In the 1070s American marketers and academics were confident marketing would become the “master” business function and dominate the thinking of corporation (Macallister, 2012). However, since 1990s marketing has become decreasingly relevant for increasingly businesses. Due to the inadequate conception of marketing, marketing failed in the role of organization, and customers generally have a negative opinion of marketing. Thus, the backdrop of marketing’s relevance is worrying. Many commentators have blamed this decline on an inadequate conception by both academics and practitioners of what marketing actually is (Parsons & Maclaran 2009). However, this essay will attempt to do against people’s thinking about “marketing is dead”, and will demonstrate that the solutions are happening, marketers updated and complemented the definition of marketing thus helped marketing rebuilding its situation in the contemporary organization.
In order to show this, this essay will firstly discuss the issues of marketing in organization structure. It will argue that marketing playing a significant role in companies and it cannot be replaced. Secondly, it will show some of the growing negative attitude from consumers toward the worsened marketing activities. It will consider several solutions including supporting customers’ value, developing new relationship with customers. Finally, this essay will demonstrate that the root of the problem (society understood marketing) is based on the outdated, wrong definition, while new definition has made contribution to business needs.
One of key arguments against marketing’s importance is that experts doubted the importance of it as a corporate function in many companies. Indeed, scholars have charted the decline of marketing within the organization, observing that is has deteriorated in both influence and prominence (McGovern et al, 2004 cited in Parsons & Maclaran, 2009). The main issues of this reduction is the loss of credibility of marketer and marketing at board level (Parsons & Maclaran 2009). That is to say the chief marketing officer (CMO) has been viewed as a position which can be replaced by other departments, hence no board level representation. There is much debate about the responsibility of CMO which resulted in marketing has not been valued as it used to be.
It is clear that marketing still play a significant role in the organization, and both academics and practitioners should dedicate marketing department. According to Gronroos (2006) marketing is considered to be most efficiently and effectively planned and implemented by a separate department. Both service marketing and relationship marketing as well as the IMP approach to business-to-business marketing in network show that marketing cannot be separated into one function and be the responsibility of one department only. Indeed, Kolter (1994, cited in Gronroos 2006) addressed that offering marketing as the most important function or even as an integrative function.
The other reason why firms should play emphasis on marketing is that other departments do not have adequate abilities and de-professionalized to support business needs that are same as marketing department. Trying to replace marketing function to the SBU (Strateic Business Unit) level often failed thus SBU managers do not have the necessary skills, have many others demand on their limited time and resource, and are driven by short-time measures of performance(Webster 2005). In addition, due to the short-time measures from SBU, the company will fail to forecast customer requirements accurately, and will easier suffer from ‘marketer myopia’. Based on those points, negative effects could happen due to neglecting marketing functions.
Another argument in favor of marketing deviating from business needs is that customers tend...