دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی پیشبرد استراتژی بازاریابی در رشته بازاریابی و فراتر از آن - تیلور و فرانسیس 2018

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this article is to advance the field of strategic marketing within the marketing discipline, which will in turn, the author argues, contribute to enhancing the discipline’s impact beyond the narrow confines of its own journals. Towards this goal, certain aspects of the history of marketing strategy need to be reviewed. However, though this article draws extensively on historical sources, it is not a history of marketing strategy. Rather, this article uses historical materials and arguments concerning the four ‘Eras’ of marketing thought to advance five major claims: the area of strategic marketing (1) had significant promise when the marketing academic discipline was founded in Era I (1900–1920), (2) was neglected in Era II (1920–1950), (3) rose to prominence in Era III (1950–1980), (4) has become a ‘fragment’ in Era IV (1980– present) and (5) has prospects that are both promising and problematic in the future ‘Era V’. Finally, a tentative prognosis for strategic marketing and the marketing discipline is suggested.

Conclusion and prognosis for Era V Marketing’s Era V

scholars in strategic marketing and other areas will owe much to those who tilled marketing’s fields in Eras I, II, III and IV. Era V’s scholars will inherit the substantive content – both theories and empirical research – of over 100 years of scholarship, a discipline that has legitimacy in the eyes of other disciplines’ scholars; a significant number of established, highimpact journals; and several, well-established, professional associations. Nonetheless, the prominent commentaries noted in this article’s introduction maintain that both the marketing discipline and the area of strategic marketing are troubled. These commentaries provide significant grounds for forecasting that marketing’s prospects in Era V are problematic. The works of Clark et al. (2014) and Houston (2016) document that the influence of the marketing discipline’s academic research is low outside the narrow confines of its own journals, and the situation is getting worse – there is a slide towards academic irrelevance. How, then, might the slide might be reversed? First, as the marketing discipline has evolved, the norms for publication in the marketing discipline’s most prominent journals have shifted so that it is extraordinarily difficult to publish ‘traditional’ marketing strategy articles. Particularly, disastrous for marketing scholarship has been the widespread adoption of the ‘SSB’ norm (i.e. the ‘same source bias’ norm).