Towards post-industrial marketing: marketplace wisdom

AUTHOR COPY

INTRODUCTION

In this article we explore the concept of wisdom as a characteristic of a system rather than as an organism quality. This leads to the introduction of the concept of marketplace wisdom by taking the market as the system, and interaction of marketplace participants as the locus of marketing wisdom. We explain marketplace wisdom by looking at historical development as well as contemporary changes in the marketplace.

Wisdom is displayed in the long-term survival and development of the marketplace

JOURNAL OF CUSTOMER BEHAVIOUR, 2010, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 379-398ISSN1475-3928 print /ISSN1477-6421 online © Westburn Publishers Ltd. doi: 10.1362/147539210X543574

Towards post-industrial marketing:marketplace wisdom

Djavlonbek Kadirov, Eastern Institute of Technology, Napier, New Zealand*

Richard J. Varey, The Waikato Management School, Hamilton, New Zealand

Abstract We enlist marketplace wisdom as a next characteristic of the progress towards a post-industrial marketing system. Marketplace wisdom is manifested in the development and application of oppositional values, beliefs, and differing cultures pertaining to the marketing system in its long-term development. In this regard, the phylogeny and ontogeny of marketplace wisdom is distinguished. Phylogeny tracks the origins of wisdom in the long-term quest for survival, whereas its ontogeny is manifest in the marketing system’s four post-industrial qualities: comprehensiveness, interactivity, value, and impact.

Keywords Future of marketing, Post-industrial, Wisdom, Value shift, Marketing system

*Correspondence details and biographies for the authors are located at the end of the article.

JOURNAL OF

CUSTOMERBEHAVIOUR

AUTHOR COPY

system. The characteristic feature is flexibility to transition between two qualitatively different eras and beyond. We outline the central qualities of the wise system – comprehensiveness (scope and diversity), interactivity (participation and co-operation), value (multi-value balance), and impact (long-term welfare and common good).

We think that these qualities are observable in the participatory, communicative, relational, and altruistic behaviour which is becoming the way of the marketplace in the 21st Century.

THE CONCEPT OF WISDOM

A search for an appropriate metaphor for describing a future of marketing has led us, via the discussion in the preceding article, to the controversial and multidisciplinary concept of wisdom. As a product of contemplation, knowledge and sound judgment, wisdom seems to be as old as humanity (Staudinger and Baltes 1996). The use of the term Homo sapiens meaning wise, intelligent, knowing man in reference to the present human species truly indicates this aspiration. Early studies of the concept are found in ancient Egyptian and Greek writings (Small 2004). Great ancient scholars such as Pythagoras (582-496 BC), Aristotle (384-322 BC), Plato (427-347 BC), and Socrates (470-399 BC) speculate on wisdom. A current rebirth of interest in the concept can be observed in the fields of philosophy, religious studies and psychology, as well as cultural anthropology, political science, education, and management (Baltes and Staudinger 2000; Small 2004).

In psychology, implicit and explicit theories of wisdom are distinguished (Sternberg 2004, 1990; Sternberg and Jordan 2005). Implicit theories of wisdom deal with the meaning of the concept in folk narratives about daily life situations. Baltes and Staudinger (2000) present their conclusions drawn from implicit theories of wisdom. They have concluded that wisdom as a folk’s everyday language concept is: clearly different from other concepts [clear phenomenon], the representation of “excellence and ideals of human development” [future], a balanced perspective of “intellectual, affective and motivational aspects of human development” [future as a psychological space], an exceptional ability to deal with oneself and others [interactivity and relationship], exhibited in good intentions toward the well-being of oneself and others [sustainability] (p. 123). Also, its ability to integrate mind, virtues and experiences [value] has been emphasised. Explicit theories of wisdom, on the other hand, focus on the task of operationalisation of the concept in terms of scientific inquiry. Three schools of empirical research on wisdom have been distinguished (Baltes and Staudinger 2000). The first research direction is about the conceptualisation of wisdom as a personality trait, whereas the second tradition sees it as a dialectical thought. The third school studies wisdom as “an expert system dealing with the meaning and conduct of life” (Baltes and Staudinger 2000, p. 124).

Consistent with the assumptions of the latter school, the Berlin wisdom paradigm (BWP) has been developed (Baltes and Kunzmann 2004; Baltes and Staudinger 1993, 2000, 1996). It refers to wisdom as expert knowledge and judgement in the fundamental pragmatics of life. Fundamental pragmatics of life here is used in the sense of human struggle to aspire to a “good life” (Baltes and Staudinger 2000, p. 124). In this model, the capacity of wise judgement has been measured through the following criteria: (a) factual knowledge; (b) procedural knowledge; (c) life span contextualism; (d) relativism; and (e) uncertainty.

Journal of Customer Behaviour, Volume 9 JCB380

AUTHOR COPY

Kadirov and Varey Towards post-industrial marketing 381

In contrast, Ardelt (2004a) proposes a different framework to measure wisdom, while launching a heavy critique at BWP. She proposes a model that integrates the cognitive (knowledge of life), reflective (knowledge of self) and affective (sympathy and love for others) personality characteristics. She states that wisdom should be studied in terms of the extent to which peoples’ personality characteristics manifest wise qualities (Ardelt 2004a, 2004b). Similarly, in the tradition of the implicit-theoretical approach, Holliday and Chandler (1986) investigate attributes of a wise individual. Those attributes are proved to be exceptional understanding, judgment and communication skills, general competence, interpersonal skills, and social unobtrusiveness (Holliday and Chandler 1986).

A more comprehensive perspective of wisdom is reflected in Sternberg’s balance theory of wisdom (Sternberg 2003). He refers to wisdom

as the application of intelligence and creativity as mediated by values toward the achievement of a common good through a balance among (a) intrapersonal, (b) interpersonal, and (c) extra-personal interests, over the (a) short-term and (b) long-term, in order to achieve a balance among (a) adaptation to existing environments, (b) shaping of existing environments, and (c) selection of new environments

(p. 123).

The five factors that are thought to characterise the balance processes are differing goals, interest conflict, contextual interaction, time perspective, and values. Regardless how intelligent and creative they are, some people can be and/or act as if foolish (the opposite of wise) argues Sternberg (2003). The reasons are seen in the faulty assumptions they hold about the world and themselves, such as believing that they are unsusceptible to an error and/or ignoring the fact per se, being egocentric, feeling omniscient, omnipotent and invulnerable. In the context of commerce and business, this parallels with the notion of “managerial frames” (Hamel and Prahalad 1994), which is the perfect example for impairment (see previous article) that occurs in organisational contexts. Humility and curiosity have been offered as an antidote. Suddenly, wisdom behind the following expression becomes clarified to a great extent: “…only by humbly considering the merits of other managerial frames can one enlarge and enrich one’s own” (Hamel and Prahalad 1994). It perhaps indicates to the way wisdom is attained, implying a distancing away from impairment (foolishness) and enrichment with wise qualities.

WHY WISDOM? WISDOM AND THE FUTURE

As Tibbs (2000), a prominent futurist and management consultant, puts it, the future is predominantly a psychological space. He thinks of it in terms of its cognitive [knowledge], affective [emotions] and conative [intentions] elements. Strikingly, wisdom has been defined as a balanced perspective of intellectual, affective and motivational aspects of human development (Baltes and Staudinger 2000). Moreover, Ardelt’s framework of wisdom incorporates cognitive and affective components (Ardelt 2004a). In parallel to this, conceptualisation of a marketing system, in theory and practice, has been moving toward embracing the concepts of knowledge [learning, creating, managing] (Ballantyne 2004; Chaston 2004; Varey 2003), emotions [attitudes, value, mood] (Barone and Miniard 2002; Gardner 1985; Pham, Cohen, Pracejus, Hughes, and Mick 2001; Richins 1997), and intentions [corporate social responsibility, sustainability, adversarial marketing] (Ginsberg and Bloom

AUTHOR COPY

2004; Hart & Milstein 2003; Kotler 2004; Porter and Van Der Linde 1995). In this sense, wisdom can perhaps be identified as an integrative view of the future. This argument is supported and grounded in the comprehensive perspective on wisdom developed by Baltes and Staudinger (2000), where they define it “as a cognitive and motivational metaheuristic that organizes and orchestrates knowledge toward human excellence in mind and virtue, both individually and collectively” (p. 122). The definition implicitly emphasises the sense of movement toward a certain direction, which is ideal, utopian and unattainable, here human excellence in absolute terms. That is the very future hoped for by many enlightened fellows.

Tibbs (2000) contends that as long as the future remains uncertain, or at least remains accepted as uncertain in a psychological level, motivation to develop and improve will exist. Otherwise, certainty kills any motivation to act. Consistent with this, uncertainty is considered one of the characterising components of the concept of wisdom according to the Berlin wisdom paradigm (Baltes and Staudinger 2000), where the ability to recognise the relative unpredictability (indeterminacy) of managing life, including business situations, is stressed. Interestingly, impairing marketing through reducing it to a set of techniques seems to be mostly about the drive to secure certainty or a wish for certainty. Such attributes as indeterminacy and uncertainty are considered non-starters in positivistic, mechanical, cause-effect, micromanagerial models. The short-sighted approach would be to reduce the future (outcome) to a certainty formula, which probably looks like this - a certain technique ensures a certain outcome. However, one of wisdom’s characteristics is being uncertain, i.e. accepting an emergent nature of reality. Then, a wise formula to act on would be that an uncertain-emergent interaction entails an uncertain-emergent outcome. Locking ourselves into using a limited bundle of techniques to advance towards a myopic view of wished for and ascertained outcomes is probably unwise both strategically and tactically. Enrichment, rather than impairment, in this sense, seems to be the right way leading toward wisdom.

MARKETPLACE WISDOM

The future is not physical, but ethereal. It resides in minds, to be accurate, in interactive social minds. It comes about (into consciousness) through social interaction. The importance of thinking in terms of interactive cognitive structures has taken the attention of many. Wright (2002) stressed “marketplace metacognition” and social intelligence as a future locus of consumer research. His definition of these concepts is:

Marketplace metacognition refers to everyday individuals’ thinking about market-related thinking. This includes people’s beliefs about their own and others’ mental states and processes and their beliefs about other people’s beliefs on those topics as these beliefs pertain to the specifi c domain of marketplace cooperation and manipulation. Marketplace social intelligence refers to the cognitive routines and contents dedicated to achieving marketplace effi cacy that are accessible to individuals by virtue of functionally specialized evolutionary processes and the development of this functionally specialized expertise over an individual’s life span

(Wright 2002, p. 677)


AUTHOR COPY


It is worthwhile to note that Wright (2002) is bounding together the theory of interactive (social) minds (Baltes and Staudinger 1996) and the concept of place - here it is marketplace. The importance of the concept of place within the field of marketing has lengthily been discussed by Sherry (1998). The phenomenon under scrutiny is an “emplaced consumption”, i.e. consumption happening in certain market spaces (Sherry 1998). Thus, consumption experiences have been enriched by the place dimension. The attempt to give it a time flavour can also be observed in a substantial body of research on retrospective marketing (Brown and Sherry 2003). Nevertheless, it also needs to be taken toward the future.

The relationship of landscape, marketscape, cyberscape and mindscape (Figure 1, I) is of interest for Sherry (1998, 2000). Though he sees these types of marketplace as parallel existing entities, viewing them in hierarchical order would perhaps not violate his assumptions too much. The adapted model of marketplaces (Figure 1, II) seems to be more responsive to the interpretive perspective of consumer research, rather than positivist view (Hudson and Ozanne 1988). The adapted model assumes all layers of the marketplace to be cognitively apprehended within marketplace metacognition. The dimensions would range from being conscious of the ethereal, to the physical, then to the ethereal, from natural to cultural, and from less to more intensive interaction along the levels.

Once again it takes us back to Wright’s (2002) definition of marketplace metacognition, to remind us that it was the “everyday individuals’ thinking about market-related thinking” (p. 677). Everyday here means that the model of marketplace is considered in a discrete point of time, in a kind of snapshot of a current situation. However, extrapolation of these fixed points along the time dimension to eternity would give us the picture of the future. So what is the essence of futuristic comprehension? Again in Wright (2002), it is about marketplace cooperation [enrichment] and domination [impairment]. To act upon it effectively, as he argues, we need to acquire marketplace social intelligence, which in our words would be wisdom or wise decision making. Then the phenomenon we are dealing with seems to be marketplace wisdom. For Wright, this would be accessible to individuals by virtue of functionally specialised evolutionary processes [wisdom as personality trait (Ardelt

Physical

Ethereal

Natural Cultural

Landscape Marketscape

CyberscapeMindscape

Mindscape

Landscape

Marketscape

Cyberscape

From ethereal tophysical toethereal

From naturalto cultural

To moreinteraction

I II

FIGURE 1 The view of marketplace (adapted from Sherry 1998, 2000)

AUTHOR COPY

2004a,2004b)] and the development of this functionally specialised expertise over an individual’s life span [wisdom as expertise (Baltes and Staudinger 1993, 2000].

A great number of researchers state a positive relationship between individual ageing and the level of wisdom (for example, Ardelt 2004b; Baltes and Staudinger 2000; Holliday and Chandler 1986; Staudinger and Baltes 1996; Staudinger and Pasupathi 2003). What about the process of ageing of a marketing system? As society approaches the maturity of (almost) fully marketised social organisation (Toffler 1980), do the system’s structures get enlightened and wiser by the elapse of time? Can we explain that humans and the marketing system resemble each other in this aspect? If ageing and getting wiser travel hand-by-hand, then it would be plausible to expect that a marketing system might acquire more wisdom through its progress along the time dimension (i.e. it naturally develops – it “grows up”). If this is possible, then how might it happen? What factors might contribute to this phenomenon?

MARKETPLACE WISDOM: CHARACTERISTICS

Drawing on the psychological research on wisdom, some characteristics or qualities of marketplace wisdom can be deduced. Those qualities are related to phylogeny and ontogeny of marketplace wisdom. Its phylogeny suggests that wisdom is crucial for survival, while its ontogeny offers its four distinctive qualities, namely it is comprehensive, interactive, value-laden, and positive.

Phylogeny of marketplace wisdom

Phylogeny refers to the process of evolutionary development of an organism or a part of it. It looks deep into history to discover why the object under analysis is like it is now, and what factors might have affected it to acquire certain features and qualities. The phylogeny of marketplace wisdom tries to explain the role wisdom plays in survival of the cognitive images of entities (social identity, brands) in ever-changing markets.

Survival of the Wisest. Salk (1973) in his book The Survival of the Wisest uses a biological analogy of population growth dynamics for several species which follows an S-shaped curve trajectory in most situations to explain what he calls a “metabiological perspective” of evolution. The metabiological perspective shows that survival depends on a human’s ability to act with wisdom, e.g. “to fit best” to environmental and social-psychological change during evolution, rather than becoming “fittest to survive” according to the Darwinian concept. Salk’s argument is that the environmental and social change would follow S-shaped curve patterns (see Figure 2) under the pressure of forces forged within both nature and a human being. Any evolutional period can be divided into Epoch A and Epoch B. Epoch A is the time of a “progressive acceleration”, while after the point of deflection (an inflection), a “progressive deceleration”, Epoch B, will come into existence. Consequently, based on inherent dualisms in value systems, here arises the conflict between two different sets of values. Values which were dominant in the former epoch will be not playing an important role in the latter stage, so a different set of values becomes vital for survival. However, a human’s tendency to stick to old fashioned values from a previous epoch would make that way of living redundant in the following stages, thus generating “misfits” and “dropouts”. Wisdom in reconciling conflicting values would lead humanity along the way of sustainable future.


AUTHOR COPY

The value conflict is explained in the light of such concepts as “Being” and “Ego”. Salk (1973) argues that the “being human” of a human being is composed of Being and Ego, where they can be compared to the genetic and somatic systems of organisms, respectively. Being is an abstract understanding of everything that pertains to human nature, something which is governed by laws imposed by nature [universe, with all its phenomena] and it is analogous to a message in a genetic form implanted into a human being. It has its own evolutionary agenda or programme given by nature and follows its own evolutionary route. Ego, being representative of individual desires and learned attitudes, in turn, can take different routes depending on environmental change. Ego is individual-specific, while Being is species-specific, and it is Being that is shared among past and future generations. Acting wisely would be to not let either of them dominate, so balance is achieved. If in Epoch A the destructive competition [war] generated and valued by Ego dominated groups [also other Ego dominated Egos] would prove useful for a while, in Epoch B this would need to be turned to a constructive approach. Ego-Being balance would ensure that the functional pattern be predominantly protective and constructive, and only usefully destructive for evolution to continue. An analogy is an immune system, which has been “preferred” by nature, because it protects the organism by destroying foreign bodies, at the same time, it can recognise and attack the host’s own cells which might render the physiology pathologic [i.e. cancerous].

Wisdom is referred to as “the art of the disciplined use of imagination in respect to alternatives, exercised at the right time and in the right measure” (Salk 1973, p. 72). The alternatives are given as dualisms (Table 1, overleaf). In each era, one set of factors is dominant whilst the other is either residual and oppositional or emergent and oppositional (Williams makes the same observation (Williams 1965)). Residual factors are remnants of a past era, whilst emergent factors are first signs of an era to

385Kadirov and Varey Towards post-industrial marketing

FIGURE 2 The pattern of perturbations that continually occur in the cultural evolutionary process (adapted from Salk 1973)

AUTHOR COPYcome. The wise and balanced reconciliation in the form of an “and” rather than an

“either/or” attitude needs to be exploited in order to survive. Environmental, social and psychological sustainability can be achieved by

understanding both the intrinsic nature of a Man and that of the game played by Nature:

It would follow that the Being and Ego attributes of a Man which are pro- rather than anti-evolution would be favored by Nature and would be signalled by subjective feelings of satisfaction and fulfi lment… a feeling of satisfaction and fulfi lment would be expected to be associated with participation in the process of evolution; feelings of frustration and anxiety are associated with not being so involved, or in not acting when the opportunity exists

(Salk 1973).

The marketplace and its cyclic character. Population growth dynamics (Salk 1973) can be successfully applied as an analogy to explain value perturbations in social, psychological and business contexts. The cyclic character of certain social values and existence of cognitive fashion-fad dynamics in marketplaces have long been recognised in academic literature (Kelley and Duke 1962; Wasson 1968). Fashion cycles have been acknowledged to occur in the context of diverse social interaction fields such as politics, culture, business, architecture, as well as clothing (Wasson 1968), particularly, in managerial behaviour (Abrahamson 1996; Abrahamson and Fairchild 1999; Spell 2001; Williams 2004) and even in the advertising industry (Kelley and Duke 1962). Developments in the field of memetics and its evolutionary implications clearly exhibit the applicability of the evolution process rhetoric to the social context (Jong 1999; Williams 2004). However, cycles are never independent, they are always built on the previous cycles. Some “new” value concepts could be newly re-conceptualised “old” ideas (Spell 2001). Main innovations bring about a radical change and would serve as a separation point between distinguished cycles.

The value cycles suggested may take analogously the form of the most often observed pattern in the organic world, namely the S-shaped evolutional perturbation (Salk 1973). Actually, any life cycle pattern [introduction, growth, maturity, and decline] or a bell-shaped diffusion of innovation’s figure transforms into the S-shaped curve when the relative percentages are turned into cumulative percentage digits (Kahn 2001). So, two phases are always differentiated; we may call them Phase A and Phase B (Figure 3), the former being reflective of progressive acceleration of

Journal of Customer Behaviour, Volume 9JCB386

TABLE 1 Conflicting dualisms (Salk 1973)

Biological Somatic - GeneticIndividual - Species

Metabiological Ego - BeingIntellect - IntuitionReason - FeelingObjective - SubjectiveMorality - RealityDifferences - DifferentiationCompetition - CooperationPower - InfluenceWin-Lose - Double-Win

AUTHOR COPY

change in complexity, the latter being an example of progressive deceleration and stabilisation. The point of deflection is the place where an increasing rate of change turns into a progressively diminishing rate, thus originating major changes in value and attitudes (Salk 1973).

Hull (1988) distinguishes between “replicator”, which is an entity that passes on its structure largely intact in successive replications and “interactor”, which is an entity that interacts as a cohesive whole with its environment in such a way that this interaction causes replication to be differential. Then the process of selection may be defined as a process in which the differential extinction and proliferation of interactors cause the differential perpetuation of the relevant replicators (Hull 1988). In the context of biological evolution, the Replicator is a genetic system and the Interactor is a somatic system. In the metabiological perspective they are Being and Ego (Salk, 1973), whereas in the memetics field they are “Meme” and “Cultural Agent” respectively (Williams 2004). The other constructs, such as “Concept” and “Institutional Actor” have also been used by some researchers to explain the survival of conceptual systems within institutions (Jong 1999).

Survival of brands. To illustrate the significance of our understanding, we apply it to the explanation of the brand and notice two different views. Conventionally, brands are vehicles that carry value to the marketplace. In contrast, the survival perspective sees a brand as the locus of the perpetuation of values which are differentially co-constructed in trading relationships (Varey 2002). This thus ensures that the social identities of selected brands become “immortal” in the long-term metacognition of actors, i.e. they evolve. However, the value negotiated and replicated through generations does not wholly depend on actors, it will follow its own route of perturbation owing to the influence of both endogenous and exogenous factors in the environment. Thus survival will probably depend on how best and wisely an actor can fit into the evolutional trend of general values.


FIGURE 3 Value evolution pattern in context of interactions among social actors

Point of Deflection

Major Innovation

Phase A

Phase A

Phase B

Phase B

AUTHOR COPY

It has been argued that the fact of being fit or unfit can only be determined ex post. If you survive, then it occurs that you are fit, if not, then you are unfit (see Jong 1999). Taking into account the continuous endogenous changes taking place in the evolutionary trend of marketplace values that are co-constructed within trading relationships, being fit once does not guarantee survival in the next perturbation. Then it matters how the interactor can best fit into the trend, i.e. how wisely s/he chooses to move on. This would require an intense interaction with other actors in order to learn about the directions of value change, as well as wise implementation of the knowledge gained in interaction.

Though the concept of brand is mostly used in the case of complex institutions, including corporations and non-profit organisations, it would be safe to presume that individual social actors also have their “brands”, i.e. unique identities which have been constructed through social interactions with other actors. Gummesson (1999) describes “parasocial relationships” to symbols and objects. Brand in this sense would symbolise the totality of relationships and experiences with an object (Gummesson 1999). Brand is seen as an active relationship that customers [actors in trading relationships] know and value (Fournier 1998; McKenna 1997). Brands are lived experiences (Lindberg-Repo and Brookes 2004). The notion of brands being owned by customers (de Chernatony 1993) means that brand is a social phenomenon, it is created in interaction and it reflects the common/shared value of interactors. The research shows that if a brand reflects the needs, values and lifestyles of consumers, it has a high probability of being chosen by customers and their communities (McAlexander, Schouten and Koenig 2002). We argue that brand is a co-created value combination which arises in negotiation among related partners in trading relationships.

Here we need to distinguish between a brand being co-created value in a certain trading relationship, which is a small part of a bigger picture, and social values, which are general and shaped in the interaction of all related social actors. Brand is a special case of a general value which is differentially replicated in the minds. The process of selection, then, can be explained through an ability to match our brand wisely to the general mainstream of value evolution, thus ensuring the survival of the brand [our values]. The sound brand would attract more people for interaction, who may perhaps be willing to sacrifice more of their time, resources and competences for this brand. It may also be that success would depend on how effective we are in competing for “brain space” [metacognition] (Blackmore 1999). The more minds (experiences) are intermediated by our brands, the more increase would be seen in the probability to survive.

Figure 4 shows how brands can evolve in complexity through the different stages. At the stage of introduction, values and experiences are simple, however, they will be moving up towards more complexity in progressive acceleration. This is the Phase A. New technologies bring about new improvements, additional features and follow-up services. Lifestyles change fast, market fragmentation and consumer proliferation all add-up to the complexity of general values. Brands start catching up with the general trend. However, stages of maturity and decline create a new reality, where the general value turns into progressive deceleration [Phase B]. The brands that lose this momentum are dropouts, whereas some of them adapt to a new situation. This stability [horizontal trend] continues until the new acceleration emerges. However, here is the next danger. Misfit brands, which are too conservative to change, are out of the survival contest. This is the “or/either” situation (Salk 1973), where a dropout value is disconnected from the past, they assume that acceleration will go on


AUTHOR COPY


forever; a misfit value would never accept that circumstances are not the same any more. What is needed is a wise consideration of all alternatives depending on context enlightened by an “and” attitude (Salk 1973).

Value Conflict. As Salk (1973) contends, Phase A and Phase B can be characterised by contrasting values. The pace of changes, in a sense of acceleration and deceleration, brings about totally new requirements for survival. These general tendencies are given in the Table 2.

The challenge for brands is to be wise enough to avoid becoming trapped by impairment in any of the stages. Impairment here would mean the halt of adapting to the changing nature of the fundamental values given in the Table 2. A certain approach may prove useful for some period of time, and then the epoch change would dictate the new rules of the game. In the light of the discussion of the death of traditional marketing (see the previous article), which can be bravely defined itself as a brand [identity], we wonder if we are experiencing change of the fundamental

FIGURE 4 The way brands survive through value perturbations (the shape of trends are borrowed from Salk 1973)

TABLE 2 Tendencies that would prevail in different epochs (adapted from Salk 1973).

Epoch A Epoch B

Anti-Death Pro-LifeAnti-Disease Pro-HealthDeath Control Birth ControlSelf-Repression Self-ExpressionExternal Restraint Self-RestraintMass marketing Relationships and dialogueValue delivery Value Co-creationCorporation-centricity Consumer-centricityDomination Co-operationMaximum resource exploitation Sustainability

AUTHOR COPY

values due to the transition to the new epoch. The rise of concern for its social impact makes us believe, again and again, that we might be passing over the threshold of the new qualitatively different epoch, which might possibly resemble the Epoch B.

Ontogeny of marketplace wisdom

Ontogeny refers to observation of the process of recent development of an organism. The ontogeny of marketplace wisdom would attempt to describe its main features and qualities as it is now. As wisdom is seen as an integrative, idealistic and utopian view of a future, the present tense in the previous sentence has been used in the sense of how this view of future is viewed or constructed in present metacognitive minds. Ontogenicly, marketplace wisdom is thought to be endowed with the following qualities.

It is comprehensive. Wisdom operates in meta-level cognitive consciousness (Wright 2002). Baltes and Staudinger (2000) use the term “metaheuristic” to characterise its comprehensive and collective nature. It is broad in scope both vertically and horizontally. Its vertical structure in a single mind comprises integrated cognitive [knowledge], affective [emotions] and conative [intentions] images of both own and other’s mental states (Ardelt 2004a). At the same time, it integrates horizontally the best of all peoples’ knowledge and actions, because it cannot be prescribed to any single person (Sternberg, 2004). It is “collectively anchored” and “individuals are weak carriers of wisdom” (Baltes and Staudinger 2000, p. 130). Surowiecki (2004), in his book The Wisdom of Crowds, argues that despite being very ineffective individually, groups of the same individuals can achieve remarkable results:

Under the right circumstances, groups are remarkably intelligent, and are often smarter than the smartest people in them. Groups do not need to be dominated by exceptionally intelligent people in order to be smart. Even if most of the people within a group are not especially well-informed or rational, it can still reach a collectively wise decision

(p. xiii).

The conditions for wisdom to arise through groupwork are described as diversity of opinion, independence, decentralisation, and mechanism for aggregation. Based on the same principles, online prediction markets are now being operated. Market trends or events can be predicted by designing the right type of prediction contracts, where people vote by buying certain contracts over others (O’Connor 2005). The events that can be predicted may range from political speculation to economic indicators, it may even include forecasting entertainment futures, such as movie box-office receipts.

In the corporate marketing context, marketplace wisdom comprehensiveness would be reflected in corporately accepting the marketing concept as a philosophy rather than a function. Comprehensiveness is achieved through integration of diverse perspectives of all functions and employees on a certain challenge to solve a customer’s problem.

It is interactive. Only social interactions may be the true source of wisdom, argue Baltes and Staudinger (1996). Their research has shown that there exists a positive relationship between the extent of social collaboration and the level of wisdom-related performance (Staudinger and Baltes 1996). In their research, two types of interaction were distinguished, namely internal and external dialogue. The latter refers to the process of constructing/making meaning and learning together with other individuals, which is referred to by some marketing scholars as an interactive communicational


AUTHOR COPY


dialogue (Ballantyne 2004; Varey 2002, 2003). The term internal dialogue refers to the cognitive self-communication and advice-seeking with an imagined “wise-self ” or “wise-other”. It is this phenomenon that Sherry (1998) observes in supermarkets, when a person talks to himself or to his pre-verbal child about his experiences and thoughts related to the process of shopping. He calls it “cart-talk” (p. 2).

Surowiecki’s (2004) mechanism of integration, as one of the conditions for wisdom discovery, presupposes intensive collaboration, interaction and dialogue. This way one can arrive at understanding the very essence of wisdom. Its implication is that a manager needs to engage in communicative interaction and dialogue with customers, employees and other stakeholders as much as possible, plus he needs to be aware about the content of interaction among others (other managers’ and stakeholders’ interactive actions). Consistently, Baltes and Staudinger (2000) relate wisdom to “a high degree of personal and interpersonal competence, including the ability to listen, evaluate and to give advice” (p. 123).

It is value-laden. The words often used by researchers in this regard are virtue, values and value. Virtue is a trait, character or quality of an object that leads it to human excellence (wisdom). Hence, the dimensions of advancement for a marketing system indicate toward the virtues of the system, which corresponds to the wisdom qualities under description [comprehensive, interactive, value-laden, positive]. Values are a set of criteria and standards by which judgement is enacted (Vickers 1965). Value, in turn, as axiological studies illustrate, involves

at its core, … a judgment of goodness/badness and better/bad for. The task here is to defi ne these judgments in the consumable, durable, and service markets…value has come to mean just about anything marketers and consumers wish with reference to offerings in the marketplace

(Oliver 1999, p.44).

The related terms that are used interchangeably are value, consumer value and customer value. Holbrook (1994) characterises the process as interactive. Although he emphasises explicitly the interaction between a subject (a consumer) and an object (a product), when we come down to seeing a product as a set of possible experiences (Vargo and Lusch 2004) then what he implies is that the value is constructed in interaction. Holbrook (1994, 1999) defines consumer value as being an interactive relativistic preference experience. The interactivity implies that value is constructed in the process of interaction between object and subject. The relativity entails three aspects, namely comparative, personal and situational dimensions. It is comparative because it involves the act of comparing between objects; it is personal because it varies among individuals; it is situational because it is a context-specific. The aspect of being preferential implies that it involves evaluative judgments towards self-interest. Consumer value is represented in terms of inherent dualistic dimensions. It is viewed to be extrinsic or intrinsic, active or reactive, and self-oriented or other-oriented. Accordingly, the typology of consumer value has been developed (Holbrook 1994). It contains eight main types of consumer value, namely: efficiency, excellence, status, esteem, play, aesthetics, ethics, and spirituality (Table 3, overleaf).

This typology emphasises that a consumer can have the diverse experiences of value in any consumption situation. The wise approach would be to maintain the right balance among them, while avoiding being too immersed in any of them. In this sense, Sternberg (2003) describes wisdom as a balance among intrapersonal, interpersonal, and extrapersonal interests over short-term and/or long-term time perspectives. The theory of the tragedy of the commons (Shultz II and Holbrook

AUTHOR COPY1999) comes to mind when the conflict between individual and common interests are

mentioned. Baltes and Staudinger (2000) emphasise travel toward wisdom to consist of small steps of positive actions. It is argued that in the marketing context these small steps correspond to the discrete occasions of value experience in consumption. This experience needs to be positive and sustainable. The essence of value seems to lie within sustainability-consistent experiences, which in turn, most probably can only be forged through communicative interaction and dialogue. Perhaps somewhat audaciously, we suggest that sustainability-consistent-value may be the wisdom of marketplace.

It is positive. The most often stressed virtue of wisdom is its positive nature. Some see it as a brainchild of the tradition of positive psychology (Baltes and Staudinger 2000). Sternberg (2003) explains the issue very clearly:

A person could be practically intelligent, but use of his or her practical intelligence toward bad or selfi sh ends. In wisdom, one certainly may seek good ends for oneself, but one also seeks common good outcomes for others. If one’s motivations are to maximize certain people’s interests and minimize other people’s, wisdom is not involved. In wisdom, one seeks a common good, realizing that this common good may be better for some than for others

(p. 123)

Both implicit and explicit theories of wisdom emphasise its representation of mind and virtue unity to achieve the well-being of both self and others (Baltes and Staudinger 2000). There has been strong evidence that people who exhibit better wisdom-related performance are more concerned with the welfare of others (Kunzmann and Baltes 2003). The concept of wisdom and that of sustainability seem to be identical as far as the welfare of the individual and society in nature is concerned.

THE WISE SYSTEM OF MARKETING

As can be noted from the preceding discussion, the marketplace wisdom qualities (virtues) closely correspond to the described outcomes of the marketing enrichment process (see the previous article on marketing dialectics, Kadirov and Varey 2010).


TABLE 3 A typology of consumer value (Holbrook 1999)

Extrinsic IntrinsicSelf-oriented

Other-oriented

Active

Reactive

Active

Reactive

Efficiency (Output/Input; Convenience)

Excellence(Quality)

Status (Success, Impression Management)

Esteem (Reputation, Materialism, Possessions)

Play (Fun)

Aesthetics (Beauty)

Ethics (Virtue, Justice, Morality)

Spirituality (Faith, Ecstasy, Sacredness, Magic)

AUTHOR COPY


Organisation-wide philosophy corresponds to the comprehensiveness, relationship marketing principles corresponds to the interactivity, the move toward the value co-creation corresponds to the value-ladenness, and the concept of sustainability corresponds to the positive cause of wisdom. The outcomes and the corresponding qualities do not actually represent action in real time, but positive intentions that sometimes materialises in the guise of hope. The hope is that in the future the marketing system will get wiser by acquiring the virtues of marketplace wisdom, or at least wise actions underlined by these virtues will prevail by that time. The supposed process of how the marketing system might acquire the wise virtues can be seen in Figure 5.

The process of transition seems to not be that of the replacement of a dominant form, but one of transcendence. The marketing system dimension will transcend to a new qualitative state, nonetheless, it may still keep some elements of impairment. This could metaphorically be called the process of amalgamation. The amalgam will keep being enriched until the wise virtues start dominating in it. That perhaps is the process in which the arrival of the wise system of marketing emerges.

The wise system of marketing is not tangible, rather it is a vision, a hope and an ideal point. The marketing system transcends toward this vision, however, the furthest it can get in practice is the state of enrichment. Along the process, each of dimensional fields seems to undergo the change which transforms from the transcendence to the virtue enhancement. The latter point is cognitive which pulls up behaviour to the positive cognitive standards. The vertical arrows emphasise the process of movement toward a common good state. In the enrichment stage, accepting an organisation-wide marketing focus would necessitate extensive use of relationship marketing principles, in other words, comprehensiveness leads to interactivity. Relationships are increasingly going to be about value co-creation, and in most instances, the value

FIGURE 5 The process of wisdom acquirement by the marketing system

Impaired system of marketing

Value delivery ConsumerismTransactionFunction

Enriched system of marketing

Value co-creation SustainabilityRelationshipPhilosophy

Wise system of marketing

Value-laden PositiveInteractiveComprehensive

TRANSCENDENCE

VIRTUE ACQUIREMENT

AUTHOR COPY

co-creation serves the sustainability purposes (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004). The interactivity brings the concept of value to be the main focus, which in turn, takes a positive shape. The positiveness here is depicted in terms of the common good, the welfare of all and the care for humanity in harmony with nature. The argumentation to support this view is as follows. If marketing is a market value reflector, then it has a potential to reflect the whole range of value experiences enacted by consumers. It takes us back to the fact that not all of our motives are purely egoistic, we have cognitive proximate mechanisms that accommodate both egoistic and altruistic desires (Sober and Wilson 1998). Arguably, it will be expected that marketing can and must reflect altruistic ideals, such as the drive for sustainability. The several underlying cognitive and psychological concepts are believed to influence the process. They are presented in Figure 6.


FIGURE 6 Underlying cognitive forces that drive the advancement of marketing system

Value Co-creationCentred on Individual

Experiences

Virtues andIntentionality

Altruistic Minds

Relationship Marketing,Interactive and Dialogue

Marketing

Social Cognition,Interactive MindsValue and Values

Current practices

MARKET SYSTEM ADVANCEMENT

Consumer-centricorganisation

MarketplaceMetacognition

Mindscape

Underlying Goals Future

Green MarketingCorporate Social

Responsibility

Marketing as a ValueProvider to Society

Growth andSurvival

Marketing as anorganisation-wide

Philosophy

Wisdom

Marketing as a Sustainability Enhancer

Wise System ofMarketing

MarketplaceWisdom

AUTHOR COPY


A NEW BEGINNING

In the context of marketing system advancement, the phenomenon of marketplace wisdom is a cognitive construct guiding the market behaviour that may derive from two broad perspectives, namely survival and wisdom. The particular forces that might indicate to the phenomenon are thought to be the marketplace metacognitive structure, the mindscape, the interactive nature of minds, the value and values, virtues, the intentionality, and pluralistic (altruistic) motives. The framework needs to be mapped out qualitatively vis-à-vis its representation in a real situation, and this reveals an exciting and challenging direction for macromarketing research in support of constructing the future for marketing.

REFERENCES

Abrahamson, E. (1996), “Management Fashion”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 254-285.

Abrahamson, E. and Fairchild, G. (1999), “Management Fashion: Lifecycles, Triggers, and Collective Learning Processes”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 4), pp. 708-740.

Ardelt, M. (2004a), “Where Can Wisdom Be Found?”, Human Development, Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 304-307.

Ardelt, M. (2004b), “Wisdom as Expert Knowledge System: A Critical Review of a Contemporary Operationalization of an Ancient Concept”, Human Development, Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 257-285.

Ballantyne, D. (2004), “Dialogue and its Role in the Development of Relationship Specific Knowledge”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 114-123.

Baltes, P. B. and Kunzmann, U. (2004), “The Two Faces of Wisdom: Wisdom as a General Theory of Knowledge and Judgment about Excellence in Mind and Virtue vs. Wisdom as Everyday Realization in People and Products”, Human Development, Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 290-299.

Baltes, P. B. and Staudinger, U. M. (1993), “The Search for a Psychology of Wisdom”, Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 75-80.

Baltes, P. B. and Staudinger, U. M. (eds.). (1996), Interactive Minds: Life-span Perspectives on the Social Foundation of Cognition, Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Baltes, P. B. and Staudinger, U. M. (2000), “Wisdom: A Metaheuristic (Pragmatic) to Orchestrate Mind and Virtue toward Excellence”, American Psychologist, Vol. 55, No.1, pp. 122-136.

Barone, M. and Miniard, P. W. (2002), “Mood and Brand Extension Judgments: Asymmetric Effects for Desirable Versus Undesirable Brands”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 280-290.

Blackmore, S. J. (1999), The Meme Machine, Oxford, England ; New York: Oxford University Press.

Brown, S. and Sherry, J. F. (eds.) (2003), Time, Space, and the Market: Retroscapes Rising. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

Chaston, I. (2004), Knowledge-Based Marketing: the 21st Century Competitive Edge, London; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

de Chernatony, L. (1993), “Categorizing Brands: Evolutionary Processes Underpinned by Two Key Dimensions”.,Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 173-188.

Fournier, S. (1998), “Consumers and their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer Research”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 343-373.

Gardner, M. P. (1985), “Mood States and Consumer Behavior: A Critical Review”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 281-300.

AUTHOR COPY

Ginsberg, J. M. and Bloom, P. N. (2004), “Choosing the Right Green Marketing Strategy”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 79-85.

Gummesson, E. (1999), Total Relationship Marketing: From the 4Ps – Product, Price, Promotion, Place – of Traditional Marketing Management to the 30Rs – The Thirty Relationships – Of the New Marketing Paradigm, Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C. K. (1994), Competing for the Future, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Hart, S. L. and Milstein, M. B. (2003), “Creating Sustainable Value”, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 56-69.

Holbrook, M. B. (1994), “The Nature of Customer Value”. In: Rust, R. and Oliver, R. (eds.), Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 21-71.

Holbrook, M. B. (ed.) (1999), Consumer Value: A Framework for Analysis and Research. London; New York: Routledge.

Holliday, S. G. and Chandler, M. J. (1986), Wisdom: Explorations in Adult Competence, Basel, Switzerland: Karger.

Hudson, L. A. and Ozanne, J. L. (1988), “Alternative Ways of Seeking Knowledge in Consumer Research”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 508-521.

Hull, D. L. (1988), Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Jong, D. (1999), Survival of the Institutionally Fittest Concepts, Journal of Memetics – Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 5-25.

Kadirov, D. and Varey, R. J. (2010), “Future Marketing: dialectics of post-industrial development, Journal of Customer Behaviour, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 357-377.

Kahn, K. B. (2001), Product Planning Essentials, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Kelley, W. T. and Duke, R. G. (1962), “Are There Fashionable Cycles in Creative Advertising?”,

Journal of Marketing, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 18-26.Kotler, P. (2004), “Wrestling with Ethics”, Marketing Management, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 30-36.Kunzmann, U. and Baltes, P. B. (2003), “Wisdom-related Knowledge: Affective, Motivational,

and Interpersonal Correlates”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 29, No. 9, pp. 1104-1119.

Lindberg-Repo, K. and Brookes, R. (2004), The Nature of the Brand Relationship Strength: An Investigation into Brand Relationships – a research perspective from Nordic Countries and New Zealand, Paper presented at the 12th International Colloquium on Relationship Marketing, Hamilton, NZ.

McAlexander, J. H., Schouten, J. W. and Koenig, H. F. (2002), “Building Brand Community”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66, No. 1, pp. 38-54.

McKenna, R. (1997), Real time: Preparing for the Age of the Never Satisfied Customer, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

O’Connor, P. (2005), “Using Java to Download Market Information from Tradesports.com” (interview), Hamilton, NZ: University of Waikato, April 13th.

Oliver, R. (1999), “Value as Excellence in the Consumption Experience”. In: Holbrook, M. (ed.), Customer Value: A Framework for Analysis and Research, London: Routledge, pp. 43-62.

Pham, M. T., Cohen, J. B., Pracejus, J. W., Hughes, D. G. and Mick, D. G. (2001), “Affect Monitoring and the Primacy of Feelings in Judgment”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 167-188.

Porter, M. E. and Van Der Linde, C. (1995), “Green and Competitive: Ending the Stalemate”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73, No. 5, pp. 120-134.

Prahalad, C. K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004), The Future of Competition: Co-creating Unique Value with Customers, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Richins, M. L. (1997), “Measuring Emotions in the Consumption Experience”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 127-146.

Salk, Jonas (1973), The Survival of the Wisest, New York: Harper & Row.


AUTHOR COPY


Sherry, J. F. (ed.) (1998), Servicescapes: The Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets, Lincolnwood, ILL: NTC Business Books.

Sherry, J. F. (2003), “What’s Past is Prologue: Retroscapes in Retrospect”. In: Brown, S. and Sherry, J. F. (eds.), Time, Space, and the Market: Retroscapes Rising, Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, pp. 313-320.

Shultz II, C., J. and Holbrook, B. M. (1999), “Marketing and the Tragedy of the Commons: A Synthesis, Commentary, and Analysis for Action”, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 218-230.

Small, M. W. (2004), “Wisdom and Now Managerial Wisdom: Do They Have a Place in Management Development Programs?”, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23, No. 8, pp. 751-764.

Sober, E., and Wilson, D. S. (1998), Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Spell, C. (2001), “Management Fashions: Where Do They Come From, and Are They Old Wine in New Bottles?” Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 358-373.

Staudinger, U. M. and Baltes, P. B. (1996), “ Interactive Minds: A Facilitative Setting for Wisdom-related Performance?”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 71, No. 4, pp. 746-748.

Staudinger, U. M. and Pasupathi, M. (2003), “Correlates of Wisdom-Related Performance in Adolescence and Adulthood: Age-Graded Differences in ‘Paths’ Toward Desirable Development”, Journal of Research on Adolescence, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 239-268.

Sternberg, R. J. (2003), “WICS: A Model of Leadership in Organizations”, Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 386-401.

Sternberg, R. J. (2004), “Words to the Wise about Wisdom?”, Human Development, Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. 286-289.

Sternberg, R. J. (ed.) (1990), Wisdom: Its Nature, Origins, and Development, Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sternberg, R. J. and Jordan, J. (eds.) (2005), A Handbook of Wisdom: Psychological Perspectives, Cambridge, UK; New York: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.

Surowiecki, J. (2004), The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economics, society and nations, London: Little, Brown.

Tibbs, H. (1999), “Making the Future Visible: Psychology, Scenarios and Strategy” [online]. Available at: www.hardintibbs.com/writing.htm [Accessed: 17th March 2004].

Varey, R. J. (2002), Marketing Communication: Principles and Practice, London; New York: Routledge.

Varey, R. J. (2003), “A Dialogical Foundation for Marketing”, TheMarketing Review, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 273-288.

Vargo, S. L., and Lusch, R. F. (2004), “Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68, No. 1, pp. 1-17.

Vickers, G. (1965), The Art of Judgment: A Study of Policy Making, London: Chapman & Hall.

Wasson, C. R. (1968), “How Predictable are Fashion and Other Product Life Cycles?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 32, No. 3, p. 36-43.

Williams, R. (1965), The Long Revolution, London: Pelican Books.Williams, R. (2004), “Management Fashions and Fads: Understanding the Role of Consultants

and Managers in the Evolution of Ideas”, Management Decision, Vol. 42, No. 6, pp. 769-780.

Wright, P. (2002), “Marketplace Metacognition and Social Intelligence”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 677-683.

AUTHOR COPY

ABOUT THE AUTHORS AND CORRESPONDENCE

Djavlonbek Kadirov is a senior lecturer in marketing at the School of Business at the Eastern Institute of Technology, Hawke’s Bay, New Zealand. He received his PhD from the University of Waikato. His research interests include macromarketing issues, specifically, marketing systems conceptualisation, sustainable marketing, societal impact of marketing, meanings in consumer culture, and time-series modeling of macromarketing effects.

Corresponding author: Dr Djavlonbek Kadirov, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Business and Computing, Eastern Institute of Technology, Private Bag 1201, Napier 4112, Hawke’s Bay, New Zealand

T +64 6 974 8000 ext. 5020 F +64 6 974 8910 E [email protected]

Richard Varey is Professor of Marketing, and a specialist in inquiring on the future of marketing, human interaction in commercial situations, and “marketing for sustainable prosperous society”. He is Associate Editor (Asia-Pacific) for the Journal of Customer Behaviour, and a former editor of the Australasian Marketing Journal. He is a member of a range editorial boards, including Marketing Theory, the European Journal of Marketing, the Journal of Communication Management, the Journal of Marketing Communications, the Australasian Marketing Journal, the Corporate Reputation Review, and the Journal of Business Ethics (sustainability panel). He is a graduate of the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK (BSc 1980) and Manchester School of Management, UMIST, UK (MSc 1990, PhD 1996). He has written books on internal marketing, relationship marketing, and marketing communication.

Dr Richard J. Varey, Professor of Marketing, Department of Marketing, The Waikato Management School, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton 3240, New Zealand

T +64 7 838 4617 F +64 7 838 4352 E [email protected]


Towards post-industrial marketing: marketplace wisdom

Documents

Transcript of Towards post-industrial marketing: marketplace wisdom