American Marketing Association Research Articles

Marketing's Evolving Identity: Defining Our Future

Marketing thought and practice has evolved over the past 100 years from a philosophy of taking things to market to a philosophy of market(ing) to customers and, increasingly today, to a philosophy of market(ing) with customers. The author discusses the evolution of these philosophies and their influence on how the American Marketing Association has defined marketing.

The American Marketing Association's 2004 Definition of Marketing: Perspectives on Its Implications for Scholarship and the Role and Responsibility of Marketing in Society

In 2004, the American Marketing Association announced a new definition of marketing. This special section examines the implications of this definition for (1) scholarship—in particular, scholarship that addresses “marketing and society”—and (2) the role and responsibility of marketing in society.

Implications of the Revised Definition of Marketing: From Exchange to Value Creation

The distinctive difference between the 1985 and the 2004 American Marketing Association definitions of marketing is the lack of exchange. In the new definition, a focus on creating and delivering value through customer relationships replaces the historical focus on the exchange paradigm. The authors welcome this change and discuss its implications, the limits of the exchange paradigm, the merits of value creation, and the future paradigm for marketing.

Institutionalization of ethics and its consequences: a survey of marketing professionals

Because of increasing ethical problems in business, organizations have tried to control these problems by institutionalizing ethics, such as by creating new ethics positions and formulating codes of ethics. In this study, the authors develop a scale for measuring the institutionalization of ethics in organizations and assess it for dimensionality, reliability and validity. Two separate studies are conducted, both using samples drawn from an American Marketing Association practitioner population. In Study 1, using a sample of 126 marketing practitioners, we performed exploratory factor analysis on 44 institutionalization items resulting in two separate dimensions of the institutionalization of ethics construct: implicit and explicit institutionalization. Using a national sample of 306 marketing practitioners in Study 2, we performed confirmatory factor analysis on these two dimensions and investigated the effects of these dimensions on perceived importance of ethics, job satisfaction, esprit de corps and organizational commitment. Implicit institutionalization had a significant direct affect on all four of these constructs. On the other hand, explicit institutionalization significantly influenced only the perceived importance of ethics.

Continuing Challenges to Scholarly Research in Marketing

This response to Professor Gaski's commentary first clarifies the editorial background for the development of the set of Journal of Public Policy & Marketing essays titled “The Sages Speak,” which appeared in the Spring 2005 issue. It then goes on to discuss three related issues: (1) the unrest about marketing scholarship that is currently gripping the academy, (2) the need for inclusion of an aggregate perspective in the official American Marketing Association definition of the field of marketing, and (3) the risks of an overreliance on a philosophy of “consequentialism” for the field.

On defining marketing: finding a new roadmap for marketing

The American Marketing Association has updated its marketing definition and included value for customers and customer relationships in the new definition. Moreover, marketing is defined as one organizational function. Taking mainly service and relationship marketing research as a starting point, this present article broadens the discussion to a generic marketing level, and analyses the underpinning logic of the updated definition. It concludes that the use of these elements of the definition is not well founded in current research. Also, it shows that marketing cannot be treated as one organizational function only. Drawing on the analysis of the updated definition, a set of propositions regarding the scope and content of a marketing definition are developed. Finally, based on the analysis and this set of propositions, an alternative marketing definition, based on the promise concept, and labelled a promises management definition, is suggested and its implications for marketing research and practice are discussed.

Invited Commentary—The Implications of “Big M” Marketing for Modeling Service and Relationships

Rust and Chung (2006) provide an excellent integration and assessment of current models of service and relationships, as well as a thought-provoking agenda for future research. In this brief essay, I identify some challenges, opportunities, and priorities for improving models of service and relationships. Rust and Chung (2006) integrate two distinctive streams of research—models of service and relationships—that are rapidly converging. This convergence is noteworthy because it reflects a shift in the content and boundaries of the marketing discipline, as exemplified by the new definition of marketing recently adopted by the American Marketing Association:

Hospital Perceived Value

The creation, distribution and communication of value have been considered to be the key element of marketing (American Marketing Association, 2004, www.marketingpower.com). The aim of this article is to identify the indicators of perceived value in a hospital context. The results show that perceived quality and emotions are key dimensions of perceived value.

Introduction to the special issue on the service-dominant logic of marketing: insights from The Otago Forum

Radical reformulation of marketing thought is not new and arguably is part of the dynamic tension just under the surface calm of any discipline. However, not since the ‘breaking free’ of services marketing from goods marketing (Shostack, 1977) has a new reconfiguration of service logic attracted so much interest so quickly. The catalyst for this interest has been the publication of an award-winning article by Stephen Vargo and Robert Lusch in the Journal of Marketing (2004a) entitled ‘Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing’. This was followed soon after by an article by the same authors in the Journal of Service Research (2004b), directly challenging the validity of the characteristic differentiators between services and goods (intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability and perishability). Of particular note is that these differentiators have been a matter of common agreement within the services marketing discipline since the early 1980s (Fisk et al., 1993). Concurrent with these publications, a special interest panel session on the service-dominant logic of marketing (S-D logic) was held at the American Marketing Association (AMA) Summer Conference in 2004. In Europe, a panel

A Customer Relationship Management Roadmap: What is Known, Potential Pitfalls, and Where to Go

The goal of this preface is to describe how the special section on customer relationship management (CRM) was developed. In May 2003, Richard Staelin, Executive Director of the Teradata Center for Customer Relationship Management at Duke University, proposed that Journal of Marketing ( JM) publish a special section. The proposal included activities that were designed to promote interactions among marketing academics and practitioners; the goal was to stimulate dialogue and new research on CRM. I found the proposal attractive because CRM is a broad-based topic that interests many marketers. After extensive discussion, the American Marketing Association (AMA) and the Teradata Center formally agreed to cosponsor the special section. Subsequently, there was a conference on Relationship Marketing and Customer Relationship Management (cochaired by Michael Ehret, Wesley Johnston, Michael Kleinaltenkamp, and Lou Pelton) that took place at Freie Universität Berlin in the summer of 2003; 1 a conference on Customer Management (cosponsored by the Marketing Science Institute and the Teradata Center) that was held at Duke University in March 2004; and two special sessions on CRM that were featured at the AMA Winter Educators' Conference held in San Antonio, Tex., in February 2005. The conferences provided many opportunities for dialogue, and the response from marketers who attended these events was enthusiastic. I also invited Richard Staelin and William Boulding (Executive Codirector of the Teradata Center) to work with me as consulting editors for the special section, and they agreed. A call for papers requested that authors submit their manuscripts to JM by May 2004. The consulting editors and I evaluated every submission with the assistance of an expert panel that included Leonard Berry, John Deighton, Michael Ehret, Christian Grönroos, Sunil Gupta, Wayne Hoyer, Wagner Kamakura, Wesley Johnston, Donald R. Lehmann, Charlotte Mason, Carl Mela, Scott Neslin, Roland Rust, Michel Wedel, and Valarie Zeithaml. All submissions underwent JM's standard double-blind review process, and members of JM's editorial review board served as reviewers. I would like to express my appreciation to everyone who participated in the development of the special section. The culmination of our work together is a set of nine articles and two essays that advance the science and practice of CRM. I hope that these articles stimulate new intellectual discoveries. —Ruth N. Bolton

Comparing Marketing Students with Practitioners on Some Key Variables of Ethical Decisions

This study compares marketing students from two major U.S. universities with a sample of U.S. practitioner members of the American Marketing Association on their personal moral philosophies (idealism and relativism), perceived importance of ethics, perceived moral intensity, and ethical intention. As hypothesized, the results reveal that marketing students are more relativistic, less likely to perceive the intensity of moral issues, and less likely to have an ethical intention than practitioners. However, the results reveal that marketing students are more idealistic than practitioners. The results reveal no significant differences between marketing students and practitioners regarding their perceived importance of ethics.

Missing links: Product classification theory and the social characteristics of goods

One of the most enduring concepts in the history of marketing thought relates to the classification of consumer goods. The product classification theory first proposed by Melvyn T. Copeland in 1923 has, with little modification, survived to the present day, and continues to be endorsed by both the American Marketing Association and the UK Chartered Institute of Marketing some 80 years after it was first published. In truth, Copeland’s classification is now outdated and bears little, if any, relevance to modern product advertising, retailing and consumption. In particular, it can not accommodate the fact that, in modern societies, consumer preoccupations with style, personal identity and status have meant that the social characteristics of goods, heavily promoted by brand managers who understand their markets, are key determinants of consumer choice and buyer behaviour. This article explores the reasons why product classification theory has been unresponsive to changes in market conditions over so many years and argues that its failure to embrace the many social influences on consumption and on consumer behaviour is now its most serious weakness.

Linking Marketing to Financial Performance and Firm Value

In January 2002, Donald R. Lehmann, Executive Director of the Marketing Science Institute, submitted a proposal for a JM Special Section, “Linking Marketing to Financial Performance and Firm Value.” The proposal included activities to promote interactions among marketing academics and practitioners, designed to advance research on this topic. I was excited about the opportunity to stimulate and publish new research, and after extensive discussions, the American Marketing Association and the Marketing Science Institute formally agreed to cosponsor the Special Section. Authors submitted their manuscripts through a paper competition as well as directly through JM. Donald R. Lehmann, the Consulting Editor, and a panel of distinguished scholars reviewed every submission. The panel included Tim Ambler, Gregory S. Carpenter, Robert Jacobson, V. Kumar, Roland T. Rust, and Rajendra K. Srivastava. All submissions underwent JM's standard double-blind review process under my editorship, and members of JM's Editorial Review Board served as reviewers. I am pleased to have this opportunity to acknowledge the important contributions of these many individuals: both authors and reviewers. As the subsequent essay suggests, three years’ hard work has produced a thought-provoking collection of articles. I hope they will generate further intellectual inquiry and debate about the link between marketing and financial performance in the business community.

Journal of Marketing Research: 2 Ps

The first issue of the Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) was published 40 years ago, at a time when I was still in high school and 4 years before I became interested in marketing. My interest was stimulated after I moved from the Netherlands to the United States. The American Marketing Association had created a new journal in 1964, partly in response to researchers’ demands for an outlet that would publish papers with a scientific orientation. To witness, the president of the American Marketing Association emphasized that the journal was intended to advance science in marketing (Davidson 1964). I note that JMR was initiated just a few years after the Gordon–Howell Report (Gordon and Howell 1959), which stimulated the incorporation of core disciplines in research at business schools. Consistent with this idea, Davidson refers to the intent of JMR to publish applications of quantitative methods and behavioral science approaches to marketing problems. During the 40 years of JMR’s existence, the nature and focus of research in marketing has changed dramatically, yet the two arguments made by Davidson (to advance science in marketing and to publish applications of quantitative methods and behavioral science approaches) are just as applicable today. In this editorial, I briefly review the history of JMR and discuss related developments. By reviewing the published editorial statements, I want to acknowledge the 12 previous editors and then describe my own perspective on the 2Ps that are critical to the management of the journal: positioning and process. I describe selected aspects of JMR’s history, delineate my intended positioning, and finish with a description of the new process I have implemented.

Be Clear and Concise in Marketing

You have accessThe ASHA LeaderIn Private Practice1 Oct 2003Be Clear and Concise in Marketing Greg Weimann Greg Weimann Google Scholar More articles by this author https://doi.org/10.1044/leader.IPP.08192003.14 SectionsAbout ToolsAdd to favorites ShareFacebookTwitterLinked In Health care information—it’s everywhere these days. From magazine articles to Web searches, there is a plethora of health care information that can be obtained quickly and with little effort. As a result, the average consumer has more information available than ever before. Because of this, information flow in the health care arena is now being dictated by both a “push” and “pull” scenario. On the push side, consumer-driven health care companies, wellness and disease management programs, and direct-to-consumer advertising are pushing information out to the public. The overall hope is that consumers will become better educated about which health care services they will need, ultimately enhancing awareness and loyalty for both practitioners and their services. On the pull side, consumers are becoming more proactive, questioning and challenging the judgments, practices, views, and long-held assumptions of members of the health professions. The common thread of the push and pull methods is that they are driven by consumers—who now wield more power in the decision-making process then ever before. But there is a risk for those practitioners who do not understand the need for clarity in their communication when educating consumers. For years, experts have argued that consumers are being bombarded with information that is often too wide in scope, but not necessarily deep enough. The fear is that all of this shallow information is making consumers confused and causing poor decision-making. A more specific problem is the temptation to get so caught up in informing and educating the consumer that you lose sight of your communication objectives. Be aware of the response you want to elicit from the consumer and carefully develop materials that specifically communicate your intended message. Remember, education can be a key marketing tool, but if it isn’t strategically implemented, it can do more harm than good. How can you ensure that your education efforts are soliciting the appropriate response from your target audience? Here are some things to keep in mind: Make it believable. The educational component of your communications strategy can enhance your overall credibility, thus establishing you as a trustworthy source of information. Your communication also reinforces the image you have identified for your practice and supports your overall goals and objectives. If you can’t tie an educational initiative back into your marketing strategy through a customer need or demand, it probably isn’t the best use of your time and resources. Make it useful. Your communication should create clarity, not confusion. When planning communication, ask yourself: What is the desired outcome? How can you communicate it clearly to your customers and your referral groups? Do you want to use the communication to build awareness of your practice or to change a certain behavior or belief? Have you included a specific call to action? If questions such as these are not answered properly, an education initiative will leave your consumers confused about which direction to take. Involve a variety of creative channels. A recent study by the American Marketing Association showed that while 77% of Americans are getting health information from physicians, 75% are now using the Internet for gathering health-related knowledge. About 38% of consumers turn to family and friends, while 35% use books and journals. Because of this wide variety of information sources, educational initiatives will require numerous channels. So make sure to strike the right balance between communicating directly with consumers and taking the appropriate strides to influence physicians, employers, administrators, policy-makers, and other key decision-makers. A strategically planned consumer education program can strengthen awareness of your services and grow your business, while positively influencing consumers and their understanding of health-related issues. Through your education efforts, you can set your practice apart and give consumers a beacon to follow. Author Notes Greg Weimann, is ASHA’s director of marketing and communications. Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Advertising Disclaimer | Advertise With Us Additional Resources FiguresSourcesRelatedDetails Volume 8Issue 19October 2003 Get Permissions Add to your Mendeley library History Published in print: Oct 1, 2003 Metrics Downloaded 340 times Topicsasha-topicsleader_do_tagleader-topicsasha-article-typesCopyright & Permissions© 2003 American Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationLoading ...

From Marketing Knowledge Tomarketing Principles

A bold and ambitious project, the Marketing Knowledge Project, is envisaged by Rossiter (2001). It concerns the knowledge upon which our discipline is based. Stage I of the project, the focus of his article, is to define the forms of marketing knowledge. Stage II is to have a panel of experts reach agreement on the content of marketing knowledge. The development of an operational test of marketing knowledge is planned for Stage III. The motivation for this project is laudable. Through textbooks, dictionaries, courses, expert systems, and decision-support systems we strive to convey marketing knowledge. The existence of dictionaries of marketing and business implies that we believe we can codify marketing knowledge (Bannock et al., 2002; Lewis and Littler, 1997; Mercer, 1999). One of the most popular introductory textbooks in the discipline claims to be a book of ‘principles’ – the word is in the title (Kotler and Armstrong, 2002). It is useful and timely, therefore, to consider the nature and content of marketing knowledge. Through examinations, quizzes, exercises, case analyses, and assignments, attempts are made to test people’s understanding of marketing knowledge. This may not be the sole purpose of programs leading to the award of bachelor’s and master’s degrees, or of professional accreditation schemes such as those administered by the Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) and the American Marketing Association (AMA), but undoubtedly ‘testing’ is one important purpose. So, giving more thought to the development of operational tests of marketing knowledge is a worthwhile exercise too. However, the difficulty with this project is not with its motivation, but with the specifics of implementation. There are several alternative ways to approach the project, and securing agreement on this is unlikely to be easy. My comments focus on forms of marketing knowledge, the truth status of marketing knowledge, the derivation of marketing principles, and domains of knowledge. Various aspects of

Will & vision: how latecomers grow to dominate markets

This book is winner of the American Marketing Association Berry Prize for The Best Book in Marketing. One of the top 10 business books of 2001, - Harvard Business Review. Engaging stories, empirical analysis, and intelligent commentary make this an impressive book.- excerpt from book review in Harvard Business Review, September 2001. Engaging stories, empirical analysis, and intelligent commentary make this an impressive book. - Harvard Business Review. Everybody knows that it's the market pioneers who have the best name recognition, the highest market share, and the most enduring market leadership...right? In order to test the truth of the perceived wisdom on being first to market, Gerard Tellis and Peter Golder carried out an in-depth historical analysis of various markets, as they evolved, over the past decade. Among other things, they found that, not only does being first not guarantee anything, but that the current trend of staking everything on getting there first all too often leads companies to embrace a disastrous strategy of rushing to market with incomplete, inferior, and flawed products. With the help of numerous fascinating case histories chronicling the success and failures at industry giants, including Xerox, Gillette, Microsoft, Matsushita, and Intel, Tellis and Golder explore the ways in which being first to market is often more a curse than a blessing. They isolate the 5 key principles that ensure enduring market leadership-vision of the mass market, managerial persistence, relentless innovation, financial commitment, and asset leverage.

An interview with Michael Porter

Executive Overview Michael Porter is the Bishop William Lawrence University Professor at the Harvard Business School. A university professorship is the highest professional recognition that can be given to a Harvard faculty member. Professor Porter is a leading authority on competitive strategy and the competitiveness and economic development of nations, states, and regions. He is the author of 16 books and over 85 articles, and has served as an advisor on competitive strategy to many leading companies. Professor Porter has also served as a counselor to governments around the world on issues of economic development and national competitiveness. He was elected a Fellow of the Academy of Management in 1988 and the Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences in 1991. He also received the Charles Coolidge Parlin Award from the American Marketing Association in 1991. Professor Porter has been awarded honorary doctorates by eight universities around the world. His national honors include the Creu de St. Jordi (Cross of St. George) from Catalonia (Spain) and the Ruben Dario Order of Merit (the highest civilian honor awarded by the government of Nicaragua). In 2001, Harvard Business School and Harvard University jointly created the Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness, led by Professor Porter, to further his work. Professor Porter maintains a long-time interest in the esthetics and business of music and art. having worked on the problems of strategy with arts organizations and aspiring musicians. Professor Porter and his two daughters, liana (14) and Sonia (12), reside in Brookline, Massachusetts.

Marketing Social Marketing in the Social Change Marketplace

Social marketing faces significant barriers to growth because there is no clear understanding of what the field is and what its role should be in relation to other approaches to social change. However, growth is possible through increases in social marketing's share of competition at the intervention, subject matter, product, and brand levels. The author proposes a specific social marketing branding campaign to advance the field, with roles for academics and the American Marketing Association.

Relationship Marketing of Services Perspectives from 1983 and 2000

In 1983 the author presented a paper entitled simply “Relationship Marketing” at the American Marketing Association's Services Marketing Conference. The paper was published in the conference proceedings and for the first time the phrase “relationship marketing” appeared in the marketing literature. For this charter issue of the Journal of Relationship Marketing, the original 1983 paper is reprinted in full. The author then offers fresh perspectives on his paper in the form of a commentary.