Journal of Macromarketing

Journal of Macromarketing http://jmk.sagepub.com/

Macromarketing Roundtable Commentary−−The Export of Marketing Education Alan Bradshaw and Mark Tadajewski Journal of Macromarketing 2011 31: 312 originally published online 20 September 2011 DOI: 10.1177/0276146711406443 The online version of this article can be found at: http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/31/3/312

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Macromarketing Society

Additional services and information for Journal of Macromarketing can be found at: Email Alerts: http://jmk.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://jmk.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://jmk.sagepub.com/content/31/3/312.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Sep 27, 2011 OnlineFirst Version of Record - Sep 20, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from jmk.sagepub.com at University of Leicester Library on September 7, 2014

Commentary Journal of Macromarketing 31(3) 312-321 ª The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0276146711406443 http://jmk.sagepub.com

Macromarketing Roundtable Commentary—The Export of Marketing Education Alan Bradshaw1 and Mark Tadajewski2

Abstract It is increasingly common for western universities to recruit marketing students from across the globe, and in particular from notionally ‘‘developing’’ economies. This practice raises questions across a variety of issues: It can smuggle discourses of subalternity into the classroom; it can construct marketing education as an agent of globalization; it can undermine commitments to maintaining criticality in the subject area; it can result in all manners of pedagogical challenges; it can raise huge amounts of money for universities; and it can reconstitute marketing education as an object for export. These issues get to the heart of marketing education in an age of ever-increasing commercialization of universities and general tendencies of neoliberalism. To explore the phenomenon, an interdisciplinary roundtable discussion was held at Royal Holloway, University of London, on September 8, 2010. The participants here present short statements outlining their positions regarding marketing education, not just as a subject for teaching and learning but also as a product for export at a time of globalization, neoliberalism and political–economic transformations. Keywords marketing education, export, ideology, development, neoliberalism, political-economy, pedagogy

In our introduction to this set of commentaries, we intend to recall relevant historical context and sketch out our own set of concerns based upon our interpretations of the past, present, and hopeful future development of marketing education. Obviously, this is proving to be a popular export from the West to notionally ‘‘developing’’ countries. The explosive growth of recent years has a complex history and one which has not always been associated with the expansion of university instruction around the world via correspondence education and distance learning. Nevertheless, these were, and remain, important conduits in the dissemination of the philosophy of marketing practice. But equally important were the visits by prominent individuals to other nations from the 1920s onwards. By the 1950s, for instance, The National Sales Executives Organization journeyed to Russia, where they taught their counterparts the importance of a customer orientation, offering them practical selling guidance (Tadajewski 2009a). As we might expect, the United States has been influential in the dissemination of marketing theory and practice throughout the world (Witkowski 2005). The reasoning behind this is fairly obvious. It was the birthplace of some of the earliest courses in university instruction in marketing and sales management (Jones and Monieson 1990). What was perhaps as important as the long intellectual gestation period, as well as the cultivation of a scholarly base suitable for translation into textbook format and delivery to students, was the fact that the United

States emerged relatively unscathed from the Second World War (Tadajewski 2006, 2009b). Not only was the industrial infrastructure intact, but as a consequence of the requirements of all the major armed forces, it had grown substantially, leaving producers with immense capacity which they had to utilize (Tadajewski 2009b). This was achieved via the expansion of domestic and international markets, with U.S. industry spreading the gospel of marketing and consumption to nations whose industrial capacity was greatly diminished but whose consumption requirements demanded fulfillment. In this context, marketing academics affiliated with the Marshall Plan and the large philanthropic foundations facilitated the dissemination of U.S. marketing ideas to those living in Europe, Russia, and Asia. Academics and practitioners from these areas were encouraged by their own governments and heads of industry to mimic the methods of the United States in view of its success in connecting

1 2

School of Management, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK University of Strathclyde, Scotland, UK

Corresponding Author: Alan Bradshaw, School of Management, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK Email: [email protected]


Bradshaw and Tadajewski

313

production, distribution, and consumption (Westwood and Jack 2008; Whitehead 1963). While some drew attention to the limitations of U.S. models and the microlevel focus of management practice taught by U.S. institutions even then (Hester 1968), in the tense political and economic climate of the postwar world, marketing cemented its place as an important business function in influential firms (Barksdale and Darden 1971; Keith 1960; Tadajewski 2010a). At the same time, universities responded to the business community’s demand for marketing literate employees. Despite the turn against marketing and business education among particular cohorts during the 1960s, due to the perceived close alliance between marketing and the military–industrial complex (Kassarjian [1994] 2008), such concerns are largely forgotten today (c.f. Luedicke, Thompson, and Giesler 2010). Marketing is now an extremely popular subject globally (Binsardi and Ekwulugo 2003; Hackley 2003), with some marketing lecturers describing themselves as preachers spreading the word of marketing to their flocks in emerging markets (e.g., Clarke and Flaherty 2003, p. 122). Reflecting these changes, many English-speaking universities attract large numbers of international students from countries such as China, Thailand, India, and other ‘‘New Emerging Markets’’ (Clarke and Flaherty 2003) to their marketing programs. The active recruitment of international students has consequently become a major source of income for universities at a time of cutbacks. Meanwhile, many universities are internationalizing their practice and developing branches of their campuses in other countries. These practices mean that marketing theory and education is increasingly configured as an object for export but also establishes a connection between marketing education and economic development (see Drucker 1958; Hosey and Wee 1988; Wood and Vitell 1986); as though one necessarily serves as a precursor to the other. Naturally enough many scholars within our community feel that marketing does provide benefits to wider society (e.g., Manfredo and Shultz 2007; Shultz and Pecotich 1997; Shultz et al. 2005). Via the marketing concept companies deliver goods and services that people claim they desire; the sales of which contribute to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the economic health of nations (c.f. Mitchell, Wooliscroft, and Higham 2010; Tadajewski 2010b; Varey 2010). Indeed, to underscore the beneficial nature of marketing practices, we might turn to the activities of marketing organizations in war-torn areas. There are many cases where individuals and companies have sought to provide needed goods and services to populations ravaged by civil wars and internecine strife (Shultz et al. 2005). Such organizations literally offer those in dire straits the food they need. Their provisioning of branded goods has larger ramifications than this, however, healing the ‘‘collective psyche,’’ and building ‘‘links’’ between ‘‘estranged people and groups’’ (Shultz et al. 2005, p. 29). Yet, these and other authors also fully appreciate the problems and ‘‘social havoc’’ that accompanies marketing practice (Macinnis and Folkes 2010; Varey 2010). Thus, there are long-standing debates about the promotion of materialism, growing levels of obesity among

children, the affect of advertizing communications on self-perception and body image, the continued perpetuation of aesthetic value systems that grew to prominence during the colonial era (e.g., via skin-lightening creams), the rise of the ‘‘underclass’’ and ‘‘pauperized groups’’ who are marginalized within a consumer society (Bauman 2007; Habermas 1998; Jay 2010), alongside the problematic tactics used by the alcohol and cigarette industries in targeting minority populations (e.g., Bauman 1983; Karnani 2007; Mills 1997; Shultz and Holbrook 2009; Smith and Cooper-Martin 1997). These implementations of market logic often arise amidst a failure of Communist government and other civic reform initially grounded in concerns with social justice. Hence the arrival of Western marketing practice can mark a new political– economic order, frequently associated with a package of ‘‘shock therapy’’ and neoliberal transformation of the economy (Harvey 2007; Klein 2008). As such, marketing activity and the sense of need for more marketing education in a country is often embedded as part of an ideological naturalization of Western capitalism (Applbaum 2000; Kelly-Holmes 1998). Indeed, the signification of the arrival of popular Western brands as a marker of the transformation of the entire political, economic, social spectrum of ‘‘developing countries’’ was wonderfully dramatized in the film, Goodbye Lenin, when the character Kristiane leaves her apartment and discovers a wonderland of Western brands in what she expected to be the German Democratic Republic. The point is that the arrival of Western marketing phenomena in ‘‘developing’’ territories is not politically neutral but fundamentally political in that it promotes a very specific worldview (see Applbaum 2000; Kelly-Holmes 1998). The fact that so many students arrive at Western universities from non-Western ‘‘developing’’ countries to study marketing thus raises all sorts of questions about power relations, subjectivity, and the potential for criticality. If coming to the West to study marketing is understood as a means of learning Western techniques in an effort to accelerate economic development, then this is already to accept a temporal displacement as though time existed on a continuum, with the West representing modernity as a present in absolute terms, whilst the developing countries are located in our historical slipstream (Tomba 2009). For faculty, to work within these parameters is already to accept being, or to be viewed as, a developed subject, while our students are concomitantly underdeveloped subjects; a decidedly ethically dubious proposition. Clearly, with the foregoing in mind, the export of marketing education with its expected ramifications for practice raises important ethical, pedagogical, and ideological questions, with the benefits and potential ‘‘darkside’’ of marketing often being passed over very quickly in mainstream marketing education (c.f. Benton 1985; Ellis et al. 2010; Pennington et al., 2009). But since marketing education is increasingly offered throughout the world, the prominence of this industry demands that we scrutinize the benefits and costs that accompany the promotion of a predominantly U.S. inflected marketing vision (Brennan et al. 2010; Clarke and Flaherty 2003; Ellis et al. 2011;


314

Journal of Macromarketing 31(3)

Prothero, McDonagh, and Dobscha 2010; Shultz and Holbrook 2009). While admittedly scholars have argued for a balanced curriculum which encompasses managerial, macromarketing, and critical marketing elements (Benton 1985; Catterall, Maclaran, and Stevens 2002; Tadajewski 2010c) and thus provides what some have called a ‘‘broader’’ (Mitchell, Wooliscroft, and Higham 2010), ‘‘elevated,’’ multidimensional ‘‘view of marketing’’ (Macinnis and Folkes 2010), it remains true that marketing education concerns itself more with technical, applied issues, rather than with attention to a more critical orientation. We would submit that a devotion to managerial perspectives without situating practice within its historical, social, economic, and ideological context provides an essentially onedimensional view of the world (Brennan et al. 2010). Students are effectively taught to adjust themselves to their corporate environment (Freire [1970] 1996), its culture, and to focus on firm-level policies, without necessarily being encouraged to question the organizational ideals they adopt (Brennan et al. 2010; Crane 2000; Laczniak and Murphy 2006). Not registering and teaching alternative ways of understanding marketing theory, practice, and its impact on society leaves us open to charges of peddling ‘‘bullshit’’ (Holbrook 2005), since we avoid engagement with the complex social world. In its place we prefer to optimistically believe we can analyze, plan, and effectively control the internal and external environment, without needing to deal with messy and problematic issues like marketing ethics, consumer vulnerability, and so forth. So, in thinking through the growing levels of participation in marketing education, the criticisms of a dominant micromarketing orientation in undergraduate and higher degree studies (Benton 1985) and the fetishized focus on the technical and technique-oriented elements of marketing (Fenby 1991; Moorman 1987), we wanted to bring together a wide range of scholars who were interested in the changes in marketing education taking place and the influence of these on the students we teach and the society in which they will play a role. Given this, we organized a Macromarketing Roundtable discussion held at Royal Holloway, University of London on September 8, 2010, to discuss the attendant issues. The event contained numerous perspectives including macromarketing, critical marketing, pedagogical sociology, consumer research, and global learning. In addition to the above concerns, a myriad of issues were explored over the course of the 2-hour discussion and these are presented below.

Exporting Higher Education—Recent Trends in UK Universities and the Recruitment of International Students Rosemary Deem, Royal Holloway, University of London The purposes of the contemporary, publicly funded university are being reconfigured (Deem 2008b), with an increasing tension between economic, social, and cultural purposes.

Whilst many academics still attach importance to the collective social and cultural benefits of their teaching, Western governments increasingly want universities to focus on wealth creation, and producing employable graduates, with many consequences for universities’ core activities and values (Boulton and Lucas 2008). As well as this tension, there are several related trends. One is the new managerialist ideology that has permeated UK universities for the past two decades (Deem, Hillyard, and Reed 2007) and led to a considerable increase in managerial posts, research and teaching audits, a human resource management approach to academic performance management and doing ‘‘more with less.’’ Some of the 1980s classic literature about universities talked about the anarchic model of the university, which is flat, collegial, chaotic, and creative (hence its description as a garbage can model). We have now moved to a hierarchical organizational model, with attempts made to line-manage academics but line-management rarely makes them teach well or do brilliant research. A second trend is the idea of entrepreneurial universities (Clark 1998). Clark’s book is a series of uncritical case studies about universities in different countries, based on ‘‘heroic narratives’’, together with the identification of key steps toward entrepreneurial universities, which also tend to recruit highfee paying international students. A third trend is the increasingly consumerist culture of students themselves. It is based on a notion of education as a commodity and a belief that individual students are the only people who benefit from higher education. In England, the emphasis on consumerism has been exacerbated by the end of free higher education for UK students in 1998, yet UK universities have been charging overseas students high fees since the late 1970s, whilst failing to address the learning and other needs of such students. It is therefore fascinating in 2010, as protests mount in England about the austerity plans of the new Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition for higher education, including abolishing public funding for arts and social science courses and significantly raising the home/EU undergraduate fee, to hear some people saying that higher fees will mean paying more attention to the student experience! A fourth trend relates to internationalization, which is on the agenda of many universities around the world (Hazelkorn 2011). However, what is meant by internationalization is often unclear, beyond recruitment of international staff and students (Al-Youssef 2009). Internationalization has been slow to reach the curriculum, which, in areas like social sciences and management, is often focused on western societies. It draws on research and textbooks published in English, with the cultural consequences of that for education (Pennycook 1998) and makes little concession to the fact that students may not be familiar with western customs and values, let alone comfortable with using the English language. Critical thinking is also emphasized. Typically this means taking international students from countries like China and India, which stress the authority of the educators and textbooks, and use rote learning, and asking them to think critically when they have no prior exposure to it.



315

Thus a form of postcolonialism focused on the supremacy of the English language and western civilizations lives on in UK higher education. This is the case not only in the curriculum and in pedagogies which, using techniques like group work and role play, place a premium on mastery of the English language. It is also found in assessment, where exams and long written assignments, both of which also favor native English speakers, often predominate in Masters programs that enroll international students. Finally, unsophisticated use of plagiarism detection software means that international students are often punished for poor study skills as much as for an intention to deceive (Hayes and Introna 2005). Furthermore, many students from South East Asia, especially at postgraduate level, find that far from the cosmopolitan culture they expect in their student life, their classmates often consist of other students from the same or a nearby country, with UK students often reluctant to mix with them (Turner 2006). International students may struggle to grasp the social and cultural subtleties of western education, let alone deal with the mismatches between their expectations and what is provided. The time is ripe to reexamine how and why we offer teaching programs to international students and what forms of curricula, pedagogy, and assessment we use when we do so.

Becoming International Stefano Harney, Queen Mary, University of London The new Tory-led government in the United Kingdom passed legislation in the autumn of 2010 to raise tuition fees for English students to rates near those paid by international students studying in the United Kingdom. It will represent a triple-fold increase in less than 3 years, the steepest increase on record in the developed world. Not surprisingly English students took to the streets in large numbers. At the same time, tuition fee increases in state-run universities in the United States are climbing steadily, provoking student occupations from California to Puerto Rico. Despite these protests, the idea of higher education as a public good is being replaced almost everywhere by the calculation that higher education is a matter of individual cost–benefit analysis. In this process students everywhere are, in the words of Paolo Do, ‘‘becoming international students.’’ By this, I take him to mean two things, both of which are highly relevant in any discussion of marketing education in a global context, and especially any discussion of how to offer a ‘‘critical marketing education’’ under these conditions. Becoming international means joining those students never included in the idea of the public good, those students who exposed the limits of this notion of the national public good. The international student is part of a different calculus. Some are supported for various reasons, but no general right to education obtains, nor does any general argument about the greater good. The only generality for international students is the market. But increasingly for UK and U.S. students, at state schools and through private for-profit providers, the market rules, and these students join the international students. Of course some

national students still avoid the market, supported by private philanthropy, but most today face it as directly as international students. This market calculus produces problems beyond indebtedness or the sheer inability to pay and therefore to go to university. It produces the idea of education as a commodity to be marketed, purchased, and held as an investment. It follows that the worth of the investment is what the market says it is, not what any student or lecturer thinks it is. University administrator, lecturer, and student all have a stake in pleasing the market therefore. Some have argued that markets are sophisticated, and that they can distinguish between a good degree and a bad one. To some extent this is true, though it is unclear that this distinction is truly made with market logic, rather than using social and cultural knowledge. Such knowledge may be used in the market, may help to produce the market, but it is not likely generated by the market mechanism itself. But more importantly, this need to please the market lines up university administrator, lecturer, and student, behind a common interest and this, it is worth reminding ourselves, is a very unhealthy way for a university to organize itself. University as sites of where ideas are professed need to be dissensual not consensual, and dissent must extend to the site itself. All of those we now study, from Socrates, to Mary Shelley, to Marx, to Darwin, to Freud, to Gandhi, and King dissented, not just about ideas but about where and how those ideas ought to be professed, and with whom. But dissent and protest destabilize markets and frighten investors. This is the second way in which all students are becoming international. Dissent comes to look like a threat to the institution, like some kind of terror practiced by the (becoming) international student against the reputation of the university. Subject to market forces, discouraged from dissent, all students today become international. So what then of the lecturer? What then of the marketing lecturer, and particularly of a critical marketing lecturer who already knows the challenge of cynicism among students about the motives for selling products, ideas, and reputations? In some ways this becoming international might help critical lecturers to clarify an old problem—the assumption that international students are cynical or not interested in critiques of marketing as part of their education. Such an assumption often drifted into dodgy culturalist arguments about certain cultures, usually Asian, where critical thinking is said not to be part of the ‘‘mindset.’’ Such arguments are, of course, deeply flawed and reflect not the lack of critical thinking among Asian students but that among the lecturers who promote these arguments. First, they fail to distinguish between an education system and the people subjected to it. The Chinese education system, for instance, may emphasize information not analysis, but China could hardly be said to be a civilization lacking critical thinking. Not only is it a revolutionary society, which itself requires a ruthless critique of what existed before, but China is, of course, also a society where civil servants took rigorous national exams going back a thousand years but were also poets and philosophers. More importantly, for our purposes these


316


arguments reflected a lack of critical reflection from lecturers on the rote nature of their own curriculum for international students, and the cynicism bred by the market calculus evident to every international student who studies in the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, or the United States (and increasingly Singapore and other new international ‘‘education hubs’’). Today as every student becomes international, we can hope that this lack of critical thinking among lecturers cannot be sustained, as the special conditions for national students under the logic of the public good disappears. But something else may also happen in this becoming international of the lecturers. Faced with larger classes, more standardized evaluations and texts, more cynical student-consumers, more demanding university administrators, lecturers may come to discover that only one kind of critique matters. Only a critique of the system itself—a system that generates through its own logic more students, more cynicism, more measurement, more pressure, more work, all without a commensurate improvement in the substance of education itself for most—only this kind of critique really counts as critical thinking. If lecturers who are becoming international grasp this new reality, they will have something in common with their students. Because the international student already knows that she is stuck in a system that treats her as a commodity. Although she can gain from this market, she must in return give up her critical thinking to realize this gain. She must agree not to question the system itself, for fear of breaking with the consensus in the university seeking to please the markets. The international student may discover that an entire degree, method of delivery, or course content needs critiquing, but usually only after she is on the degree. The money and time has been spent. The only thing worse than suffering on a bad degree, one that treats her like a commodity, is not to get the bad degree for which she has invested. Meanwhile, lecturers becoming international are squeezed by key performance indicators and new targets, and the only thing worse than continuing is the threat of joining the growing global reserve army of academic labor. The choice of no choice at the heart of becoming international may yet provide the basis for solidarity. For critical marketing lecturers becoming international is an opportunity not to evaluate marketing by whether it moves toward the neoclassical dream of perfect information but toward the material conditions where all students and lecturers can inquire freely into the system of education itself that generates marketing knowledge.

Marketing Education is a Critical Project James Fitchett, University of Leicester MSc programs in marketing continues to increase in size in terms of student registrations to the extent that in the United Kingdom it is now common place to see cohorts approaching 100 students or more. Marketing programs are some of the most popular and lucrative for school or colleges. Most of our students are categorized as ‘‘international,’’ which means that their country of origin is outside of the European Union

(EU). Whereas ‘‘home/EU’’ students typically pay lower fees, and undergraduate funding is (at present) highly regulated and capped in the United Kingdom, universities and colleges are free to set fees for international students by what are in effect market-based mechanisms. For a postindustrial economy like the United Kingdom the market for international students, of which students of marketing are a sizable proportion, has come to constitute a major growth export industry involving millions (if not billions) of dollars and tens of thousands of students annually. Extrapolating these estimates further to include the considerably larger numbers of international students following marketing programs at North American colleges and also add estimates from other major international education providers in Western Europe, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, it becomes clear that the market for marketing education produces vast wealth for developed economies. If the experience of the United Kingdom is anything to go by the majority of these students are from South East Asia and China, with the Asian subcontinent, South America, and Africa being seen as the most important growth markets for the future. To many these figures, both in monetary terms and student numbers, are significant for a number of reasons. We can question the legitimacy of an institution that channels vast resources from developing economies to developed ones to conclude that it represents a kind of neocolonial enterprise by which Western capitalist values and ideologies are exported en masse to the rest of the world. The counter position is that this should not be viewed as a negative state of affairs, and that such ‘‘knowledge transfer’’ simply further highlights the benefits of the global economy. In order to assess the strength and validity of these arguments it is necessary to give some consideration to the motives of students as well as providers of marketing education and to evaluate the type of experiences that this education tends to involve. In my experience in the United Kingdom an increasing number of marketing educators are becoming more skeptical about the legitimacy of the traditional marketing syllabus not only for international students but also for the home audience. There is, sadly, limited evidence to support the promise that a conventional marketing education, with its emphasis on managerialism, functionalism, and inspired largely by a North American discourse that emerged from the aftermath of the Second World War and during the cold war, is able to deliver the kinds of value that international students expect and anticipate when contemplating the prospect of studying a marketing degree abroad. Evidence suggests that the marketing function continues to slip down the corporate hierarchy and is not generally viewed as some kind of powerhouse for corporate strategy development and implementation (Sheth and Sisodia 2005; Verhoef and Leeflang 2009). Marketing education marketing is not doing what it is supposed to do or promises to do in terms of aiding company success (Shultz 2003) and few executives have any marketing experience or marketing education (Doyle 2000). The fact that marketing education plays a very small role in the development of applied marketing ability (Hunt, Chonko, and Wood 1986) poses a problem for both neoliberal and critical perspectives alike. On the one hand



317

it undermines the argument that educating young and wealthy elites from the developing economies in marketing will produce long-term benefits in terms of the economic development of those countries. But it also takes the sting out of the ideological critique of marketing-colonialism. Marketing programs do have the potential to make a positive and progressive contribution to international students and the countries to where they will return home following their time spent abroad. In order to do so, however, it is necessary for the institution of marketing education to face up to some of its realities and responsibilities. We can and should question the merits of so many young people from all over the world choosing to study marketing rather than other subjects and disciplines. This speaks very much to debates about student/consumer choice, as well as to anecdotes regarding our abilities as human beings to choose exactly those things that are worst for us. But that so many students do choose to study marketing, rather than whether or not they should do so, should be our starting point. A marketing syllabus can be a basis from which to approach a broad range of issues and topics that are highly relevant not only to students as potential champions of business but to also as future consumers and citizens. Approaches informed by the macromarketing movement and the critical marketing tradition, for example, all offer alternative discourses through which marketing knowledge can be understood as applied, relevant, contemporary, and above all accessible to a wide audience (see Ellis et al. 2011). It is vital that we, as a community of educators, do not forget that the value of education extends well beyond the confines of syllabus and content. The critical skills embedded within the ‘‘Western’’ tradition of education as well as the experience of study abroad does, I believe, offer students many positive and constructive opportunities that exceed the narrow mythologies of marketing management dogma. If marketing educators aspire to some notion of changing the world for the better then they need to engage with that world through the students they teach. This also means finding ways to deliver an experience that will enable those students to understand and confront the macro and critical debates in markets, marketing, and consumption.

The Peruvian Way to Marketing Education Janice Denegri-Knott, Bournemouth Media School In Peru, far removed from the higher education sector which reaches a small population of better-off University and College students, marketing now reaches thousands of microentrepreneurs. Within this context, marketing has been awarded a transformational role by the many NGOs and microcredit institutions operating in Peru which see marketing education as aiding the transformation of the disenfranchised poor into successful, self-enterprising subjects. This transformative potential can also be found in discourses Peruvians themselves are writing about marketing as a practical discipline. In the texts, they write about how marketing is to be applied in Peru, their blogs, commentaries published in the national press and in how they teach their students, marketing or marketeando seems

more akin to a philosophy of life rather than a mere business orientation. Such endorsement and transformation correspond to specific sociocultural and economic factors: a buoyant economy, this year achieving a growth rate of 6.6% (El Comercio 2010); more than 30 percent of the population living in poverty (UNDP 2010); a new entrepreneurial class of microentrepreneurs who provide 75 percent of Peru’s employment and generate 40 percent of its wealth (IPM 2009) and a large lower middle class characterized by its resourcefulness to appropriate and mix whatever resources are available in order to make a living (Arellano 2010). To begin with and given the enthusiasm with which Peruvians today write about marketing we may want to see the teaching of marketing as a way to improve the standing of marginalized, impoverished groups in society and propel the economic well-being of a nation, as an instance of marketing domesticated the ‘‘Peruvian way.’’ To hijack the notion of transformative consumer research touted in consumer culture theory (CCT) circles we may see this as transformative marketing: a more civic marketing with a social mission. We may also imagine a transformative potential along the lines of civilizing processes (Elias [1939] 2000) or strategies of government (Rose 1998, 1999) aimed at producing new forms of doing and thinking about oneself and others that can conflict and even destroy cultural arrangements that are not aligned with neoliberal, free market-orientated projects. It follows then that marketing education within the context of developing nations will be detrimental to their cultures and their well-being (e.g., O’Malley, Weir, and Shearing 1997). And these are outcomes that worry some analysts. We can begin to mitigate this concern by first suggesting that there is no passive appropriation of market ideology by marketing educators and their students in Peru, and that marketing education itself represents an instance, to borrow from Terrence Witkowski, of discursive and practical domestication, where the concept of marketing and its application is transformed to meet very local and idiosyncratic needs. There is an inherently plural, creolized quality to how marketing is understood by those writing about and teaching marketing in Peru. Plurality first emerged as a problem of translation, when various terms were toyed with to capture the meaning of the English ‘‘marketing’’ in Spanish. Initially, terms like mercadeo, mercadotecnia, and commercializacioń were introduced in the translated texts of Stanton and Futrell (1987), Kinnear and Taylor (1991), Kotler and Armstrong (1994), and McCarthy (1960) in a bid to find a suitable Spanish equivalent. All failed to capture the nuances of the English term or the reality of how marketing was being practiced in the 1970s and 1980s when marketing began to be formally taught in Peru (IPM 2008, 2009; Linares 2009). Today there are marketing knowledges of various pedigrees taught. There are practical manuals and training programs which offer tactical and pragmatic advice on how to increase sales and offer good customer service for microentrepreneurs (e.g., Becerra Marsano and Garcıá Vega 2008); applied marketing texts which build on theoretical elements that could be applied to a Peruvian


318


context (IPM 2008, 2009; Pipoli 2002, 2003), to more complex sociological examinations of how marketing practice has ended up being reinvented as a result of cultural changes unfolding in Peru (e.g., Arellano 2010; Bailoń and Nicoli 2010). Often we find Peruvian academics reflecting on the fruits of their labor and intellectual gymnastics required in stretching, adapting, filtering, and mixing foundational marketing theory, localized understandings of how marketing is carried out in Peru, the idiosyncrasies of the Peruvian consumer, the organizations marketing graduates will eventually service and the material constraints which make the implementation of certain marketing activities difficult, if not impossible (e.g., e-commerce, complex real-time integration of marketing systems). For example, Becerra Marsano and Garcıá Vega (2008, p. 7) introduce their marketing manual for microentrepreneurs by stating that they have ‘‘recreated those elements of marketing which are important, but from the perspective of the micro-entrepreneur living in Lima,’’ and this as they add, supposes a process of ‘‘filtering and adaptation’’ (Becerra Marsano and Garcıá Vega, 2008, p. 7). This filtering and adaption of marketing theory produces a dual process of domestication. On the one side, marketing education programs which are initially framed by what is understood to be foundational theory found in texts penned by American academics, coalesces with local knowledges and material limitations, like lack of financial capital or deficient technological infrastructures, which ultimately produce an understanding largely dictated by local circumstances and resources. On the other, these interpretative efforts also end up domesticating the marketing concept by extending its application beyond its traditional business context and into the domain of everyday life. This is typified in the enunciation of marketing as a verb, marketeando, and signals the opening and broadening of the application of marketing to include both the vocabulary and tools necessary to become not only a successful entrepreneur but a better person, as well as incorporating culturally situated understandings of progress which blend individual success with communitarian and national ideals. This becomes particularly apparent when marketing education is positioned as a positive agent of change for those who lack cultural and economic capital. In this regard, often the provision of marketing education as part of a diet to transform the petit or small entrepreneur into a star entrepreneur is used as part of social reform. Differently put, marketing education is seen as a means of preparing the subject to assume his role in civil society and the market as the preferred mechanism for fighting off poverty and achieving political freedom and social justice. Although we may recognize many of the ideals enumerated in marketing manuals aimed at the microenterprise owner and University and College students, as promoting individual rationality and self-enterprise (Rose 1998, 1999), this endorsement of marketing knowledges as useful guides to conduct your everyday life and become a ‘‘better,’’ more professional, selfenterprising individual, respond to a typically Peruvian appraisal of progress. Reciprocity, solidarity, and communitarianism—social practices which characterize the societal

arrangements of indigenous populations in Peru—reconfigure a Western understanding of progress as individual achievement, to a community-nation one. So, in Peru marketing education as part of larger neoliberal project ends up being practiced and understood in distinctively situated ways. Marketeando, then, can be understood as a fluid template for action which is fed by all sorts of knowledges, global and local, which ultimately do not constitute a triumph of market imperialism but rather an instance where programs of transformation end up being transformed themselves.

Domesticating Marketing Education in the Developing World Terrence Witkowski, California State University, Long Beach Marketing education should be made relevant to local market conditions and marketing systems in the developing world. Student learning will be enhanced when classroom instruction, texts, cases, and projects reflect their local marketing realities. Unfortunately, this has not always been the case. Research at Vietnamese universities, for example, has found that the marketing textbooks being used are directly translated versions of texts popular in the United States (Witkowski, Nguyen, and Pham 2010). However, relatively few local faculty were trained or lived in a capitalistic society and some basic concepts remain unfamiliar to them. Although reasonably conversant with core marketing theories, these instructors have had relatively little practical experience with Western marketing and find it difficult to convey some concepts to their students. The lack of a well-established business infrastructure in countries like Vietnam makes the teaching and implementation of advanced marketing concepts, such as the intricacies of brand management, customer relationships, and online retailing, rather irrelevant at times. As a result, students only gain a superficial knowledge of applicable modern marketing theories and strategies, and when they join the workforce they face challenges for which they were not well-prepared in college. To improve marketing education in developing countries, local market institutions and marketing practices need to be understood on their own terms and in comparison with global models. Food marketing is a good place to begin because no product class is more deeply cultural than what we eat, and few if any products are traded more internationally. Studies of food distribution should describe local periodic and public markets, street vending, and independent, single-line stores and compare them with global chains of grocery retailers and food service establishments. In some ways, this recommendation harkens back to the situation confronting early (ca. 1902–1920) marketing educators in the United States who often had to go out and talk to businessmen to learn about how they operated, and then had to write texts from scratch (Hagerty 1936; Litman 1950; Weld 1941). Hagerty, who first taught ‘‘Distribution of Products’’ in Spring, 1905, at Ohio State University, obtained much information by personally interviewing businessmen in different fields and by instructing his students on how to do the same.



319

Similarly, academics in developing nations should take it upon themselves to research and write about how their own marketing systems actually work. They need to thoroughly understand their local markets and how consumers negotiate the risks inherent to fast-changing marketing systems (Veeck, Yu, and Burns 2010). Local research and teaching should pay particular attention to the needs of low income consumers, not just the elites who are able to purchase global and/or luxury goods. Studies should likewise address local marketing institutions, consider the various marketing functions they perform, and show how different types of products are distributed and sold in their respective countries. In short, developing world educators need to revisit the institutional, functional, and commodity approaches that dominated the marketing field in the first half of the twentieth century (Shaw and Jones 2005). By doing so, they and their students will learn more about fundamental marketing concepts and, ultimately, contemporary marketing management. Marketing educators in developing countries should not completely reinvent marketing and, in so doing, isolate their discipline from knowledge created by the global field. They need to know best managerial practices abroad and be familiar with leading edge research created by a global community of marketing scholars. In this way, they can help prepare their students for work in major corporations. However, their marketing pedagogy will have more relevance and lead to better learning outcomes if it is domesticated to reflect local marketing systems and the consumers they serve. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References Al-Youssef, Joanna (2009), ‘‘The Internationalisation of Higher Education Institutions – A Case Study of a British University,’’ doctoral dissertation, University of Bath. Applbaum, Kalman (2000), ‘‘Crossing Borders: Globalization as Myth and Charter in American Transnational Consumer Marketing,’’ American Ethnologist, 27 (2), 257-282. Arellano, Rolando (2010), Al Medio Hay Sitio: El Crecimiento Social Seguń los Estilos de Vida. Lima: Planeta. Bailoń, Jaime and Alberto Nicoli (2010), Chicha Power: El Marketing se Reinventa. Lima: Universidad de Lima Fondo Editorial. Barksdale, Hiram, C. and Bill Darden (1971), ‘‘Marketers’ Attitudes Toward the Marketing Concept,’’ Journal of Marketing, 35, 29-36. Bauman, Zygmunt (1983), ‘‘Industrialism, Consumerism and Power,’’ Theory, Culture & Society, 1 (3), 32-43. ——— (2007), ‘‘Collateral Casualties of Consumerism,’’ Journal of Consumer Culture, 7 (1), 25-56.

Becerra Marsano, Ana Marıá and Emilio Garcıá Vega (2008), Aspectos Ba´sicos de Ma´rketing para la Micro y Pequenã Empresa. Lima: Universidad del Pacifico. Benton, Raymond (1985), ‘‘Micro Bias and Macro Prejudice in the Teaching of Marketing,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 5, 43-58. Binsardi, Arnaz and Frances Ekwulugo (2003), ‘‘International Marketing of British Education: Research on the Students’ Perception and the UK Market Penetration,’’ Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 21 (5), 318-327. Boulton, Geoffrey and Lucas, Colin (2008), ‘‘What are Universities for? Amsterdam: League of European Research Universities.’’ Brennan, Ross, Lynn Eagle, Nick Ellis, and Matthew Higgins (2010), ‘‘Of a Complex Sensitivity in Marketing Ethics Education,’’ Journal of Marketing Management, 26 (13-14), 1165-1180. Brown, Sally and Elspeth Jones, eds. (2007), Internationalizing Higher Education: Enhancing Teaching, Learning and Curriculum. London: Routledge. Catterall, Miriam, Pauline Maclaran, and Lorna Stevens (2002), ‘‘Critical Reflection in the Marketing Curriculum,’’ Journal of Marketing Education, 22 (4), 184-192. Clark, Burton (1998), Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation. Issues in Higher Education. London: Elsevier. Clarke, Irvine II and Theresa B. Flaherty (2003), ‘‘Challenges and Solutions for Marketing Educators Teaching in Newly Emerging Markets,’’ Journal of Marketing Education, 25 (2), 118-129. Crane, Andrew (2000), ‘‘Corporate Greening as Amoralization,’’ Organization Studies, 21 (4), 673-697. Deem, Rosemary (2008), ‘‘Producing and Re/producing the European University in the 21st century: research perspectives on the shifting purposes of higher education’’, Deem, R., Higher Education Policy, 21(3), 439-456. Deem, Rosemary and Kevin J. Brehony (2000), ‘‘Doctoral Students’ Access to Research Cultures: Are Some More Equal than Others?’’ Studies in Higher Education, 25 (2), 149-165. Deem, Rosemary, Sam Hillyard, and Mike Reed (2007), Knowledge, Higher Education and the New Managerialism: The Changing Management of UK Universities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Doyle, Peter (2000), ‘‘Value-Based Marketing,’’ Journal of Strategic Marketing, 8 (4), 299-311. Drucker, Peter, F. (1958), ‘‘Marketing and Economic Development,’’ Journal of Marketing, 22 (3), 252-259. El Comercio (2010), Peru´ liderara´ el crecimiento econo´mico en Latinoame´rica hasta 2015. http://elcomercio.pe/economia/487533/ noticia-fmi-liderara-crecimiento-economico-latinoamerica-hasta-2015 (accessed November 15, 2010). Elias, Norbert (1939/2000), The Civilizing Process: Sociogenetic and Psychogenetic Investigations, 2nd ed. London: WileyBlackwell. Ellis, Nick, James Fitchett, Matthew Higgins, Matthew, Jack Gavin, Ming Lim, Michael Saren, and Mark Tadajewski (2011), Marketing: A Critical Textbook. London: Sage. Fenby, Barbara, Lou (1991), ‘‘Feminist Theory, Critical Theory, and Management’s Romance With the Technical,’’ Affilia, 6 (1), 20-37. Freire, Paulo (1970/1996), Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin.


320


Habermas, Jurgen (1998), ‘‘Learning by Disaster? A Diagnostic Look Back on the Short 20th Century,’’ Constellations, 5 (3), 307-320. Hackley, Chris (2003), ‘‘‘We Are All Customers Now’: Rhetorical Strategy and Ideological Control in Marketing Management Texts,’’ Journal of Management Studies, 40 (5), 1325-1352. Hagerty, James E. (1936), ‘‘Experiences of our Early Marketing Teachers,’’ Journal of Marketing, 1, 20-27. Harvey, David (2007), A Brief History of Neo-Liberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hayes, Niall and Lucas Introna (2005), ‘‘Cultural Values, Plagiarism, and Fairness: When Plagiarism Gets in the Way of Learning,’’ Ethics and Behaviour, 15 (1), 213-231. ——— (2011), Rankings and the Reshaping of Higher Education: The Battle for World-Class Excellence. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Hester, Martin (1968), ‘‘US Business Schools: A Cautionary Tale,’’ Management Decision 2 (1), 10-14. Holbrook, Morris, B. (2005), ‘‘Marketing Miseducation and the MBA Mind: Bullshit Happens,’’ Marketing Education Review, 15 (3), 1-5. Hosey, Suzanne and Chow Hou Wee (1988), ‘‘Marketing and Economic Development: Focusing on the Less Developed Countries,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 8, 43-53. Hunt, Shelby, Lawrence B. Chonko, and Van Wood (1986), ‘‘Marketing Education and Marketing Success: Are They Related?’’ Journal of Marketing Education, 6 (1), 2-13. Instituto Peruano de Marketing (2008), Leyes del Marketing Praćtico en el Peru´. Lima: IPM. ——— (2009), Co´mo Aplicar el Marketing en el Peru´. Lima: IPM. Jay, Martin (2010), ‘‘Liquidity Crisis: Zygmunt Bauman and the Incredible Lightness of Modernity,’’ Theory, Culture and Society, 27 (6), 95-106. Jones, D. G. Brian and David, D. Monieson (1990), ‘‘Early Development of the Philosophy of Marketing Thought,’’ Journal of Marketing, 54 (1), 102-113. Karnani, Aneel (2007), ‘‘The Mirage of Marketing to the Bottom of the Pyramid: How the Private Sector Can Alleviate Poverty,’’ California Management Review, 49 (4), 90-111. Kassarjian, Harold, H. (1994/2008), ‘‘Scholarly Traditions and European Roots of American Consumer Research,’’ in The History of Marketing Thought, Vol. III, Mark Tadajewski and D. G. Brian Jones, eds. London: Sage, 301-312. Keith, Robert J. (1960), ‘‘The Marketing Revolution,’’ Journal of Marketing, 24 (3), 35-38. Kelly-Holmes, Helen (1998), ‘‘The Discourse of Western Marketing Professionals in Central and Eastern Europe: Their Role in the Creation of a Context for Marketing and Advertising Messages,’’ Discourse & Society, 9 (3), 339-362. Kinnear, Thomas and James Taylor (1991), Marketing Research: An Applied Approach, 4th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Klein, Naomi (2008), The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. London: Penguin. Kotler, Philip and Gary Armstrong (1994), Principles of Marketing, 7th ed. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall College Division. Laczniak, Gene, R. and Patrick, E. Murphy (2006), ‘‘Normative Perspectives for Ethical and Socially Responsible Marketing,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 26 (2), 154-177.

Linares, Luis (2009), Introduccioń al Marketing. http://www .marketeando.com/search/label/INTRODUCCI%C3%93N%20AL% 20MARKETING (accessed September 18, 2010). Litman, Simon (1950), ‘‘The Beginnings of Teaching Marketing in American Universities,’’ Journal of Marketing, 15, 220-223. Luedicke, Marius, K., Craig, J. Thompson, and Markus Giesler (2010), ‘‘Consumer Identity Work as Moral Protagonism: How Myth and Ideology Animate a Brand-Mediated Moral Conflict,’’ Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 1016-1033. Macinnis, Deborah, L. and Valerie, S. Folkes (2010), ‘‘The Disciplinary Status of Consumer Behavior: A Sociology of Science Perspective on Key Controversies,’’ Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 899-914. McCarthy, Jerome (1960), Basic Marketing: A Managerial Approach. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin. Mills, Mary-Beth (1997), ‘‘Contesting the Margins of Modernity: Women, Migration, and Consumption in Thailand,’’ American Ethnologist, 24 (1), 37-61. Manfredo, Mark and Shultz, Clifford (2007), ‘‘Risk, Trade, Recovery, and the Consideration of Real Options: The Imperative Coordination of Policy, Marketing, and Finance in the Wake of Catastrophe,’’ Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 26(1):33-48. Mitchell, Robert W., Ben Wooliscroft, and James Higham (2010), ‘‘Sustainable Market Orientation: A New Approach to Managing Marketing Strategy,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 30 (2), 160-170. Moorman, Christine (1987) ‘‘Marketing as Technique: The Influence of Marketing on the Meanings of Consumption,’’ in Philosophical and Radical Thought in Marketing, A. Fuat Firat, Nikhilesh Dholakia, and Richard P. Bagozzi, eds. Latham: Lexington Books, 193-215. O’Malley, Pat, Lorna Weir, and Clifford Shearing (1997), ‘‘Governmentality, Criticism, Politics,’’ Economy and Society, 26 (4), 501-517. Pennington, Julia, R., A. Dwayne Ball, Ronald D. Hampton, and Julia N. Soulakova (2009), ‘‘The Cross-National Market in Human Beings,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 29 (2), 119-134. ——— (1998), English and the Discourses of Colonialism. London and New York, NY: Routledge. Pipoli, Gina (2002), Casos de la Mercadotecnia Aplicados a la Realidad Peruana, Tomo 1. Lima: Universidad del Pacifico. ——— (2003), El marketing y sus aplicaciones a la realidad peruana. Lima: Universidad del Pacı´fico. Prothero, Andrea, Pierre McDonagh, and Susan Dobscha (2010), ‘‘Is Green the New Black? Reflections on a Green Commodity Discourse,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 30 (2), 147-159. Rose, Nikolas (1998), Inventing Our Selves: Psychology, Power, and Personhood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ——— (1999), Governing the Soul: The Shaping of the Private Self. London: Free Association Books. Shaw, Eric H. and D. G. Brian Jones (2005), ‘‘A History of Schools of Marketing Thought,’’ Marketing Theory, 5/3, 239-282. Sheth, Jagdish and Rajendra Sisodia (2005), ‘‘Does Marketing Need Reform?’’ Journal of Marketing, 69 (4), 10-12. Shultz, Clifford and Pecotich, Anthony (1997), Marketing and development in the transition economies of Southeast Asia: policy explication, assessment and implications. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing.16(1) 55-68.



321

Shultz, Clifford, J., II, Timothy J. Burkink, Bruno Grbac, and Natasa Renko (2005), ‘‘When Policies and Marketing Systems Explode: An Assessment of Food Marketing in the War-Ravaged Balkans and Implications for Recovery, Sustainable Peace, and Prosperity,’’ Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 24 (1), 24-37. Shultz, Clifford, J., II and Morris B. Holbrook (2009), ‘‘The Paradoxical Relationships Between Marketing and Vulnerability,’’ Journal of Marketing & Public Policy, 28 (1), 124-127. Shultz, Don. (2003), ‘‘Marketing gets no respect in the boardroom,’’ Marketing News, 37 (24), 9. Smith, N. Craig and Elizabeth Cooper-Martin (1997), ‘‘Ethics and Target Marketing: The Role of Product Harm and Consumer Vulnerability,’’ Journal of Marketing, 61, 1-20. Stanton, William J. and Charles Futrell (1987), Fundamentals of Marketing. New York, NY: McGrawHill Book. Tadajewski, Mark (2006), ‘‘The Ordering of Marketing Theory: The Influence of McCarthyism and the Cold War,’’ Marketing Theory, 6 (2), 163-200. ——— (2009a), ‘‘Quaker Travels, Fellow Traveller? Wroe Alderson’s Visit to Russia During the Cold War,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 29 (3), 303-324. ——— (2009b), ‘‘Eventalizing the Marketing Concept,’’ Journal of Marketing Managemement, 25 (1-2), 191-217. ——— (2010a), ‘‘Reading ‘the Marketing Revolution’ Through the Prism of the FBI,’’ Journal of Marketing Management, 26 (1-2), 90-107. ——— (2010b), ‘‘Critical Marketing Studies, Logical Empiricism, ‘Critical Performativity’ and Marketing Practice,’’ Marketing Theory, 10 (2), 210-222. ——— (2010c), ‘‘Towards a History of Critical Marketing Studies,’’ Journal of Marketing Management, 26 (9-10), 773-824. Tomba, Massimiliano (2009), ‘‘Historical Temporalities of Capital: An Anti-Historicist Perspective,’’ Historical Materialism, 17 (4), 44-65. Turner, Yvonne (2006), ‘‘Students from Mainland China and Critical Thinking in Postgraduate Business and Management Degrees: Teasing out Tensions of Culture, Style and Substance,’’ International Journal of Management Education 5 (1), 3-12. UNDP (2010), Regional Human Development Report for Latin America and the Caribbean 2010. http://www.idhalc-actuarsobreelfuturo.org/ site/engl/index.php (accessed November 30, 2010).

Varey, Richard J. (2010), ‘‘Marketing Means and Ends for a Sustainable Society: A Welfare Agenda for Transformative Change,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 30 (2), 112-126. Veeck, Ann, Hongyan Yu, and Alvin C. Burns (2010), ‘‘Consumer Risks and New Food Systems in Urban China,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 30 (3), 222-237. Verhoef, Peter and Peter Leeflang (2009), ‘‘Understanding the Marketing Department’s Influence Within the Firm,’’ Journal of Marketing, 73 (2), 14-37. Weld, Louis D. H. (1941), ‘‘Early Experiences in Teaching Courses in Marketing,’’ Journal of Marketing, 5, 380-381. Westwood, Robert and Gavin Jack (2008), ‘‘The US CommercialMilitary-Political Complex and the Emergence of International Business and Management Studies,’’ Critical Perspectives on International Business, 4 (4), 367-388. Witkowski, Terrence H. (2005), ‘‘Antiglobal Challenges to Marketing in Developing Countries: Exploring the Ideological Divide,’’ Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 24 (1), 7-23. Witkowski, Terrence H., Hieu Nguyen, and Huyen Thi Pham (2010), ‘‘Marketing Education in Vietnam: A Review and Agenda for Development,’’ In Proceedings of the 11th ISMD International Conference on Markets and Development (CD-ROM, no editor or page numbers). Wood, R. Van and Scott J. Vitell (1986), ‘‘Marketing and Economic Development: Synthesis and Evaluation,’’ Journal of Macromarketing, 6, 28-48.

Bios Alan Bradshaw teaches, writes, and learns about marketing, capital, and consumer culture at Royal Holloway, University of London. Mark Tadajewski is Professor of Marketing in the Department of Marketing at the University of Strathclyde, Scotland. His research is forthcoming or has appeared in Business History, Journal of Macromarketing, Organization, Marketing Theory, Journal of Marketing Management, and the Journal of Historical Research in Marketing. His recent coauthored and coedited books include Marketing: A Critical Textbook (SAGE, 2011) and a dictionary called Key Concepts in Critical Management Studies (SAGE, 2011). He is Co-Editor of the Journal of Marketing Management and an Associate Editor of the Journal of Historical Research in Marketing. He sits on the editorial boards of Marketing Theory and the Journal of Macromarketing.
