Search results

This autobiography sums up the life story of one of the contributors to the history of inquiry and instruction in the field of marketing, with special attention to the historical developments that have influenced the study of consumer behavior and the concept of branding.

This paper is an autobiographical essay, a personal history.

The reminiscence illustrates the way life experiences evolve, showing the interaction among personal growth, education, career choices and work experience that led to Professor Levy’s contributions to the field of marketing education and its research literature.

The paper describes a unique life, and an unusual explication of the personal life sources of influential ideas. It is novel in its large perspective and integrative narrative, and the unusual exposure of its various conceptual issues and links. It should be of interest to marketing historians, managers and scholars of marketing education.

The increased attention being directed toward nonquantitative (so‐called relativistic) research designs within marketing has encouraged marketing's use of methods that were developed in the “softer” social sciences. Representative of such trends is Sidney Levy's use of mental‐structuralist mythological theory within the context of consumer behavior. This paper demonstrates how another school of mythology (Jungian analysis) can be used to deal with consumer behavior and the way consumers respond to certain advertisements. Although serious methodological problems exist in Jungian analysis, techniques that explore the impact of universal innate human thought upon consumer behavior can be useful. As a specific example, the “archetype” of the athlete and its relation to consumer behavior and product promotion will be discussed.

The author describes how he entered the marketing field and describes his contributions in four sections: articles written, books published, students nurtured, and executives consulted and trained. He describes his contributions to the marketing field in nine areas: marketing theory and orientations, improving the role and practice of marketing, analytical marketing, the social and ethical side of marketing, globalization and international marketing competition, marketing in the new economy, creating and managing the product mix, strategic marketing, and broadening the concept and application of marketing.

This inquiry aims to contribute to the literature on the historical developments that have influenced the origin, uses, and meanings of branding.

In this qualitative work an historical methodology was followed and, according to Howell and Prevenier's guidelines, a wide variety of sources were selected of the data presented. Moreover, this study draws on three important perspectives – that of the practitioner, the scholar, and the consumer – in order to offer a thorough view of the relevant issues concerning the evolution of branding.

The investigation suggests that various forces (e.g., the media, economic developments during the Second World War, marketing research and theorizing) have enacted a comprehensive transformation in the concept of branding. First, the paper offers evidence of the link between fire/burning and the origin of branding. Second, it shows that, in its early days, branding was characterized as a phenomenon with limited applicability. Third, the paper demonstrates how that phenomenon was transformed into a multidimensional, multifunctional, and malleable entity. Last, it presents recent evidence from both business and academia that shows the current, complex status of the concept of branding.

The paper is novel in its large perspective and integrative narrative, and the unusual exposure of its various conceptual issues and links. It should be of interest to marketing historians, brand managers, and scholars of branding.

This paper aims to introduce a special issue of the Journal of Historical Research in Marketing which includes autobiographical sketches by leading scholars in the history of marketing and consumer research.

A brief review of the (auto)biographical tradition in marketing scholarship leads to a commentary on the four accounts in this issue.

Highlights of the four portraits are presented and insights into their authors’ lives and careers are offered.

The authors hope this introductory article whets readers’ appetites to learn more about the four contributors whose careers and personal lives are explicated for their consumption.

This paper aims to trace the roots and development of Consumer Culture Theory (CCT) through the eyes of major participants in this field of study.

The report is a qualitative essay based on data accumulated and integrated from several directions: the CCT literature, reminiscent versions by significant scholars, and participant/observation by the author.

The CCT conferences began in 2005, sparked by the contribution of Eric Arnould and Craig Thompson. However, earlier versions are traced through the growth of interest in the study of consumer behavior starting in ancient times and spurred by the surge of post-World War II prosperity and technological advances. The expansion of consumer studies through the Association for Consumer Research (ACR), the Journal of Consumer Research (JCR), and the Heretical Consumer Research (HCR) were precursors of CCT. Perspectives are provided by Shankar and Patterson, Mark Tadajewski, Russell Belk, Fuat Firat, and Markus Geisler, with a special emphasis on early roots by the author.

The paper is novel in its application of The Rashomon Effect which shows how different scholars perceive a particular historical phenomenon. It is also a useful example of the qualitative orientation of CCT culture and style in studying situations, both contemporary and historical, to gain holistic insights.

The two debates about the domain of marketing and the division between theory and practice are old, recurring and endless. Nevertheless, it is indubitable that marketing pervades society whether or not the critics like the idea of it or the troubling forms it sometimes takes. Similarly, the differences between theoreticians and practitioners are – like parts of a tree – also inevitable as they think differently, have different roles to play, have different languages and feel superior to each other. Those who are blind to these facts create the debates instead of realizing that is the way it is and making the best of it. Reasonable people bridge the gaps by understanding the situation and working cooperatively with their diverse colleagues.