Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Christian Grönroos
Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki, Finland
Discusses the nature and The marketing mix management paradigm management of a relationship-type market-
sometimes negative conse- has dominated marketing thought, research ing strategy is discussed based on the notion
quences of the dominating and practice since it was introduced almost of a marketing strategy continuum. Finally,
marketing paradigm of today, 40 years ago. Today, this paradigm is begin- the possibility of building a general theory of
marketing mix management, ning to lose its position[1-3]. New approaches marketing based on the relationship
and furthermore discusses have been emerging in marketing research. approach is examined. A further discussion
how modern research into, The globalization of business and the evolv- of the nature of the relationship marketing
for example, industrial mar- ing recognition of the importance of cus- paradigm is, however, beyond the scope of
keting and services marketing tomer retention and market economies and of this report.
as well as customer relation- customer relationship economics, among
ship economics shows that other trends, reinforce the change in main-
another approach to market- stream marketing. Marketing mix and the four Ps
ing is required. This develop- Relationship building and management, or
ment is supported by evolving Marketing, the way most textbooks treat it
what has been labelled relationship market-
trends in business, such as today, was introduced around 1960. The con-
ing, is one leading new approach to market-
strategic partnerships, ing which eventually has entered the market- cept of the marketing mix and the Four Ps of
alliances and networks. ing literature[2,4-14]. A paradigm shift is marketing – product, price, place and promo-
Suggests relationship market- clearly under way. In services marketing, tion – entered the marketing textbooks at that
ing, based on relationship especially in Europe and Australia but to time[26]. Quickly they also became treated as
building and management, as some extent also in North America, and in the unchallenged basic model of marketing,
one emerging new marketing industrial marketing, especially in Europe, so totally overpowering previous models and
paradigm of the future. Con- this paradigm shift has already taken place. approaches, such as, for example, the organic
cludes that the simplicity of Books published on services marketing[15-17] functionalist approach advocated by Alder-
the marketing mix paradigm, and on industrial marketing[18-20] as well as son[27,28] as well as other systems-oriented
with its Four P model, has major research reports published are based approaches (e.g. [29,30]) and parameter theory
become a strait-jacket, fos- on the relationship marketing paradigm. developed by the Copenhagen School in
tering toolbox thinking rather A major shift in the perception of the funda- Europe (e.g. [31,32]) that these are hardly
than an awareness that mar- mentals of marketing is taking place. The remembered, even with a footnote, in most
keting is a multi-faceted shift is so dramatic that it can, no doubt, be textbooks of today. Earlier approaches, such as
social process, and notes described as a paradigm shift[21]. Marketing the commodity (e.g. [33]), functional (e.g. [34]),
that marketing theory and researchers have been passionately con- geography-related regional (e.g. [35]) and
customers are the victims vinced about the paradigmatic nature of institutional schools (e.g. [36]) have suffered a
of today’s mainstream marketing mix management and the Four Ps similar fate. Only a few models from these
marketing thinking. model[22]. To challenge marketing mix man- approaches have survived. The American
agement as the basic foundation for all mar- Marketing Association, in its most recent
keting thinking has been as heretical as it definition, states that “marketing is the
This article was published process of planning and executing the concep-
in Asia-Australia Marketing was for Copernicus to proclaim that the earth
moved[23,24]. tion, pricing, promotion and distribution of
Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, 1994,
was reissued in Manage- The purpose of this report is to discuss the ideas, goods and services to create exchange
ment Decision, Vol. 32 nature and consequences of the dominating and satisfy individual and organizational
No. 2, 1994 and is based on marketing paradigm of today, marketing mix objectives”[37].
an invited paper presented management of the managerial school (cf. [25]) Eventually the Four Ps of the marketing
at the 1st International and how evolving trends in business and mix became an indisputable paradigm in
Colloquium in Relationship modern research into, for example, industrial academic research, the validity of which was
Marketing, Monash Univer- marketing, services marketing and customer taken for granted[10,16,38]. For most market-
sity, Melbourne, Australia, ing researchers in large parts of the academic
relationship economics demand a relation-
August 1993.
ship-oriented approach to marketing. Rela- world it seems to remain the marketing truth
tionship building and management are found even today. Kent[38] refers to the Four Ps of
Management Decision to be an underlying facet in the research into the marketing mix as “the holy quadruple …
35/4 [1997] 322–339 these areas. Relationship marketing is sug- of the marketing faith … written in tablets of
© MCB University Press gested as one new marketing paradigm, and a stone” (p. 146). For an academic researcher
[ISSN 0025-1747] looking for tenure and promotion, to question
number of consequences for marketing and
[ 322 ]
Christian Grönroos it has been to stick out his or her neck too far. customer service the responsibility of every-
Keynote paper: From Prospective authors of textbooks, who sug- one and not of a separate department only.
marketing mix to relationship gest another organization than the Four Ps In fact, the Four Ps represent a significant
marketing – towards a solution for their books, are quickly oversimplification of Borden’s original con-
paradigm shift in marketing
corrected by most publishers. As a result, cept, which was a list of 12 elements not
Management Decision intended to be a definition at all. Moreover,
empirical studies of what the key marketing
35/4 [1997] 322–339
variables are, and how they are perceived and the elements of this list would probably have
used by marketing managers, have been to be reconsidered in any given situation.
neglected. Moreover, structure has been McCarthy either misunderstood the meaning
vastly favoured over process consid- of Borden’s marketing mix, when he reformu-
erations[38]. In marketing education, teach- lated the original list in the shape of the rigid
ing students how to use a toolbox has become mnemonic of the Four Ps where no blending
the totally dominating task instead of dis- of the Ps is explicitly included, or his follow-
cussing the meaning and consequences of the ers misinterpreted McCarthy’s intentions. In
marketing concept and the process nature of many marketing textbooks organized around
market relationships. Marketing in practice the marketing mix, such as Philip Kotler’s
has, to a large extent, been turned into man- well-known Marketing Management[58], the
aging this toolbox instead of truly exploring blending aspect and the need for integration
the nature of the firm’s market relationships of the Four Ps are discussed, even in depth,
and genuinely catering to the real needs and but such discussions are always limited
desires of customers. owing to the fact that the model does not
explicitly include an integrative dimension.
In the 1950s in Europe, researchers within
How did the marketing mix emerge? the so-called Copenhagen School approached
marketing in a similar way to the notion of
A paradigm like this has to be well founded the marketing mix, based on the idea of action
by theoretical deduction and empirical parameters presented in the 1930s by von
research; otherwise much of marketing Stackelberg[59]. Rasmussen[31] and Mick-
research is based on a loose foundation and witz[32] developed what became known as
the results of it questionable. The marketing parameter theory, which was a dynamic mar-
mix developed from a notion of the marketer keting mix approach linked to the product life
as a “mixer of ingredients”[39]. The marketer cycle and where the parameters were inte-
plans various means of competition and grated by means of varying market elastici-
blends them into a “marketing mix” so that a ties. Moreover, Mickwitz also stated that the
profit function is optimized, or rather satis- demand side has to be connected to the sup-
fied. The “marketing mix”, concept was intro- ply side in a managerial marketing theory.
duced by Neil Borden in the 1950s (e.g. [40]), This was done using an economic approach
and the mix of different means of competi- rather than a behavioural approach. Parame-
tions was soon labelled the Four Ps[26]. ter theory was a much more developed model
The marketing mix is actually a list of cate- than the Four Ps version of the marketing
gories of marketing variables and, to begin mix notion. Unfortunately, it never received
with, this way of defining or describing a enough international attention, and eventu-
phenomenon can never be considered a very ally it was overwhelmed by the Four Ps that
valid one. A list never includes all relevant were much easier to comprehend and teach.
elements; it does not fit every situation, and it Today, the key aspects of parameter theory,
becomes obsolete. And, indeed, marketing dynamism and an integration of consumer
academics every now and then offer addi- behaviour and managerial decision making
tional Ps to the list, since they have found the are pointed out as important research topics
standard “tablet of faith” too limited[41-54]. It (cf. [3]).
is, by the way, interesting to notice that since Probably Borden’s original idea of a list of a
the Four Ps were definitely canonized some large number of marketing mix ingredients
time in the early 1970s, new items to the list that have to be reconsidered in every given
almost exclusively have been in the form of situation was shortened for pedagogical rea-
Ps[55,56]. Advocators of the marketing mix sons, and because a more limited number of
management paradigm have sometimes sug- marketing variables seemed to fit typical
gested that service should be added to the list situations observed in the late 1950s and in
of Ps (e.g. [53,57]). This would be disastrous, the 1960s by the initiators of the short-list of
because it would isolate customer service as a four standardized Ps. These typical situations
marketing variable from the rest of the can be described as involving consumer pack-
organization, just as has happened with the aged goods in a North American environment
Four P marketing mix variables. It would with huge mass markets, a highly competitive
effectively counteract all attempts to make distribution system and very commercial
[ 323 ]
Christian Grönroos mass media. However, in other markets the of the properties or characteristics accord-
Keynote paper: From infrastructure is, to varying degrees, differ- ing to which marketing mix elements should
marketing mix to relationship ent and the products are only partly be classified is a major flaw.
marketing – towards a consumer packaged goods. Nevertheless, the
paradigm shift in marketing Van Waterschoot and Van den Bulte[61, p. 85]
four Ps of the marketing mix have become the recognize three flaws in the Four Ps model:
Management Decision
universal marketing model or even theory The properties or characteristics that are
35/4 [1997] 322–339
and an almost totally dominating paradigm the basis for classification have not been
for most academics, and they have had a identified. The categories are not mutually
tremendous impact on the practice of market- exclusive. There is a catch-all subcategory
ing as well. Is there any justification for this? that is continually growing. (See also [38,62].)
[ 333 ]
Christian Grönroos have discussed the background of the market- 15 Grönroos, C., Strategic Management and Mar-
Keynote paper: From ing mix and other theoretical approaches to keting in the Service Sector, Swedish School of
marketing mix to relationship marketing which existed at the time when the Economics and Business Administration,
marketing – towards a marketing mix was introduced. Sheth et al.[3] Helsinki, Finland, (published in 1983 in the
paradigm shift in marketing provide an extensive overview of the evolution USA by Marketing Science Institute and in the
Management Decision of marketing thought. However, as they only UK by Studentliteratur/Chartwell-Bratt), 1982.
35/4 [1997] 322–339 observe the development in North America 16 Grönroos, C., Service Management and Market-
(out of well over 500 publications in their very ing. Managing the Moments of Truth in Service
elaborate reference list, only six are published Competition, Free Press/Lexington Books,
outside North America, and five of these are Lexington, MA, 1990.
written by Americans), some important contri- 17 Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A., Marketing
butions are missing. Services. Competing through Quality, Free
2 Grönroos, C., “Quo vadis, marketing? Towards Press/Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, 1991.
a neo-classical marketing theory”, in 18 Håkansson, H. (Ed.), International Marketing
Blomqvist, H.C., Grönroos, C. and Lindqvist, and Purchasing of Industrial Goods, Wiley,
L.J. (Eds), Economics and Marketing. Essays in New York, NY, 1982.
Honour of Gösta Mickwitz, Economy and Soci- 19 Turnbull, P.W. and Valla, J-P. (Eds), Strategies
ety, No. 48. Swedish School of Economics and for International Industrial Marketing, Croom
Business Administration, Helsinki, Finland, Helm, London, 1986.
1992, pp. 109-24. 20 Ford, D. (Ed.), Understanding Business Mar-
3 Sheth, J.N., Gardner, D.M. and Garrett, D.E., kets: Interactions, Relationships and Networks,
Marketing Theory: Evolution and Evaluation, Academic Press, London, 1990.
Wiley, New York, NY, 1988. 21 Kuhn, T.S., The Structure of Scientific Revolu-
4 Jackson, B.B., “Build customer relationships tions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL,
1962.
that last”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 63,
22 A typical example of this paradigmatic posi-
November-December 1985, pp. 120-8.
tion was expressed by a US professor at a
5 Gummesson, E., “The new marketing – devel-
services marketing conference in the late
oping long-term interactive relationships”,
1980s. When in a panel discussion the dominat-
Long Range Planning, Vol. 20 No. 4, 1987,
ing role of marketing mix management and its
pp. 10-20.
four Ps was questioned, he responded by stat-
6 Gummesson, E., Marketing – A Long-Term
ing that he was a student of McCarthy and
Interactive Relationship. Contribution to a New
nothing could convince him that there could
Marketing Theory, Marketing Technique Cen-
be anything wrong with the four Ps and the
ter, Stockholm, Sweden, 1987.
marketing mix.
7 Gummesson, E., The Part-time Marketer, Cen-
23 As Kuhn[24] puts it: “Consider … the men who
ter for Service Research, Karlstad, Sweden,
called Copernicus mad because he proclaimed
1990.
that the earth moved … Part of what they
8 Gummesson, E., Relationsmarknadsföring,
meant by ‘earth’ was fixed position. Their
Från 4 P till 30 R (Relationship Marketing.
earth, at least, could not be moved. Corre-
From 4 Ps to 30 Rs), Stockholm University, spondingly, Copernicus’ innovation was not
Sweden, 1993. simply to move the earth. Rather, it was a
9 Dwyer, F.R., Shurr, P.H. and Oh, S., “Developing whole new way of regarding the problems of
buyer and seller relationships”, Journal of physics and astronomy, one that necessarily
Marketing, Vol. 51, April 1987, pp. 11-27. changed the meaning of both ‘earth’ and
10 Grönroos, C., “Defining marketing: a market- ‘motion’. Without these changes the concept of
oriented approach”, European Journal of a moving earth was mad” (pp. 149-50). See also
Marketing, Vol. 23 No. 1, 1989, pp. 52-60. Kuhn[25].
11 Grönroos, C., “A relationship approach to 24 Kuhn, T.S., The Structure of Scientific Revolu-
marketing: the need for a new paradigm”, tions, 2nd ed., University of Chicago Press,
Working Paper 190, Swedish School of Econom- Chicago, IL, 1970.
ics and Business Administration, Helsinki, 25 Kuhn, T.S., The Copernican Revolution, Cam-
Finland, 1989. bridge, MA, 1957.
12 Grönroos, C., “The marketing strategy contin- 26 McCarthy, E.J., Basic Marketing, Irwin, Home-
uum: a marketing concept for the 1990s”, Man- wood, IL, 1960.
agement Decision, Vol. 29 No. 1, 1991, pp. 7-13. 27 Alderson, W., “Survival and adjustment in
13 Christopher, M., Payne, A. and Ballantyne, D., organized behavior systems”, in Cox, R. and
Relationship Marketing: Bringing Quality, Alderson, W. (Eds), Theory in Marketing,
Customer Service and Marketing Together, Irwin, Homewood, IL, 1950, pp. 65-88.
Butterworth, London, 1991. 28 Alderson, W., Marketing Behavior and Execu-
14 Blomqvist, R., Dahl, J. and Haeger, T., Relation- tive Action, Irwin, Homewood, IL, 1957.
smarknadsföring. Strategi och metod för 29 Fisk, G., Marketing Systems, Harper & Row,
servicekonkurren (Relationship marketing. New York, NY, 1967.
Strategy and methods for service competition), 30 Fisk, G. and Dixon, D.F., Theories of Marketing
IHM Förlag, Göteborg, Sweden, 1993. Systems, Harper & Row, New York, NY, 1967.
[ 334 ]
Christian Grönroos 31 Rasmussen, A., Pristeori eller Parameterteori – 44 Judd, V.C., “Differentiate with the 5th P:
Keynote paper: From Studier Omkring Virksomhedens Afsaetning people”, Industrial Marketing Management,
marketing mix to relationship (Price Theory or Parameter Theory – Studies of Vol. 16, November 1987, pp. 241-7.
marketing – towards a the Sales of the Firm), Erhvervsokonomisk 45 Staudt, T.A. and Taylor, D.A., Marketing. A
paradigm shift in marketing Managerial Approach, Irwin, Homewood, IL,
Forlag, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1955.
Management Decision 32 Mickwitz, G., Marketing and Competition, 1965.
35/4 [1997] 322–339 46 Lipson, H.A. and Darling, J.R., Introduction to
Societas Scientarium Fennica, Helsinki, Fin-
land (available from University Microfilms, Marketing: An Administrative Approach,
Ann Arbor, MI), 1959. Wiley, New York, NY, 1971.
33 Copeland, M.T., “The relation of consumers’ 47 Kelly, E.J. and Lazer, W., Managerial
buying habits to marketing methods”, Marketing, Irwin, Homewood, IL, 1973.
Harvard Business Review,Vol. 1, April 1923, 48 Traynor, K., “Research deserves status as
pp. 282-9. marketing’s fifth P”, Marketing News (Special
34 Weld, L.D.H., “Marketing functions and mer- marketing manager’s issue), 8 November 1985.
cantile organizations”, American Economic 49 Johnson, A.A., “Adding more Ps to the pod or –
Review, Vol. 7, June 1917, pp. 306-18. 12 essential elements of marketing”, Marketing
35 Reilly, W.J., The Law of Retail Gravitation, News, 11 April 1986, p. 2.
University of Texas, Austin, TX, 1931. 50 Keely, A., “The ‘new marketing’ has its own set
36 Duddy, E.A. and Revzan, D.A., Marketing. An of Ps”, Marketing News, Vol. 21, 6 November
Institutional Approach, McGraw-Hill, New 1987, pp. 10-11.
York, NY, 1947. 51 Berry, D., “Marketing mix for the ’90s adds
37 “AMA board approves new marketing defini- an S and 2 Cs to the 4 Ps”, Marketing News,
tion”, Marketing News, 1 March 1985. 24 December 1990, p. 10.
38 Kent, R.A., “Faith in Four Ps: an alternative”, 52 Mason, N. and Mayer, M.L., Modern Retailing
Theory and Practice, Irwin, Homewood, IL,
Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 2
1990.
No. 2, 1986, pp. 145-54.
53 Collier, D.A., “New marketing mix stresses
39 Culliton, J.W., The Management of Marketing
service”, The Journal of Business Strategy,
Costs, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA,
Vol. 12, March-April 1991, pp. 42-5.
1948.
54 LeDoux, L., “Is preservation the fifth ’P’ or just
40 Borden, N.H., “The concept of the marketing
another microenvironmental factor?”, in
mix”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 4,
McKinnon, G.F. and Kelley, C.A. (Eds), Chal-
June 1964, pp. 2-7.
lenges of a New Decade in Marketing
41 Kotler[42] has, in the context of megamarket-
Education, Western Marketing Educators
ing, added public relations and politics, thus
Association, 1991, pp. 82-6.
expanding the list to six Ps. In service market-
55 In spite of all the additional categories of mar-
ing, Booms and Bitner[43] have suggested
keting variables that have been offered by
three additional Ps, people, physical evidence
various authors, there is only one textbook
and process. Judd[44], among others, has
that is thoroughly based on anything other
argued for just one new P, people. The way of
than the Four Ps: Donald Cowell’s[56] book on
challenging the Four Ps has always been to use
the marketing of services which is organized
the same clinical approach, i.e. to simplify the around the Seven P framework.
market relationship by developing a list of 56 Cowell, D., The Marketing of Services,
decision-making variables. No real innovative- Heinemann, London, 1984.
ness or challenge to the foundation of the 57 Lambert, D.D. and Harrington, T.C., “Estab-
underlying paradigm have been presented. In lishing customer service strategies within the
the 1960s and early 1970s, categories which did marketing mix: more empirical evidence”,
not begin with the letter P were suggested; e.g. Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 10 No. 2,
Staudt and Taylor, Lipson and Darling and 1989, pp. 44-60.
Kelly and Lazer[45-47] (three categories each). 58 Kotler, P., Marketing Management. Analysis,
The letter P almost always has been present in Planning, and Control, 7th ed., Prentice-Hall,
lists of categories put forward in the 1980s and Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991.
1990s; e.g. Traynor[48] (five categories), John- 59 von Stackelberg, H., “Theorie der vertrieb-
son[49] (12), Keely[50] (four Cs), Berry[51] and spolitik und der qualitätsvariation”, Smollers
Mason and Mayer[52] (six), Collier[53] (seven) Jahrbuch, Vol. 63 No. 1, 1939.
and LeDoux[54] (five). 60 Dixon, D.F. and Blois, K.J., Some Limitations of
42 Kotler, P., “Megamarketing”, Harvard Business the 4Ps as a Paradigm for Marketing, Market-
Review, Vol. 64, March-April 1986, pp. 117-24. ing Education Group Annual Conference,
43 Booms, B.H. and Bitner, M.J., “Marketing Cranfield Institute of Technology, Cranfield,
strategies and organization structures for July, 1983.
service firms”, in Donnelly, J.H. and George, 61 van Waterschoot, W. and Van den Bulte, C.,
W.R. (Eds), Marketing of Services, American “The 4P classification of the marketing mix
Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, 1982, revisited”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56,
pp. 47-51. October 1992, pp. 83-93.
[ 335 ]
Christian Grönroos 62 Van den Bulte, C., “The concept of marketing 78 Berry, L.L., “Relationship marketing”, in
Keynote paper: From mix revisited: a case analysis of metaphor in Berry, L.L., Shostack, G.L. and Upah, G.D.
marketing mix to relationship marketing theory and management”, Working (Eds), Emerging Perspectives of Services Mar-
marketing – towards a Paper, State University of Ghent, Belgium, keting, American Marketing Association,
paradigm shift in marketing 1991. Chicago, IL, 1983, pp. 25-8.
Management Decision 63 Möller, K., “Research traditions in marketing: 79 It is interesting to notice that, in the 1950s,
35/4 [1997] 322–339 theoretical notes”, in Blomqvist, H.C., Grön- economists such as Abbott[80], Brems[81] and
roos, C. and Lindqvist, L.J. (Eds), Economics Mickwitz[32], who tried to add more market-
and Marketing. Essays in Honour of Gösta ing-oriented realism to micro-economic price
Mickwitz, Economy and Society, No. 48, theory, introduce quality as one of their key
Swedish School of Economics and Business parameters. Especially for Abbott, quality was
Administration, Helsinki, Finland, 1992, pp. the focal parameter. His definition of quality
197-218. was astonishingly modern, very close to the
64 Arndt, J., “Perspectives for a theory in market- ones of perceived service quality and TQM:
ing”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 9 No. 3, “The term ’quality’ will be used … in its broad-
1980, pp. 389-402. est sense, to include all the qualitative ele-
65 Arndt, J., “On making marketing science more ments in the competitive exchange process –
scientific: role of orientations, paradigms, materials, design, services provided, location,
metaphors, and puzzle solving”, Journal of and so forth”[80, p. 4]. Quality was one of the
Marketing, Vol. 49, Summer 1985, pp. 11-23. marketing variables explicitly included in
66 McGarry, E.D., “Some functions of marketing parameter theory (cf.[32]).
reconsidered”, in Cox, R. and Alderson, W. 80 Abbott, L., Quality and Competition, New York,
(Eds), Theory in Marketing, Richard D. Irwin, NY, 1955.
Homewood, IL, 1950, pp. 263-79. 81 Brems, H., Product Equilibrium under Monopo-
67 Chamberlin, E.H., The Theory of Monopolistic listic Competition, Harvard University Press,
Competition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1951.
Cambridge, MA, 1933. 82 Grönroos, C., Marknadsföring av Tjänster. En
68 McKenna, R., Relationship Marketing. Success- Studie av Marknadsföringsfunktionen i
ful Strategies for the Age of the Customer, Addi- Tjänstef öretag (Marketing of Services. A Study
son-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1991. of the Marketing Function of Service Firms),
69 Rapp, S. and Collins, T., The Great Marketing with an English summary (diss.; Swedish
Turnaround, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, School of Economics and Business Adminis-
NJ, 1990. tration Finland), Akademilitteratur/Market-
70 Clancy, K.J. and Shulman, R.S., The Marketing ing Technique Center, Stockholm, 1979.
Revolution. A Radical Manifesto for Dominat- 83 Langeard, E. and Eiglier, P., Servuction. Le
ing the Marketplace, Harper Business, New Marketing des Services, Wiley, Paris, 1987.
York, NY, 1991. 84 Grönroos, C., “Designing a long-range market-
71 Piercy, N., Marketing Organization. An Analy- ing strategy for services”, Long Range Plan-
sis of Information Processing, Power and Poli- ning, Vol. 13, April 1980, pp. 36-42.
tics, George Allen & Unwin, London, 1985. 85 Heskett, J.L., “Lessons in the service sector”,
72 Piercy, N., Marketing-led Strategic Change, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 65, March-April
Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, 1992. 1987, pp. 118-26.
73 Webster, F.E. Jr, “The rediscovery of the mar- 86 Reichheld, F.E., “Loyalty-based management”,
keting concept”, Business Horizons, Vol. 31, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 71, March-April
May-June 1988, pp. 29-39. 1993, pp. 64-73.
74 Blankenburg, D. and Holm, U., “Centrala steg i 87 Reichheld, F.E. and Sasser, W.E. Jr, “Zero defec-
utvecklingen av nätverkssynsättet inom Upp- tions: quality comes to service”, Harvard
salaskolan”, in Gunnarsson, E. and Wallerst- Business Review, Vol. 68, September-October
edt, E. (Eds), Uppsalaskolan och dess Rötter 1990, pp. 105-11.
(The Uppsala School and its Roots), Uppsala 88 Crosby, P.B., Quality Is Free, McGraw-Hill, New
University, Sweden, 1990, pp. 16-35. York, NY, 1979.
75 Johanson, J. and Mattsson, L.-G., “Marketing 89 Williamson, O., Markets and Hierarchies:
investments and market investments in Analysis and Antitrust Implications, Free
industrial networks”, International Journal of Press, New York, NY, 1975.
Research in Marketing, No. 4, 1985, pp. 185-95. 90 Grönroos, C., “Facing the challenge of service
76 Kock, S., A Strategic Process for Gaining competition: the economies of service”, in
External Resources through Long-lasting Kunst, P. and Lemmink, J. (Eds), Quality
Relationships, Swedish School of Economics Management in Services, Van Gorcum, Assen,
and Business Administration, Helsinki/ Maastricht, 1992, pp. 129-40.
Vasa, Finland, 1991. 91 Storbacka, K., Customer Relationship Prof-
77 Grönroos, C. and Gummesson, E., “The Nordic itability, Swedish School of Economics and
school of service marketing”, in Grönroos, C. Business Administration, Helsinki, Finland,
and Gummerson, E. (Eds), Service Marketing – 1993.
Nordic School Perspectives, Stockholm Univer- 92 Barnes, J.G. and Cumby, J.A., “The cost of
sity, Sweden, 1985, pp. 6-11. quality in service-oriented companies:
[ 336 ]
Christian Grönroos making better customer service decisions 96 The term “relationship marketing” was first
Keynote paper: From through improved cost information”, introduced by Berry in a services marketing
marketing mix to relationship Research Paper, ASB Conference 1993, Univer- context[78]. Managing relationships is, how-
marketing – towards a sity of New Brunswick, Canada, 1993. ever, nothing new in business. Many entrepre-
paradigm shift in marketing 93 In their overview of schools of marketing neurs do business by building and managing
Management Decision thought, Sheth et al.[3] observe research into relationships and always have, but without
35/4 [1997] 322–339 services marketing, but they do not see any using the term relationship marketing. In a
new lines of thought in it. However, as they historical perspective, relationships were of
have studied North American research only, utmost importance in ancient trade. An old
they do not recognize the new approaches to proverb from the Middle East says that “as a
services marketing inherent, for example, in merchant, you’d better have a friend in every
the Nordic school of services. Industrial mar- town”.
keting research goes without much comment, However, in growing companies, the focus
mainly because the authors do not include the was shifted away from relationships by the
European interaction/network approach in occurrence of scientific management. This
their discussion. In the last chapter of their development goes even further back to Adam
book, the authors conclude that interactions Smith’s The Wealth of Nations. Smith[97]
which are market transactions should be the advocated, among other things, that one
unit of analysis in marketing (p. 193). How- should pursue the division of labour, so that
ever, they add that instead of studying single the capability of a person to perform one
transactions only (cf.[94]) a time dimension given task in an organization would improve
has to be included: and the time it would take to take care of this
Consequently, it is very likely that the task would decrease. The ideas of Adam
domain of marketing will be defined Smith and later of scientific management (cf.
around, not only the market, but also the [98]) were, among other things, specialization
concept of repeated market transactions or and division of labour, whereas relationship
what is more popularly called ‘relation-
building and management require cross-
ship marketing’. This should strongly
suggest that the focus is not on a single functional teamwork and close collaboration
market transaction or on selling, but on a within a firm. However, as Webster[95] points
continued relationship between the buyer out, even during the times of scientific man-
and the seller (p. 194). agement, influential industrialists such as
Henry Ford and others emphasized the impor-
According to the authors, relationship
marketing is viewed as a range of repeated tance of relationship building.
market transactions between the same 97 Smith, A., The Wealth of Nations. An Inquiry
seller and buyer where the fundamental into the Nature and Cause of the Wealth of
unit of analysis is the single market trans- Nations, Methuen, London, 1950 (original
action (pp. 200-1). This is, however, still a published 1776).
transaction marketing-oriented view of 98 Taylor, F.W., Scientific Management, Harper &
relationship marketing. In the relation- Row, London, 1947, (a volume of two papers
ship marketing concept which has evolved originally published in 1903 and 1911 and a
within services marketing and industrial written testimony for a Special House Com-
marketing the relationships themselves, mittee in the USA in 1912).
as well as elements involved in the estab- 99 Grönroos, C., “Relationship approach to the
lishment and management of relation- marketing function in service contexts: the
ships, are considered the focal issue and marketing and organizational behavior inter-
the “unit of analysis”. Single transactions, face”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 20
or interactions, are only part of it. Fur- No. 1, 1990, pp. 3-12.
thermore, interactions may also be non- 100 Gummesson, E., “Marketing revisited: the
economic in nature, and not only
crucial role of the part-time marketers”,
economic.
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 25 No. 2,
In his analysis of the current change in
1991, pp. 60-7.
marketing focus, Webster[95] concludes
101 This definition is slightly developed from
that “the focus shifts from products and
firms as units to people, organizations, earlier ones in Grönroos[10,11]. Normally,
and the social processes that bind actors formal definitions cannot be found in the
together in ongoing relationships” (p. 10). literature. Instead, authors offer descriptions,
According to him, subjects that have been some of which are more informative than
the study of psychologists, organizational others. In his discussion of marketing for
behaviourists, political economists and multiservice organizations, Berry[78] views
sociologists have to be considered funda- relationship marketing as a strategy to
mental areas of interest to marketing. attract, maintain and enhance customer
94 Bagozzi, R., “Marketing as exchange”, Journal relationships. Rapp and Collins[69] say that
of Marketing, Vol. 39, October 1975, pp. 32-9. the goals of relationship marketing are to
95 Webster, F.E. Jr, “The changing role of market- create and maintain lasting relationships
ing in the corporations”, Journal of Market- between the firm and its customers that are
ing, Vol. 56, October 1992, pp. 1-17. rewarding for both sides. Christopher
[ 337 ]
Christian Grönroos et al.[13] consider relationship marketing an 108 “Philip Kotler explores the new marketing
Keynote paper: From approach that aligns marketing, customer paradigm”, Marketing Science Institute
marketing mix to relationship service and quality, with an emphasis on a Review, Spring 1991, pp. 1, 4-5.
marketing – towards a focus on customer retention, an orientation 109 Jackson, B.B., Winning and Keeping Indus-
paradigm shift in marketing trial Customers. The Dynamics of Customer
on product benefit, a long time-scale, a high
Management Decision customer service orientation, a high cus- Relationships, Lexington Books, Lexington,
35/4 [1997] 322–339 MA, 1985.
tomer commitment and a high customer
contact as well as on the notion that quality is 110 Vavara, T.G., Aftermarketing: How to Keep
the concern of all. Blomqvist et al.[14] Customers for Life through Relationship
offer the following key characteristics of Marketing, Business One Irwin, Homewood,
relationship marketing: every customer is IL, 1992.
considered an individual person or unit, 111 Sonnenberg, F.K., “Relationship management
activities of the firm are predominantly is more than wining and dining”, Journal of
directed towards existing customers, it is Business Strategy, Vol. 9, May-June 1988,
based on interactions and dialogues, and the pp. 60-3.
firm is trying to achieve profitability through 112 Czepiel, J.A., “Managing relationships with
the decrease of customer turnover and the customers: a differentiating philosophy of
strengthening of customer relationships. marketing”, in Bowen, D.E. and Chase, R.D.
Gummesson[8] concludes that relationship (Eds), Service Management Effectiveness,
marketing is a strategy where the manage- Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1990,
ment of interactions, relationships and net- pp. 299-323.
works are fundamental issues. There are also 113 Congram, C.A., “Building relationships that
some more practice-oriented descriptions of last”, in Congram, C.A. and Friedman, M.L.
relationship marketing: for example, the one (Eds), Handbook of Marketing for the Service
Industries, AMACOM, New York, NY, 1991,
by Copulinsky and Wolf[102] that states that
pp. 263-79.
relationship marketing is a process where the
114 Ferguson, J.M. and Brown, S.W., “Relation-
main activities are to create a database
ship marketing and association
including existing and potential customers, to
management”, Journal of Professional Ser-
approach these customers using differenti-
vices Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2, 1991, pp. 137-47.
ated and customer-specific information about
115 Houston, F.S. and Gassenheimer, J.B., “Mar-
them, and to evaluate the life-term value of
keting and exchange”, Journal of Marketing,
very single customer relationship and the
Vol. 51, October 1987, pp. 3-18.
costs of creating and maintaining them. In
116 We first introduced the concept of the market-
most of these descriptions, only the relation-
ing strategy continuum with relationship
ship between a supplier and its customers is
marketing at one end and transaction market-
included. This seems to be too narrow a view
ing at the other in 1991 in an article “The
of relationship marketing.
marketing strategy continuum: a marketing
102 Copulinsky, J.R. and Wolf, M.J., “Relationship
concept for the 1990s” in Management Deci-
marketing: positioning for the future”,
sion[12]. A previous version mainly focusing
Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 11, July-
on services, was published in 1990 in Service
August 1990, pp. 16-20. Management and Marketing[16].
103 Calonius, H., “A buying process model”, in 117 Lehtinen, J., Quality-oriented Services Market-
Blois, K. and Parkinson, S. (Eds), Innovative ing, University of Tampere, Tampere, Fin-
Marketing – A European Perspective, Proceed- land, 1986.
ings from the XVIIth Annual Conference of the 118 Gummesson, E., Quality Management in
European Marketing Academy, University of Service Organizations, ISQA (International
Bradford, 1988, pp. 86-103. Service Quality Association), New York, NY,
104 Swan, J.E., Trawick, F. and Silva, D.W., “How 1993.
industrial salespeople gain customer trust”, 119 Normann, R., Service Management, Wiley,
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 13, New York, NY, 1984.
August 1985, pp. 203-11. 120 George, W.R., “Internal marketing for retail-
105 Moorman, C., Deshpande, R. and Zaltman, G., ers. The junior executive employee”, in
“Relationships between providers and users Lindqvist, J.D. (Ed.), Developments in Market-
of market research: the role of personal trust”, ing Science, Academy of Marketing Science,
Working Paper No. 93-111, Marketing Science 1984.
Institute, Cambridge, MA, 1993. 121 Compton, F., George, W.R., Grönroos, C. and
106 Zaltman, G. and Moorman, C., “The role of Karvinen, M., “Internal marketing”, in
personal trust in the use of research”, Journal Czepiel, J.A., Congram, C.A. and Shanahan, J.
of Advertising Research, Vol. 28, October- (Eds), The Service Challenge: Integrated for
November 1988, pp. 16-24. Competitive Advantage, American Marketing
107 Kotler, P., “It’s time for total marketing”, Association, Chicago, IL, 1987, pp. 7-12.
Business Week ADVANCE Executive Brief, 122 Barnes, J.G., “The role of internal marketing:
Vol. 2, 1992. if the staff won’t buy it, why should the cus-
[ 338 ]
Christian Grönroos tomer?”, Irish Marketing Review, Vol. 4 No. 2, Warwick Business School, Coventry, 1993,
Keynote paper: From 1989, pp. 11-21. pp. 248-58.
marketing mix to relationship 123 Carlzon, J., Moments of Truth, Harper & Row, 130 The marketing concept is attributed to
marketing – towards a New York, NY, 1987. McKitterick[131] and to Keith[132] and the
paradigm shift in marketing Pillsbury Company. However, this customer-
124 It is interesting to notice that Taylor, in his
Management Decision testimony about scientific management in oriented approach to doing business is, of
35/4 [1997] 322–339 1912, explicitly states that “…in its essence, course, nothing new. For example, in a book
scientific management involves a complete on advertising and market communication
mental revolution on the part of the working published in 1916 in Norway, the author,
men engaged in any particular establishment Romilla (Robert Milars), gives the following
or industry … And it involves the equally piece of advice: “Førsøk at se paa tingen fra
complete mental revolution on the part of kundens side av disken (Try to look at the
those on the management’s side … And with- situation from the customer’s side of the
out this complete mental revolution on both counter)”[133, p. 35]. And according to an old
Chinese saying, “customers are the precious
sides scientific management does not exist”[98,
things; goods are only grass”. The industrial
testimony, p. 27] (emphasis added). Relation-
revolution and scientific management,
ship marketing can be successfully imple-
among other reasons, made managers and
mented only if such a “mental revolution” or
researchers lose sight of it.
cultural change through “attitude manage-
131 McKitterick, J.B., “What is the marketing
ment”[16] takes place in the organization.
management concept?”, in Bass, F. (Ed.), The
125 Merton, R.K., Social Theory and Social Struc-
Frontiers of Marketing Thought in Action,
ture, Free Press, New York, NY, 1957.
American Marketing Association, Chicago,
126 Hunt, S.D., “The morphology of theory and IL, 1957, pp. 71-82.
the general theory of marketing”, Journal of 132 Keith, R.J., “The marketing revolution”,
Marketing, Vol. 35, April 1971, pp. 65-8. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 24, January 1960,
127 Hunt, S.D., “The nature and scope of market- pp. 35-8.
ing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, July 1976, 133 Romilla, Reklame-laere (Advertising), Akti-
pp. 17-28. etrykkeriet, Trondhjem, 1916.
128 Howard, J.A., “Marketing theory of the firm”, 134 McInnes, W., “A conceptual approach to
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47, Autumn 1983, marketing”, in Cox, R., Alderson, W. and
pp. 90-100. Shapiro, S.J. (Eds), Theory in Marketing,
129 Gummesson, E., “Marketing according to Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL, 1964,
textbooks: six objections”, in Brownlie, D., pp. 51-67.
Saren, M., Wensley, R. and Whittington, R. 135 Arndt, J., “Towards a concept of domesticated
(Eds), Rethinking Marketing: New Perspec- markets”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43,
tives on the Discipline and Profession, Autumn 1979, pp. 69-75.
Application questions
1 Compare the author’s point that “the 2 How does your organization enact its rela-
marketing department is obsolete” with tionships with its customers? Think par-
parallel organization structural initiatives ticularly about “moments of truth”.
in the management of quality. How would 3 Is the marketing mix paradigm dead – or
marketing organize itself without a dying? What might such a paradigm shift
department? mean in organizations of the future?
[ 339 ]