A general theory of marketing: Conceivable, elusive, or illusive

Q1 Business, Management and Accounting
Rajan Varadarajan
{"title":"A general theory of marketing: Conceivable, elusive, or illusive","authors":"Rajan Varadarajan","doi":"10.1007/s13162-022-00246-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h2>Abstract\n</h2><div><p>Hunt et al. (2022, in this issue) provide a perspective on the evolution of the marketing discipline spanning five eras, its current state, and outlook. Looking back, they view certain developments in the evolutionary trajectory of the discipline during Era 4 as troubling. Looking ahead at Era 5, they propose certain course correction initiatives for consideration by the marketing academia. They delineate the service-dominant logic, general framework of integrative marketing, and resource-advantage theory of competition as candidates that merit consideration for the mainstream focus of the discipline during Era 5 and propose a set of questions for evaluation. In reference to the evolutionary trajectory of the field during Era 4, they characterize the fragmentation of the field and subsequent loss of community as a troubling development. As argued in this commentary, fragmentation is an inevitable consequence of specialization and a normal phenomenon in the evolutionary trajectory of academic disciplines. Upheavals due to fragmentation, if any, are likely to be transient. Of the three candidates highlighted by the authors as meriting consideration for the discipline’s mainstream focus during Era 5, this commentary primarily focuses on Hunt’s resource-advantage theory as a foundation for developing a general theory of marketing from the perspective of Hunt’s fundamental explananda of marketing.</p></div></div>","PeriodicalId":7786,"journal":{"name":"AMS Review","volume":"12 3-4","pages":"177 - 183"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMS Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13162-022-00246-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract

Hunt et al. (2022, in this issue) provide a perspective on the evolution of the marketing discipline spanning five eras, its current state, and outlook. Looking back, they view certain developments in the evolutionary trajectory of the discipline during Era 4 as troubling. Looking ahead at Era 5, they propose certain course correction initiatives for consideration by the marketing academia. They delineate the service-dominant logic, general framework of integrative marketing, and resource-advantage theory of competition as candidates that merit consideration for the mainstream focus of the discipline during Era 5 and propose a set of questions for evaluation. In reference to the evolutionary trajectory of the field during Era 4, they characterize the fragmentation of the field and subsequent loss of community as a troubling development. As argued in this commentary, fragmentation is an inevitable consequence of specialization and a normal phenomenon in the evolutionary trajectory of academic disciplines. Upheavals due to fragmentation, if any, are likely to be transient. Of the three candidates highlighted by the authors as meriting consideration for the discipline’s mainstream focus during Era 5, this commentary primarily focuses on Hunt’s resource-advantage theory as a foundation for developing a general theory of marketing from the perspective of Hunt’s fundamental explananda of marketing.

市场营销的一般理论:可想象的、难以捉摸的或虚幻的
AbstractHunt等人(2022,本期)对营销学科跨越五个时代的演变、现状和前景提供了一个视角。回过头来看,他们认为第四纪元期间该学科进化轨迹的某些发展令人不安。展望时代5,他们提出了一些课程调整举措,供营销学界考虑。他们将服务主导逻辑、整合营销的总体框架和竞争的资源优势理论描述为时代5期间值得考虑的学科主流焦点的候选者,并提出了一组评估问题。关于第4时代该领域的进化轨迹,他们将该领域的碎片化和随后的社区丧失描述为一个令人不安的发展。正如本评论所述,碎片化是专业化的必然结果,也是学术学科发展轨迹中的一种正常现象。分裂造成的动荡(如果有的话)可能是短暂的。在作者强调的三位候选人中,值得考虑的是该学科在第五时代的主流关注点,本评论主要关注亨特的资源优势理论,从亨特对市场营销的基本解释的角度,将其作为发展市场营销一般理论的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AMS Review
AMS Review Business, Management and Accounting-Marketing
CiteScore
14.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The AMS Review is positioned to be the premier journal in marketing that focuses exclusively on conceptual contributions across all sub-disciplines of marketing. It publishes articles that advance the development of market and marketing theory.The AMS Review is receptive to different philosophical perspectives and levels of analysis that range from micro to macro. Especially welcome are manuscripts that integrate research and theory from non-marketing disciplines such as management, sociology, economics, psychology, geography, anthropology, or other social sciences. Examples of suitable manuscripts include those incorporating conceptual and organizing frameworks or models, those extending, comparing, or critically evaluating existing theories, and those suggesting new or innovative theories. Comprehensive and integrative syntheses of research literatures (including quantitative and qualitative meta-analyses) are encouraged, as are paradigm-shifting manuscripts.Manuscripts that focus on purely descriptive literature reviews, proselytize research methods or techniques, or report empirical research findings will not be considered for publication.  The AMS Review does not publish manuscripts focusing on practitioner advice or marketing education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信