Should the American Marketing Association (AMA) adopt one single definition of “marketing”?
Despite continuous and detailed research in marketing, it has been difficult to develop a consensus in its definition with various schools of thought advancing different definitions which all seem valid. Thus, leading to a definition of the four main schools of thought requires developing the keywords advanced by each school. However, it would be utterly difficult to develop the pros and cons of each school of thought. The schools of thought thus examine the history of marketing without developing a debate on which school of thought could be better than the rest. Cook and colleagues (2002) thus conducted a research based on the early 19th century definitions of marketing, noting their keywords.
Do the four schools of thought holistically address the marketing definition?
Cooke and colleagues (2002) note that the economic utilities approach mainly looks at the channels of distribution. Product movement assists in increased efficiency and leads to a reduction of cost. The advantage of this approach is that scholars mainly look at the channel flows of various products while taking into consideration the middlemen, and the institutions these people interact with (Cooke et al., 2002).
As noted, keywords in the school of thought include storage, transfer and ownership, distribution and transpiration. Thus the most valid description of marketing according to this school of thought is that marketing is the performance of business activities directed towards the flow of goods and services from the producer to the consumer (Cook et al., 2002). However, the economic utility viewpoint neglects consumer satisfaction leading to the emergence of the consumer or the buyer’s viewpoint that addresses the issue.
Additionally, the development of the consumer affairs department, a move by many states and federal governments was in a bid to ensure basic marketing mix integrity. However, as Cook and colleagues (2002) note, the consumer viewpoint does not consider the excessive costs associated with marketing as the main driving force behind any capitalistic society is the maximization of profit through marketing activities. Thus whereas consumers are concerned over rising prices, which Cook and colleagues (2002) regard as the gap between product performance and marketing claims, the view mainly endeavors to satisfy consumer needs through increased expectation for product quality with little consideration for the producer or the costs of production (Cook et al., 2002). Thus the main keywords in the view are meeting or satisfying consumer needs, wants and target consumers. The best definition according to the school of thought is marketing is the process by which institutions, organizations and other business enterprises select, assess consumer needs and targets the specific consumers and satisfy their needs (Cook et al., 2002).
The societal viewpoint regards marketing as an activity that is common in all cultures and must occur so that the process of consumption can take place. The view mainly exists in an industrial economy. In the latter, few individuals are worried about their needs and wants as the marketing concept is bound to fulfill all of them (Barney, 1991). Thus the major keywords in this viewpoint include exchange, standards of living, consumption and the social process. This generates a third description of marketing as the phase of human wants through which human wants are satisfied using the exchange of goods on one hand and the valuable consideration of money on the other.
The fourth is a managerial viewpoint that regards the micro marketing activities in a firm. Thus in this school of thought, marketing is viewed in consideration with the management. Other than the whole economic system, greater concentration is given to the organization of the firm other than the marketing activity (Barney, 1991). Management’s decisions such as the analysis, strategy, and profit are the main points of view in this school of thought.
Regarding the point of view, the main activities include pricing, product development and the strategy that enables organizations to make a profit. Thus key terms are; product development, stimulate demand, profit, organization objectives and strategy (Barney, 1991). The school of thought leads to the definition of marketing being a combination of activities designed to make a profit, stimulating demand, however, precedes the various activities in this process.
What is the main harmonizing point considering the four schools of thought and their definitions of marketing?
Thus while handling marketing research, it is vital to note that the four schools of thought have the consumer in question, the satisfaction of want, monetary gains or the exchange of goods at the minimum value, in addition to identification of wants (Kohli et al., 1993). Further, any researcher would have to consider the environment in which the marketing research is developed as some societies other than being capitalistic are altruistic and the economic viewpoint might not be valid.
Darroch and colleagues (2004) echo the same sentiments arguing that marketing definitions need to consider the environment, changes in the environment and the human knowledge of the same environment. The American Marketing Association given the above has developed a marketing definition that takes into account the aforementioned schools of thought: “marketing is an organizational function and set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways, they benefit the organization and the stakeholder” (Darroch et al., 2002, p.30). A marketing orientation is thus necessary in the development of any marketing definition.
How does the marketing orientation relate to the definitions of marketing?
A marketing orientation refers to the type of organizational culture that is customer-centric in focus and directs organizational decision making to meet explicit and latent customer needs at a profit (Kohli et al., 1993). This is however difficult to achieve as most companies are mostly profit motivated. Thus the likes of Procter and Gamble, despite having created a wide market base, have problems with their products. For instance, the company’s baby pampers had effects on many babies leading to public outbursts by mothers and a website on the same, that had pictures of affected babies posted (Kohli et al., 1993). However, the development of good marketing orientation skills ensures the organization’s ability to effectively and efficiently collect, disseminate and use the information of a particular market place to correctly develop the right products for the right people.
The developments of consumer complains despite detailed market research indicates the company’s inability to develop the right products for the specific consumer segment. The benefit of the research is that the firm can develop market-oriented behaviors, processes, and structures (Kohli et al., 1993). Such a firm will thus collect, disseminate and use information about the market place in the right manner and demonstrate competence in their behaviors. Thus any market research on the right definitions of marketing will consider the environment, the organization, the consumer, and the satisfaction of consumer needs. A single definition for the word marketing is not enough as each is bound to concentrate on the view that favors them. For instance, managers will focus on profit maximization; consumers, on the other hand, will regard the satisfaction of consumer needs while economic views relate to the bridging the gap between production and consumption.
References
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Cooke, F. Rayburn M., & Abercrombie C.L. (2001). The History of marketing thought as related in the definitions of marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 23(1), 10-20.
Darroch J., Miles, P., Jardine. A., & Cooke, F. (2004). Marketing and its Relationships to a marketing orientation: An extension of Cookie, Rayburn and Abercrombie. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 23(2), 29-35.
Kohli, A., Jaworski B., & Kumar A. (1993) Markor: A market orientation. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 467-477.