The explosion of interactive technology (web 2.0), for example, smart phone; an increase in concern of population about environmental issues and many other factors have “given the dramatic changes occurring in the marketing environment” (Baker 1995, citied in OM&P, 1998:840). Marketers have mission to understand and re-present these changes to adapt to new circumstances. This essay will look into how modern marketing has developed and expanded and what should marketers do to turn these challenges to opportunities to cope with the future. The modern marketing was largely built-up by the North – Americans (Meek, Ryan, & Lenney, 2010). At the end of 19th century, higher quality products at lower prices were created in the Industrial Revolution which had changed the function of US’ markets: from sellers’ markets to buyers’ markets. From 1910 to 1940, marketing was no longer only referred as part of economics; it was believed to be about “coordination, planning and managing complex relationships” (Meek, Ryan, & Lenney, 2010:7). After World War II, a need to consume products as quick as possible and the picture of the collapse of the economic system in America during the 1950s led to a great need of marketing in order to increase production capacity and guarantee that it worked every time (Eyerman and Lofgren 1995; Packard 1957; Brown 1996, citied in OM&P, 1998). Interests in marketing grew rapidly afterwards, the first concept of the marketing tool – marketing mix consisted of 12 variables including product, price, branding, distribution, personal selling, advertising, promotion, packaging, display, servicing, physical handling, fact finding and analysis was presented by Borden (Meek, Ryan, & Lenny, 2010). Even though, Borden concept was good which set marketing into a management function, it was “considered too long and unwieldy” (Stringer 1997, citied in OM&P, 1998:833). Later, in a seminal work, McCarthy reconstructed Borden’s idea into the “4Ps’ model of marketing” (product, price, place, promotion) and “presented it as an aid to instruction and a starting point from which to construct a marketing strategy” (Gronroos 1994a 1994b, citied in Meek, Ryan, & Lenney, 2010:10). The 4Ps became a popular marketing model that most researches topics depended heavily on (Gundlach and Wilkie 1990 cited in Meek, Ryan, & Lenney, 2010) and today most students studying marketing all know about this model at the very first place. However, after years of development and expansion, observers recognized some weaknesses and limitations of 4Ps. The most significant weakness of this model is it goes against the core marketing concept: “customer is somebody to whom something is done rather than somebody for whom something is done” (OM&P, 1998:834). The management mix always has uncomfortable relationship with the industrial sectors and services sectors, therefore it usually does not work in these two sectors (Meek, Ryan, & Lenney, 2010). “Even in consumer markets, it is now seen to have lost much of its potency” (OM&P, 1998:839).
The necessary of marketing mix can not be denied, but that 4Ps model failed to recognise the unique features of business-to-business and service marketing areas; and had become “peripheral in comparison to relationships” (Gummesson 1994 cited in Meek et al., 2010) . At that time, early models of relationship marketing (RM) had been established by “incorporating the notion of “customer service” as additional and central to the “updated” marketing mix” and “the marketers view the 4Ps from a customer-oriented perspective instead of market-oriented perspective” (Christopher et al., 1991:13, Kotler et al., 1999: 110 cited in Meek et al., 2010:30). The marketing mix was not the only aspect of traditional marketing being challenged, many other marketing concepts were on the fire. For example, the traditional transaction marketing model appeared...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document