To answer you Q, unfortunately, i have not. But, I strongly recommend you and your team to consider Narver, Slater & Maclachlan's (2004) measurement scale of MO- Responsive and Proactive Market Orientation and New-Product Success. Journal of Product Innovation Mgmt, 21:334-347. The argument is that market orientation should not be measured on a single direction (customers express needs) instead it should be a dual direction, along with customers latent needs as well.

Thank you, Mazalan. In the meantime, I have been advised to look at this paper, which recommends testing reliability for intelligence generation, intelligence dissemination and response, separately: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019850115003259

I used MARKOR scale in a sample of companies in 2010 in Bulgaria. Some of the questions were very low values of Cronbach's Alpha and was forced to withdraw from the questionnaire. Also recommend you test scale Narver and Slater.

See An Analysis of the MKTOR and MARKOR Measures of

Market Orientation: An Australian Perspective

On the other hand, research by Chakrabarty and Roge (2003) and Han, Kim, and Srivastava (1998) have supported the

Narver and Slater’s MKTOR scale and argued that individual dimensions of this scale fit the data adequately. Additionally,

Mavondo and Farrell (2000) compared the reliability of the MARKOR and the MKTOR scales and suggested that

the MKTOR scale was superior to the MARKOR instrument in cross-culture, cross-industry studies. Finally, Soehadi,

Hart, and Tagg (2001) contrasted the MARKOR and Deng & Dart (1994) scales and found that the latter of the two exhibited higher reliability and validity.

Soehadi, A. W., Hart, S., & Tagg, S. K. (2001). Measuring market orientation in the Indonesian retail context. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 9(4), 285-299

That is really helpful, Evgeni. Many thanks.