market orientation: antecedents and consequences, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57, July, pp. 53-70. Johnsson, M. (1998), Packaging logistics: a value added approach, doctorial thesis, Department of Design Sciences, Lund University, Lund. Jonson, G. and Johnsson, M. (2004), Packaging Technology for the Logistician, 3rd ed., Lund University, Lund. Kassarjian, H. (1977), Content analysis in consumer research, Journal of Consumer Research, 4 June, pp. 8-17.

Kessler, E.H. and Chakrabarti, A.K. (1999), Speeding up the pace new product development, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 231-47. Kleinschmidt, E.J. and Cooper, R.G. (1991), The impact of product innovativeness on performance, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 240-51. Kohli, A.K. and Jaworski, J.B. (1990), Market orientation: the construct, research propositions, and managerial implications, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, April, pp. 1-18. Kotler, P. (2006), Marketing Management, Pearson Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Laczniak, G.R. (1983), Framework for analyzing marketing ethics, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 3 Nos 1, Spring, pp. 7-18. Lambert, D.M., Stock, J.R. and Ellram, L.M. (1998), Fundamentals of Logistics Management, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. ` Lambin, J.J. (2002), Marketing strategique et operationnnel, Du marketing a lorientation-marche, Dunod, Paris. Lawton, L. and Parasuraman, A. (1980), The impact of the marketing concept on new product planning, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44, Winter, pp. 19-25. Lee, S.G. and Lye, S.W. (2003), Design for manual packaging, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 163-89. Lemoine, W. and Dagnaes, L. (2003), Globalisation strategies and business organisation of a network of logistics service providers, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 209-28. Li, T. and Calantone, R. (1998), The impact of market knowledge competence on new product advantage: conceptualization and empirical examination, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 13-29. Lockamy, A. (1995), A conceptual framework for assessing strategic packaging decisions, The International Journal of Logistics Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 51-60. Melnyk, S.A., Lummus, R., Vokurka, R.J. and Sandor, J. (2007), Supply Chain Management 2010 and Beyond. Mapping the Future of the Strategic Supply Chain, APICS Educational and Research Foundation, Chicago, IL. More, R.A. (1982), Risk factors in accepted and rejected new industrial products, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 9-15. Nancarrow, C., Wright, L.T. and Brace, I. (1998), Gaining competitive advantage from packaging and labelling in marketing communications, British Food Journal, Vol. 100 No. 2, pp. 110-8. Narver, J.C. and Slater, S.F. (1990), The effect of a market orientation on business protability, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 20-35. Narver, J.C., Slater, S.F. and MacLachlan, D.L. (2004), Responsive and proactive market orientation and new-product success, The Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 21, pp. 334-47. Neef, D. (2004), The Supply Chain Imperative: How to Ensure Ethical Behavior in Your Global Suppliers, AMACOM/American Management Association. Nickels, W.G. and Jolson, M.A. (1976), Packaging the fth p in the marketing mix, SAM Advanced Management Journal, Winter, pp. 13-21. Olson, E.M., Walker, O.C. and Ruekert, R.W. (1995), Organizing for effective new product development: the moderating role of product innovativeness, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59, January, pp. 48-62. Paine, F.A. (1981), Fundamentals of Packaging, Institute of Packaging, Stanmore.

Packaging innovation

351

EJIM 13,3

352

Paine, F.A. (1991), The Packaging Users Handbook, Blackie Academic & Professional, Glasgow. Paine, F.A. and Paine, H.Y. (1992), A Handbook of Food Packaging, Blackie Academic & Professional, Glasgow. Pinson, C. (1998), Marketing Semiotics, working paper (N 98/39/MKT), INSEAD, Paris, available at: www.insead.edu/facultyresearch/research/search_papers.cfm Prendergast, P.G. and Pitt, L. (1996), Packaging, marketing, logistics and the environment: are there trade-offs?, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 60-72. Raghubir, P. and Greenleaf, E.A. (2006), Ratios in proportions: what should the shape of the package be?, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70, April, pp. 95-107. Robertson, G.L. (2006), Food Packaging: Principles and Practice, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Robertson, T.S. and Gatignon, H. (1986), Competitive effects on technology diffusion, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50, July, pp. 1-12. Rourke, L. and Anderson, T. (2004), Validity in quantitative content analysis, Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 5-18. Rundh, B. (2005), The multi-faceted dimension of packaging. Marketing logistics or marketing tool?, British Food Journal, Vol. 107 No. 9, pp. 670-84. Saghir, M. (2004), The concept of packaging logistics, Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual POM Conference, Cancun, April 30-May 3. Saghir, M. and Jonson, G. (2001), Packaging handling evaluation methods in the grocery retail industry, Packaging Technology and Science, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 21-9. Sara, R. (1990), Packaging as a retail marketing tool, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 10-21. Schmidt, J.B. and Calantone, R.J. (1998), Are really new product development projects harder to shut down?, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 111-23. Schoormans, J.P.L. and Robben, H.S.J. (1997), The effect of new package design on product attention, categorization and evaluation, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 18 Nos 2-3, pp. 271-87. Sci, P.T. (2006), Logistics improvement through packaging rationalization: a practical experience, Packaging Technology and Science, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 303-8. Shapiro, R.D. and Heskett, J.L. (1985), Logistics Strategy. Cases and Concepts, West Publishing Co., St Paul, MN. Slater, S. and Narver, J.C. (1995), Market orientation and the learning organization, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59 No. 7, pp. 63-74. Soroka, W. (2002), Fundamentals of Packaging Technology, Institute of Packaging Professionals, Naperville, IL. Stewart, B. (1996), Packaging as an Effective Marketing Tool, Kogan Page, London. Stock, J.R. and Lambert, D.M. (1987), Strategic Logistics Management, Irwin, Homewood, IL. Thgersen, J. (1999), The ethical consumer. Moral norms and packaging choice, Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 439-60. Till, B.D. and Nowak, L.I. (2000), Toward effective use of cause-related marketing alliances, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 9 No. 7, pp. 472-84. Twede, D. (1992), The process of packaging logistical innovation, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 69-94.

Twede, D. and Parsons, B. (1997), Distribution Packaging for Logistical Systems: A Literature Review, Pira International, Leatherhead. Twede, D., Clarke, R.H. and Tait, J.A. (2000), Packaging postponement: a global packaging strategy, Packaging Technology and Science, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 105-15. Twedt, D.W. (1968), How much value can be added through packaging, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 32, January, pp. 61-5. Underwood, R.L. (2003), The communicative power of product packaging: creating brand identity via lived and mediated experience, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 62-76. Underwood, R.L. and Klein, N. (2002), Packaging as brand communication: effects of product pictures on consumer responses to the package and brand, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 58-69. Underwood, R.L. and Ozanne, J.L. (1998), Is your package an effective communicator? A normative framework for increasing the communicative competence of packaging, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 207-20. Underwood, R.L., Klein, N.M. and Burke, R.R. (2001), Packaging communication: attentional effects of product imagery, Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 10 No. 7, pp. 403-22. Van den Berg-Weitzel, L. and van de Laar, G. (2001), Relation between culture and communication in packaging design, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 171-84. Wansink, B. (1996), Can package size accelerate usage volume?, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, pp. 1-14. Williams, H., Wikstroem, F. and Lofgren, M. (2008), A life cycle perspective on environmental effects of customer focused packaging development, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 853-9. Yam, K.L. (2009), The Wiley Encyclopedia of Packaging Technology, Wiley, New York, NY. Yoon, E. and Lilien, G.L. (1985), New industrial product performance: the effect of market characteristics and strategy, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 134-44. Further reading Axelrod, M.D. (1976), The dynamics of the group interview, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 437-41. Bailey, K.D. (1994), Methods of Social Research, The Free Press, New York, NY. Berelson, B. (1955), Content analysis, in Lindsey, G. (Ed.), Handbook of Social Psychology, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA. Eden, C., Ackerman, F. and Cropper, S. (1992), The analysis of cause maps, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 309-24. Erdener, C.B. and Dunn, C.P. (1990), Content analysis, in Huff, A.S. (Ed.), Mapping Strategic Thought, Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Rosenthal, R. (1991), Meta-analytic Procedures for Social Research, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. Weick, K.E. (1978), Cognitive processes in organizations, in Staw, B. (Ed.), Research in Organizational Behavior: An Annual Series of Analytical Essays and Critical Reviews, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.

Packaging innovation

353

EJIM 13,3

Weick, K.E. and Browning, L.D. (1986), Argument and narration in organizational communication, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 243-59. Weick, K.E. and Roberts, K.H. (1993), Collective mind in organizations: heedful interrelating on ight decks, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 357-81. About the authors Maria Vernuccio is an assistant professor in the Department of Management, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy. She earned her PhD in management and nance from the Sapienza University of Rome. Her current research and teaching interests involve issues in marketing, e-business, and innovation management. Maria Vernuccio is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: maria.vernuccio@uniroma1.it Alessandra Cozzolino is a researcher in the Department of Management, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy. She received her PhD in management and nance from the Sapienza University of Rome. Her research interests are logistics and supply chain management, production and operations management, and innovation management. Laura Michelini is a postdoctoral research fellow and lecturer in economics and management at the LUMSA University of Rome. She received her PhD in science of communication from the LUMSA University of Rome. Her research interests are marketing, corporate social responsibility, and innovation management.

354

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints