Marketing Renaissance:

Opportunities and Imperatives for

Improving Marketing Thought,
Practice, and Infrastructure
My three-year term as editor of Journal of Marketing concludes with the October 2005 issue. On the basis of my
interactions with various people in the marketing community, I believe that marketing science and practice are in
transition, bringing change to the content and boundaries of the discipline. Thus, I invited some distinguished
scholars to contribute short essays on the current challenges, opportunities, and imperatives for improving mar-
keting thought and practice.
Each author chose his or her topic and themes. However, in a collegial process, the authors read and com-
mented on one another’s essays, after which each author had an opportunity to revise his or her essay. The result
is a thoughtful and constructive set of essays that are related to one another in interesting ways and that should be
read together. I have grouped the essays as follows:
•What is the domain of marketing? This question is addressed in four essays by Stephen W. Brown, Frederick E. Webster
Jr., Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp, and William L. Wilkie.
•How has the marketing landscape (i.e., content) changed? This question is addressed in two essays, one coauthored by
Jagdish N. Sheth and Rajendra S. Sisodia and the other by Roger A. Kerin.
•How should marketing academics engage in research, teaching, and professional activities? This question is addressed in
five essays by Debbie MacInnis; Leigh McAlister; Jagmohan S. Raju; Ronald J. Bauerly, Don T. Johnson, and Mandeep
Singh; and Richard Staelin.
Another interesting way to think about the essays, as Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp suggests, is to group the
essays according to whether they address issues of content, publishing, or impact (see Table 1).
These 11 essays strike a common theme: They urge marketers—both scientists and practitioners—to expand
their horizontal vision. What do I mean by horizontal vision? In The Great Influenza, Barry (2004) describes the
enormous strides that were made in medical science early in the twentieth century. His depiction of William Welch,
an extremely influential scientist who did not (as a laboratory researcher) generate important findings, includes a
characterization of the “genius” that produces major scientific achievements.
The research he did was first-rate. But it was only first-rate—thorough, rounded, and even irrefutable, but not deep
enough or provocative enough or profound enough to set himself or others down new paths, to show the world in a new
way, to make sense out of great mysteries…. To do this requires a certain kind of genius, one that probes vertically and
sees horizontally. Horizontal vision allows someone to assimilate and weave together seemingly unconnected bits of
information. It allows an investigator to see what others do not see and to make leaps of connectivity and creativity.
Probing vertically, going deeper and deeper into something, creates new information. (p. 60)
At my request, each author has provided thoughtful and concrete suggestions for how marketing academics and
practitioners, both individually and collectively (through our institutions), can work to improve our field. Many of
their suggestions urge people and institutions to expand their horizontal vision and make connections, thereby ful-
filling their potential to advance the science and practice of marketing. In his essay, Richard Staelin writes (p. 22),
“I believe that it is possible to influence directly the generation and adoption of new ideas.” I agree. I ask the reader
to think about the ideas in these essays and to act on them. Through our actions, we shape our future.
—Ruth N. Bolton

more to business in general rather than limit them to mar-

keting practice. The underpinnings of this essay stem from
When Executives Speak, We Should a recent executive roundtable discussion that Ruth Bolton
Listen and Act Differently and I facilitated specifically for the purpose of developing
this essay. Participants in the hour-long teleconference
included five executives from IBM, Yellow Roadway, Lux-
Stephen W. Brown ottica Retail (i.e., LensCrafters and Sunglass Hut), McKin-

C
ompared with some of the essays in this issue, this sey & Company, and Cisco Systems.1 By design, only one
one is less about marketing scholarship per se and
more about how marketing scholarship can con- 1Roundtable participants included Frank Baynham, Executive
tribute more broadly to business practice. I believe that mar- Vice President, Luxottica Retail; Gary Bridge, Vice President,
keting scholars can and should position their contributions Internet Solutions Group, Cisco Systems; Greg Reid, Senior Vice

© 2005, American Marketing Association Journal of Marketing

ISSN: 0022-2429 (print), 1547-7185 (electronic) 1 Vol. 69 (October 2005), 1–25
 TABLE 1
Opportunities and Imperatives for Improving Marketing Thought, Practice, and Infrastructure
Content Research and Publication Impact

Business practice (Brown; Kerin) Multidisciplinary research (MacInnis) Readability (Bauerly, Johnson, and
Singh)

Marketing in organizations (Webster) Serving stakeholders (Raju)

International marketing (Steenkamp) Scholarship evaluation (McAlister) Big new ideas (Staelin)

Marketing and society (Wilkie)

Does marketing need reform? (Sheth and Sisodia)

of the executives was from marketing, yet all participants to find connectivity and ways to leverage synergies” to
had a deep interest in customers and topics of interest to increase competitiveness and provide additional value to
marketing scholars. The executives represented organiza- customers. McKinsey & Company’s Nick Semaca agreed
tions that are active in business-to-business and business-to- with this observation, but he argued that opportunities for
consumer spaces, and all were board members of the Center improvement still exist within silos for many organizations.
for Services Leadership at Arizona State University. A second major imperative is in the art and science of
In the paragraphs that follow, I highlight six business execution. The roundtable participants observed a growing
opportunities and imperatives that were discussed in the shift in emphasis from strategy to execution. Bridge noted
executive roundtable. Some are directly related to the that major companies know one another’s strategies partly
research of marketing academics, and all are important to because they are announced in the newspaper and are fea-
marketing scholarship. I conclude by arguing how a broader tured in business magazines. Pointing to the Ritz Carlton
perspective in marketing scholarship can offer greater value Hotels, Semaca noted that in some instances, superior exe-
to business practice. cution can be the core of an organization’s strategy, as it is
with Ritz Carlton’s approach to customer service. Although
Imperatives for Practice it may not seem that profound, Wiley stressed that execut-
At the beginning of the discussion, the executives cited ing the strategy is much more difficult than many people
opportunities and imperatives in the transformation of orga- think. For many firms, execution occurs at the interface
nizations through the integration of business processes and with the customer.
the use of technology. First, IBM’s Mike Wiley noted an The drive for executional excellence leads to a third
“unprecedented fusion between a focus on business process imperative: more consistency in organizations. For exam-
and the use of technology to transform, reengineer, and then ple, Marriott wants its processes to be the same and its cus-
enable new processes.” In Wiley’s view, this transformation tomers’ experiences to be consistently positive whether the
generates competitive advantage, cost saving efficiencies, property is in Shanghai or Chicago. According to Bridge,
and enhanced customer experience. this imperative also arises from firms’ needs for standard-
Building on this observation, Gary Bridge of Cisco Sys- ization, economies of scale, and better and faster decision
tems indicated that most of these improvements require making. He also noted that organizations function best
cross-functional integration: when all associates know their roles.
Paralleling this trend toward consistency is a fourth
It’s between the silos that we see almost all of the really
large opportunities now. Within silos, I think there isn’t imperative: empowering people who are touch points with
much more to do. There just isn’t much more we can do customers. Frank Baynham of Luxottica Retail stressed that
on supply chain management until we get to RFID [radio frontline employees must be given boundaries or parame-
frequency identification]. There isn’t much more we can ters but must also have the flexibility to treat each customer
do on CRM [customer relationship management] until we as an individual. Bridge cited a U.K. airline that empowers
get everything connected. We do have all these gover- its employees to write up to a £100 check to a customer in
nance issues to overcome that are between silos, not
real time to address a problem.
within silos.
A fifth imperative the executives discussed was the
According to Greg Reid of Yellow Roadway, the wave notable development of providing customers with solutions
of mergers and acquisitions sweeping business adds to the rather than simply goods and/or services. According to
mandate for integration. New organizational forms “[need] Bridge, this often manifests in greater service emphasis and
better content. He referenced General Electric, which is less
President and Chief Marketing Officer, Yellow-Roadway; Nick
interested in selling jet engines than in selling the more
Semaca, Director and Leader, Americas Travel & Logistics Prac- profitable multiyear service contracts that take care of
tice, McKinsey & Company; and Michael Wiley, General Man- everything for the client. Baynham noted that being solution
ager, Services Transformation, IBM. oriented means spending more time with the customer, first

2 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

listening to understand the customer’s needs and then offer- Bridge noted that 20 years ago, he believed that marketing
ing solutions that he or she may not know are available. scholarship was driving change in practice. Today, he noted,
Reid cautioned that a firm must be able to deliver on the “I’m not seeing the continuous flow of new relevant ideas.
basics of its products and services before it can be success- The manipulating of two to three variables in an arcane sit-
ful in offering solutions. uation is far a field from the day-to-day trade-offs we must
The final imperative discussed was who is responsible make in business with dozens of variables plus volatile
for the firm’s relationships with customers. Semaca and political and human factors.”
Wiley noted that in their organizations, the people who Wondering whether the answer for building bridges may
develop and manage customer or client relationships are the be in the translation, Semaca pointed to Harrah’s Entertain-
same as those who deliver the actual services and solutions. ment and its chief executive officer (CEO) Gary Loveman,
Wiley added that for key clients, this can be a single person a former Harvard Business School professor. This CEO cat-
at IBM. Other executives noted that the customer must be a apulted his firm to a leading position in the gaming indus-
shared responsibility throughout the organization. Notably, try. Drawing on academic research, Harrah’s developed
none of the executives mentioned marketing as being sophisticated models of customer behavior and translated
responsible for the customer. Implicit in the roundtable dis- this work into guidelines and incentives for frontline and
cussion was the view that marketing and sales often have a “backstage” employees to follow.
major role in making promises to customers and in generat- Two roundtable executives believed that business is
ing new business. However, the keeping of promises and partly responsible for the scholarship–practice gap. For
building customer loyalty is typically considered the example, Reid argued that business must play a role in
responsibility of others in the enterprise. working with academic researchers to determine practical
applications. Referencing current research his firm is doing
Bridging Scholarship and Practice with Arizona State University’s (ASUs) Center for Services
Several of the essays in this issue note the weak linkage Leadership (CSL), Baynham stressed the importance of up-
between marketing scholarship and marketing practice. Fur- front discussions so that both parties understand each
ther contributing to this scholarship–practice gap is the other’s objectives, the key questions to be studied, and the
diminished role and influence of marketing in companies. projected outcomes of the research.
Sheth and Sisodia indicate (p. 11) that “many strategically Despite the significance of the scholarship–practitioner
important aspects of marketing … are being taken away by gap, the executives voiced notable interest in the customer
other functions in the organization.” The authors also note and other topics of interest to marketing academics. What
that at many companies, marketing has become a form of can realistically be done? Let me offer one recommendation
sales support. to change our perspective significantly. When thinking
The executive roundtable discussion reinforced the about business, as scholars, we must broaden our perspec-
decline in marketing’s influence in firms. The term “mar- tive. In the near future, I do not believe that marketing will
keting” was mentioned only a couple of times in an hour of assume a more prominent position within organizations.
intense exchange. Yet customers, clients, and competitive- However, many executives and managers outside marketing
ness were on the executives’ minds throughout the are interested in what marketing academics study, such as
discussion. work that links customer metrics to business performance
When they were asked how business scholarship could and work on the interface between the customer and the
help business practice, the executives believed that thinking organization.
in terms of processes and across disciplines would do won- For scholarly contributions, I believe that we need to
ders, but some also realized that the recognition and reward broaden our targeted practitioner segments (see Figure 1).
systems must be revolutionized to jolt academic researchers Traditionally, academics view the practitioner audience as
into thinking and acting outside their disciplinary silos. marketers. I propose an expansion of the practitioner seg-
The executives also advocated that academic research ments as I illustrate in Figure 1.
should be more problem driven and focused on rich con- To illustrate my proposition, I use an example with
texts. Speaking from the perspective of a former professor, which I am familiar. The CSL at ASU was launched 20

FIGURE 1
Scholarship and Practice

Scholarship Practice Areas

Traditional view Marketing Marketing

Strategic management
Marketing
Enlightened view Marketing Operations
Supply chain
Human resources
Finance

Invited Essays / 3
years ago by the university’s Department of Marketing. sional practice. A successful reconceptualization of the field
Although projecting a distinct brand to the business and will recognize that marketing must be understood at three
academic communities, the CSL’s leadership and knowl- levels and will integrate these three dimensions of the mar-
edge workers are intertwined with the department. Much of keting space into a coherent whole.
the CSL’s substantive research is conducted by marketing
faculty and doctoral students working with prominent firms Marketing as Tactics, Strategy, and Organizational
(for more information about how the CSL has engaged Culture
firms in scholarly research, see Brown and Bitner 2006). Marketing has tactical, strategic, and cultural dimensions
More than 40 leading corporations are CSL members, (Webster 1992). Over the past 60 years or so, the emphasis
including IBM, Marriott, Southwest Airlines, Siemens, and in research, teaching, and management practice has shifted
Harley-Davidson. The board members that represent the among these dimensions. At any given point, one has been
member companies have changed over time. In the early emphasized to the detriment of the others. For the past two
years of the CSL’s existence, most of the business leader- or three decades, the tactical dimension has dominated,
ship came from marketing executives. However, in succeed- with an emphasis on operational (i.e., input-level) market-
ing years, more board members began to have nonmarket- ing decision variables and short-term business performance
ing backgrounds. Today, the business leaders who advise results, especially sales volume and market share. Method-
the CSL include general management, operations, supply ological rigor has been emphasized over problem impor-
chain, finance, and marketing executives. tance and relevance and has been facilitated by the avail-
What attracts board members and other business leaders ability of large databases on product movement and
to the CSL is its thought leadership in relation to customer individual retail transactions. Data and methodology have
focus and competing through service. With most of the dominated academic research at the expense of both theory
CSL’s research being produced by marketing faculty and development and practical relevance, retarding the progress
doctoral students, this business interest suggests that what of the marketing discipline in a rapidly changing market
marketing scholarship offers is too good to be confined to environment. The focus has been on transactions as the unit
marketing practitioners, especially when many organiza- of analysis rather than on the long-term enduring economic,
tions have marginalized the role of marketing. In other interpersonal, and interorganizational relationships that
words, the bridge from scholarship to practice can be more characterize most marketing activity and produce sustain-
fruitful if marketing scholars significantly broaden their able business performance and growth.
view of what kind of practitioners may be interested in this The tactical view of marketing is rooted in the concept
work. of the four Ps (i.e., product, price, promotion, and place)
A New Practitioner Focus and in the microeconomic optimization paradigm. Mistak-
enly, the sum of the four Ps was labeled as marketing strat-
This essay features a roundtable of business leaders talking egy, even though the most important of marketing vari-
about the opportunities and imperatives that confront firms ables—market segmentation, targeting, and positioning,
today. The wide-ranging discussion covered issues of con- which also appeared as marketing concepts in the 1950s—
textual and direct interest to marketing scholarship. The were not part of this tactical formulation.
leaders’ observations demonstrate that the contributions of Short-term tactical outcomes, such as sales volume and
marketing scholars should be targeted to practitioner audi- changes in awareness, are easily observed and measured,
ences beyond marketers. The role and stature of marketing and their effects on performance are easily isolated from
has waned in many firms. Yet the interest in creating and those of other decision variables and competitive responses.
delivering value to customers is at the forefront of business These measures are the same ones used to evaluate the
priorities. Thus, as marketing scholars, we can build better weekly, monthly, and quarterly performance of most mar-
bridges to practitioners when we begin to view our target keting personnel. Pressure from financial markets and
markets as the many parts of a firm that are interested in shareholders causes many firms to emphasize these short-
customers, not just the marketers. term outcomes and to devote insufficient time to strategic
thinking. Strategy should guide tactics. The sum of tactics
without specific strategic analysis and formulation does not
Back to the Future: Integrating equate to a coherent strategy.
Marketing as Tactics, Strategy, and Marketing strategy is part of the firm’s business-level
(as opposed to corporate-level) strategy; it is focused at the
Organizational Culture level of the strategic business unit (SBU); and it is
expressed by the definition of the SBU’s served markets—
Frederick E. Webster Jr. its segmentation, targeting, and positioning choices; its
value propositions to customers; its positioning in the value

M
arketing thought leaders are taking a critical look at chain; and its strategy for capturing a fair share of the value
their field. They have identified several issues that created for customers as a fair return for the owners. The
have slowed progress in the development of the new definition of marketing recently adopted by the Ameri-
marketing discipline and are moving toward a new view of can Marketing Association (AMA) captures this strategic
marketing as both an intellectual discipline and a profes- focus:

4 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

 Marketing is an organizational function and a set of pro- central theme within marketing, it has received little schol-
cesses for creating, communicating, and delivering value arly attention and often is nothing more than lip service in
to customers and for managing customer relationships in firms that claim to adopt it. Shareholder interests have dom-
ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders.
inated management attention and corporate values. Both
The strategic theme of marketing gained dominance in academic and business neglect of the fundamental impor-
the 1970s as part of a pervasive organizational focus on for- tance of customer orientation reflect the notion that identi-
mal, long-range strategic planning. Marketing responsibility fying its impact on business performance requires a long-
was expanded beyond selling, advertising, promotion, and term perspective and is extremely difficult to measure.
distribution, with heightened emphasis on product innova- The good news is that significant research in the past
tion and new business development. However, this empha- decade has found positive associations between long-term
sis was relatively short lived, and SBU-level marketing business performance and customer orientation (Desh-
strategy was co-opted in many firms by the strategic plan- pandé, Farley, and Webster 2002; Narver and Slater 1990).
ning department and in the academic realm by the emer- These studies developed reliable scales for measuring mar-
gence of the new discipline of strategic management in ket orientation as a combination of customer and competitor
which market segmentation, value proposition, and cus- orientation and have found these concepts to be correlated
tomer orientation became key building blocks. Marketing with business performance (Deshpandé and Farley 1999).
scholars devoted relatively little attention to these macro- In general, these results suggest strong support for the
organizational and environmental trends that were reshap- notion that true marketing competence, including customer
ing the field in practice as they focused increasingly on tac- orientation and innovativeness as advocated by the market-
tical, not strategic, decisions. ing concept, is central to the long-term success of the firm.
The third dimension of marketing, organizational cul- However, the view of marketing as organizational culture
ture, is the most difficult to define, observe, and measure. A remains the least visible of the three marketing dimensions.
general definition of culture is the things we take for
granted, which emphasizes how difficult it is to observe. Rebuilding the Influence and Integrity of
Organizational culture is a system of values and beliefs that Marketing
guide the actions of an organization’s members. From a Because marketing has been downsized or eliminated as a
marketing management perspective, organizational culture corporate function in many firms, marketing competence
can be defined as organizational cognition, or a knowledge has waned in those organizations. Trying to assign market-
system that expresses itself in assertions about why things ing responsibility to the SBU level often fails because SBU
happen the way they do in a particular organization, helps managers do not have the necessary marketing skills, have
members understand the organization’s functioning, and many other demands on their limited time and resources,
provides norms for their behavior (Deshpandé and Webster and are driven by short-term measures of performance.
1989). Marketing advocacy depends more on the marketing com-
The so-called marketing concept is an expression of mitment of a CEO who can articulate the importance of
organizational culture, a normative statement that the firm customer orientation as the keystone of corporate culture
should always put customers’ interests first. It is a manage- and the basis for increasing the value of the firm (Webster,
ment philosophy asserting that the existence and legitimacy Malter, and Ganesan 2003). The position of the chief mar-
of the firm ultimately depends on satisfying customer keting officer (CMO) was often created to fill the gap left
needs. The marketing concept was rapidly accepted by by the elimination of corporate marketing departments, but
managers in many companies, and it quickly became a part only rarely has this position been filled by a person with the
of marketing textbooks in the 1960s. It was expressed in necessary strategic and analytical skills, the true support of
statements by some leading executives that the firm would a committed CEO, and a clear mandate to build marketing
ultimately be organized around the marketing function, that competence and strategic thinking throughout the
serving customers was not the means to the end of prof- organization.
itability but the end itself, and that marketing was too Recent trends in marketing publications suggest that the
important to be left to the marketing people. issues outlined here are being recognized and addressed by
Despite its inherent moral appeal, the marketing con- both scholars and practitioners. Problems are being more
cept has several basic weaknesses. Most important, it lacks clearly articulated, but comprehensive solutions have yet to
strategic content. It says nothing about how the firm should be proposed. Although an estimated three-fourths of com-
compete. Like the narrow tactical focus, it ignores such panies have reorganized their marketing approach in the
basic questions as which needs the firm should focus on, past five years, these changes are always driven by dissatis-
who its customers should be, and how the firm should faction with the status quo rather than by a clear vision of
match its capabilities with the underserved needs of the the optimal organization. There is still a desperate need for
marketplace. This lack of strategic focus was a major reason the integration of tactics, strategy, and culture in the recon-
many firms brought marketing under the influence of strate- ceptualization of the marketing field as a business practice
gic planning departments. When those departments were and an academic discipline. Our understanding of market-
eliminated—a trend that occurred in the late 1970s and con- ing must be embedded in our understanding of organiza-
tinued through the 1980s—marketing competence often tions, not just markets, and it must focus on issues of imple-
went with it. Although customer orientation has remained a mentation, not just strategy formulation.

Invited Essays / 5
 It is not likely that business leaders or young scholars Three Reasons to Conduct More Research on an
will be the source of new conceptualizations of our field. International Basis
Business leaders acting alone seldom have the time or the Cross-national generalizability and contingencies in
inclination for such disciplined reflection, though they can marketing theory. To advance marketing as an academic
be the source of new ideas, insights about how the world of discipline, we must examine the validity of our theories and
marketing is changing, and challenges to marketing thought models, as well as their generalizability and boundary con-
leaders. They must be listened to, but we should not expect ditions, in international contexts. Cross-national generaliza-
them to do our work for us. Young scholars, who by defini- tion is implicit in our theories; that is, we usually develop
tion are the best trained in the latest techniques to do path- theories without explicit reference to their socioeconomic,
breaking research, cannot be expected to have either the institutional, and cultural contexts. In many instances,
perspective on the total marketing field or the ability to cross-national generalization should not be assumed. To
commit their time to developing integrated reconceptualiza- illustrate, consider market orientation, one of the most
tions of their newly chosen discipline. There are few incen- heavily researched constructs in marketing. Research con-
tives for executives to step outside the owner-focused man- ducted in Western countries supports the detrimental effect
dates of transactions-based generally accepted accounting of formalization and centralization on market orientation
principles and securities regulations to advocate the pri- (e.g., Jaworski and Kohli 1993). However, Burgess and
macy of customers’ interests or for academic newcomers to Nyajeka (2005) show that this relationship does not neces-
challenge old paradigms in the field. sarily apply to countries characterized by cultural hierarchy
Despite the current cry for better measurement of the and the lower formal education of employees. In countries
financial impact of marketing expenditures, we must not such as Zimbabwe, moderate levels of formalization and
limit ourselves to the development of measures of market- centralization actually stimulate the information acquisition
ing performance at the tactical level. This would be self- and dissemination that is necessary for a market focus.
defeating. We need to develop measures, which will Employees with less formal education need to be informed
inevitably be less precise, of marketing’s influence at the about market orientation and must have their roles clarified
strategic and cultural levels if we are to understand market- in order to deliver. Transaction cost theory, a predominant
ing as an integrated body of knowledge and practice. theoretical framework used to explain organizational
The major challenges are conceptual, not methodologi- boundary decisions, provides another example. Geyskens,
cal. We must show renewed respect for conceptual thinking Steenkamp, and Kumar (2005) find that the explanatory
as opposed to methodological rigor. We must tolerate work power of the transaction cost dimensions differs systemati-
that bursts through and redefines the currently accepted cally and predictably across national cultural contexts.
boundaries of our intellectual domain. We must respect These and other examples (e.g., Deshpandé and Farley
insight and risk taking as much as we worship empirically 2004; Ozsomer and Simonin 2004; Scheer, Kumar, and
verifiable propositions. We must work to advocate a proper Steenkamp 2003; Xie, Song, and Stringfellow 1998) illus-
balance of rigor and relevance, both theoretical and practi- trate the need to test even our most established theories in
cal, and bring to bear the results of scholarship that goes an international setting. Including country and cultural vari-
back to the roots of the development of all three dimensions ables enlightens us in new ways and clarifies marketing
of marketing. Not all relevant knowledge is less than 20 phenomena.
years old! Pushing the theoretical envelope. A reason marketing
theories may lack cross-national generalizability is that key
country characteristics moderate the structural relations
Moving Out of the U.S. Silo: A Call between the constructs in the theories. We can push the the-
to Arms for Conducting oretical envelope by identifying and including these pivotal
country characteristics in our frameworks, leading to true
International Marketing Research contingency theories of marketing. In marketing, national
culture has attracted the most attention.
Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp Cultural norms and beliefs are powerful forces shaping
people’s perceptions, dispositions, and behaviors. A soci-

A
lthough marketing academics demonstrate diversity ety’s shared cultural priorities frame the social and eco-
by borrowing from many behavioral science disci- nomic reward contingencies to which people and organiza-
plines, we are less eclectic when selecting popula- tions must adapt for smooth and effective functioning. For
tions in which to test our theories. We derive most of what example, Tellis, Stremersch, and Yin (2003) find support for
we know from studies conducted in Western countries, typ- the hypothesis that the takeoff of new products is faster in
ically the United States, the world’s largest economy. countries that are low in uncertainty avoidance and high in
Although this research yields a valuable stock of theoretical the need for achievement than in countries that are high in
and empirical findings, three important reasons mandate uncertainty avoidance and low in the need for achievement.
that we must now move out of the “U.S. silo” and conduct In another example, Steenkamp, ter Hofstede, and Wedel
more research on an international basis. In this essay, I dis- (1999) find that a country’s culture systematically and pre-
cuss these three reasons and delineate the unique research dictably moderates the effects of consumers’ personal val-
challenges and opportunities for conducting research in ues on their tendency to purchase new products and brands.
emerging consumer markets (ECMs). These and other results of studies that include cultural vari-

6 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

ables offer important new insights. Future studies have the cept of ubuntu—a pervasive spirit of caring and community,
potential to expand research on the effect of country con- harmony and hospitality, humility, respect, and responsive-
texts by drawing on socioeconomic theory (Etzioni and ness (Mangaliso 2001)—must be recognized and included
Lawrence 1991) and institutional theory (North 1990). in business models. Ubuntu stresses kinship ties, reward
Inherently international issues. The globalization of the systems linked to team performance, and consensus-based
marketplace is arguably one of the most important chal- decision making. When properly managed, firms derive sig-
lenges that companies face today; firms need to assess how nificant competitive advantages from ubuntu, including
each element of their marketing strategy should be executed intrinsic motivation, loyalty, and long-term effectiveness.
along the continuum of internationally standardized to The traditional business focus on relatively expensive,
locally adapted. Marketing academics can contribute impor- large-unit, overengineered products is unlikely to be suc-
tant new knowledge to these inherently international issues. cessful in ECMs beyond small segments of relatively afflu-
Although the entire domain of marketing practice could be ent consumers. To illustrate, 95% of all shampoo units sold
examined, I choose only two to illustrate this point: interna- in India (representing 60% of total value) are single-serve
tional market segmentation and new product launch units, many of which are designed for the poor and do not
strategies. even require hot water (Hammond and Prahalad 2004).
Research evidence shows that international segments of Brown and Hagel (2005) introduce the concept of “innova-
consumers can be identified if data are corrected for tion blowback”; they expect that ECMs will become impor-
methodological biases, both for products (Steenkamp and tant catalysts for product/service and process innovation
ter Hofstede 2002; Ter Hofstede, Steenkamp, and Wedel because of the huge pool of youthful, low-income con-
1999) and services (Bijmolt, Paas, and Vermunt 2004; sumers, who are unusually demanding, open-minded, and
Bolton and Myers 2003). Much work remains to be done in adventurous. Companies that are able to develop the new
this area, including accommodating changes in segment innovation skills to be successful in these markets (e.g.,
sizes and structural properties of international segments production-driven networks, customer-driven modularity,
over time, developing proper procedures for correcting for process-driven services) are likely to gain competitive
response styles, integrating international segmentation in advantage, both in ECMs and in their home markets (Brown
managerial decision making, and extending international and Hagel 2005). However, little research has been con-
segmentation studies to include ECMs more fully. ducted on these innovation skills.
The choice of product introduction strategy is crucial Unit of analysis. The unit of analysis in individualistic
for companies. In an important game-theoretic article, Western countries is typically the individual consumer or
Kalish, Mahajan, and Muller (1995) derive optimal condi- manager, and research has largely focused on individual
tions for the implementation of a waterfall (sequential) ver- decision making. However, group decision making is rela-
sus a sprinkler (simultaneous) product introduction strategy. tively more important in collectivistic ECMs, which are
A waterfall strategy is favored when the product has a long often characterized by high cultural embeddedness and
life cycle; when the foreign market is relatively small, complex webs of personal and business obligations. We
exhibits slow growth, and is low on innovativeness and need more theorizing and better tools to conceptualize,
competitiveness; and when fixed costs of entry are high. measure, and analyze these social networks; to understand
These analytical findings need to be tested empirically. their role in group decision making; and to examine the rec-
iprocal and dynamic relations between individual and group
The Special Case of ECMs norms, attitudes, and behaviors.
Most non-U.S. marketing research is conducted in other Measurement instruments. On average, ECMs are char-
Western countries, even though more than 80% of the acterized by lower levels of formal education. Unfortu-
world’s consumers live in ECMs. These countries represent nately, many established measurement instruments require a
the growth and future of our companies. Over the next fairly high degree of respondent sophistication. We urgently
decade, General Electric expects that as much as 60% of its need simpler and shorter measurement instruments that can
revenue growth will be from ECMs, and its outlook is be used in ECM market research. Schwartz and colleagues
echoed by other multinational corporations such as (2001) developed the Portrait Values questionnaire to assess
Siemens, Philips, Procter & Gamble, and Volkswagen (Wall value priorities of less-educated populations, and it has
Street Journal Europe 2005). As such, ECMs pose specific been used successfully in ECMs (Steenkamp and Burgess
research challenges, three of which I highlight: business 2002). A cross-culturally validated short form of the Big
models, unit of analysis, and measurement instruments. Five personality instrument is also available. Other
Business models. To be appropriate to ECMs, Western researchers have sometimes constructed their own short
business models must often be recast. The profit maximiza- form of existing scales on a rather ad hoc basis by including
tion goal and the pursuit of self-interest—the very founda- only the highest-loading items in their study (e.g., Batra et
tion of many Western business models—may not be the dri- al. 2000).
ving forces in embedded cultures. Other motivations and Although some work has begun to address measurement
constructs must be substituted or incorporated. For exam- issues in ECMs, much work remains to be done to construct
ple, understanding organizational relations in China shorter and simpler scales, new scales for concepts that are
requires recognition of guanxi, or the “expectations that, particularly relevant in ECMs (e.g., embeddedness, guanxi,
sometime, favors will be returned” (Ambler, Styles, and ubuntu), and different wording and response formats. Some
Xiucun 1999, p. 76). Similarly, in Africa, the cultural con- existing scales may need to be adapted at least partially to

Invited Essays / 7
the local context. Baumgartner and Steenkamp (1998) to customers and for managing customer relationships in
describe analytical procedures to analyze such combined ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders.
emic–etic instruments and to compare results across I appreciate the professional appeal in capturing a market-
countries. ing manager’s role. However, this definition’s sole focus is
I hope that future editions of the well-known Handbook on marketing within an individual organization, which lim-
of Marketing Scales (Bearden and Netemeyer 1999) will its scholarship.
contain more information on the validity of marketing
scales in ECMs. In the spirit of the innovation blowback, I Dangers in adopting goals of all organizations engaged
except that marketing research in the United States and in marketing. In my view, the greatest risk of equating all
other Western countries will also profit from the develop- marketing with managerial decisions within organizations is
ment of scales that are cognitively less demanding. that their goals are being adopted by marketing thinkers
without any external appraisal. This leads to something akin
A Challenge to blanket approval of the reality of the marketing world’s
In her editorial, Bolton (2003) notes that international mar- undertakings. When identifying ourselves with these goals
keting research is underrepresented in Journal of Marketing and actions, whose perceived interests are being served, and
(JM). The same applies to the other top marketing journals, does this matter? A brief consideration of egregious exam-
which is unfortunate. International marketing research ples found in political campaigning, lobbying, fraud, bid
enables us to assess the cross-national generalizability and rigging, energy gouging, channel stuffing, and so forth,
contingencies of our theories and therefore to push the the- alerts us that many organizations are highly imperfect enti-
oretical envelope in entirely new directions. It also provides ties with mixed motivations. Furthermore, in most organiza-
answers to inherently international issues. Research in tions, people other than marketers are setting priorities.
ECMs is especially necessary, given their significant market Organizational marketing is important, but it should not be
potential for our companies and their unique research chal- taken to represent all of marketing thought.
lenges. As a discipline, let us move out of the U.S. silo. The Limitations in addressing the competitive nature of our
world is beckoning us. marketing system. The sole focus on a firm also leaves us
without strong concepts to assess multiple firms engaged in
simultaneous marketing activity. For example, when 8 or 12
firms compete in a market, how do we assess the “market-
Needed: A Larger Sense of ing” that is occurring on all fronts? Inefficiencies would be
Marketing and Scholarship natural, but they are beyond the managerial purview itself.
Is this why our field has not had more of an impact on
antitrust enforcement?
William L. Wilkie
Limitations in addressing the marketing system’s inter-
Has a Larger Sense of Marketing Gone Missing? actions with consumers. One major task for every consumer
is allocating his or her budget for purchases. If we ask, How

A
broad unrest appears to be surfacing about our well do marketers help consumers with their budget and
field’s direction and practices, and I appreciate this effort allocation decisions?” the answer is, “Very poorly.” In
opportunity to share my observations. In recent the aggregate, all marketers simply propose too much con-
years, Elizabeth Moore and I have been pursuing the ques- sumption for each consumer. The system acts as if con-
tion, What is marketing, anyway? (Wilkie and Moore 1999, sumer resources and wants are infinite and insatiable: Every
2003).2 Our findings show that the field has changed product and service category is advocated as worthy of con-
sharply over time, and some considerable knowledge has sumption for virtually everyone. Furthermore, within each
been left behind during the general advance. However, this category, marketers are offering consumers highly conflict-
has now gone too far. Some of today’s views of marketing ing advice as to which alternative to select. To cope, con-
scholarship are overly constraining, especially regarding sumers must ignore or resist most marketing programs and
broader conceptualizations of marketing. To illustrate, con- respond positively to only a relative few.3 These characteris-
sider the new official statement of our field. tics surely make it difficult to equate each marketer’s best
interest with each consumer’s best interest. (I stress that
Limitations of the AMA’s New Definition of
these are not criticisms but rather characteristics of the mar-
Marketing
keting system that are not evident from the managerial per-
The AMA has recently defined the term “marketing” as spective on marketing.)
follows:
Limitations in addressing major societal and public pol-
Marketing is an organizational function and a set of pro- icy issues. There are two good examples of this issue: (1)
cesses for creating, communicating, and delivering value Childhood obesity is a growing problem in the United
States. Is a single-firm focus for marketing the most effec-
2Copies of our articles “Marketing’s Contributions to Society” tive way to address this? (2) Direct-to-consumer advertising
(Wilkie and Moore 1999) and “Scholarly Research in Marketing: of prescription drugs is actually a public policy experiment
Exploring the ‘4 Eras’ of Thought Development” (Wilkie and
Moore 2003) can be downloaded at http://web2.business.nd.edu/
Faculty/wilkie.html. 3For extended discussion, see Wilkie (1994, Ch. 2).

8 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

in the United States. How helpful have marketing acade- of the people asked to speak at his reception. Midway
mics been in devising or evaluating this policy?4 My point through my remarks, I detoured from my outline and
is simple: There are issues in our world that are larger than mused, “By the way, there seems to be a meanness creeping
the problems of a single organization. into our field, and we really don’t need this.” Much to my
surprise, applause for this sentiment spread across the 100–
Removing research opportunities from many marketing
150 people in the room. A chord had inadvertently been
academics who would like to pursue these broader issues.
struck that resonates with many marketing academics today.
Given the AMA’s definition, how are academic marketing
This little vignette suggests a high level of emotion
thought leaders being prepared to address the role of mar-
behind the scenes of our professional lives. Virtually every-
keting in society? To examine this, a survey of AMA–Sheth
thing in print is about facts, theories, methods, and applica-
Doctoral Consortium participants was conducted (Wilkie
tions. Behind this, however, is the living reality of our acad-
and Moore 1997). The results show a striking gap between
emic lives and pursuits. Collectively, we are the College of
personal interest levels and training that is provided: Two-
Marketing. Individually, we are talented people who have
thirds of the doctoral candidates reported having a personal
each invested heavily to be in a position to contribute to
interest in learning about marketing and society, but fewer
knowledge.
than one in ten had taken even a single course on the sub-
As the vignette suggests, overt attention needs to be
ject, and their self-ratings of expertise were low. Doctoral
paid to the quality of life in our field today. It is especially
programs sorely need to reconsider this issue.
painful to talk with people who, as young, aspiring scholars
It is troubling to realize that knowledge does not neces-
in the field, are now out of research academia (or virtually
sarily accumulate in a field; knowledge can disappear over
so), embittered by their experiences and still suffering from
time if it is not actively transmitted (e.g., Wilkie 1981). One
the blows to their youthful enthusiasm, idealism, and self-
responsibility of academia is to place a field of study into
confidence.5 Are there steps to improve this situation? I
proper perspective. I believe that the concept of an aggre-
think so.
gate marketing system (Wilkie and Moore 1999) should
Briefly, I assert that it is time for a new marketing acade-
occupy a central position in marketing scholarship. How-
mic summit, perhaps as a task force on thought development,
ever, this will not happen unless current scholars accept that
with the goal of enhancing the participation in and quality of
important knowledge is being lost from the active body of
marketing scholarship. In addition to addressing what
marketing thought. As research specialization has pro-
should be studied and how, I suggest that serious attention
ceeded (with good reason), this risk has increased. Knowl-
should be given to how research quality of life can be
edge outside of a person’s specialty may first be viewed as
improved. For example, informal discussions with senior
noninstrumental, then as nonessential, then as nonimpor-
academics suggest that journal acceptance rates currently
tant, and finally as nonexistent. My particular concern is for
hover at approximately 10%, and tenure achievement for
the subsequent generations of scholars (both today’s and the
first positions at research schools are 25% or less (recall
future’s doctoral students) who may not gain enough back-
that this is the outlook for presumably the best-trained, most
ground to even realize that a choice is available to them.
talented people entering our field). It strikes me that these
Understating the scope and importance of marketing. figures reflect a pall on the pursuit of knowledge (at least to
Finally, a key finding in the “Marketing’s Contributions” the extent that it is internally motivated) and help engender
(Wilkie and Moore 1999) article flowed from a system the cynicism and meanness that has entered our college. A
illustration that included 75 marketing-related activities. Of key goal for this summit should be to strive to improve
these 75 marketing system activities, we found that market- these rates and to engender a more positive context for our
ing managers control only approximately 30, or fewer than work.6
half. They influence most other activities, but they are not in Specific topics I believe deserve to be addressed include
control of them; furthermore, these activities are not what is the following:
typically considered marketing according to the current
•The unrealistic expectations of many universities today in
view of the field. To me, this understates the importance of context of a six-year tenure time frame and an overemphasis
marketing and calls for a perspective that is beyond the con- on “A” journals.7
trollable decisions of marketing managers; such a perspec-
tive must reflect inclusive appreciation of organizational
operations and of governments’ roles in the facilitation of 5I have developed further thoughts along these lines in an
marketing system operations. In brief, we need a larger con- invited Journal of Marketing essay titled “On Books and Scholar-
ception of marketing. ship: Reflections of a Marketing Academic” (Wilkie 2002). It can
be downloaded at http://web2.business.nd.edu/Faculty/wilkie.
Is Marketing Academia Losing Its Heart? html.
6For an earlier report, see AMA Task Force on the Development
A spontaneous episode at the 2005 AMA Winter Marketing of Marketing Thought (1988).
Educators’ Conference sent a signal about the state of our 7Note that I would personally advocate extending the tenure

field today. Kent Monroe was named the 2005 Distin- period to nine or ten years (with options for a person to go up
guished Marketing Educator (a fitting honor), and I was one early) and would require that papers actually be read and evaluated
for their quality and contribution. It would be difficult for the mar-
keting field alone to gain such change, but our key institutions
(i.e., AMA, Association for Consumer Research, and Institute for
4For an initiative in this area, see Farris and Wilkie (2005). Operations Research and Management Sciences) could surely

Invited Essays / 9
 •The crucial role of a few key journals for the field—a positive A moral dilemma. Phil Kotler noted that marketing’s
or negative in the face of continuing growth and fundamental dilemma stems from two of marketing’s cen-
fragmentation? tral axioms: First, give customers what they want, and do
•The sometimes destructive (and delaying) behaviors of not judge what they want. Customers often want products
reviewers, coupled with overreaching intrusions into free-
doms of thought, theory, and method.8
that are not good for them (e.g., tobacco, high calorie fast
foods, sweets, alcoholic drinks). Second, many products
•Current strengths, weaknesses, and biases in doctoral educa-
tion, together with exploration of postdoctoral opportunities. may be acceptable to the customer but are harmful to soci-
•Opportunities and problems presented by the twin forces of ety (e.g., asbestos, lead paint, guns, gas-guzzling
globalization and the Internet, including the explosion of automobiles).
business education around the world and the coming infusion The central thesis of Johny Johannson’s (2004) recent
of thousands of new marketing academics. book is that marketing has become “morally corrupt” and
has helped reduce the American way of life to its lowest
In closing, let me say that academic marketing has wonder-
ful potentials, and it deserves our care, consideration, and common denominator while contributing to a rising tide of
cultivation. anti-American sentiment around the world. He suggests that
marketing promotes many dangerous and unhealthy prod-
ucts using “preposterous and phony” arguments. Advertis-
ing is ubiquitous across old and new media, and there is
Does Marketing Need Reform? increasingly nowhere for customers to hide (Johannson
2004).

Jagdish N. Sheth and Rajendra S. Marketing’s Image Problem

Sisodia The image of marketing, far from strong to begin with, has

I
n August 2004, a day-long symposium organized by taken a beating in recent years. J. Walker Smith presented
Bentley College was held in Boston to address the ques- results from a recent Yankelovich survey that found that
tion, “Does Marketing Need Reform?” Speakers were 60% of consumers claimed that their opinion of marketing
asked to address how the marketing function can simultane- and advertising has become much worse over the past few
ously bolster trust with customers and respect within orga- years and that marketing and advertising is “out of control.”
nizations. The event featured 17 speakers and drew approx- On the basis of a study of the image of marketing using
imately 125 attendees.9 Judging by the response, it appears approximately 1000 consumers, Raj Sisodia reported that
that this topic hit a hot button for many in the discipline. In approximately 62% of the respondents had a negative atti-
this brief essay, we highlight some of the perspectives that tude toward marketing, and only 10% had a positive attitude
were suggested at the symposium. The actual presentations (Sheth, Sisodia, and Barbulescu 2006). On the positive side,
can be viewed online at www.bentley.edu/events/ marketing is often associated with creativity, fun, humorous
markreform/, and we are publishing a book of essays on the advertising, and attractive people, but most people (includ-
theme (Sheth and Sisodia 2006). ing most business students) associate negative words, such
as “lies,” “deception,” “deceitful,” “annoying,” and “manip-
The Case for Reform ulating,” with marketing.
Speakers were unanimous in the view that marketing indeed Marketer Myopia
needs significant reform. It is ultimately marketing’s
responsibility to align the interests of customers and the It could be argued that marketing academics and practition-
company, and too often, this just does not happen. As Glen ers alike are suffering from “marketer myopia”; that is, they
Urban remarked, “Marketing effectiveness is down. Mar- are so focused on what they do that they fail to notice sig-
keting is intrusive. Productivity is down. People resent mar- nificant changes in the environment around them. Summa-
keting. Marketing has no seat at the table at the board level rizing his recent book, Jerry Wind suggested that new men-
and top management. Academics aren’t relevant. And we tal models are necessary to guide the thinking of marketing
have an ethical and moral crisis. Other than that, I think we executives, practitioners, scholars, and journal editors
are in good shape.” (Wind, Crook, and Gunther 2004). He questioned whether
the narrow and deep focus in academic marketing research
and modeling is of value to business executives. Wind also
approach other areas of business to explore a unified improvement criticized the prevailing marketing mind-set that largely
for business schools. I would not leave this up to the deans; they ignores the 86% of the world living outside developed
have other agendas beyond scholarship to pursue. countries, most with per capita incomes below $1,000 per
8I wanted to use the subheading “Reviewers and Rigor ... Mor-
year.
tis?” but I could not work it in because of space constraints. Kay Lemon identified three key ways that marketers are
9The speakers were Rajiv Grover, Steven Haeckel, Johny
Johansson, Philip Kotler, Katherine N. Lemon, Robert F. Lusch,
myopic and thus fail. First, most marketers fail to take a
Raj Sisodia, J. Walker Smith, Rajendra Srivastava, Mohanbir long-term view. Their typical focus is on short-term gains:
Sawhney, Jagdish Sheth, Glen Urban, Rajan Varadarajan, Freder- improve sales this month, stock price this quarter, market
ick E. Webster Jr., William Wilkie, Jerry Wind, and David Wolfe. share this week, shelf space compared with competitors.

10 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

This short-term perspective leads to angry and irate con- An Agenda for Reform
sumers, proliferation of “me too” products (because they Regain trust with customers. Building on his recently
are less risky), proliferation of “me too” research (because published article (Urban 2004) on the subject, Glen Urban
it is easier to publish), greater resistance to marketing, con- proposed a possible new paradigm for marketing: Instead of
sumer confusion, and the threat of additional governmental just trying to create products their customers might want,
intervention and regulation. Second, marketers often fail to
marketers should actively advocate for their customers
consider all relevant constituencies. Although many do a
across all departments within the company. Several forces
good job of considering current customers, they fail to con-
are converging to increase customers’ power: the Internet-
sider the effect of marketing on those not directly in the tar-
fueled ability of increasingly skeptical customers to talk to
get market. Third, marketers fail to appreciate their own
one another, reduced media power, overcapacity, and more
strength and power. Marketing is infusing and transforming
stringent government regulations. More and more cus-
cultures around the world. Marketers must be mindful of
tomers are actively exercising their power, many becoming
how powerful their tools are and understand their short- and
crusaders for or against companies. In response, companies
long-term effects on consumers. Marketing academics must
must choose between “old style marketing” (i.e., the push
teach students how to use that power responsibly.
model that characterized marketing from approximately
Demographic denial. Peter Drucker (1999) has identi-
fied the worldwide decline in birth rates as the number one 1950 to 2000) and “trust-based marketing,” whereby com-
issue that society faces today. David Wolfe highlighted two panies cooperate and work with customers to make them
demographic trends. First, marketing has yet to come to successful. As Urban said, “If you gave customers full
terms with the reality that the majority of adults in the mar- information and the best technical and buying advice you
ketplace today are older than 40 years of age. By 2010, could, would you suggest they buy your product? If you
annual spending in the United States by households that are can’t say that, then you must work on a better product.”
headed by people under the age of 45 is projected to be Use technology to enhance mutual value. Sawhney sug-
$1.62 trillion, compared with $2.63 trillion by those 45 gested that the implication of widespread connectivity is a
years of age and older; that is a trillion dollar difference. Yet greater need for collaboration with customers and business
most marketing remains resolutely youth fixated. Wolfe partners because most value creation is now outsourced. He
suggested that marketers need to understand developmental proposed that companies must integrate customers into an
psychology to appreciate how customers evolve continu- entire set of end-to-end processes from ideation to support.
ously over their life spans. Second, around midlife, women Sawhney also noted that technology is enabling customers
begin to outnumber men quite significantly. However, most to move toward “do-it-yourself’ marketing. If they choose
marketing today remains aggressively masculine in charac- to, customers can disintermediate marketers from the mar-
ter and fails to speak effectively to women or aging men. keting process; they can self-inform, self-evaluate, self-
segment, self-price, self-support, self-organize, self-
Marketers’ Diminished Role and Influence Within advertise, self-police, and self-program.
the Company
Broaden marketing’s perspective. Marketing has come
The fundamental value of a marketing mind-set is not in to view itself too narrowly and, in many cases, merely as
question. As Rajiv Grover put it, “If marketing is defined as sales support. It must adopt a much broader perspective
satisfying the expressed and latent needs of customers, it is centered on improving the quality of life for customers.
well accepted out there, so marketing is not really being Marketers should develop new marketing models that focus
marginalized. But marketers are being marginalized, in the on long-term issues about which customers really care. To
sense that many strategically important aspects of market- counteract the pressure to produce products that are harmful
ing (e.g., pricing, ad budgeting, new product decisions) are to people or to society, marketing should take the responsi-
being taken away by other functions in the organization.” bility to educate customers in ways that positively affect the
Fred Webster noted that marketing management was once
world. Marketing should also work to promote better corpo-
considered destined to assume ultimate influence and con-
rate citizenship. Kay Lemon noted that a new corporate cit-
trol over the U.S. corporation and become the dominant
izenship metric (www.accountability.org.uk) on global
function (Keith 1960). With few exceptions, this has not
accountability ranks only one U.S. company in the top 100
happened. A key problem is that most marketing managers
(Hewlett-Packard). Marketing has great power to align cor-
are not finance literate and have trouble answering ques-
porate interests with great societal causes, such as alleviat-
tions about the productivity of expenditures. Equally impor-
ing poverty and disease. Jerry Wind highlighted C.K. Praha-
tant, other managers are usually not marketing literate. Raj
lad’s (2004) recent book, which shows how marketing can
Srivastava suggested that marketing does a poor job of com-
help solve real problems and alleviate poverty on a large
municating the value it creates because marketers do not
scale by targeting “the fortune at the bottom of the
speak the “financial language.” There is little appreciation
for the balance sheet power of brands. Marketing is consid- pyramid.”
ered a variable cost, not a committed cost, so its budget is Make marketing a true profession. Today, anyone can
considered “soft money” that can readily be cut. Marketers go into business as a marketer. To strengthen marketing as a
are hard-pressed to justify their budget requests because profession, Sheth suggested requiring certification and
they command little trust within most organizations. recertification of marketing practitioners, similar to the

Invited Essays / 11
accounting and medical professions. He also suggested the newsworthy domains and discoveries, similar to medicine
establishment of a National Academy of Marketing, similar and engineering. Grover recommended that marketing be
in reputation and mandate to the National Academy of taught as an art and a science (analogous to cooking)
Science. because the creative dimension will always be crucial to
Revitalize marketing within the organization. Srivastava good marketing.
noted that marketers have historically focused on sales-
related measures, such as market share, but have largely Conclusion
ignored profitability and shareholder value. Marketing must As the world becomes increasingly market driven and glob-
do a better job managing its resources and demonstrating ally competitive, marketing is becoming marginalized at a
the value of investing in marketing programs. The role of time when it is most needed. Unfortunately, the “side
marketing in achieving price and stock appreciation is effects” of marketing today often overwhelm its intended
beginning to be understood, but other effects also need to be main effects. Can marketing’s reputation be redeemed? Not
measured. For example, a strong brand confers greater clout unless it resolves the fundamental contradiction at its core:
in terms of dealing with distributors and can lead to the Marketing claims to be about representing the customer to
ability to negotiate lower distribution costs. the company, but it remains mostly about representing the
Sheth suggested that instead of being managed as a line company to the customer, using every trick in its bag to
function, marketing should be designated as a corporate make customers behave in the company’s best interests.
staff function (similar to finance, information technology, Speakers at the symposium were unanimous in asserting
legal issues, and human resource management), with both that “marketing as usual” is not working any more and that
capital and operating budgets. Marketing’s domain should fundamentally new thinking is necessary to rejuvenate this
include branding, key account management, and business vital and potentially most noble of business functions. Done
development. The head of corporate marketing should right, marketing is truly an enlightened undertaking. As Phil
report directly to the CEO, and a standing committee of the Kotler and Bill Wilkie reminded the attendees, marketing
board should be formed to oversee the company’s market- has made major contributions to raising standards of living
ing activities. around the world. It has played a role in creating markets
Use new terminology. Reflecting a growing trend, for products that reduced drudgery, increased convenience,
Southwest Airlines has named its department of marketing and enriched life in general in the twentieth century.
the “customer department” and its human resources depart-
ment the “people department.” Sheth suggested that the
word “marketing” has lost so much credibility that compa- Strategic Marketing and the CMO
nies would be better off using the designation of chief cus-
tomer officer rather than CMO.
Many have come to believe that the term “consumer” Roger A. Kerin
objectifies customers and creates a one-dimensional image

M
in the minds of marketers. Kotler suggested that using this arketing has evidenced a renaissance of sorts in the
term creates the image of customers with their mouths corporate hierarchy with the creation of the CMO
open, waiting to be filled by marketers. Instead, he pro- position. According to a recent Booz Allen Hamil-
posed the term “prosumers,” which acknowledges that cus- ton study (Hyde, Landry, and Tipping 2004), 47% of For-
tomers participate in the creation of value. tune 1000 companies have a CMO designation on their
organizational chart. This study also concluded (p. 37) that
Learn from other disciplines. Several speakers com- “[c]ontrary to prevailing wisdom, the marketing function is
mented on the continuing need for marketing to learn from more important now than ever before.” Marketing has
other disciplines. Wind suggested that marketing is becom- indeed found “a chair at the table” (a phrase to describe ele-
ing too self-centered and isolated now that it has matured as vation to the senior executive suite), but the CMO’s chair
a discipline. Likewise, Sawhney commented that marketing has proved to be a hot seat. A CMO’s tenure averages 22.9
began as an eclectic discipline but has become increasingly months, only 14% of CMOs for the world’s top brands have
insular and has come to view itself falsely as self-contained. been with their companies for more than three years, and
He proposed that marketing transcend its narrow horizons fewer than half of CMOs have been on the job for 12
and begin learning again from neighboring disciplines. months (Welch 2004).
Reform marketing academia. Several speakers spoke of The CMO “churn and burn” statistics are not surprising.
the responsibilities of marketing academics in restoring My interactions with CMOs are consistent with the impres-
marketing to a position of respect in companies and in soci- sions of McGovern and Quelch (2004), who cite several
ety. A recurring theme was the need for greater relevance in reasons for the high casualty rate. Many CMOs mention
academic research. Webster suggested that there has been that the position is often ill-defined; there is little formal
an increased emphasis on rigor versus practical relevance. authority, corporate expectations are frequently unrealistic,
Academic research must become more relevant without sac- and credibility and legitimacy with other company “chief-
rificing rigor. He added that it is critically important that tains” is absent. I would add that some CMOs simply over-
research become more idea driven, not just data driven. promise and underdeliver on proposed top-line initiatives
Sheth suggested that academic research should focus on and bottom-line outcomes. Indeed, it may be that few mar-

12 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

keting specialists are up to the task. My essay puts these Materialization of the CMO
recent developments into context and considers future So what is new? First, the conditions that circumscribed the
prospects for the CMO position, if not an individual, as the presence, role, and influence of corporate-level marketing
embodiment of strategic marketing perspectives and prac- are disappearing. Companies are divesting unrelated busi-
tice in the corporate executive suite. I also address implica- nesses and pruning product lines and brands. Corporate
tions for scholarly research in marketing and executive strategic planning departments have been dismantled as a
education. consequence. This “deconglomeration” process has height-
ened senior management’s attention to and involvement in
Marginalization of the CMO business and marketing strategy formulation and execution
The origins of the CMO can be traced to the late 1950s and to generate top-line growth from existing businesses
early 1960s, when the role of chief marketing executive (Varadarajan, Jayachandran, and White 2001). Second, the
emerged in corporations. At the time, CEOs focused on majority of CEOs today have significant marketing and
converting their companies from a production or sales ori- sales (along with operations) experience in their career his-
tory before assuming general management responsibilities
entation to a market(ing) orientation (Keith 1960). A com-
at the business unit level (Allen 2005). Most are in their 50s
mon practice was to aggregate and centralize marketing
and actually benefited from marketing responsibilities (and
staff resources at the corporate level for the purpose of
accountability) being delegated to business units over the
developing marketing policy and planning guidelines that
past 25 years. These executives recognize the potential role
could be adopted within each of the company’s business and contribution of strategic marketing thinking in the exec-
units. Subsequently, CEOs looked to these executives (now utive suite. Otherwise, the CMO position would not exist.
labeled corporate vice president or senior vice president of Third, previously autonomous business units have been
marketing) to (1) promote strategic marketing thinking in reined in as CEOs mandate “best practices” across units,
their organizations, (2) represent a genuine marketing pres- resource sharing, comarketing efforts, and the like.
ence and mind-set at corporate headquarters, and (3) assist These structural changes have cleared the path for
in the preparation and implementation of business unit mar- corporate-level marketing to find a chair at the table again
keting strategy designed to achieve a competitive advan- in the senior executive suite. However, those who occupy
tage. By one estimate, about half of the largest U.S. manu- the chair will not necessarily be marketing specialists or
facturing firms had an individual who was considered the have the same experience, skills, and knowledge as chief
chief marketing executive in the early 1970s. Most reported marketing executives 35 years ago, much of which was
to the company chairman or to the president (Hopkins and acquired in brand management systems and advertising
Bailey 1971). agencies (Silver 2003). Rather, the CMO position demands
The following 25 years witnessed the gradual devolu- that its occupant combine a broad business outlook, multi-
tion of corporate-level marketing and its strategic role and industry experience, and cross-functional management
influence in U.S. companies. Why did this happen? There expertise with the analytical skills to interpret extensive
are at least four interrelated reasons: (1) the proliferation of market and operational data and an intuitive sense of con-
businesses and product lines in the aftermath of aggressive sumer, customer, and competitor motivations and market-
acquisition activity common to companies in the 1970s and based assets. The position also expects that its occupant
1980s; (2) the emergence of strategic-planning staffs largely view technology not so much as an enabler of marketing
as an outgrowth of the budgeting and financial-planning processes and activities but as a key differentiator and a
process associated with multibusiness firms, which in turn means to create, communicate, and deliver value to con-
co-opted marketing’s strategic role; (3) the perceived inef- sumers. Finally, the position requires the action and results
fectiveness of a single, corporate-based marketing head and orientation of frontline marketing. Chief marketing officers
do not have the luxury of hiding behind the pernicious oxy-
staff to address an increasingly diverse set of markets and
moron “great strategy, poor execution” as evidenced by the
business models; and (4) the growing autonomy of business
position’s high turnover.
units followed by the dispersion of marketing responsibili-
The resurgence of corporate-level marketing, manifest
ties and personnel among individual operating units (Hop-
in the CMO position, has important implications for the
kins and Bailey 1984; Kerin, Mahajan, and Varadarajan academic marketing community. For example, a recurrent
1990). By the late 1990s, the corporate marketing presence theme in the Marketing Science Institute’s (MSI’s) 2004–
had become an administrative cost center and assumed a 2006 research priorities (McAlister and Taylor 2005) is the
supportive role in many companies under the direction of a need for research that has value to senior management. My
vice president for marketing services. This position entailed sense is that this research, regardless of topic, should
managing marketing–service supplier relationships (e.g., explore multifunctional, business-level issues; identify
advertising agencies, research firms) with a primary empha- cause-and-effect relationships; and focus on metrics that
sis on coordination, monitoring, guidance, and dotted-line matter to CEOs and corporate boards. Marketing educators
links extending into business units. Noticeable in this in executive MBA and senior executive development pro-
administrative and supportive role was the limited reference grams must address the demands placed on the CMO posi-
to strategic marketing perspectives as a source of insight or tion and modify course content and pedagogy. For example,
direction for corporate or business strategy. emphasis should be placed on improving data and financial

Invited Essays / 13
analysis skills and encouraging creativity in framing strate- research have the potential to affect applied constituents
gic marketing initiatives in light of implementation consid- (see the essay by Raju).
erations and financial targets.
Self- and Other Categorizations
However, movement toward such multidisciplinary and
Them Versus Us: Woes on the multimethodological perspectives seems to be inconsistent
with a strong trend I have observed in the field. At a funda-
Bifurcation of the Academic mental level, academics in marketing identify themselves
Marketing Discipline10 not by substantive interest (e.g., advertising, materialism)
and theoretical orientation but by methodology. Specifi-
cally, there is an evolving bifurcation of the field in which
Deborah J. MacInnis researchers categorize themselves and others as “behav-
ioral” (often meaning experimentalists who study consumer
The Domain of Marketing behavior but sometimes also meaning “ethnographic

M
arketing is a multifaceted field that leverages per- types”) and “modelers.” Some also identify themselves as
spectives from multiple disciplines to study sub- “managerial types,” which typically means behaviorally ori-
stantive topics ranging from the study of the macro ented people who use surveys to study organizations.
to the micro, the organization to the consumer, capitalist Houston, We Have a Problem
practice to social welfare, and the local to the global. Mar-
keting also serves an important applied constituency that Although self- and other categorizations by methodology
demands tools (theories, methods, and measures) to inform may be appropriate in some contexts, some intellectual and
marketing, consumer, or public policy actions. As is true in disciplinary problems accrue when categorization by
most scientific disciplines, the study of the substantive top- method becomes a focal lens for viewing the field. Consider
ics in marketing often involves a diverse set of theoretical the following questions:
and methodological perspectives to understand and appreci- What is important? First, categorization by method
ate fully all aspects of the phenomena under study. For affects the focus on theory versus data versus relevance.
example, the impact of advertising on consumers is Academics taking a behavioral approach increasingly focus
enriched by theoretical perspectives from linguistics, litera- on theory, often at the expense of relevance or generaliz-
ture, psychology, sociology, anthropology, and economics ability; it is quite possible that we may answer theoretically
and by such diverse methodological approaches as ethnog- interesting questions about phenomena that exist only in the
raphy, experimentation, survey research, discrete choice artificial world we create for purposes of testing theory.
models, and quantitative modeling techniques using aggre- Indeed, in some cases, articles are so far removed from mar-
gate data. Through this multimethod, multitheory perspec- keting that it is difficult to understand (1) what they have to
tive, we (the “blind men”) gain insight into the “elephant” do with marketplace phenomena or (2) why they are pub-
known as advertising. lished in marketing rather than psychology, sociology, or
anthropology journals. Modelers seem to focus on data and
Marketing and Science relevance with increasingly little regard for theory. “Strat-
There is general agreement in the philosophy of science that egy types” focus on theory, data, and relevance; however,
data or ideas are used to advance a theory, which is tested little gets through the review process because authors are
by data, which in turn leads to theory revision and addi- being subjected to the standards that are used in both behav-
tional testing through relevant methods and acquired data ioral (strong theory, methodological controls) and modeling
(Zaltman, Le Masters, and Heffring 1982). In an applied (real-world data, advanced techniques) contexts (Stewart
discipline such as marketing, there is also hope that findings 2005).
will provide substantive insights that are relevant to man- What is good research? Second, categorization by
agers, consumers, and policymakers. In this ideal world, method leads to inconsistent rules about what constitutes
progress is made by a strong interface between data and “good research.” For example, in the behavioral area, arti-
theory, rigor and relevance. Because various methodologies cles are not viewed as interesting unless they advance
differ in their emphasis on external versus internal validity, theory or entail interactions (e.g., demonstrate that the
their obtrusive versus unobtrusive nature, and the study of theory does not apply under certain conditions). In contrast,
universal versus particular systems (McGrath 1981), knowl- in the strategy area, articles are not viewed as interesting
edge accrues through the use of diverse methods that com- unless they demonstrate generalizations across populations,
pensate for the weaknesses of others. Such compensation is have multi-item scales, and use multiple informants. In
warranted because the decisions made on the basis of this modeling, articles are not viewed as interesting unless they
advance a new technique.
10Wilkie
Is your research rigorous? Third, a focus on methodol-
and Moore (2003) have provided a rich and deep his-
torical perspective on the evolution of the field of marketing. With
ogy can create an overemphasis on empirical articles, par-
their systematic study as a background, I comment on observa- ticularly those that study short-term marketing tactics (see
tions about more recent history and trends in the discipline that the essay by Webster), and can encourage “marketer
cause concern. myopia” (see the essay by Sheth and Sisodia), perhaps at

14 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

the expense of big ideas (see the essay by Staelin), theory Roadblocks
development, conceptualization, and integrative frame- If this trend toward categorization by method is indeed real,
works that have broader applicability and more time where does it come from? A potential cause is a limited
unbounded potential (Lehmann 2005; MacInnis 2004). understanding about the relative strengths and weaknesses
Where’s my hammer? Fourth, categorization by method of prevailing methodological paradigms (McGrath 1981).
leads to the study of only those things that can be examined Depth training in a certain methodological perspective can
with a prevailing methodological approach. For example, lead to beliefs about the “right” way to do research and to
because the behavioralists in marketing are overrepresented disrespect and disregard research that is limited on the very
by experimental approaches to marketing and consumer characteristics we regard as critical to our own methodolog-
behavior, there are major gaps in the understanding of ical paradigm (e.g., internal versus external validity). This
important and underresearched domains that are difficult to attitude may perpetuate some of the “meanness” in our field
understand with only an experimental approach, such as that Wilkie describes. It may lead us to adopt rigid rules
those applicable to broad economic, social, and societal about what constitutes “valid” research (e.g., homogeneous
issues. Several Association for Consumer Research presi- versus heterogeneous samples, single versus multiple infor-
dents have noted such gaps (e.g., Andreasen 1993; Belk mants), “important” research (e.g., those that demonstrate
1987; Lutz 1989; Richins 2000; see also the essay by interactions versus those that advance generalizations; see
Wilkie). This enhances our irrelevance to the applied con- Leone and Schultz 1980), and research that advances theory
stituency we serve and other disciplines because these versus practice and to use our expertise as reviewers to eval-
underresearched domains address some of the more rele- uate research more on fit with our own methodological
vant, interesting, and difficult issues. approach than on its capacity to yield intellectual insights
Do you think like me? Fifth, categorization by method that help us understand a substantive domain. Another
leads to less intellectual stimulation because articles are potential source of the current status is fear of accepting
reviewed by like-minded researchers who share a common something unknown or unfamiliar. This problem is magni-
methodological perspective rather than by those whose dif- fied when that unfamiliar thing is studied by people with
ferent perspectives might stimulate provocative thought. whom we are not familiar.
What do we really know? Sixth, categorization by Pathways
method leads to a narrowing of knowledge among people
who study the same thing. Rather than becoming truly an Pathways to remedy the pitfalls of self- and other catego-
“expert” on a given marketing phenomenon (e.g., consumer rizations by methodology require instilling in doctoral stu-
choice), regardless of the publication in which an article dents a more intellectually driven and a less methodologi-
appears (Marketing Science, Organizational Behavior and cally driven approach to the pursuit of marketing
Human Decision Processes, Journal of Consumer phenomena. Doctoral training should help students view a
Research) or of its focus (information processing, behav- particular method not as a philosophy of how to do research
ioral decision theory), we tend to read articles that are rele- but as exactly what it is—a method by which a phenome-
vant only to a particular substantive interest that appears in non can be understood. This requires helping students
certain journals. This often leads to a limited understanding understand that all methodological approaches are flawed,
of what is collectively known about a substantive topic and none is better than the other, and intellectual advances can
a failure to cite work that extends beyond our narrow be made only by an approach that attempts to observe the
purview. bigger picture that emerges from diverse approaches. This
requires that methods are approached from the standpoint
Are you with me or against me? Seventh, at a cultural of creatively addressing an interesting question rather than
level, this trend toward categorization by method bifurcates as the “right way” to approach a problem. We must let the
the field into “camps,” which often view one another as dog wag the tail, not vice versa.
irrelevant or even adversarial. For example, to hire a “mod- Toward this end, we might consider organizing seminars
eler” to a faculty is viewed as offering little potential to by substantive areas (e.g., materialism, advertising effects,
enrich behaviorally oriented faculty members’ academic branding) rather than by whether they take a behavioral,
research programs and/or the intellectual environment. strategy, or quantitative approach. Such seminars could be
Rather than examining how someone different could offer led by researchers whose different methodological orienta-
unique and diverse perspectives that could enrich our under- tions, yet shared substantive similarities, offer the capacity
standing of a given marketing phenomenon, we view their to spawn intellectual discussions. A similar approach may
presence, though potentially quite pleasant and enjoyable, be taken for academic conferences, which could be orga-
as less intellectually relevant than someone whose method- nized and attended by people who share a similar substan-
ological perspective resembles our own. As evidence of tive interest. In the review process, strong editors could seek
these camps, consider the nature of academic conferences broad-minded reviewers who appreciate research based on
and the kinds of journals deemed appropriate for a given its substantive contribution rather than on its adherence to
academic piece. methodological paradigms.
Could you ever work with me? Finally, categorization by Pathways also include actively seeking out others whose
method has led researchers to view opportunities for joint perspective (quantitative versus behavioral) is different
research among those whose methodological perspectives from our own (behavioral versus quantitative) yet who
differ from their own as limited. share a common substantive interest (Staelin 2005). Several

Invited Essays / 15
articles in the discipline demonstrate the value of this per- Research) to increase the number of pages they publish
spective (e.g., blending the theoretical strengths of behav- each year and to move away from “rigid rules about what
ioral researchers with the modeling techniques of more constitutes ‘valid’ research” (see MacInnis, p. 15) toward
quantitatively oriented researchers). Such alliances focus review criteria that ask, Does this article provide new
not on how we differ but on the substantive commonalities insight? Is this article “not wrong”?
that join us. Efforts such as these would make people in the I begin my elaboration of these ideas by first noting that
“other camp” seem less like strangers and more like others I refer to JM, Journal of Marketing Research, Marketing
we can respect and with whom we can personally interact. Science, and Journal of Consumer Research as the “premier
Another pathway involves the reformulation of recruit- journals” in marketing because these are the journals that
ing of both doctoral students and faculty candidates. Too tend to be considered in marketing promotion and tenure
often, we categorize potential recruits in terms of their decisions. Although there are several other excellent U.S.-
methodology (e.g., quantitative versus behavioral). Label- based and non-U.S.-based marketing journals, promotion
ing people in this way alters the way we understand both and tenure committees are familiar with only a few journals
them and their work and may blind us to potential substan- from other disciplines (Henderson, Ganesh, and Chandy
tive interests we might share. Finally, new pathways mean 1990), and such committees use journal quality as a proxy
taking a more open-minded approach, learning more about for the quality of a candidate’s publications because
how problems are approached from various perspectives, research quality is difficult to evaluate outside a person’s
and appreciating research for what it is rather than for how discipline (Swanson 2004).
similar it is in approach to our own. As do others before me, I take as a given that our field
has a limited set of premier journals and turn my attention
to the issues related to “research quality” in those journals.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist Glen Elli-
Unleashing Potential11 son (2002) developed qr theory to describe the academic
review process. According to Ellison’s theory, academic
Leigh McAlister articles are evaluated on two kinds of quality: q quality,
which is related to the importance and interest of the main

T
he potential for scholars to contribute to marketing ideas in the article, and r quality, which is related to the exe-
thought and practice has never been greater. The MSI cution of the article (e.g., exposition, links to the literature,
research priorities indicate that marketing practition- robustness tests, extensions, methodology). In particular,
ers have a pressing need to understand return on marketing Ellison posits a social norm for publication (!, z), where !
spending, branding, new products and growth, nontradi- is a value judgment parameter (0 " ! " 1) and z is an over-
tional research tools and methods, customer management, all quality requirement. Articles are accepted for publica-
and the role that marketing should play in an organization. tion if !q + (1 – !)r # z. Assuming that q quality is deter-
When clear articulations of practitioners’ problems are mined by the initial work and that r quality is refined in the
combined with an increasing number of well-trained mar- review process and assuming that reviewers continuously
keting scholars, the result should be great strides forward in try to learn the current social norm for quality, the qr model
marketing thought and practice. Unfortunately, this is not predicts that, over time, r quality standards (i.e., execution)
necessarily the case. The very expansion of well-trained will receive increasing focus and q quality standards (i.e.,
marketing scholars, which offers such promise, has led to a related to the importance of the idea) will receive decreas-
division of the field. As MacInnis notes in this collection of ing focus. This happens because reviewers, being human,
essays, the field is divided into “camps,” each with its own overrate the r quality of their own research, and therefore,
definition of “good research,” each viewing other camps as on the basis of reviews of their own work, they learn that
irrelevant or even adversarial. These divisions are exacer- the r quality emphasis is greater than they believed. Other
bated by the lack of expansion in the number of pages in forces that contribute to the increasing emphasis on r qual-
marketing’s “premier” publication outlets. When one camp ity standards that Ellison mentions are reviewers’ attempts
is in control of a journal, articles from other camps are to impress editors by requiring complex revisions and
unlikely to be accepted, and regardless of which camp is in reviewers’ competitiveness, which can lead reviewers to
control, articles that address the kinds of important (and impose r quality standards above the norm to hold others
inherently messy) problems that make up the MSI research back. Ellison’s qr theory suggests that editors can reverse
priorities are discouraged. In this essay, I draw on Ellison’s this process by accepting articles that reviewers have
(2002) qr theory of the academic review process to help rejected, thereby providing reviewers with new information
explain the evolution of publication standards for premier about the appropriate balance between q quality (ideas) and
marketing journals and to help motivate my call for the pre- r quality (execution). However, Ellison notes that editors are
mier marketing journals (i.e., JM, Journal of Marketing reluctant to overrule reviewers because they rely on review-
Research, Marketing Science, and Journal of Consumer ers to evaluate articles, and they do not want to be viewed as
“lowering standards.”
11I thank Ajay Kohli for noting the problem caused by the lack The problem that Ellison’s (2002) qr model outlines for
of expansion in our premier journals and an anonymous reviewer all academic fields is even worse for the marketing field. In
for directing me to Swanson (2004). That article, which builds on the period between 1980 and 1999, the annual number of
Ellison’s (2002) article, helped reframe this essay. articles published in premier marketing journals actually

16 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

declined by 2.71 articles per year (Swanson 2004).12 Dur- In addition, our field is using review standards that favor
ing this same time period, the supply of well-trained mar- execution over ideas. Lehmann (2005, p. 142) calls for
keting scholars increased. Furthermore, the pool of well- restoring balance between execution and ideas:
trained marketing scholars targeting premier journals is set [T]he pendulum may have swung too far in terms of
to increase again as business schools in Europe and Asia black-belt methods when simple ones would suffice (and
adopt U.S. standards for faculty promotion (Montgomery be easier to communicate). A consequence of this is that
2005). As I have written elsewhere, I am concerned about even the topic-oriented journals are increasingly insistent
the implications of a rapidly expanding number of well- on the latest methods…. [There is a disturbing] tendency
trained scholars who are faced with a shrinking number of to avoid addressing important problems that are inherently
messy.
slots in premier journals (McAlister 2005). Even if the field
was not divided into “camps” and even if the naturally When I became Executive Director of MSI, Don
evolving process of setting journal norms was not driving Lehmann passed the responsibility for MSI’s working paper
increased focus on execution and decreased focus on ideas, series to me and suggested two simple criteria for paper
this combination of an increasing pool of scholars aspiring acceptance: Does the paper provide new insight? Is the
to a decreasing number of slots in premier journals would paper “not wrong”? With the luxury of a working paper
cause a narrowing of work that appears in those journals. series that has essentially no page constraint, these criteria
Think about the problem in terms of Type I and Type II work quite well. If the premier journals adopted similar
error.13 Since the early 1980s, the supply of potential sub- acceptance criteria, we could rebalance the “execution ver-
missions to premier journals has gone up by an estimated sus idea” quality standard. If our premier journals, which
factor of five,14 but there is no reason to believe that the have begun to expand pages, would accelerate that trend
average quality of that supply has changed. If we assume and substantially expand the number of articles published
that premier journals have focused on the job of avoiding each year, reviewers might find it easier to show the toler-
Type I error (i.e., accepting articles that might be “wrong”), ance for different perspectives called for by Staelin in his
the greatly increased supply structurally determines an essay. I believe that doing these things would unleash the
increase in Type II error (i.e., rejecting papers that might be potential that resides in the growing body of well-trained
“right”).15 marketing scholars. By boosting the incentive for those
However, our field is divided into camps. Staelin (2005, scholars to produce important and interesting new ideas, we
p. 149) tries to reunite those camps: could accelerate the process of addressing those messy
When reviewing others’ work (e.g., for a journal, for pro- problems with which marketing practitioners struggle.
motion, for hiring), screen for breadth and depth and show
tolerance for approaches that differ from yours. Do not
rule something out just because it is not “sophisticated.”
Instead, try to determine whether the work has impact and Revitalizing the Role of Marketing
the ability to modify the existing core of knowledge. in Business Organizations: What
Can Poor Academics Do to Help?

Jagmohan S. Raju

M
12Swanson included only JM, Journal of Marketing Research, any essays in this volume have convincingly
and Journal of Consumer Research in the set of premier marketing
journals for his analysis. I do not believe that adding statistics for
argued that as a practice profession, marketing
Marketing Science to his data set would change his finding that the faces many challenges and dangers. Several lead-
annual number of articles published in premier marketing journals ing organizations have abolished, or have seriously consid-
has fallen steadily since the early 1980s. ered abolishing, marketing departments, partly because aca-
13I thank John Hauser and Don Morrison for suggesting that it
demics and other thought leaders have convinced
is important to realize that the review process generates both Type companies that “marketing is far too important to be left
I and Type II errors. only to the marketing departments.”16 In a recent confer-
14Swanson (2004) reports Association to Advance Collegiate
Schools of Business statistics that show that the number of ence at Wharton, it was suggested that the life span of a
doctoral-level marketing faculty positions roughly doubled from CMO is relatively short, and many CMOs believe that one
approximately 1000 to 2000 between 1980 and 1999. However, of the more serious challenges they face is justifying their
only a small percentage of those 1000 doctoral-level marketing own existence. Marketing budgets are being cut in many
faculty in 1980 were well trained in the sense that their research corporations because it is difficult to justify the return on
skills prepared them to publish in premier journals. Since 1980, a such expenditures. Thus, marketing professionals no longer
growing percentage of graduating doctoral students have those
have a “seat at the table” (Webster, Malter, and Ganesan
research skills. Thus, although the total number of doctoral-level
marketing faculty only doubled between 1980 and 1999, I estimate 2003). All in all, these are not good signs.
that the number of well-trained marketing professors has grown by Conversely, it appears that marketing as a discipline in
at least a factor of five. the world of academics is not doing badly. Indeed, a fairly
15As a simple test of the increase in Type II error hypothesis, I
pose this question: Is there any person reading this essay who has
not had a paper rejected by a premier journal for reasons that did 16Although many have used similar phrases in different con-
not compromise the contribution of that paper? texts, this particular phrase is assigned to Jack Trout.

Invited Essays / 17
strong case can be made that it has never been better. Casual we need to be equally proud of studying problems that mat-
observation, discussions with colleagues from other univer- ter to practitioners, and we must provide solutions that they
sities, and anecdotal evidence lead me to the following can implement. Another issue worth thinking about is who
conclusions: the right audience is within a company. In general, our audi-
•In general, over the past 20 years, the average size of market- ence in companies historically has been people engaged in
ing departments has increased at major business schools. marketing research. I believe that we need to go further than
•More marketing courses are being taught, and furthermore, this.
marketing courses are in great demand.
Doing it Right Versus Doing the Right Thing
•Marketing academics hold important leadership positions at
many business schools. Indeed, the list of marketing acade- Our discipline pays great attention to the precision of argu-
mics holding leadership positions (deans, deputy deans, vice ments and the methodology used, but often, this can lead to
deans, associate deans, and similar important administrative incrementalism. We should be more open to studying prob-
titles) has never been greater. lems that matter, even if we need to make some limited
•The number of manuscripts being submitted to major market- compromises in terms of the precision with which we study
ing journals is at an all-time high. In the past few years, there
have been some of the most dramatic increases. Numbers
these. As my esteemed colleague Len Lodish (1974) sug-
reported at Marketing Science, Journal of Marketing gested many years ago, approximate answers to important
Research, and Management Science suggest increases of up to problems or issues are just as useful (if not more useful)
100% over the past five years. than precise answers to wrong, well-defined, narrow prob-
•The number of doctoral degrees granted in marketing world- lems. This balance will also enable us to appeal to senior
wide is at healthy levels. Furthermore, the demand for these levels in the organization; our current audience is at a more
graduates, though varying from one year to the next, remains junior level.
quite strong.
Directing the Output of Our Doctoral Programs
It appears that the life on one side of the street is quite dif-
ferent from the life on the other side. It makes me wonder Our doctoral programs are designed to train future acade-
why the two are so different, but it may also explain why mics, and this is a desirable motive because demographic
some academics are surprised (if not shocked) when they changes suggest that there may be an acute shortage of mar-
become aware of what is happening on the other side. keting academics in the future. However, we should encour-
Should marketing academics care about what is happening age (and if not encourage, at least not discourage) doctoral
on the other side? This essay attempts to argue that we students to enter the business world. Many leading corpora-
should, and it provides some ideas as to what can be done. tions are led by people who have doctoral degrees in chem-
Why are marketing practitioners in trouble? It can be istry, life sciences, and engineering. Why not doctoral
argued that marketing in the world of practice is flounder- degrees in marketing? Corporations can gain if they are led
ing because practitioners do not fully use the tools that aca- by people who have an in-depth knowledge and an appreci-
demics and other marketing thought leaders develop. There- ation of how to understand customer needs and develop
fore, they deserve to be in their current state. However, products, services, and programs that enable a company to
there is the possibility that what we have given them is not satisfy such needs profitably. Furthermore, it does not hurt
good enough, or not potent enough, compared with what if members of the audience understand our language,
other disciplines receive from their thought leaders. To because they have been taught to do so.
determine which of the two explanations is the cause
requires considerable work. A more pragmatic approach is Valuing Consulting Activity
to reconcile that there is some truth to each of these reasons. Virtually all academics in medical schools spend some time
If there is some truth to the latter argument, academics may taking care of patients. Indeed, in most cases, it is a part of
need to change. Furthermore, no matter what the reason is their responsibility. This not the case in business schools.
for the “plight of the practitioners,” to the extent that mar- Do our “patients” not need any help, or are we incapable of
keting is an applied discipline and one of the key end cus- helping them? Do we not care one way or the other? These
tomers is the practitioner, we need to do what we can to are questions that we need to address directly.
make sure the customers are healthy. It is with this objective
I humbly make the following suggestions. Teach What We Study and Discover in Our
Research
Choosing Our Audiences We all want to teach what we study and discover in our
Most marketing academics live and thrive in a university research, and we try hard to do so. However, the structure
setting. Our colleagues are people from basic disciplines, and design of our courses often limits our intentions. A
and this lineage has done wonders for our field. However, large majority of students take just one course in marketing;
rather than focusing on pleasing economists or mathemati- this course goes by different names in different schools, but
cians,17 we need to keep in mind that one of our key con- it is often referred to as “Introduction to Marketing.” In
stituencies is the practitioners. We are grateful when our most schools, this course teaches the development of a mar-
work gets published in Journal of Applied Mathematics, but keting plan using some well-known and useful frameworks
that have stood the test of time. However, in comparing our
17The word “economist” or “mathematician” can be substituted approach with the first courses taught in other disciplines,
by the word “psychologist” or “statistician” if the reader prefers. there appears to be some differences. The first course in

18 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

finance does not address the development of a financial plan mula: 206.835 – (.846 × [number of syllables per 100
for a company. The first course in operations management words]) – (1.015 × [average number of words per sen-
also does not attempt to write an operations plan. I believe tence]). This commonly used and highly validated measure
that we try to cover too much and therefore focus more on of readability is standard on word processing software. The
breadth than on depth, thus limiting our ability to link longer the words and sentences, the more difficult the pas-
teaching with research. What if our first course was titled sage is presumed to be. A Flesch score of 100 represents the
“Customer Analysis”? Such a course should put equal easiest readability, and 0 represents the most difficult read-
weight on behavioral and quantitative methods, and it could ability. As we depict in Figure 2, readability levels dropped
be cotaught if necessary. abruptly and significantly (p < .01) during the 1966–1971
period and fell into the “very difficult to read” range there-
Measure the Value of Marketing Decision Aids after. The Flesch formula is just one measure of readability,
and Models but Severin and Tankard (1992) find that better Flesch
Many other contributors have commented on measuring the scores lead to better reader comprehension.
value of marketing inputs. Our focus should be to measure
From Where Does Difficult Reading Come?
not only the value of a particular marketing input (e.g.,
advertising) or a particular marketing asset (e.g., brand) but We believe that difficult reading stems from a confluence of
also the value of better methods and models we develop. factors. Benson (2004) notes the ten-year period following
For example, what is the value of better allocation of the Carnegie (Pierson 1959) and Ford (Gordon and Howell
resources, such as sales force across territories and advertis- 1959) Foundation reports as a time of radical change in
ing across products. business education. Benson reports that, on average, a new
Finally, we should be more comfortable with our own doctoral school in business was opened every 73 days dur-
identity. Our field has made many important contributions ing that decade and that faculty positions were filled with
to the business world, to society, and to science. We need to properly degreed professors. Business degrees were refo-
be more comfortable with who we are. We could even be cused from training workers to training managers; business
more proud of who we are. If we have a good article that colleges responded to demands for rigorous research and
fits equally well in two outlets, we may want to consider theory development. Since that time, the evolution of mar-
publishing it in a marketing journal rather than in an eco- keting thought, ideas, and issues has increased the complex-
nomics journal. If we have two equally good doctoral stu- ity of the discipline, and specializations have caused a
dents who we are considering hiring, one from psychology widening separation among subareas of the discipline. This
and the other from marketing, we may want to hire the stu- specialization has also been associated with a proliferation
dent from marketing. If we are more comfortable and possi- of publication outlets based on various target audiences.
bly more proud of our own identity, it will surely help us,
and it may also rub on to the practitioners.
FIGURE 2
JM’s Readability (1936–2001)
Readability and the Impact of
50
Marketing
Mean Flesch Reading Score

Ronald J. Bauerly, Don T. Johnson, &

Mandeep Singh

I
f marketers want to communicate across specializations,
across functional areas, and outside the marketing disci-
30
pline and if marketing science is to influence practice,
readability is a necessary, if not sufficient, condition to
bridge these audiences. We examine the readability levels of
JM over its history and find a dramatic decline in the 1966–
1971 period. We explore the reasons this occurred and offer
suggestions for enhancing readability and thus the impact
of marketing.
10
JM’s Readability 1936–2001
19 6
19 1
19 6
19 1
19 6
19 1
19 6
19 1
19 6
19 1
19 6
19 1
20 6
01
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
19

Klare (1963, p. 1) defines readability as “the ease of under-

Year
standing or comprehension due to the style of writing.” To
measure the readability of JM, we took samples from the
Notes: The Flesch readability test can be used to classify docu-
introductions of the first five articles in the first issue of JM ments as having different levels of readability. The “very diffi-
in each five-year period from 1936 to 2001. We measured cult” category is the classification for any document that
the readability of the passages using the Flesch (1948) for- scores lower than 30 on the Flesch scale.

Invited Essays / 19
 Another factor affecting the level of readability is the articles are written in an academic style, the information
authors themselves. Most authors are trained in doctoral must be diffused through other outlets before it is likely to
programs devoted more to the development of research be directly usable by practitioners.
skills than to the development of writing skills. New profes-
sors learn through the interactive research process that writ- Suggestions for Improving Readability
ing skills are given limited attention. Professors read pub-
Nothing less than a true commitment to improved readabil-
lished articles, and to increase their chances of being
ity is required. We outline several worthwhile options.
published, they mimic what they read.
There is evidence that the editing and review process
Could reviewers be unwittingly contributing to the
improves readability (Roberts, Fletcher, and Fletcher 1994).
belief that difficult writing increases the likelihood of publi-
Excellent advice on how to improve readability has been
cation? In his seminal article about journal readability,
provided by editors (e.g., Kover 2002; Mick 2005; Staelin
Armstrong (1980) finds some support for the proposition
2002). Authors can also have their papers professionally
that high-prestige publications are expected to have low
readability. Armstrong rewrote passages from articles in ten edited before submission. Some institutions already provide
highly ranked management journals to be more readable such services for their faculty either through in-house staff
and then asked groups of faculty participants to read the dif- or by paying for external copy editors. Major journals such
ferent versions. Participants rated the less readable versions as JM could assign readability management to an assistant
as being of better quality. In a similar vein, Metoyer-Duran editor whose focus would be to improve the readability of
(1993) finds that articles accepted at College & Research provisionally accepted papers. The motivation for authors
Libraries had worse readability scores than rejected articles. would be strong if only an improvement in readability stood
Such evidence is a disquieting reminder of the virulence of between them and publication. Doctoral programs could
the difficult-to-read phenomenon. require a technical writing course with a commitment to
What contributed to the decline of readability in JM? In helping students develop more readable writing styles. We
his examination of the literary history of JM, Kerin (1996) must train new scholars to recognize that good, readable
details the evolution of JM from a largely descriptive jour- writing defines good scholarship.
nal to a scholarly and professional one. Journal of Market- In summary, this collection of invited essays concurs on
ing has witnessed dramatic stakeholder realignments over a critical premise. If marketing is to enjoy its central organi-
the years (see Table 2). Its editorial staff, editorial review zational role, we must collaborate across specialized silos
board membership, and authors have all moved dramati- within marketing (see the essay by MacInnis) and across
cally away from practitioners to academicians. As a conse- functional and discipline-related areas (see the essay by
quence, merely descriptive articles have been replaced with Raju) and to conduct and disseminate research that is cus-
articles that make a meaningful scholarly contribution. As tomized to the world markets (see the essay by Steenkamp).
Kerin (1996, p. 9) notes, this was “determined, in large Furthermore, as this essay contends, if marketing science is
measure, by logic in argumentation and thoroughness in to influence marketing practice, we must work toward mak-
documentation in both qualitative and quantitative terms.” ing it not only relevant but also readable. Readability pro-
By the early 1970s, surveys of JM subscribers found vides a critical bridge among specialized silos, functional
that many subscribers had come to view the journal as too areas, global markets, and marketing practice. We believe
“academic” and lacking in “marketing applications” that the English language is a wonderful, flexible, supple
(Grether 1976). More recently, Crosier (2004) found that tool; in the hands of an experienced and properly motivated
JM is not alone; readability is quite difficult in other major writer, it should allow for the effective communication of
marketing journals as well. As Staelin (2002) asserts, when complex ideas to readers.

TABLE 2
JM Stakeholders

Academic Practitioner

Year Number Percentage Number Percentage

Editorial staff 1966 2 25 6 75

1971 6 75 2 25
2001 4 100 0 0
Review board 1966 24 35 41 65
1971 38 63 22 37
2001 102 98 2 2
Contributing authors 1966 32 58 23 42
1971 63 91 6 9
2001 68 97 2 3

20 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

 that marketing is a complex discipline that requires people
to be open to many difference approaches and ideas, many
Influencing the Practice Through of which may come from disciplines other than marketing,
Big New Ideas if our profession is to provide successful solutions. In addi-
tion, these essays imply that without this breadth and toler-
ance, our field will become insular and lose its relevance
Richard Staelin and impact. With this in mind, I discuss a few ways to

W
e all enter the academy believing that our efforts broaden our scope of issues and tolerance for new ideas and
will have an impact. Some of us center our atten- thus positively influence the practice of marketing.
tion on teaching, aiming to diffuse our acquired
knowledge to students who act as change agents; others Big New Ideas
view the creation of new ideas as the best way to modify the Our field has come a long way since the mid-1960s. Entire
practice; and still others attempt to influence the practice new fields have developed. Some of these fields have had a
through consulting. Yet it is not always clear that marketing direct impact on the practice of marketing (e.g., the analysis
academics have had their desired impact. Indeed, this is a of scanner data, brand equity studies), and others have had a
recurring theme in all the essays of this issue. Bauerly, much more indirect effect (e.g., analytic model building, the
Johnston, and Singh worry that our current publications are study of how consumers make decisions). In addition, many
not readable and therefore are less likely to affect the prac- of the concepts developed within the field of marketing
tice. MacInnis believes that the bifurcation of our profes- have migrated into other disciplines. Still, there is a grow-
sion leads to silos, and as a result, knowledge is lost across ing perception that our field is closing in on itself and not
these different branches of our profession. She suggests that having any impact on the practice. Wilkie refers to this as a
the people in different areas be open to other perspectives “meanness” that has crept into our field. Raju believes that
and appreciate research for what it is. Steenkamp also wor- our field is searching for incremental ideas rather than big
ries about silos. He argues that most of our theories are too ideas. McAlister believes that we are rejecting manuscripts
U.S. centric, and as a consequence, we are not able to that are not wrong just because there is a page constraint.
address important global issues. After detailing several of Using citations, Baumgartner and Pieters (2003) find that
these issues, he calls for marketing scholars to become other disciplines rarely build on the knowledge developed
more international in their research. Kerin calls for market- in marketing journals. The question then becomes, What
ing academics to broaden their interests so that they can can be done to make sure our field progresses and broadens
address multifunctional and business-level issues rather its influence?
than only marketing issues. This theme can also be found in Let me begin by addressing our journals. I agree with
Brown’s essay. He believes that we need to expand our tar- others that if we are to make strides in developing new
get market to managers in all parts of the firm and not only knowledge, we must learn from others. One way to enhance
marketing managers. Wilkie believes that most marketing this learning is for our leading marketing journals to publish
academics focus their attention on helping the firm and thus articles that cover a wide range of topics and use multiple
do not consider societal issues. He points to the possible approaches. Such a view is consistent with the data pro-
negative impact that can result from this narrow focus. Raju vided by Baumgartner and Pieters (2003), who analyze the
conjectures that the demise of marketing departments in citations from 49 marketing journals. They find that the
corporations is partly due to academics not providing prac- most influential marketing journals are those that have a
titioners with the correct tools and knowledge. He suggests broad span of influence; that is, such marketing journals
that we interact more with practitioners and that we modify publish articles that are cited by works published in a wide
our core marketing course to provide deeper knowledge. array of marketing journals. This leads me to suggest that at
McAlister is less concerned about knowledge generation least the editors of our core set of journals should try to
and more concerned about the knowledge creators who do attract the best articles in our field, regardless of topic or
not have enough outlets for publishing their new findings. method. It also leads me to suggest that the authors of such
She calls for the journals to expand the number of pages articles should emphasize the substantive or conceptual
published each year. Webster believes that we tend to tackle aspects of their work (versus the methods used) because
only part of the problem at any one time and that we need to these aspects tend to be of greatest interest to the largest
encourage senior faculty to take on complex issues that group of readers.
simultaneously address tactics, strategy, and organization. Now, consider the creation of big ideas. We all teach our
Sheth and Sisodia summarize the views of 17 speakers by students that one of the best ways to learn is to experiment.
pointing out that marketing needs to reform. They believe Experimentation implies some unanticipated variance. This
that the field needs to regain the trust of customers, make variation is useful because it enables a researcher to begin
better use of technology, broaden marketing’s perspective, to understand the underlying forces that influence a particu-
and learn from other disciplines. lar situation and thus to improve the work. However, this
Running throughout many of these essays is the need unanticipated variance can also lead to some undesirable
for academics not only to be aware of others’ work but also outcomes because for every positive draw, there is also a
to show tolerance and respect for others’ work and to negative draw. Researchers (especially young researchers)
broaden their own perspective. Implicit is the assumption tend to be risk averse. Because new ideas are also different

Invited Essays / 21
ideas, many researchers shy away from looking for the These two examples indicate that the field is still open
unexpected. This is particularly evident in the selection of to new ideas. However, in both cases, it took strong leader-
potential research projects and in the review process (i.e., in ship to ensure that ideas “saw the light of the day.” Because
the input and output stages of research). I was part of the review process for the CRM issue, I can
I certainly do not have the magic bullet to solve this safely note that many of the articles would not have been
problem, but I believe that it is possible to influence directly published if the editor (and consulting editors) took only the
the generation and adoption of new ideas. Consider two advice of the reviewers. My conversations with Rich Lutz
examples: The first took place in the mid-1980s when MSI confirmed that he also played a major role in ensuring that
provided seed money to a group of researchers who were the initial interpretive research papers made it through the
interested in how consumers actually used the products that review process. In both cases, the editors were willing to
firms sold to them (versus the standard paradigm at the time experiment, knowing full well that they could be accepting
of helping the firm influence consumers to buy the prod- a paper that would not meet the market test for impact.
uct). Using a diverse set of new (at least to marketing) Editors are not the only people who need to foster new
approaches—now referred to as interpretive research— ideas. Senior faculty across our discipline must take it on
these researchers traveled from coast to coast one summer themselves to facilitate new ideas and approaches. This is
in a Winnebago to observe product use (for a description of certainly the major theme of Webster’s essay when he calls
the trip, see Belk 2005). This resulted in several manu- for integrative research. However, it goes beyond this. The
scripts, many of which were sent to Journal of Consumer idea of facilitating new ideas also extends to the establish-
Research for possible publication. Because this type of ment of centers that act as umbrellas for a diverse set of
research and the questions it asked were new to the field, scholars and that address major substantive issues. Often,
there was much debate about the relevance of the topics and these issues cut across functional lines and require collabo-
the appropriateness of this new field to marketing. Many rative research. The process of facilitating big new ideas
people advocated that the papers should not be published in also pertains to those asked to evaluate others’ work for pos-
Journal of Consumer Research. However, the editor at the sible publication and during the promotion and tenure
time, Rich Lutz, was supportive and guided these papers process. Here, emphasis should be given to the generation
through the review process. As a result, a whole new field of big ideas and approaches versus technical sophistication
of inquiry gained the visibility and legitimacy necessary to or the number of publications. Reviewers need to look for
sustain its long-term viability. the good in a paper rather than view their task as finding the
A second example of the use of seed money and an edi- bad. The same issues apply to teaching. We should quickly
tor willing to support a budding new field is the case of cus- diffuse new ideas into the classroom and tie these ideas to
tomer relationship management (CRM). Approximately other areas of business, and we need people to step up and
four years ago, Duke received funding from Teradata, a develop new ways to deliver our knowledge to the practic-
division of NCR, to foster CRM research and curriculum ing managers.
design. Rather than using the money to fund internal opera- Finally, there is the issue of doctoral training. We must
tions, the Duke faculty decided to provide overall guidance prepare these new scholars to have deep knowledge in a
and seed money to a large number of researchers through- particular area of marketing. However, we also need to
out the world who were interested in studying different ensure that they have enough understanding of the diverse
aspects of CRM. Four years later, enough research had been approaches found in our field that they respect others’ work.
generated that Ruth Bolton, as editor of the JM, decided to Moreover, if this new breed of marketing academics is to
dedicate a significant number of journal pages to this one make an impact, they will need to understand how our field
issue. She appointed Bill Boulding and me to usher articles is integrated into the broader discipline of business. Without
through the review process with the goal of establishing a this respect and this broader knowledge, there is less chance
cohesive body of research that could act as a foundation for that they will be able to solve the next set of big problems
further exploration. facing our profession.

REFERENCES
Allen, Kelly (2005), “Leading CEOs: A Statistical Snapshot of sumer Research, Vol. 20, Leigh McAlister and Michael Roth-
S&P 500 Leaders,” (January), (accessed March 1, 2005), schild, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research,
[available at http://www.spencerstuart.com/home/]. 1–5.
AMA Task Force on the Development of Marketing Thought Armstrong, J.S. (1980), “Unintelligible Management Research
(1988), “Developing, Disseminating, and Utilizing Marketing and Academic Prestige,” Interfaces, 10 (2), 80–86.
Knowledge,” Journal of Marketing, 52 (October), 1–25.
Barry, John M. (2004), The Great Influenza: The Epic Story of the
Ambler, Tim, Chris Styles, and Wang Xiucun (1999), “The Effect
Deadliest Plague in History. New York: Viking Penguin.
of Channel Relationships and Guanxi on the Performance of
Inter-Province Export Ventures in the People’s Republic of Batra, Rajeev, Venkatraman Ramaswamy, Dana Alden, Jan-
China,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16 (1), Benedict E.M. Steenkamp, and S. Ramachander (2000),
75–87. “Effects of Brand Local/Non-Local Origin on Consumer Atti-
Andreasen, Alan R. (1993), “A Social Marketing Research Agenda tudes in Developing Countries,” Journal of Consumer Psychol-
for Consumer Behavior Researchers,” in Advances in Con- ogy, 9 (April), 83–95.

22 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

Baumgartner, Hans and Rik Pieters (2003), “The Structural Influ- Direct-to-Consumer Advertising,” Journal of Public Policy &
ence of Marketing Journals: A Citation Analysis of the Disci- Marketing, 24 (Spring), 3–6.
pline and Its Subareas Over Time,” Journal of Marketing, 67 Flesch, R. (1948), “A New Readability Yardstick,” Journal of
(April), 123–39. Applied Psychology, 32 (3), 221–33.
——— and Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp (1998), “Multi-Group Geyskens, Inge, Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp, and Nirmalya
Latent Variable Models for Varying Numbers of Items and Fac- Kumar (2005), “Make, Ally, or Buy? A Meta-Analysis of
tors With Cross-National and Longitudinal Applications,” Mar- Transaction Cost Theory,” working paper, Economics and
keting Letters, 9 (1), 21–35. Business Administration, Tilburg University.
Bearden, William O. and Richard G. Netemeyer (1999), Hand- Gordon, R.A. and J.E. Howell (1959), Higher Education for Busi-
book of Marketing Scales, 2d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage ness. New York: Columbia University Press.
Publications. Grether, J.T. (1976), “The First Forty Years,” Journal of Market-
Belk, Russell W. (1987), “Happy Thought,” in Advances in Con- ing, 40 (July), 63–69.
sumer Research, Vol. 14, Melanie Wallendorf and Paul Ander- Hammond, Allen L. and C.K. Prahalad (2004), “Selling to the
son, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1–4. Poor,” Foreign Policy, (May–June), 30–37.
——— (2005), “Posessions, Self, and the Sacred,” in 16th Paul D. Henderson, G., Jr., K. Ganesh, and P.R. Chandy (1990), “Across-
Converse Symposium, Abbie Griffin and Cele C. Otnes, eds. Discipline Journal Awareness and Evaluation: Implications for
Chicago: American Marketing Association, 46–66. the Promotion and Tenure Process,” Journal of Economics and
Benson, P. George (2004), “The Evolution of Business Education Business, 42 (4), 325–51.
in the U.S.,” Decision Line, 35 (2), 17–20. Hopkins, David S. and Earl L. Bailey (1971), The Chief Marketing
Bijmolt, Tammo, Leo J. Paas, and Jeroen K. Vermunt (2004), Executive: A Profile. New York: The Conference Board.
“Consumer and Country Segmentation: Multi-Level Latent ——— and ——— (1984), Organizing Corporate Marketing.
Class Analysis of Financial Product Ownership,” International New York: The Conference Board.
Journal of Research in Marketing, 21 (4), 323–40. Hyde, Paul, Edward Landry, and Andrew Tipping (2004), “Mak-
Bolton, Ruth N. (2003), “From the Editor,” Journal of Marketing, ing the Perfect Marketer,” Strategy & Business, (Winter),
67 (January), 1–3. 37–43.
——— and Matthew B. Myers (2003), “Price-Based Global Mar- Jaworski, Bernard and Ajay Kohli (1993), “Market Orientation:
ket Segmentation for Services,” Journal of Marketing, 67 Antecedents and Consequences,” Journal of Marketing, 57
(July), 108–128. (July), 53–70.
Brown, John S. and John Hagel (2005), “Innovation Blowback: Johannson, Johny (2004), In Your Face: How American Marketing
Disruptive Management Practices from Asia,” McKinsey Quar- Excess Fuels Anti-Americanism. London: Financial Times/
terly, 1, 35–45. Prentice Hall.
Brown, Stephen W. and Mary Jo Bitner (2006), “Mandating a Ser- Kalish, Shlomo, Vijay Mahajan, and Eitan Muller (1995), “Water-
vice Revolution for Marketing” in The Service Dominant Logic fall and Sprinkler New-Product Strategies in Competitive
of Marketing: Dialog, Debate, and Directions, Robert F. Lusch Global Markets,” International Journal of Research in Market-
and Stephen L. Vargo, eds. New York: M.E. Sharpe, ing, 12 (2), 105–119.
forthcoming. Keith, Robert (1960), “The Marketing Revolution,” Journal of
Burgess, Steven M. and Pfavai Nyajeka (2005), “Market Orienta- Marketing, 24 (January), 35–38.
tion and Performance at the “Bottom of the Pyramid: The Case Kerin, Roger (1996), “In Pursuit of an Ideal: The Editorial and Lit-
of Zimbabwean Retailers,” working paper, Graduate School of erary History of the Journal of Marketing,” Journal of Market-
Business, University of Cape Town, South Africa. ing, 60 (January), 1–13.
Crosier, Keith (2004), “How Effectively Do Marketing Journals ———, Vijay Mahajan, and P. Rajan Varadarajan (1990), Contem-
Transfer Useful Learning from Scholars to Practitioners?” porary Perspectives on Strategic Market Planning. Boston:
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 22 (5), 540–56. Allyn and Bacon.
Deshpandé, Rohit and John U. Farley (1999), “Understanding Klare, G.R. (1963), The Measurement of Readability. Ames: Iowa
Market Orientation: A Prospectively Designed Meta-Analysis State University Press.
of Three Market Orientation Scales,” in Developing a Market Kover, Arthur (2002), “Editorial: Readability,” Journal of Adver-
Orientation, Rohit Deshpandé, ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage tising Research, 42 (2), 5.
Publications, 217–35. Lehmann, Donald R. (2005), “Journal Evolution and the Develop-
——— and ——— (2004), “Organizational Culture, Market Ori- ment of Marketing,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 24
entation, Innovativeness, and Firm Performance: An Interna- (Spring), 137–142.
tional Odyssey,” International Journal of Research in Market- Leone, Robert P. and Randall L. Schultz (1980), “A Study of Mar-
ing, 21 (1), 3–22. keting Generalizations,” Journal of Marketing, 44 (January),
———, ———, and Frederick E. Webster Jr. (2002), “Triad 10–19.
Lessons: Generalizing Results on High Performance Firms in Lodish, Leonard M. (1974), “Vaguely Right Approach to Sales-
Five Business-to-Business Markets,” International Journal of force Allocations,” Harvard Business Review, 52
Research in Marketing, 17 (4), 353–62. (January–February), 119–25.
——— and Frederick E. Webster Jr. (1989), “Organizational Cul- Lutz, Richard J. (1989), “Positivism, Naturalism and Pluralism in
ture and Marketing: Defining the Research Agenda,” Journal of Consumer Research: Paradigms in Paradise,” in Advances in
Marketing, 53 (January), 3–15. Consumer Research, Vol. 16., Thomas Srull, ed. Provo, UT:
Drucker, Peter F. (1999), Management Challenges for the 21st Association for Consumer Research, 1–8.
Century. New York: HarperCollins. MacInnis, Deborah J. (2004), “Where Have All the Papers Gone?
Ellison, G. (2002), “Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: Reflections on the Decline of Conceptual Articles,” Association
A qr Theory,” Journal of Political Economy, 110 (5), for Consumer Research Newsletter, (Spring), 1–3.
994–1034. Mangaliso, Mzamo P. (2001), “Building Competitive Advantage
Etzioni, Amitai and Paul R. Lawrence (1991), Socio-Economics: from Ubuntu: Management Lessons from South Africa,” Acad-
Toward a New Synthesis. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. emy of Management Executive, 15 (1), 23–33.
Farris, Paul W. and William L. Wilkie (2005), “Marketing Schol- McAlister, Leigh (2005), “Toward Insight and Relevance,” Journal
ars’ Roles in Policy Arenas: An Opportunity for Discourse on of Public Policy & Marketing, 24 (Spring), 131–32.

Invited Essays / 23
——— and Earl Taylor (2005), “Choosing Priorities,” Marketing Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E.M. and Steven M. Burgess (2002),
Management, 14 (March–April), 42–46. “Optimum Stimulation Level and Exploratory Consumer
McGovern, Gail and John A. Quelch (2004), “The Fall and Rise of Behavior in an Emerging Consumer Market,” International
the CMO,” Strategy & Business, (Winter), 44–48ff. Journal of Research in Marketing, 19 (2), 131–50.
McGrath, Joseph. E. (1981), “Dilemmatics: The Study of ——— and Frenkel ter Hofstede (2002), “International Market
Research Choices and Dilemmas,” American Behavioral Scien- Segmentation: Issues and Perspectives,” International Journal
tist, 25 (2), 154–79. of Research in Marketing, 19 (3), 185–213.
Metoyer-Duran, Cheryl (1993), “The Readability of Published, ———, ———, and Michel Wedel (1999), “A Cross-National
Accepted, and Rejected Papers Appearing in College and Investigation into the Individual and National Cultural
Research Libraries,” College and Research Libraries, 54 Antecedents of Consumer Innovativeness,” Journal of Market-
(November), 517–26. ing, 63 (April), 55–69.
Mick, David (2005), “Inklings: From Mind to Page in Consumer Stewart, David W. (2005), personal communication, (February 19,
Research,” Association of Consumer Research Newsletter, 2005).
(Summer), 1–3. Swanson, Edward P. (2004), “Publishing in the Majors: A Com-
Montgomery, David B. (2005), “Asian Management Education: parison of Accounting, Finance, Management and Marketing,”
Some Twenty-First-Century Issues,” Journal of Public Policy Contemporary Accounting Research, 21 (1), 223–55.
& Marketing, 24 (Spring), 150–54. Tellis, Gerard J., Stefan Stremersch, and Eden Yin (2003), “The
International Takeoff of New Products: The Role of Econom-
Narver, John C. and Stanley F. Slater (1990), “The Effect of Mar-
ics, Culture, and Country Innovativeness,” Marketing Science,
ket Orientation on Business Profitability,” Journal of Market-
22 (Spring), 188–208.
ing, 54 (October), 20–35.
Ter Hofstede, Frenkel, Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp, and Michel
North, Douglass C. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and
Wedel (1999), “International Market Segmentation Based on
Economic Performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer- Consumer–Product Relations,” Journal of Marketing Research,
sity Press. 36 (February), 1–17.
Ozsomer, Aysegul and Bernard L. Simonin (2004), “Marketing Urban, Glen L. (2004), “The Emerging Era of Customer Advo-
Program Standardization: A Cross-Country Exploration,” cacy,” Sloan Management Review, 45 (2), 77–82.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21 (4), Varadarajan, P. Rajan, Satish Jayachandran, and J. Chris White
397–419. (2001), “Strategic Interdependence in Organizations: Decon-
Pierson, F.C. (1959), The Education of American Businessmen. glomeration and Marketing Strategy,” Journal of Marketing, 65
New York: McGraw-Hill. (January), 15–28.
Prahalad, C.K. (2004), The Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid: Wall Street Journal Europe (2005), “GE Will Pursue Growth in
Eradicating Poverty Through Profits. Philadelphia: Wharton Emerging Markets,” (March 2), A4.
School Publishing. Webster, Frederick E., Jr. (1992), “The Changing Role of Market-
Richins, Marsha (2000), “Consumer Behavior as a Social Sci- ing in the Corporation,” Journal of Marketing, 56 (October),
ence,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 28, Valdosta, 1–17.
GA: Association for Consumer Research, 1–5. ———, Alan J. Malter, and Shankar Ganesan (2003), “Can Mar-
Roberts, John C., Robert H. Fletcher, and Suzanne W. Fletcher keting Regain a Seat at the Table?” MSI Report No. 03-003.
(1994), “Effects of Peer Review and Editing on the Readability Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute, 29–49.
of Articles Published in Annals of Internal Medicine,” Journal Welch, Greg (2004), CMO Tenure: Slowing the Revolving Door.
of the American Medical Association, 272 (2), 119–21. New York: Spencer Stuart.
Scheer, Lisa K., Nirmalya Kumar, and Jan-Benedict E.M. Wilkie, William L. (1981), “Presidential Address: 1980,” in
Steenkamp (2003), “Similar and Divergent Reactions to Per- Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 8, Kent Monroe, ed. Ann
ceived Inequity in U.S. Versus Dutch Interorganizational Rela- Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 1–6.
tionships,” Academy of Management Journal, 46 (June), ——— (1994), Consumer Behavior, 3d ed. New York: John Wiley
303–316. & Sons.
Schwartz, Shalom H., Gila Melech, Arielle Lehmann, Steven M. ——— (2002), “On Books and Scholarship: Reflections of a Mar-
Burgess, Mari Harris, and Vicki Owens (2001), “Extending the keting Academic,” Journal of Marketing, 66 (July), 141–52.
Cross-Cultural Validity of the Theory of Basic Human Values ——— and Elizabeth S. Moore (1997), “Consortium Survey on
with a Different Method of Measurement,” Journal of Cross- Marketing and Society Issues: Summary and Results,” Journal
Cultural Psychology, 32 (5), 519–41. of Macromarketing, 17 (April), 89–95.
Severin W.J. and J.W. Tankard (1992), Communication Theories: ——— and ——— (1999), “Marketing’s Contributions to Soci-
Origins, Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media, 3d ed. New ety,” Journal of Marketing, 63 (Special Issue), 198–218.
York: Longman Group. ——— and ——— (2003), “Scholarly Research in Marketing:
Sheth, Jagdish N. and Rajendra S. Sisodia (2006), Does Market- Exploring the ‘4 Eras’ of Thought Development,” Journal of
Public Policy & Marketing, 22 (Fall), 116–46.
ing Need Reform? Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, forthcoming.
Wind, Jerry, Colin Crook, and Robert Gunther (2004), The Power
———, ———, and Adina Barbulescu (2006), “The Image of
of Impossible Thinking: Transform the Business of Your Life
Marketing,” in Does Marketing Need Reform? Armonk, NY:
and the Life of Your Business. Philadelphia: Wharton School
M.E. Sharpe.
Publishing.
Silver, Steve (2003), “Bring on the Super-CMO,” Strategy & Busi- Xie, Jinhong, X. Michael Song, and Anne Stringfellow (1998),
ness, (Summer), 14–19. “Interfunctional Conflict, Conflict Resolution Styles, and New
Staelin, Richard (2002), “A Prior Editor’s Guidelines on Readabil- Product Success: A Four-Culture Comparison,” Management
ity,” (accessed on April 18, 2005), [available at http://bear.cba. Science, 44 (December), S192–S206.
ufl.edu/centers/MKS/author_information/readability.asp]. Zaltman, Gerald, Karen Le Masters, and Michael Heffring (1982),
–——— (2005), “Era’s III and IV: My Reflections,” Journal of Theory Construction in Marketing: Some Thoughts on Think-
Public Policy & Marketing, 24 (Spring), 146–49. ing. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

24 / Journal of Marketing, October 2005

AUTHORS
Ronald J. Bauerly is Professor of Marketing, Department of Mar- Jagdish N. Sheth is Charles H. Kellstadt Professor of Marketing,
keting and Finance, Western Illinois University (e-mail: RJ- Goizueta Business School, Emory University (e-mail:
Baurely@wiu.edu). jag@jagsheth.com).
Stephen W. Brown is Edward M. Carson Chair in Services Mar- Mandeep Singh is Professor of Marketing, Department of Market-
keting and Professor of Marketing, W.P. Carey School of Busi- ing and Finance, and Director of Faculty Development, West-
ness, and Executive Director, Center for Services Leadership, ern Illinois University (e-mail: M-Singh@wiu.edu).
Arizona State University (e-mail: stephen_brown@asu.edu). Rajendra S. Sisodia is Professor of Marketing, Bentley College (e-
Don T. Johnson is Professor of Finance, Department of Marketing mail: rsisodia@bentley.edu).
and Finance, Western Illinois University (e-mail: DT- Richard Staelin is Edward and Rose Donnell Professor of Busi-
Johnson@wiu.edu). ness Administration, Fuqua School of Business, Duke Univer-
Roger A. Kerin is Harold C. Simmons Distinguished Professor of sity (e-mail: rstaelin@duke.edu).
Marketing, Edwin L. Cox School of Business, Southern Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp is CentER Research Professor of
Methodist University (e-mail: rkerin@mail.cox.smu.edu). Marketing, GfK Professor of International Marketing
Deborah J. MacInnis is Professor of Marketing, Marshall School Research, and Director of Graduate Studies, Tilburg University
of Business, University of Southern California (e-mail: (e-mail: J.B.Steenkamp@uvt.nl).
macinnis@usc.edu). Fredrick E. Webster Jr. is Charles Henry Jones 3rd Century Pro-
Leigh McAlister is Executive Director of the Marketing Science fessor of Management, Emeritus, Tuck School of Business,
Institute (e-mail: lmcalister@msi.org). Dartmouth University, and Visiting Scholar, Eller College of
Jagmohan S. Raju is Joseph J. Aresty Professor of Marketing, Management, Arizona State University (e-mail: Frederick.E.
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania (e-mail: Webster@Dartmouth.edu).
rajuj@wharton.upenn.edu). William L. Wilkie is Aloysius and Eleanor Nathe Professor of
Marketing, Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre
Dame (e-mail: Wilkie.1@nd.edu).

Invited Essays / 25