What is Marketing? A Study on Marketing Managers’ Perception of the Definition of Marketing

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International.

The existence of different conceptualizations of marketing theory and the confusion as to what marketing is and what are its functions have been proposed (McDonald, 2009). Several authors indicate that the confusion about the conceptualization of marketing is due to the multiplicity of definitions and interpretations established by academic literature (e.g. Bolajoko, Salome, & Sikuade, 2013; Brooksbank, Davey, & McIntosh, 2010a, 2010b; Gamble, Gilmore, McCartan, & Durkan, 2011). Literature exposes a debate as to how broad or specific the definition of marketing should be; for example, Gronroos (2006) states the definition should be broad or generic as to include a wide variety of products and contexts (such as transaction-based marketing or relationship-based marketing). He established that the “marketing definition has to be somewhat abstract, without losing its power as a guideline for teaching and practicing marketing” (p. 397). On the other hand, McDonald (2009) states that many definitions of marketing are admirable and correct; however, they provide little direction as to what the term includes and excludes. This may cause those definitions to be harder to use in a practical manner. The inconsistent, somewhat abstract, definitions offered by academics and organizations contribute to a growing confusion about marketing among marketing professionals (Brooksbank et al., 2010a, 2010b).

From the perspective of marketing managers, this multiplicity of definitions and interpretations complicates the development of marketing within organizations and has contributed to its decline (Davidson, 2009; McDonald, 2009). It could also be related to the decline of the functions carried out by the marketing manager within organizations (McDonald, 2009). Verhoef and Leeflang (2009) suggest that marketing has lost its strategic importance within organizations primarily due to the development of marketing by the marketing manager from a tactical perspective (product management, pricing, promotion, and place) and not from a strategic perspective (marketing analysis, selection of target market, brand positioning strategies for value creation in consumers). One of the arguments established in literature seeks to reach a consensus as to the development of an underlying definition that includes strategic and tactical functions (McDonald, 2009). If the marketing manager finds it difficult to understand what encompasses marketing, it becomes even more difficult to develop marketing efforts in an organization, given that managers in other departments may have the same confusion (Webster, Malter, & Ganesan, 2005).

In the writings of Bolajoko, Salome, and Sikuade (2013), “the conceptualization and the domain of marketing has been a contentious issue among academicians and practitioners in the field of marketing” (p. 56). The authors state that this could lead to different perspectives as to what is marketing. Webster, Malter, and Ganesan (2005) have also found differing views of marketing within organizations.

Since literature has clearly established the multiplicity and confusion present in the conceptualization of marketing and its functions, this study seeks to evaluate it using a sample of Puerto Rican marketing managers. This will help contribute to the ongoing debate established in literature and within the practice.

The numbers of marketing definitions presented in literature have led to ambiguity about what marketing is for marketing managers, senior management and other functional managers. In 2009, McDonald states that although there are many “admirable and correct” definitions, these definitions provide little guidance on what to include and exclude in the marketing practice (p. 434).

Literature states that the ambiguity surrounding what is marketing—because of its multiple definitions—could be causing confusion among marketing managers that carry out marketing efforts in organizations (Brooksbank et al., 2010a, 2010b). Previous research has looked at how the multiple definitions of marketing have influenced marketing departments; for example, Webster et al. (2005) conducted in-depth interviews with chief executive officers (CEOs) and chief marketing officers (CMOs), which disclosed a general uncertainty among marketing’s definition. One of the significant findings raised by the authors was the fact that the definition of marketing tends to be specific to each company, which is mainly guided by the vision of the CEO; for example, one of the definitions provided by a CEO was: “I have always defined marketing as brand management plus sales” (Webster et al., 2005, p. 36). These senior officers also noted that marketing has moved from the advertising and merchandising divisions to be part of the sales and service divisions; in fact, some marketing executives tended to equate marketing with sales. Other general comments from the CEOs and CMOs were that it was difficult to identify people that conducted specific marketing responsibilities. The CMOs also agreed that the definition of marketing was an important situation that needed to be addressed. Finally, they indicated that the ambiguity that surrounds the concept of marketing makes it difficult to gain financial support in the organizations because marketing managers’ responsibilities are unclear.

This confusion about what marketing is within organizations is also evident in the profusion of titles that those professionals practicing marketing functions have (McDonald, 2009). Some examples of the titles that define the position of a marketing manager are: sales people, copy writers, advertisers, direct mailers, and market researchers; therefore, the perception of senior management about marketing could be dictating how the marketing manager carries out strategic and tactical functions.

The way marketing is defined within organizations may be limiting the strategic and tactical actions that are executed by executives. McDonald (2009) states that in practice marketing is seen as “mismarketing”¹ (p. 431) which has resulted in the degradation of marketing as a promotional tactical function.

In the last decade there has been a change in the trend with the definitions context for marketing from a tactical approach to a more strategic approach or a combination of both; for example, the definitions of the American Marketing Association have been changed since its first release in 1935 (Wilkie & Moore, 2012). The definition in 1985 was the one that introduced the concept of the four P’s (product, price, promotion, and place), which gave a managerial focus on specific tasks. In 2004, a new definition was introduced with a managerial character that focused on a strategic point of view but also kept the tactical part of marketing (Wilkie & Moore, 2012). Although this definition included a managerial approach, they delineated marketing to organizations with a more appropriate definition for marketing management discipline and not for marketing (Gundlach & Wilkie, 2009; Wilkie & Moore, 2007). Later, this definition was revised and a new definition was introduced in 2007 which presents marketing as an activity that provides value to customers, partners, customers, and society in general (Wilkie & Moore, 2012).

Definitions of the American Marketing Association show that marketing is much more than promotion and personal selling (Kerin, Hartley, & Rudelius, 2013). They have academic and professional relevance and are developed using the consensus of academic and professional marketers.

The purpose of this study is to address how marketing managers are currently defining marketing. In contrast to previous studies (e.g. Webster et al., 2005), this study will be performing a more specific analysis of the marketing definitions provided by marketing managers. Previous research and writings are based on the analysis of definitions established in literature (Gamble et al., 2011; Bolajoko et al., 2013). This study helps expand academic literature by providing a different perspective on the situation, the marketing manager’s viewpoint. The study will also analyze the definitions established by marketing managers from strategic and tactical perspective, something not addressed in previous research. Finally, it also serves as a descriptive tool of the different perspectives in Puerto Rico that address how marketing managers define marketing. It serves as an initial study that will lead to further, more in-depth research about marketing in Puerto Rico.

Specifically, the research questions addressed in this study are:

1. 1. How do marketing managers define marketing?
2. 2. How often do marketing managers define marketing as a tactical function, strategic function, or both?
3. 3. How often do marketing managers define marketing as a sales function?
4. 4. How often do marketing managers define marketing as a function of promotion?

Content analysis is “the systematic, objective, quantitative analysis of message characteristics” (Neuendorf, 2002, p. 1). This study utilized content analysis techniques to examine the definitions of marketing as presented by the person who is in charge of marketing activities (i.e. brand manager, marketing managers, director of marketing, vice-president of marketing, etc.), in companies’ native to Puerto Rico.

The selection of the population and sample used in this study followed methodology established in previous studies about marketing managers (e.g. Dibb, Simkin, & Farhangmehr, 2001; Verhoef & Leeflang, 2009, 2010; Verhoef et al., 2011), where researchers sampled managers in charge of marketing. The sample was obtained through the following procedure. First, the top native companies in Puerto Rico were identified using the “Top 400 Locally Owned Companies” of 2012 published by Caribbean Business Book of Lists. Second, companies were contacted via telephone to identify who the person in charge of marketing was. A total of 102 companies stated that they had a marketing manager or a related position.

Data collected for this study was part of a previous survey conducted on the marketing functions performed by marketing managers and marketing metrics used by them. From this instrument, the researchers used two open-ended questions to perform the analysis in this study: (1) How do you define marketing? (2) What is the title of the position you hold within the company? A personalized email message was sent to each marketing manager with the electronic survey. The email explained the purpose of the study and invited marketing managers to complete the electronic survey. To increase response rates, email reminders were sent a short period after the initial survey was sent to participants.

The four variables used to classify marketing definitions in this study were: strategic marketing function, tactical marketing structure, sales, and promotion/communication. Strategic marketing structure refers to the identification and analysis of consumer needs, the definition of the target market or target markets, and development of positioning strategies to create a value proposition to the consumer (Cravens & Piercy, 2006; Ferrell & Hartline, 2006; Kotler & Keller, 2009). The tactical marketing function specifies the precise marketing actions to be implemented, such as product characteristics, promotion, pricing, distribution channels, and services (Kotler & Keller, 2009). This definition is mainly related to the marketing mix (product, price, promotion, and place) developed by McCarthy (1960). Sales functions refers to the attainment of sales force goals in an effective and efficient manner through planning, staffing, training, leading, and controlling organizational resources (Futrell, 2001). The promotion/communication function is part of the marketing mix. Kotler and Keller (2012) define promotion/communication as “the means by which firms attempt to inform, persuade, and remind consumers, directly or indirectly, about the products and brands they sell” (p. 476).

The sample of managers (marketing managers, marketing directors, vice-presidents of marketing, vice-presidents of sales and marketing, etc.) that accessed the link to participate in the study was of 69 people; however, after eliminating 19 samples from survey because of incomplete responses, the final sample size was of 50 marketing managers. Content analysis allowed the researchers to analyze the 50 responses of the open-ended question about how marketing is defined by marketing managers. The Appendix lists the definitions that marketing managers provided² (referring to Research Question 1). All 50 definitions provided by marketing managers were analyzed using the four constructs—strategic function, tactical function, sales and promotions/communications.

Based on the definitions provided, this study found that marketing managers do not define marketing using a particular concept or frame (strategic functions, tactical functions, sales, and promotions/communications). In fact, many marketing managers tended to include more than one of the four constructs in their definition; for example, one manager stated that marketing is “the entire set of activities and strategies designed to foster and position products to potential customers in the right distribution channels.” This definition illustrates the strategic, tactical, and the promotion/communication concepts.

Additional Findings

Participants were also asked to provide the “name” for the position they held within the company. In this study, 19 different titles for managers that carry out marketing functions were identified. Table 1 delineates the variety of titles that the person in charge of marketing held and the number of participants that held each of those titles.

Table 1
Position Title

Source: Own elaboration.

The variety of titles for a marketing manager also supports previous literature relating the confusion of the role of the marketing manager and the definition of the term “marketing” (McDonald, 2009).

A variety of definitions from marketing managers were identified. This goes in accordance to previous literature that has also identified many definitions for marketing in the past 60 years. This diversity of definitions has caused confusion about the functions to be performed by the marketing manager within organizations (Gamble, Gilmore, McCartan-Quinn, & Durkan, 2011;McDonald, 2009;). This confusion about marketing is evidenced by the multiplicity of titles that marketing managers possess (McDonald, 2009).

One of the research questions sought to examine whether marketing managers perceived marketing within an organization as a strategic or tactical function. Various authors have stated that it is important that the marketing manager possess a more pertinent strategic role in organizations (Verhoef & Leeflang, 2009; Webster et al., 2005); however, this study observed that only a small percentage of marketing managers performed strategic functions and that the majority performed tactical functions. This supports the decline or marginalization of marketing to tactical functions related to administration of the marketing mix. Twenty-eight percent (n=14) reflected performing both functions. The small group of marketing managers that stated they performed both strategic and tactical functions could perceive marketing as a strategic and tactical role, reflecting the marketing domain that new marketing definitions are trying to emphasize (McDonald, 2009). This study also found that marketing is still being viewed from a promotional perspective by practitioners. This goes in accordance with what is stated in literature relating to how marketing has become strictly a promotional feature (Kotler, 2005).

The analysis carried out in this study provides evidence of the confusion that exists about what marketing means to the marketing manager in organizations. Gamble, Gilmore, McCartan-Quinn, and Durkan (2011) suggest that there are two opposing views related to the definition of marketing. The first perspective is to find and agree on a single definition of marketing, something that has not been found. The second perspective is that there is no unifying theory of marketing. Given that marketing occurs in different contexts and industries, a definite marketing theory is not possible. This perspective allows for variations to marketing definitions depending on the context or situation in which it occurs. It is influenced by the different uses of the term and languages of the industry in each context. This could be an explanation for the inconsistency of definitions raised by the managers. This perspective may explain the multiplicity of definitions established by the managers. The existence of multiple definitions and interpretations that enhance what has been raised into awareness may cause confusion into what marketing is. In this research what stands out most is the diversity of the definitions and terms offered by the management under study.