Sample Management Article Review Paper on A Ten Country-Company Study of Sustainability and Product-Market Performance: Influences of Doing Good, Warm Glow, and Price Fairness

An Article Review/Critique for the Author(s)


Article Title: A Ten Country-Company Study of Sustainability and Product-Market Performance: Influences of Doing Good, Warm Glow, and Price Fairness

I believe that the main point or the central focus of the paper is on understanding the perceived impacts of business sustainability and product-market performance on the consumers’ perceptions and satisfaction. The paper particularly addresses the perceived role of sustainability and product-market performance in influencing various marketing perspectives, such as price fairness and other consumer perceptions. The authors describe sustainability as a critical component of modern business operations. The purpose of this critique is to examine some of the issues I found convincing/unconvincing about different sections of the paper.

What did the Authors do well? Poorly? What needs improvement?

The article’s topic of sustainability and product-market performance is of great importance, especially for businesses seeking to attain or retain a unique competitive advantage. Similarly, companies can increase their market share and boost shareholder value by adopting sustainable business practices and efficient product-market performances. Therefore, the article topic is fascinating because it provides a comprehensive insight into how businesses can remain competitive and viable by implementing various sustainability goals and performance measures. I also find the article’s description of crucial facts and ideas to be fascinating and convincing. However, while I believe that you did many things right in this paper, I still have numerous issues that I would like to bring to your attention. Notably, below are some of the critical issues that I would encourage you to consider to improve the content of this article further.

  1. For instance, your informative abstract summarizes the main aspects of the study, main research findings, and other significant trends of the entire paper. You also included a clear summary of your interpretations and conclusions. However, you can improve the abstract by stating the overall purpose of the study, basic study design, and the research problems. You should also keep the length of the abstract short and precise to avoid possible duplication of crucial facts.
  2. I also think that your introduction section is right because it establishes and sustains credibility with the readers. You also offered a detailed explanation of key facts, which I also find exciting. Your introduction section is acceptable because it identifies the central topic of the study and an explicit illustration of a clear focus of the paper. However, you failed to provide a proper balance between the information in the selected sources and the authors’ primary arguments. I also think that you can improve the section by including clear topic sentences to explain your major arguments.
  3. I believe that research questions are vital in every study. You should include research questions that are feasible, relevant, and exciting in your introduction section. The questions should form the basis of your literature review and the rest of the steps taken to execute the research.
  4. In essence, I believe that the article offers insightful arguments on the impact of sustainability and product-market performance. However, you did not provide a coherent analysis and integration of various theoretical models and frameworks. Your explanation of the theories is too abstract and complex. Therefore, you should use simple and more precise explanations of the theories.
  5. The literature review section is also missing in your article. The section should include a clear illustration of the relationship that possibly exists between the proposed research and past statistical reviews. A comprehensive review of literature is an indication of the originality and relevance of your research problems. The section should illustrate your ability to apply analytical thinking through a clear connection between secondary and primary sources. Lastly, your literature review section should identify some of the weaknesses of your experimental procedures, possible theoretical conflicts, and a comprehensive understanding of the topic.
  6. The alternative and null hypotheses are testable and falsifiable. The hypotheses are also clear and precise based on known facts and existing theoretic knowledge. However, I think that you did not do the theories and hypotheses section well. Specifically, the description of the theories and hypotheses should integrate and illustrate a clear relationship with the research purpose. You also need a more coherent theoretical representation of the chosen hypotheses. Lastly, you should derive your hypotheses from the research aim, questions, and variables.
  7. For the method section, I believe that you should have a clear description and explanation of a methodology that you used to test the five hypotheses. For instance, you should include a clear illustration of how the survey instrument will facilitate the data collection processes. Besides, you should provide a more logical and coherent explanation of the research variables and their implications.
  8. A clear illustration of the study design in this section will enable readers to identify possible validity and reliability issues. Moreover, with a clear description of the sampling methods used in this research, your data collection and analysis appear distorted and illogical. For instance, you should provide detailed explanations of your sampling frame comparability and data collection procedures. A proper illustration of the sample comparability will eliminate the readers’ concern about possible biases in the data collection exercises.
  9. You did an excellent job in the results and analyses section. You integrated relevant tables and explanations of the hypotheses and research topic. The only improvement I would recommend is a short and clear description and explanation of the results stipulated in the data tables. Your data analysis method should generate comprehensive descriptive statistics on the research variables.
  10. Lastly, you included a comprehensive discussion of the research outcomes and various implications, which I found fascinating and thought-provoking. However, I think that you could still improve this section a lot more. First, I believe that you should begin every paragraph with a clear description of the findings, followed by brief interpretations. Second, you should focus more on illustrating the theoretical contribution of the research outcomes a lot more. The section should engage the readers in a meaningful argument on the relationship between the research hypotheses and purpose. Currently, you are focusing more on the explanation of data generated from the previous sections. A theoretical and practical discussion of the research implications will allow you to highlight the study’s central purpose to the readers.
  11. You may refer to class notes and readings in this and other courses to guide you. Keep your criticisms constructive – focus on specific, concrete changes that realistically could have improved the study, taking into account the financial constraints, data-access constraints, and time constraints on a typical research project.

Other Specific suggestions on how the Author(s) Could Improve the Study

The article provides explicit explanations and solutions to the issue of sustainability and product-performance. However, the article’s interpretation as an explanatory framework may result in the distorted interpretation of the perceived impacts of business sustainability on consumer satisfaction. Therefore, the article should give a detailed definition and the perceived impacts of sustainability and product-performances. Similarly, while I agree with most of the arguments and ideas in this paper, I think that the authors could provide detailed information on how modern businesses can attain and sustain sustainability.

Lastly, some readers may struggle to understand the content of the paper because of the complex language. Thus, you should make the content more readable and understandable to different individuals. For instance, you should consider using simple subheadings, shorter paragraphs, and clear topic sentences. These changes may help attract and retain the readers’ attention to the article. Furthermore, a simple explanation and interpretation of the keywords and concepts that readers may struggle to interpret will also improve this article’s quality.





Hult, G. T. M., Mena, J. A., Gonzalez-Perez, M. A., Lagerström, K., & Hult, D. T. (2018). A ten country-company study of sustainability and product-market performance: Influences of doing good, warm glow, and price fairness. Journal of Macromarketing, 38(3), 242-261.