Advertisement

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 12–23 | Cite as

An evaluation of progress in the development of a definition of marketing

  • O. C. Ferrell
  • George H. Lucas
Article

Abstract

This study evaluates progress in developing a definition of marketing. A survey of marketing educators, managers, scholar-experts and students was conducted to determine elements important in a definition of marketing, a ranking of popular definitions of marketing and an evaluation of the definitions based on relevant criteria. All categories of respondents ranked the 1985 AMA definition of marketing as the definition that best represents the discipline of marketing.

Keywords

Marketing Exchange Relationship Market News American Market Association Market Definition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alderson, Wroe 1957. Marketing Behavior and Executive Action. Homewood, Ill: Richard D. Irwin.Google Scholar
  2. — 1965.Dynamic Marketing Behavior. Homewood, Ill. Richard D. Irwin.Google Scholar
  3. —, and Miles W. Martin. 1965. “Toward a Formal Theory of Transactions and Trasvections.”Journal of Marketing Research 2 (May), 117–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. “AMA Board Approves New Marketing Definition.” 1985.Marketing News. March 1: 1.Google Scholar
  5. Bartels, Robert 1974. “The Identity Crisis in Marketing.”Journal of Marketing 38 (October): 73–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bagozzi, Richard P. 1974a. “Marketing as an Organized Behavioral System of Exchange.”Journal of Marketing 38 (October): 77–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. — 1974b. “What Is a Marketing Relationship?.”Der Market 51: 64–69.Google Scholar
  8. — 1975a. “Marketing as Exchange.”Journal of Marketing 39 (October): 32–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. — 1975b. “Social Exchange in Marketing.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 3 (Fall). 314–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. — 1976. “Science, Politics, and the Social Construction of Marketing.” InMarketing: 1776–1976 and Beyond. Ed. K.L. Bernhardt. Chicago: American Marketing Association: 586–92.Google Scholar
  11. — 1977. “Is All Social Exchange Marketing? A Reply.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 5 (Fall). 315–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. — 1978. “Marketing as Exchange.”American Behavioral Scientist 21 (March–April): 535–56.Google Scholar
  13. — 1979. “Toward a Formal Theory of Marketing Exchanges.” InConceptual and Theoretical Developments in Marketing. Eds. O.C. Ferrell, Stephen W. Brown and Charles W. Lamb, Jr., Chicago. American Marketing Association, 431–47.Google Scholar
  14. — 1986. Principles of Marketing Management.Chicago, IL:Science Research Associates Inc. Google Scholar
  15. Berkowitz, Eric, Roger Kerin, and William Rudelius. 1986.Marketing. St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Boone, Louis E. and David L. Kurtz. 1986.Contemporary Marketing. Hinsdale, IL, Dryden Press.Google Scholar
  17. Carman, James W. 1973. “On the Universality of Marketing.”Journal of Contemporary Business 2 (Autumn): 1–16.Google Scholar
  18. Committee on Definitions 1960. “Marketing Definitions: A Glossary of Marketing Terms.” Chicago: American Marketing Association. 15.Google Scholar
  19. Cooke, Ernest F, C.L., Abercrombie, and J. Michael Rayburn. 1986. “Problems with the AMA’s New Definition of Marketing Offer Opportunity to Develop an Even Better Definition.”Marketing Educator 5 (Spring). 1 and 25.Google Scholar
  20. Eggert, Robert J. 1974. “Eggert Discusses Additional Goals for This Administration, Seeks Help in Defining Marketing.”Marketing News September 15: 1.Google Scholar
  21. Ekeh, Peter P. 1974.Social Exchange Theory: The Two Traditions. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press: Chap. 3.Google Scholar
  22. Ferrell, O.C., and J.R. Perrachione. 1980. “An Inquiry Into Bagozzi’s Formal Theory of Marketing Exchange.”Theoretical Developments in Marketing, Eds. Charles W. Lamb and Patrick M. Dunne. Chicago: American Marketing Association, 158–161.Google Scholar
  23. Homans, George C. 1974.Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. Rev. Ed. New York. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  24. Hunt, Shelby D. 1983.Marketing Theory. Homewood, Ill: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.Google Scholar
  25. —, and Larry Chonko. 1984. “Marketing and Machiavellanism.”Journal of Marketing 48 (Summer): 30–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. — 1976.Marketing Theory. Columbus, Ohio: Grid Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
  27. Kotler, Philip and Sidney J. Levy. 1969. “Broadening the Concept of Marketing.”Journal of Marketing 33 (January): 10–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kotler, Philip “A New Form of Marketing Myopia: Rejoinder to Professor Luck.”Journal of Marketing 33 (July).Google Scholar
  29. — and Gerald Zaltman. 1971. “Social Marketing: An Approach to Planned Social Change.”Journal of Marketing 35 (July) 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. — 1972. “A Generic Concept of Marketing.”Journal of Marketing 36 (April): 46–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. — 1984.Marketing Management, Analysis, Planning and Content. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.Google Scholar
  32. Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd Ed. Chicago. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  33. Lazer, William 1985. Personal Correspondence in Reply to the Expert Survey.Google Scholar
  34. Levi-Strauss, Claude 1969.The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Boston. Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  35. Levy, Sidney J. and Gerald Zaltman. 1975.Marketing and Conflict in Society. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  36. Luck, David J. 1969. “Broadening the Concept of Marketing Too Far.”Journal of Marketing 33 (July): 53–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. — 1974. “Social Marketing: Confusion Compounded.”Journal of Marketing 38 (October): 70–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Luck, David J. 1986. Personal Correspondence in Reply to the Expert Survey.Google Scholar
  39. Lusch, Robert 1984. Memo to AMA Definition of Marketing Committee, April 4th: 1.Google Scholar
  40. McCarthy, E. Jerome 1981.Basic Marketing: A Managerial Approach. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc.Google Scholar
  41. Marketing Staff of the Ohio State University 1965. “Statement of Marketing Philosophy.”Journal of Marketing 29 (January). 43–44.Google Scholar
  42. Nicholls, William G. 1974. “Conceptual Conflicts in Marketing.”Journal of Economics and Business 26 (Winter).Google Scholar
  43. Peter, Paul J. and Jerry C. Olson. 1983. “Is Science Marketing?.”Journal of Marketing 47 (Fall): 111–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pride, William, and O.C. Ferrell 1977.Marketing: Basic Concepts and Decisions, Boston.Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  45. Robin, Donald E. 1978. “A Useful Scope for Marketing.”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 6 (Summer): 228–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • O. C. Ferrell
    • 1
  • George H. Lucas
    • 2
  1. 1.Texas A&M UniversityWingsvilleUSA
  2. 2.Memphis State UniversityMemphisUSA

Personalised recommendations