The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1755-750X.

htm

JHRM 3,1

EXPLORATIONS & INSIGHTS

118

Dixons library: on the structuring of the marketplace and marketing practices

Mark Tadajewski
University of Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to read a selection of Dixons library collection in conjunction with his published work in an effort to make his book collection and research speak to contemporary scholars who should be exposed to Dixons writings. Design/methodology/approach The paper adopts a viewpoint approach. Findings A case is made that Dixons work is characterised by a concern with the historical sedimentation and structuration of marketing theory and practice. Originality/value Calls attention to Dixons work for scholars who might otherwise have bypassed it by linking it with contemporary interpretive and critical marketing approaches. Keywords Marketing theory, History, Books, Critical marketing Paper type Viewpoint

I am not exaggerating when I say that to a true collector the acquisition of an old book is its rebirth (Benjamin, 1999, p. 63).

Introduction I have been asked to comment upon Donald F. Dixons library. Before I do this, for those readers who wish to examine the list of material contained in the library that I use as a prism to discuss Dixons scholarship and marketing theory more generally, this can be found on the Conference on Historical Analysis and Research in Marketing web site (http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/charm/). Printing off his reading list for the course he taught on the development of marketing thought and comparing where the two lists diverge serves to underline that here we have a scholar of considerable learning. As a contribution to this special issue I use Dixons scholarship and library to illustrate how his writing speaks to current concerns in order to encourage a new generation to read his work with the care and attention it deserves. I conclude by articulating the relationship between Dixons intellectual output and contemporary interpretive and critical marketing studies. Thinking through Dixons library To state the obvious, the variety and quantity of material that Dixon collected[1] makes the task of passing comment on his library daunting. But why should we be interested
Journal of Historical Research in Marketing Vol. 3 No. 1, 2011 pp. 118-130 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1755-750X DOI 10.1108/17557501111102472

Material that is contained in Dixons library is marked with an asterisk; key gures whose work appears in Dixons library are marked in the same way. The author thanks Professor Robert Tamilia, Professor Ian Wilkinson and Professor Brian Jones for providing some of the material consulted during the production of this article.

in what Dixon collected or in how he used the material in his possession? First, Dixon is one of the very best historians of marketing thought and the way he approached his scholarly labours should be of interest to those beginning an academic career. Second, marketing scholars exist within an institutional climate in which publication is rewarded. To become a decent writer, an academic rst has to have engaged in extensive reading (Brown, 2004, 2005a). In line with this, Dixons structured collection of texts contains all the material one would expect to see in a rst rate economics library and more. As such, it highlights the type of reading and collecting strategy researchers should adopt if they wish to make solid contributions to the literature. They need to demonstrate their knowledge of the classics, while providing novel interpretations of their subject matter. Chance and serendipity obviously have a role to play (Brown, 2005a; Hester, 1968; Leslie, 2007). But combined, structured reading and interdisciplinary breadth (Brown, 2005b), will all help facilitate access to the means of ideational distribution (Wilkinson, 2011b). Book collections, moreover, offer us a biopsy of the individual collector (Rubin, 2007), giving us insight into their thought patterns. On this basis, Dixons collection reveals him to be a methodical scholar, carefully sourcing related material, scouring the texts he accumulated for insights into marketing, retailing and consumer behaviour. Certainly, a remark made by Seneca is directly relevant here. Seneca, Dixon (1995a, p. 188) says:
[. . .] criticized people who collect books not for the sake of learning, but to make a show, just as many who lack even a childs knowledge of letters use books, not as tools of learning, but as decorations for the dining room.

Dixons library

119

Dixons library has been put to good use. These books spoke through Dixon, the long dead voices of inuential scholars absorbed and reworked in imaginative ways to reect on the development of marketing thought, drawing attention to the way certain ideas could have offered potentially more fruitful ways for thinking about marketing practice, if only we had explored them (Dixon, 2000). While it is always difcult to summarise the contributions of a scholar without being reductionist, my reading of Dixons library and his academic writing leads me to think about his contribution in the following way. Broadly speaking Dixon is concerned with the historical sedimentation of marketing theory and practice. For this reader, he demonstrates a commitment to marketplace realism that has parallels in the work of Stuart Chase (Chase *, 1925; Westbrook, 1980). Moreover, his desire to remind scholars that the marketplace is not just a rational-choice wonderland, where we each make decisions solely on the basis of price, reveals a commitment to conceptual realism that revises empirically problematic models by juxtaposing them with the complex realities of the marketplace. Moving on to reect on his library might encourage one to conjure up images of an archive of classical, neoclassical, institutional and Austrian economic thought. Such an image would not be far removed from reality. In Dixons library there are seminal texts on political economy by Stanley Jevons * and Smith (1776/1976) *; alongside the key counterpoints for the analyses offered by Smith by Bernard Mandeville * (Teichgraeber, 1984). Jevons and Smith, most notably, were central gures in economics and moral philosophy, respectively. Both articulated the idea that we must take consumption seriously in terms of its utility (Lynd, 1936). Alfred Marshall *, another spectre that

JHRM 3,1

120

haunts Dixons library extended this logic slightly further, making the case that consumption provided satisfaction. Veblen (1899) takes us beyond these ideas, supplementing the accounts provided by the founding fathers of economics with what Robert Lynd called the realistic dynamics of human nature lured and chivvied by its inner needs, by social compulsions, and by business enterprise which constitute the seemingly simple and matter-of-fact entity we call demand (Lynd, 1936, p. 497). Among Dixons collection we also nd scholars well known for their critical evaluations of the interplay between various institutions consumers, producers and government such as John Commons *, the inuential institutional economist. Commons contested liberal assumptions that took the individual as a free oating entity, unconnected to the social environment, who sought to negotiate the marketplace in an attempt to satisfy all their requirements (Tilman and John, 2008). Of course, there are other ways of meeting our needs outside of the market (Dixon, 2002, 2011). Dixon and his co-authors illustrate this, pluralising the institutions and non-market forms through which people meet their everyday requirements (Dixon, 1978, 2011). Alongside important reections on political economy, there are treatises that deal with the issue of the wastes associated with marketing (i.e. the twentieth-century funds analysis *). This should not surprise us, the topic was extensively studied in the early twentieth century (White, 1927). However, we should note that the twentieth century was not Dixons sole focus. He is one of the few to have engaged with marketing practices in ancient times and in most periods between then and now (Shaw, 1995; Wilkinson, 2011a). To do this he draws on a large range of original writings in his papers on retailing in classical Athens (Dixon, 1995b) and ancient Rome (Dixon, 1995a; Wilkinson, 2011b). More familiar to readers of this journal are tracts on marketing and distribution such as Shaws * (1915) Some Problems in Market Distribution, Hess * (1915) well-balanced study of the function of advertising, Cox et al.s * (1965) inuential co-authored book, Distribution in a High-Level Economy and Aldersons * (1965) posthumous, Dynamic Marketing Behavior, among others (Dixon, 1965). What he has done with the many books in his collection is think through them, using them to stimulate critical reection on key arguments in marketing theory and in doing so has injected the discipline with an important element of conceptual and marketplace realism. Conceptual and marketplace realism I have long been impressed with the way Dixon marshals his knowledge of economics to chart a pre-history of macromarketing topics (Dixon, 1999). His willingness to question the competitive market equilibrium model that assumes the existence of rational actors operating in intellectual and social isolation serves as an exemplar of Dixons desire for conceptual realism (Dixon and Sybrandy, 1997). Conceptual and marketplace realism lends Dixons work a contemporary feel that should resonate with scholars who situate their work in the emerging critical marketing vein (Hamilton, 2009; Jafari and Goulding, 2008; Tadajewski, 2010a, d; Varman and Vikas, 2007; Vikas and Varman, 2007). In common with this literature, he directs our attention to the structures that enable and constrain marketplace practices (Dixon and McLaughlin, 1968, 1971). This is not undertaken for traditional marketing management reasons, that is, in order to enable practitioners to sell people more products and services. Of course, Dixon is not unsympathetic to this type of activity. His consultancy work indicates an interest in practitioner issues (Tamilia, 2010). Much like Monieson

(Jones et al., 2010; Tadajewski, 2010b), Dixon is interested in critically scrutinising the way the market works in order to critique the criticism being made of the marketing system by particular groups. The obvious examples that demonstrate this are his studies of the power dynamics of the gasoline industry (Dixon, 1971) and those dealing with the low-income market (Dixon and McLaughlin, 1968, 1971). Dixon wants the marketing system to work for people and for us to appreciate the value of its functions (as Reavis Cox * and later Wilkie and Moore (1999) adroitly illustrated). The marketing system, for Dixon, serves as a provisioning mechanism for society; with society superordinate to all subsystems. This said, societal and political control over the economic realm and marketing system has never been unproblematic (Dixon, 2002; Habermas, 2009; Lekachman, 1962). Sometimes certain groups are more powerful and thereby better placed to articulate their own requirements in a self-serving manner (Dahrendorf, 1958a, b). These issues remain as pressing today as they ever have been (Harney, 2009). To take a Dixonian turn, perhaps if we knew the history of some of the ideas, concepts and value systems that we draw upon, but often fail to reect upon, this would not necessarily have been the case. Ethics, the marketing system, Adam Smith and other members of Dixons library As commentators increasingly argue, while the economy is a subsystem of the social, economic doctrines are extremely powerful structuring forces in all facets of social life (Harvey, 2007; Taylor, 2010). Neoliberalism effectively encourages the extension of a market logic where one was previously absent, as in the case of education (Holbrook, 2005; Svensson and Wood, 2007). The problem here, as no doubt Dixon can appreciate given his references to Adam Smiths * morally and ethically engaged writings, is that an economic or market logic is frequently disconnected from the ethics that served as a counterpoint to Smiths invisible hand. Of course, Smiths moral writings are often forgotten, being replaced with unsatisfying assertions that self-interest will result in societal welfare (Dixon, 1984, 2002; Henderson, 1896, pp. 392-3). Clearly we have ignored the lessons provided by Hobbes who suggested that self-interested behaviour had to be contained by a powerful state (Teichgraeber, 1984). Machiavelli (1531-1532/1999, p. 54), likewise, had a dim view of human nature, men[. . .]are greedy for prot; while you treat them well, they are yours (Smith *, 1776/1976). Variants of this view of human nature are often articulated in the mass media and directed at business people (Hester, 1968; Tye, 2002, p. 235). Marketers, most notably, have frequently been depicted as mendacious (Brown, 2001), ethically myopic (Drumwright and Murphy, 2009) and willing to control markets by legal and illegal means (Ashton and Pressey, 2008; Dickson and Wells, 2001; Lekachman, 1962; Tadajewski, 2010c). Steiner (1976), for example, attempted to demonstrate that such views of marketing practice were longstanding, found in ancient reections on the marketplace. As mentioned earlier, Dixon is very attentive to primary sources, and upon turning to the scholars that Steiner cites, found a markedly different representation of marketing. In the ancient world there was recognition of the necessity of a division of labour, with some groups specialising in selling. Their activities, within certain bounds, were viewed as socially benecial (Dixon, 2008b, pp. 34-5).

Dixons library

121

JHRM 3,1

122

Telescoping to the late nineteenth century and remaining close to Dixons library, we can nd a number of key authors who studied their social climate with the precision of a surgeon, trying to determine when rhetoric served to elide the power relations extant in the market. The arguments of Veblen (1919/2005, 1921/2006 *, 1924 *) and Edward Bellamy (Dixon, 1973) provide us with a useful contrast to a liberal conception of the marketplace (Dixon and Sybrandy, 1997). Both scholars question the empirical veracity of the metaphor of the invisible hand (Tilman, 1984). They dismiss the idea that government can control powerful forces in society such as industry and demand a rethinking of dysfunctional institutions (Tilman, 1984; Dickson and Wells, 2001). Other scholars found in Dixons collection or cited by authors in his library afliated with institutionalist economics and more unusually neoclassical thinkers such as Carver * (1913) made related arguments (Samuels, 1984). What we can take from this, therefore, is hopefully an obvious point that current debates about the growth of corporate control over the political and cultural system are nothing new (Keister, 1937), but arguably they have reached levels far in advance of historical precedents (Habermas, 2009; Nason, 2008; Spender, 2007). Furthermore, control over the economic, social, cultural and natural environment is an issue that has merited much discussion and Dixons book collection dwells at length on these topics. As a case in point, Robertson and Dennison * (1960) in The Control of Industry provide a thoughtful interrogation of early twentieth century industrial society. Like Dixon and Wagner (1973) they appreciate the benets of the economic system and offer a degree of praise for government intervention in markets. Their examination does not stop there, however, as they worry about the unbalanced everyday existence of many people, whereby work overtakes all other aspects of existence. In a refrain that chimes with Dixons research, the economic system, Robertson and Dennison assert, was meant to support human growth and self-development. This is where control over industry was needed, since there was always the potential for human development to be subsumed by the needs of industry and humane reection replaced by economic calculus (Hester, 1968). Let us now move from this macro-level discussion and turn to meso- and micro levels. The structuring of the marketplace Unsurprisingly, given the presence of texts in his library that deal with conict in the market and in recognition that the emergence and historical sedimentation of industrial society was enabled by violence, subjection and hardship for many (Aktouf, 1992; Harney, 2009), Dixon is attentive to meso- and micro-level structures operating on human behaviour. Economic progress, as he appreciates, is not cost-free (Dixon, 2000, p. 85). In his comments on the structuring of the market it is difcult not to see the imprint of the work of John Barton *, Henry George *, Herbert Hess *, Simon Patten *, Richard T. Ely *, John Bates Clark *, John Dewey *, Thorstein Veblen * and Stuart Chase * upon Dixons scholarship. What various authors in Dixons library took issue with was the way in which people were translated into consumers, and the affect of this on the quality of their existence. Advertising, in particular, came in for much criticism (Clark, 1925; Griff, 1969; Hess, 1913, 1915 *). Since the factory system had expanded and Taylor (1911/1998) had improved efciency, some way had to be found to encourage people to purchase the vast constellation of items now available. The emergence of the credit system helped here,

as did the greater use of advertising and personal salesmanship (Renouard, 2007). All of which were used to buttress the producer complex (Keister, 1937, p. 327). Hess * (1915), on the other hand, was much more afrmative about the role of advertising in society from ancient times all the way up to the period when he was writing. As Dixon should be aware, in Productive Advertising, Hess examined the critiques that advertising increased the prices consumers paid, while having a negative inuence on their decision-making. Like Dixon, Hess stresses consumer education as a means to facilitate consumer literacy so that people[. . .]become more scientic in their buying (Hess, 1913, p. 240). In spite of the fact that Dixon (2011) felt deep disappointment with Aldersons * (1957) work, the latters research has had a major impact on the discipline and offers us a counterpoint to the more critical studies of advertising that are archived in Dixons library. Alderson sketches a largely rational vision of human behaviour (Dixon, 1999, 2011) and advertising, for both Alderson (1934) and Hess (1913, 1915 *), was a means of entertainment, providing us with a distraction from our everyday trials and tribulations (Alderson, 1962). In equal measure it performs an educative function, persuading us to try new products and services which improve our life experience (Griff, 1969). Nevertheless, for a number of the commentators in Dixons library, Aldersons positive interpretation of advertising would overstate its contribution to society. They might respond that it played a major role in stimulating people to buy products that were non-essential, not edifying or just downright shoddy (Chase, 1925 *; Chase and Schlink, 1927). This brings us in a roundabout way to the consumer educationalist, Stuart Chase and his interest in a book also owned by Dixon, Progress and Poverty * (George, 1880/1976). Progress, poverty and irrationality Progress and Poverty was a very popular book. George was a Self-Educated Economist who scrutinised the impact of industrialisation, immigration and a variety of other issues on the social environment of the nineteenth century. Mainstream political economy at this time was focused predominantly on the activities of capitalists, ignoring at the same time the inuence of the industrial system on workers and the natural environment. Put simply, as Veblen (1919/2005, 1924 *) and Bellamy (1897) argue, political economy served to legitimate economic exploitation and the class system. While appreciating the benets of industrialisation, George sought to reveal the dark-side of the economy, including the slave trade, the general plight of workers and a variety of externalities (Barker, 1945, p. 109). Dixon does something similar albeit from a marketing perspective, examining the consumer practices of shoppers in Ghettos whose voices were excised in debates conducted by prominent government ofcials and observers. Thus, where George questioned the abuses of government and business that worked against the public interest (Barker, 1945, p. 113), Dixon takes a realistic view of retailing-consumer power relations and uses his ndings to question the representation of market practices promulgated by inuential bodies such as The Supreme Court (Dixon, 1971), the House Government Operations Committee (Dixon and Wagner, 1973) and the Federal Trade Commission (Dixon and McLaughlin, 1971). For example, when studying the question of whether less afuent consumers pay more for their groceries, Dixon and McLaughlin studied inner city Philadelphia. Philadelphia was one of many areas that had been witness to the white ight

Dixons library

123

JHRM 3,1

124

to the suburbs, while inner city locations were the domain of immigrants, lower income groups and ethnic minorities (Savitch, 1978). Focusing on this location, Dixon and McLaughlin examine the structure of the retailing system and the relative absence of chain store outlets in nancially deprived areas. This leads consumers to shop locally, buying their groceries from smaller, more expensive stores. But this is not an exemplar of consumer irrationality, nor is it simply a case of marketer mendacity in terms of charging higher prices to those who cannot shop elsewhere. We must appreciate, Dixon and McLaughlin assert, that our conceptual and culture-centric attitudes [. . .] cloud the situation rather than contribute to solutions (Dixon and McLaughlin, 1971, p. 99). In other words, we should not rush to accuse consumers from other cultural groups of irrationality in their consumption behaviour before we understand their lived experience. Dixon and McLaughlin (1968, 1971) point out that there are other factors beyond a lack of mobility and absence of transportation options that inuence the consumption patterns of these groups. These factors are, of course, important. Equally signicant are structural constraints that are not easily noticeable: shopping in the inner city is sometimes severely restricted by geographic boundaries [that are] invisible, and unknown to the outsider, which dene the turf of gangs (Dixon and McLaughlin, 1968, p. 10). Racial difference as a cognitive structure is also documented as an inuence that orients consumer behaviour:
Attitudes towards supermarkets, as representative[s] of the white power structure, may also play a role in limiting mobility [. . .] Returning an item to a supermarket may be psychologically difcult because of the actual or perceived attitude of the personnel (Dixon and McLaughlin, 1968, p. 10).

Having worked through this complex topic, Dixon advocates consumer education, presumably to motivate people to question their own consumption behaviour and thereby improve their ability to negotiate the marketplace in a way most advantageous to their requirements (Dixon and McLaughlin, 1971). Marketing scholars had a role to play here in terms of public policy formation by providing operational suggestions based upon the data which are widely available (Dixon, 1974, p. 101). Theory and empirical research were consequently to be used to improve the marketing system. This, of course, suggests a certain axiological position in the sense that he views the marketing system as a human construction which can be modied accordingly (Dixon, 1978), albeit with difculty (Habermas, 2009; Lekachman, 1962; Nason, 2008; Spender, 2007). Back to the future: the social construction of the market Dixons intellectual independence is well illustrated by the fact that his attention was not circumscribed by the social ideology (Schudson, 1981) of the marketing concept, which leads some to assume that all needs must be satised via market exchange (Kilbourne et al., 1997). Nor by the blatant ideology (Smith, 1987) of consumer sovereignty that suggests that marketers do actually respond to customer needs or even have the customer as their primary focus (Dixon, 1992, 2008a). More recently he has devoted attention to less well-travelled facets of marketing practice. Making an argument that is commensurate with those of interpretive scholars he warns against assuming that all people have the same perception(s) of appropriate forms of need satisfaction:

Productive activities, that is, activities that buyers perceive as increasing their material well-being include drug-dealing, prostitution, loan-sharking, dealing in stolen goods, pornography, the provision of human organs for transportation, and gambling (Dixon and Sybrandy, 1997, p. 5; Pennington et al., 2009).

Dixons library

Clearly, not all people can adopt subject positions in the marketplace that are equal. This can be a function of many factors: a lack of education or a history of substance abuse to name the most obvious. Dixons argument above thus serves to encourage a more sceptical reexivity when thinking about market practices. Indeed, we could take this further and illustrate the prescience of these ideas and others that pepper his research via aloza and a brief reference to an article on the social construction of markets (Pen Venkatesh, 2006). Penaloza and Venkatesh (2006) want to destabilise the focus of marketing scholarship from the activities of marketing managers; there are other groups in society that we should study they argue. Linked to this they question the logic of treating people as isolated individuals somehow extracted from their cultural context, preferring instead to view human behaviour as socially oriented and they make a case for scholars to pay attention to the nature of cultural differences. Similar arguments have been articulated in critical marketing research dealing with vulnerable consumers whose limited literacy skill-set restricts their freedom to engage in the market (Adkins and Jae, 2010; Adkins and Ozanne, 2005; Ozanne et al., 2005). Dixon would no doubt applaud such efforts to study these groups in an attempt to help them better achieve the goals they set themselves. Obviously, there are differences between the interpretive tradition, critical marketing[2] and Dixons work. He remains largely indebted to functionalist values which can be critiqued for their status-quo orientation and concern with societal pattern maintenance (Dixon, 1984, p. 5). Since Parsons structural functionalist work has been criticised in this manner elsewhere, we do not need to devote our attention to it (Burrell and Morgan, 1979/1992, pp. 26, 55). Nonetheless, to bring this short paper to an end, Dixon has used his library as an excellent sensitizing device enabling him to reect on and critique marketplace myths of many varieties, in turn undermining what had been conceptually, theoretically and empirically taken-for-granted in marketing theory and practice. Conclusion Dixons library reminds us that the path to historical, conceptual and methodological inspiration can be found in the archives of ancient civilizations, all the way up to the papers and books that we currently have on our desks. You never know where such a spark will come from, but interdisciplinary, critical reading of the sort practiced by Dixon increases the odds of this happening (Brown, 2005a). What Dixons library and publication record reveals is that we can use historical research to cultivate a certain independence of mind, to afrm the value of the marketplace in some respects, highlighting the historical contingency of exchange relations that we take-for-granted, (re)connecting these with moral, ethical and cultural values.
Notes 1. According to personal correspondence between Professor Stan Shapiro and Professor Dixon, the latter sent over 1,000 feet of his papers to a recycling plant. Given that Walter Benjamin talks about the importance of chance for book collectors (Leslie, 2007), we might say

125

JHRM 3,1

the same for marketing historians: what intellectual pearls were lost in the processing of Dixons notes into toilet paper or some such product? 2. Certainly, Dixon does not invoke critical theory type language in his work, even though he does possess Marxist literature such as Sweezys (1949) The Theory of Capitalist Development.

126

References Adkins, N.R. and Jae, H. (2010), Marketplace vulnerability of limited English procient consumers: opportunities to increase knowledge in macromarketing, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 93-104. Adkins, N.R. and Ozanne, J.L. (2005), Critical consumer education: empowering the low-literate consumer, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 153-62. Aktouf, O. (1992), Management and theories of organizations in the 1990s: towards a critical radical humanism?, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 407-31. Alderson, W. (1934), Marketing problems under a planned economy, Bulletin of the Taylor Society, Vol. 17, February, pp. 2-3. Alderson, W. (1957), Marketing Behavior and Executive Action, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL. Alderson, W. (1962), Mass audience capable of improvement in taste, Business & Society, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 25-8. Alderson, W. (1965), Dynamic Marketing Behavior: A Functionalist Theory of Marketing, Richard D. Irwin, Homewood, IL. Ashton, J.K. and Pressey, A.D. (2008), Regulatory perceptions of marketing: interpreting UK competition authority investigations from 1950 to 2005, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 156-64. Barker, C.A. (1945), Henry George and the California background of Progress and Poverty, California Historical Society Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 97-115. Bellamy, E. (1897), Equality, D. Appleton, New York, NY. Benjamin, W. (1999), Unpacking my library: a talk about book collecting, in Arendt, H. (Ed.), Illuminations, Pimlico, London, pp. 61-9. Brown, S. (2001), Marketing A Retro Revolution, Sage, London. Brown, S. (2004), Writing marketing: the clause that refreshes, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 321-42. Brown, S. (2005a), Science, serendipity and the contemporary marketing condition, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 Nos 11/12, pp. 1229-34. Brown, S. (2005b), Writing Marketing: Literary Lessons from Academic Authorities, Sage, London. Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979/1992), Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis, Ashgate, Aldershot. Carver, T.N. (1913), The Distribution of Wealth, The Macmillan, New York, NY. Chase, S. (1925), The Tragedy of Waste, Grosset & Dunlap, New York, NY. Chase, S. and Schlink, F.J. (1927), Your Moneys Worth: A Study in the Waste of the Consumers Dollar, The Macmillan, New York, NY. Clark, F.E. (1925), An appraisal of certain criticisms of advertising, American Economic Review, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 5-13. Cox, R., Goodman, C.S. and Fichandler, T.C. (1965), Distribution in a High Level Economy, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Dahrendorf, R. (1958a), Out of utopia: toward a reorientation of sociological analysis, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. LXIV No. 2, pp. 115-27. Dahrendorf, R. (1958b), Toward a theory of social conict, Journal of Conict Resolution, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 170-83. Dickson, P.R. and Wells, P.K. (2001), The dubious origins of the Sherman Act: the mouse that roared, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 3-14. Dixon, D.F. (1965), Dynamic marketing behavior the end or a beginning? A review article, Economic and Business Bulletin, December, pp. 35-41. Dixon, D.F. (1971), Market exclusion and dealer coercion in sponsored TBA sales, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 62-6. Dixon, D.F. (1973), Brave new marketing revisited, Business & Society, Vol. 13, pp. 10-14. Dixon, D.F. (1974), Groceries in the ghetto, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 99-101. Dixon, D.F. (1978), The poverty of social marketing, MSU Business Topics, Vol. 26, Summer, pp. 50-6. Dixon, D.F. (1984), Macromarketing: a social systems perspective, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 4, Fall, pp. 4-17. Dixon, D.F. (1992), Consumer sovereignty, democracy and the marketing concept: a macromarketing perspective, Canadian Journal of Administrative Science, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 116-25. Dixon, D.F. (1995a), Retailing in ancient Rome: gleanings from contemporary literature, art and architecture, available at: http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/charm/CHARM%20proceedings/ CHARM%20article%20archive%20pdf%20format/Volume%207%201995/179%20dixon. pdf (accessed 1 September 2010). Dixon, D.F. (1995b), Retailing in classical Athens, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 74-85. Dixon, D.F. (1999), Some late nineteenth-century antecedents of marketing theory, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 115-25. Dixon, D.F. (2000), Schumpeter fty years later, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 82-8. Dixon, D.F. (2002), Emerging macromarketing concepts from Socrates to Alfred Marshall, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55, pp. 87-95. Dixon, D.F. (2008a), Consumer sovereignty, democracy, and the marketing concept: a macromarketing perspective, in Tadajewski, M. and Brownlie, D. (Eds), Critical Marketing: Issues in Contemporary Marketing, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 67-83. Dixon, D.F. (2008b), Prejudice V. marketing? An examination of some historical sources, Critical Marketing: Issues in Contemporary Marketing, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 33-44. Dixon, D.F. (2011), Aldersons Marketing Behavior and Executive Action inserted into the marketing theory course taught by Reavis Cox at Wharton fty years ago: a students reaction, Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 10-28. Dixon, D.F. and McLaughlin, D.J. (1968), Do the poor really pay more?, Business & Society, Autumn, pp. 7-12. Dixon, D.F. and McLaughlin, D.J. (1971), Shopping behavior, expenditure patterns, and inner-city food prices, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 96-9. Dixon, D.F. and Sybrandy, A. (1997), Needed: a theory of markets for macromarketing, Proceedings of the Macromarketing Conference, Bergen, Norway. Dixon, D.F. and Wagner, R.D. (1973), Antitrust: some problems for franchising and small business, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 11, pp. 26-30.

Dixons library

127

JHRM 3,1

128

Drumwright, M.E. and Murphy, P.E. (2009), The current state of advertising ethics: industry and academic perspectives, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 83-107. George, H. (1880/1976), Progress and Poverty, Dent, London. Griff, M. (1969), Advertising: the central institution of mass society, Diogenes, Vol. 17, pp. 120-37. Habermas, J. (2009), Life after bankruptcy: an interview with Jurgen Habermas, Constellations, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 227-34. Hamilton, K. (2009), Consumer decision making in low-income families: the case of conict avoidance, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 8, pp. 252-67. Harney, S. (2009), Extreme neo-liberalism: an introduction, Ephemera: Theory and Politics in Organization, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 318-29. Harvey, D. (2007), Neoliberalism as creative destruction, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 610 No. 1, pp. 21-44. Henderson, C.R. (1896), Business men and social theorists, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 385-97. Hess, H.W. (1913), Advertising and the high cost of living, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 48, pp. 238-43. Hess, H.W. (1915), Productive Advertising, J.B. Lippincott, Philadelphia, PA. Hester, M. (1968), US business schools a cautionary tale, Management Decision, Vol. 2, Spring, pp. 10-14. Holbrook, M.B. (2005), Marketing miseducation and the MBA mind: bullshit happens, Marketing Education Review, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 1-5. Jafari, A. and Goulding, C. (2008), We are not terrorists! UK-based Iranians, consumption practices and the torn self, Consumption, Markets and Culture, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 73-91. Jones, D.G.B., Cunningham, P., McLean, P. and Shapiro, S. (2010), The intellectual odyssey of David D. Monieson (1927-2008): a quest for usable knowledge, Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 198-217. Keister, A.S. (1937), The consumer is stirring, Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 317-27. Kilbourne, W., McDonagh, P. and Prothero, A. (1997), Sustainable consumption and the quality of life: a macromarketing challenge to the dominant social paradigm, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 17, pp. 4-24. Lekachman, R. (1962), Businessmen and their rivals, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 343, pp. 109-17. Leslie, E. (2007), Walter Benjamin, Reaktion Books, London. Lynd, R.S. (1936), Democracys third estate: the consumer, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 481-515. Machiavelli, N. (1531-1532/1999), The Prince, Penguin, London (translated by Bull, G.). Nason, R.W. (2008), Structuring the global marketplace: the impact of the United Nations global compact, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 418-25. Ozanne, J.L., Adkins, N.R. and Sandlin, J.A. (2005), Shopping [for] power: how adult literacy learners negotiate the marketplace, Adult Education Quarterly, Vol. 55 No. 4, pp. 251-68. Penaloza, L. and Venkatesh, A. (2006), Further evolving the new dominant logic of marketing: from services to the social construction of markets, Marketing Theory, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 299-316. Pennington, J.R., Ball, A.D., Hampton, R.D. and Soulakova, J.N. (2009), The cross-national market in human beings, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 119-34.

Renouard, J. (2007), The predicaments of plenty: interwar intellectuals and American consumerism, Journal of American Culture, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 54-67. Robertson, D. and Dennison, S. (1960), The Control of Industry, 2nd ed., Nisbet, Welwyn. Rubin, H. (2007), What CEOs book collections say about them, The New York Times, 20 June, available at: www.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/business/worldbusiness/20iht-libraries.4. 6757114.html (accessed 4 September 2010). Samuels, W.J. (1984), On the nature and existence of economic coercion: the correspondence of Robert Lee Hale and Thomas Nixon Carver, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. XVIII No. 4, pp. 1027-48. Savitch, H.V. (1978), Black cites/white suburbs: domestic colonialism as an interpretive idea, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 439, September, pp. 118-34. Schudson, M. (1981), Criticizing the critics of advertising: towards a sociological view of marketing, Media, Culture & Society, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 3-12. Shaw, A.W. (1915), Some Problems in Market Distribution, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Shaw, E. (1995), The rst dialogue on macromarketing, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 7-20. Smith, A. (1776/1976), An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. Smith, N.C. (1987), Consumer boycotts and consumer sovereignty, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 7-19. Spender, J.C. (2007), Management as a regulated profession, Journal of Management Inquiry, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 32-42. Steiner, R.L. (1976), The prejudice against marketing, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40, July, pp. 2-9. Svensson, G. and Wood, G. (2007), Are university students really customers? When illusion may lead to delusion for all!, International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 17-28. Sweezy, P. (1949), The Theory of Capitalist Development, Dennis Dobson, London. Tadajewski, M. (2010a), Critical marketing studies: logical empiricism, critical performativity and marketing practice, Marketing Theory, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 210-22. Tadajewski, M. (2010b), Reading Professor David D. Monieson: humanism, pluralism, and intellectualisation, Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 227-37. Tadajewski, M. (2010c), Reading the marketing revolution through the prism of the FBI, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 26 Nos 1/2, pp. 90-107. Tadajewski, M. (2010d), Towards a history of critical marketing studies, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 26 Nos 9/10, pp. 773-824. Tamilia, R. (2011), The timeless intellectual contributions of Donald F. Dixon, Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 33-52. Taylor, F.W. (1911/1998), The Principles of Scientic Management, Dover, London. Taylor, L. (2010), Of human greed: Laurie Taylor interviews David Harvey, The Humanist, Vol. 125 No. 4, available at: http://newhumanist.org.uk/2325/of-human-greed-laurietaylor-interviews-david-harvey (accessed 15 August 2010). Teichgraeber, R.F. (1984), Review: the soul of modern economic man: ideas of self-interest, Thomas Hobbes to Adam Smith. Political Theory, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 443-6.

Dixons library

129

JHRM 3,1

130

Tilman, R. (1984), The utopian vision of Edward Bellamy and Thorstein Veblen, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. XIX No. 4, pp. 879-98. Tilman, R. and John, R. (2008), Commons, the new deal and the American tradition of empirical collectivism, Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. XLII No. 3, pp. 823-51. Tye, L. (2002), The Father of Spin: Edward L. Bernays and the Birth of Public Relations, Henry Holt, New York, NY. Varman, R. and Vikas, R.M. (2007), Freedom and consumption: towards conceptualizing systemic constraints for subaltern consumers in a capitalist society, Consumption, Markets and Culture, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 117-31. Veblen, T. (1899), The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions, Macmillan, New York, NY. Veblen, T. (1919/2005), The Vested Interests and the Common Man, Cosimo Classics, New York, NY. Veblen, T. (1921/2006), The Engineers and the Price System, Cosimo Classics, New York, NY. Veblen, T. (1924), Absentee Ownership and Business Enterprise in Recent Times: The Case of America, George Allen & Unwin, London. Vikas, R.M. and Varman, R. (2007), Erasing futures: ethics of marketing an intoxicant to homeless children, Consumption, Markets and Culture, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 189-202. Westbrook, R.B. (1980), Tribune of the technostructure: the popular economics of Stuart Chase, American Quarterly, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 387-408. White, P. (1927), Scientic Marketing Management: Its Principles and Methods, Harper & Brothers, New York, NY. Wilkie, W.L. and Moore, E. (1999), Marketings contributions to society, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, pp. 198-218. Wilkinson, I. (2011a), Don Dixon: a scholar of marketing and gentleman of the rst order, Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 96-107. Wilkinson, I. (2011b), Tipping point: the teaching of the Wharton marketing theory seminar 50 years ago, Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 29-32. Further reading Bellamy, E. (1888/1996), Looking Backward, Dover, New York, NY. Clark, J.M. (1938), Social Control of Business, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Dixon, D.F. (1982), The ethical component of marketing: an eighteenth-century view, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 2, Spring, pp. 38-46. About the author Mark Tadajewski is Professor of Marketing at the University of Strathclyde Business School. He is the Co-editor of the Journal of Marketing Management, an Associate Editor of the Journal of Historical Research in Marketing and the Author of numerous academic articles and edited books. His research interests currently revolve around the history of marketing thought, the marketing practices of exemplar marketing rms and critical marketing studies. Mark Tadajewski can be contacted at: mt66@le.ac.uk

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints