Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:56:14.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Meaning of ‘Marketing‘

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Reinhard Angelmar  and
Christian Pinson
Reinhard Angelmar
Affiliation:
Ecole Superieure des Sciences Economiques et Commerciales
Christian Pinson
Affiliation:
Ecole Superieure des Sciences Economiques et Commerciales
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the most persistent problems of marketing has been the question of what is meant by ‘marketing’. In the fifties and sixties discussion focused on the alleged scientific character of marketing. “Is marketing an art or a science?” was the principal question of the day [14], [5], [28]. This preoccupation with the procedures and the conceptual framework of marketing was followed by an eager interest in the contributions which clarification of marketing concepts could make to attaining the objectives of marketing managers. Managerial marketing and management science in marketing are the results of this identification of marketing with the objectives of its managerial users [16], [25]. More recently the emphasis has switched from procedures, conceptual framework, and objectives to the problem of the proper boundaries of marketing [19], [23], [18].

Type
Discussion
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , June 1975 , pp. 208 - 214
Copyright
Copyright © 1975 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anastasi, A. Fields of Applied Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.Google Scholar
Bartels, R. “The General Theory of Marketing.” Journal of Marketing 32 (1968): 29–33.10.1177/002224296803200107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, R. Marketing Theory and Metatheory. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, 1970.Google Scholar
Bunge, M. Scientific Research I: The Search for System. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1967.10.1007/978-3-642-48135-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buzzell, R. D. “Is Marketing a Science?” Harvard Business Review 41 (1963).Google Scholar
Cartwright, D. “Basic and Applied Social Psychology.” Philosophy of Science 16 (1949): 193–208.10.1086/287037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, M. R. Reason and Nature. New York: Free Press, 1953.Google Scholar
Committee of the American Marketing Association (R. S. Alexander, Chairman). Marketing Definitions: A Glossary of Marketing Terms. 1960.Google Scholar
Dawson, L. M. “Marketing Science in the Age of Aquarius.” Journal of Marketing 35 (1971): 66–72.10.1177/002224297103500311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foster, G. M. Applied Anthropology. Boston: Little-Brown, 1969.Google Scholar
Gouldner, A. W. and Miller, S. M. (eds.). Applied Sociology: Opportunities and Problems. New York: Free Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Grunberg, E. “The Meaning of Scope and External Boundaries of Economics.” The Structure of Economic Science. Edited by Krupp, S. R. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1966. Pages 148–165.Google Scholar
Hesse, M. “Is there an Independent Observation Language?” In The Nature and Function of Scientific Theories. Edited by Colodny, R. G. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, D. D. “Marketing as a Science: An Appraisal.” Journal of Marketing 16 (1952): 286–293.10.1177/002224295201600303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, A. The Conduct of Inquiry. New York: Chandler, 1964.Google Scholar
Kelley, E. J. and Lazer, W. (eds.). Managerial Marketing: Perspectives and Viewpoints. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, 1967.Google Scholar
Korzybinski, A. Science and Sanity. New York: Science Press, 1941.Google Scholar
Kotier, P. “A Generic Concept of Marketing.” Journal of Marketing 36 (1972): 46–54.Google Scholar
Kotier, P. and Levy, S. J. “Broadening the Concept of Marketing.” Journal of Marketing 33 (1969): 10–15.Google Scholar
Kotler, P. and Levy, S. J. “A New Form of Marketing Myopia: Rejoinder to Professor Luck.” Journal of Marketing 33 (1969): 55–57.10.1177/002224296903300311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Levy, M. J. Jr. “Some Basic Methodological Difficulties in Social Science.” Philosophy of Science 17 (1950): 287–301.10.1086/287104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luck, D. “Broadening the Concept of Marketing—Too Far.” Journal of Marketing 33 (1969): 53–54.Google Scholar
Marketing Staff of The Ohio State University. “A Statement of Marketing Philosophy.” Journal of Marketing 29 (1965): 43–44.10.1177/002224296502900109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, D. B. and Urban, G. L. Management Science in Marketing. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1969.Google Scholar
Nicosia, F. M. Consumer Decision Processes. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1966.Google Scholar
Pigou, A. C. Essays in Applied Economics. London: P. S. King and Son, 1923.Google Scholar
Taylor, W. J. “‘Is Marketing a Science?‘ Revisited.” Journal of Marketing 29 (1965): 49–53.Google Scholar
Weber, M. “Objectivity in Social Science.” In Readings in the Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Edited by Brodbeck, M. New York: Macmillan, 1968. Pages 85–97.Google Scholar
Whitehead, A. N. Science and the Modern World. New York: Macmillan, 1967.Google Scholar