4. Conclusions
The aim of this paper was to reconceptualise SoME in constructs that made it more relevant to the broader marketing academy. We briefly reviewed the current state of SoME in particular, drawing attention to the power imbalance away from SoME and the perception of SoME as a low value activity. This was then followed by the presentation of three futurescapes as a means of conceptualising some of SoME’s potential futures. The first futurescape addressed the inequity of journal publications. The second futurescape explored opportunities to disseminate SoME beyond conventional journal publication and the third futurescape investigated the structure of support mechanisms within business schools for SoME. These futurescapes were offered as a means to add to the broader conversation regarding both marketing and business education in the hope that it may contribute positively to the development of SoME, becoming a more viable research area for top marketing academics. There are limitations with all the futurescapes presented, in particular the requirement for champions who hold power within in the academy to support change for SoME at systemic and institutional levels, as well as the time it will take for any change to disrupt the status quo. We build on the work of many others (Abernethy and Padgett, 2011; Arbaugh et al 2017; Boshier, 2009; Finch et al., 2012; Nagy 2011; Olssen and Peters, 2005) who view discipline-focused education research such as SoME as important within academia. We recognise the duality of an academic’s role as both a researcher and a teacher and draw these aspects closer together.
