The concept of marketing and its mismatch with academic practice

Marketing is best understood as the organization’s customer-facing system that creates, communicates, delivers, and governs exchanges to sustain relationships and, ultimately, organizational survival. Its core priority is customer value in competitive contexts, while other stakeholders matter insofar as they enable that value within rules set by public policy and regulation. We argue for a bounded, integrative definition—specific enough to guide action yet general enough to travel across settings—that treats markets as adaptive exchange systems and positions marketing as a dynamic learning loop: sensing shifts in needs, iterating offerings and prices, orchestrating channels and complements, and converting traction into diffusion. Against this managerial reality, academic practice often misfires; it leans too much on aggregate firm proxies or student/online samples, suffers construct–measure disconnects and identification gaps, and elevates non-actionable levers and proxy outcomes, producing findings that are less helpful to real decision-making processes. Realizing that it is a stretch-goal, we propose re-anchoring marketing research in more decision-relevant data and designs. Implementing this, the discipline is able to generate cumulative, managerially useful knowledge consistent with marketing’s purpose.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AMS Review
Published
2026-04-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-026-00337-0
Primary Topic
Management and Marketing Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The concept of marketing and its mismatch with academic practice

Tohid Ghanbarpour, Anders Gustafsson
AMS Review
Management and Marketing Education
article

The concept of marketing and its mismatch with academic practice

Tohid Ghanbarpour, Anders Gustafsson
article en

Abstract

Marketing is best understood as the organization’s customer-facing system that creates, communicates, delivers, and governs exchanges to sustain relationships and, ultimately, organizational survival. Its core priority is customer value in competitive contexts, while other stakeholders matter insofar as they enable that value within rules set by public policy and regulation. We argue for a bounded, integrative definition—specific enough to guide action yet general enough to travel across settings—that treats markets as adaptive exchange systems and positions marketing as a dynamic learning loop: sensing shifts in needs, iterating offerings and prices, orchestrating channels and complements, and converting traction into diffusion. Against this managerial reality, academic practice often misfires; it leans too much on aggregate firm proxies or student/online samples, suffers construct–measure disconnects and identification gaps, and elevates non-actionable levers and proxy outcomes, producing findings that are less helpful to real decision-making processes. Realizing that it is a stretch-goal, we propose re-anchoring marketing research in more decision-relevant data and designs. Implementing this, the discipline is able to generate cumulative, managerially useful knowledge consistent with marketing’s purpose.

AMS ReviewVol. 16(1)
BI Norwegian Business School (NO), Høyskolen Kristiania (NO), University of Manchester (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Management and Marketing Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.