• G. Tomas M. Hult
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Business book series (BRIEFSBUSINESS, volume 20)


Research on the role of marketing in organizations has typically adopted either a functional or a cross-functional perspective. Moorman and Rust (1999, p. 181) describe a functional marketing organization as having “the concentration of the responsibility for marketing activities (knowledge and skills) within a group of specialists in the organization.” Workman et al. (1998, p. 32) defines “cross-functional dispersion of marketing activities as the extent to which functional groups, other than marketing, are involved in traditional marketing activities.” While there has been a tendency in the marketing literature in the last 2 decades to increasingly emphasize the cross-functional perspective over the functional perspective (Moorman and Rust 1999), each perspective and its potential combinative effects (Kogut and Zander 1992) has key implications for the marketing organization (Workman et al. 1998). More importantly, each perspective is rooted in the idea of a set of marketing activities being performed by marketing specialists and/or nonspecialists.


Business Process Organization Theory Marketing Activity Marketing Literature Marketing Organization 
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.


  1. Achrol, R.S., and P. Kotler. 1999. Marketing in the network economy. Journal of Marketing 63(Special Issue): 146–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J.C., H. Håkansson, and J. Johanson. 1994. Dyadic business relationships within a business network context. Journal of Marketing 58: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barney, J.B. 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management 17(1): 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Clarkson, M. 1995. A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review 20(1): 92–117.Google Scholar
  5. Day, G.S. 1994. The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing 58: 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Day, G.S. 2011. Closing the marketing capabilities gap. Journal of Marketing 75(4): 183–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eesley, C., and M.J. Lenox. 2006. Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management Journal 27(8): 765–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Freeman, R.E. 1984. Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Marshfield, MA: Pitman Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
  9. Håkansson, H. 1989. Corporate technological behaviour. Worchester, England: Billing & Sons, Ltd.Google Scholar
  10. Håkansson, H. 1992. Evolution processes in industrial networks. In Industrial networks—a new view of reality, ed. B. Axelsson and G. Easton. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Håkansson, H., and J. Johanson. 1984. A model of industrial networks. In Industrial networks—a new view of reality, ed. B. Axelsson and G. Easton. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Håkansson, H., and C. Östberg. 1975. Industrial marketing—an organizational problem. Industrial Marketing Management 4(2/3): 113–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hult, G.T.M. 2011. Market-focused sustainability: market orientation plus! Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 39(1): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hult, G.T.M., D.J. Ketchen Jr., and E.L. Nichols Jr. 2002. An examination of cultural competitiveness and order fulfillment cycle time within supply chains. Academy of Management Journal 45(3): 577–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hult, G.T.M., J.A. Mena, O.C. Ferrell, and L. Ferrell. 2011. Stakeholder marketing: a definition and conceptual framework. AMS Review 1(1): 44–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hunt, S.D. 2000. A general theory of competition: resources, competences, productivity, and economic growth. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  17. Johanson, J., and J.-E. Vahlne. 2011. Markets and networks: implications for strategy making. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 39(4): 484–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kogut, B., and U. Zander. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science 3(3): 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moorman, C., and R.T. Rust. 1999. The role of marketing. Journal of Marketing 63(Special Issue): 180–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Narver, J. C., S. F. Slater, and D. L. MacLachlan. 2000. Total market orientation, business performance, and innovation. Report No. 00-116, Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.Google Scholar
  21. Pfeffer, J., and G.R. Salancik. 1978. The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  22. Srivastava, R.K., T.A. Shervani, and L. Fahey. 1999. Marketing, business processes, and shareholder value: an organizationally embedded view of marketing activities and the discipline of marketing. Journal of Marketing 63(Special Issue): 168–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Teece, D.J. 2010. Forward integration and innovation: transaction costs and beyond. Journal of Retailing 86(3): 277–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thompson, J.D. 1967. Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Thorelli, H.B. 1986. Networks: between markets and hierarchies. Strategic Management Journal 7(1): 37–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vorhies, D.W., and N.A. Morgan. 2005. Benchmarking marketing capabilities for sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Marketing 69: 80–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Waluszewski, A. 1989. Framväxten av en Mekanisk Marsateknik—en Utvecklingshistoria. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala Universitet.Google Scholar
  28. Wernerfelt, B. 1984. A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5: 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Williamson, O.E. 1975. Markets and hierarchies: analysis and antitrust implications. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  30. Workman Jr., J.P., C. Homburg, and K. Gruner. 1998. Marketing organization: an integrative framework of dimensions and determinants. Journal of Marketing 62(3): 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Tomas M. Hult
    • 1
  1. 1.Michigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations