2007年--外文翻譯--永恒的科特勒和博登的理論關(guān)系營(yíng)銷(xiāo)和4p營(yíng)銷(xiāo)理論實(shí)質(zhì)（節(jié)選）

1、<p>　　5900漢字，3300單詞，1.8萬(wàn)英文字符</p><p>　　出處：Zineldin M, Philipson S. Kotler and Borden are not dead: myth of relationship marketing and truth of the 4Ps[J]. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2007, 24(4):229-2

2、41.</p><p>　　Kotler and Borden are not dead: myth of relationship marketing and truth of the 4Ps</p><p>　　M Zineldin，S Philipson</p><p>　　Introduction</p><p>　　Building

3、 relationships is how you relate to and communicate with people. Relationships with others have been used from time immemorial to cope with the complexity of everyday life. Relationship marketing is one of the oldest app

4、roaches to marketing, yet one of the least understood. It is a broad topic and many scholars and researchers have approached it from different perspectives. It is becoming one of those fashionable concepts that every mar

5、keter and manager uses but defines in different ways</p><p>　　Over the last decade, considerable emphasis has been placed on the importance of relationship marketing. This re-orientation of marketing has bee

6、n proposed in contrast to the traditional approach, transactional marketing. Relationship marketing aims at creating a client relationship from the start to satisfy and retain existing customers, while transactional mark

7、eting tries to make the sale and find new customer .</p><p>　　A considerable number of academic scholars have devoted a considerable amount of time and effort to criticize and attack the traditional marketin

8、g mix theory. Success does not come solely from the manipulation of marketing mix elements but by building a long-term relationship between buyer and seller (Ford et al. 1986). The marketing mix approach is considered to

9、o limited. The marketing mix approach is not adequate in meeting the requirements of the marketing concept. Zineldin says that the mark</p><p>　　Therefore, relationship marketing has been seen as a shift in

10、paradigm, moving away from the marketing mix (or so called Kotlerism) with the 4Ps in focus. Many Scandinavian/Nordic researchers agree than Scandinavian companies have a much higher focus on relationship marketing than

11、 other European or American countries and that there is a paradigm shift moving away from traditional transactional marketing.</p><p>　　Kotler argues that transaction marketing is more useful than relat

12、ionship marketing when the customer has a short- time horizon and can easily switch from one supplier to another without spending more. Relationship marketing can pay off if customers have a long-term perspective and the

13、re will be high costs for switching supplier. Kotler argues that the decision whether to use relationship marketing or transactional marketing depends on the industry and the needs of the customer. There are two ty</p

14、><p>　　Relationship marketing as a paradigm shift!</p><p>　　Definition of paradigm: Paradigm is our world view in any particular field. It tells us how we view, understand and explain the world.<

15、;/p><p>　　The author Aijo (1996) means that there indeed is a revolutionary paradigm shift taking place in the area of marketing and that relationship marketing is the core of this paradigm shift. The main role

16、 and goal of the Nordic School and of Nordic authors has been to help extend the notion of relationship marketing from service marketing to traditional marketing and to the point when relationship marketing actually is d

17、efined as the new marketing paradigm.</p><p>　　According to our knowledge, only a few studies of current marketing practices have been conducted to investigate whether marketing is turning towards a paradigm

18、 shift or not. The research of marketing practices in the contemporary environment was indeed led in 1997 by Brodie, Coviello, Brookes and Little in the University of Auckland in New Zealand. The results did not support

19、the concept of a total “paradigm shift”. Instead, the findings in several companies confirmed that the transaction marke</p><p>　　Their study results contradict the trend of academics and practitioners of th

20、e so-called relationship marketing “paradigm shift”. As far as we know, in Scandinavia, no comprehensive research has been conducted by authors from the Nordic School to revaluate the relevance of the argumentation about

21、 this “paradigm shift”. This is the main issue of our study.</p><p>　　The purpose of the article is to explore theoretically and empirically if the paradigm shift has relevant reasons to exist or if transact

22、ional marketing is still the main marketing approach practiced by firms in Scandinavian/Nordic countries. The paper will explain the evolution of the relationship approach, and show the indispensable role of the traditio

23、nal marketing mix theory in the development of the relationship marketing/management and strategy.</p><p>　　Is relationship marketing a paradigm shift?</p><p>　　The shift from sales orientation

24、to marketing orientation led to the development of the “marketing mix” theory. Today, the marketing mix theory is well known and referred to as the 4Ps, i.e. product, price, promotion “communication”, and place “distribu

25、tion” (McCarthy, 1971).</p><p>　　It should be recognized that the origins of the marketing mix concept or approach was developed by Niel Borden at the Harvard Business School in the 1960s to describe the imp

26、ortant ingredients or elements that should be considered in formulating a marketing program. These ingredients or elements were the following (Borden, 1964):</p><p>　　. product planning (P1);</p><

27、p>　　. pricing (P2);</p><p>　　. branding;</p><p>　　. channels of distribution/place (P3);</p><p>　　. personal selling;</p><p>　　. promotions (P4);</p><p>

28、;　　. advertising;</p><p>　　. packaging;</p><p>　　. display;</p><p>　　. servicing;</p><p>　　. physical handling; and</p><p>　　. fact finding and analysis.&l

29、t;/p><p>　　Over time Borden’s elements of marketing mix have unfortunately been simplified under the four headings or categories (4Ps). These marketing mix elements are the four key decision areas that marketer

30、s must manage in order to facilitate the exchange or transfer of goods, services, or ideas so that they may satisfy customer needs better than the competition. The American Marketing Association’s (AMA) definition of mar

31、keting (management) embodies these principles: Marketing is the process of planni</p><p>　　The 4Ps must work together in a single marketing plan to satisfy the customer’s needs and allow the firm to make a r

32、easonable profit. Marketing mix elements are often viewed as controllable variables because they can be changed. They also describe the result of the management’s efforts to creatively combine marketing activities.</p

33、><p>　　Kotler (1994) defines “exchange” as follows: Exchange is the act of obtaining a desired product from someone by offering something in return .Whether exchange actually takes place depends upon whether th

34、e two parties can find terms of exchange that will leave them both better off (or at least not worse off) than before the exchange.</p><p>　　To initiate the exchange process, the seller must know what the po

35、tential buyer needs. To implement the firm’s sales strategy and ensure its success, the marketers must actively manage, facilitate, and expedite satisfying exchange relationships through the creation, distribution, promo

36、tion and pricing of high quality goods, services and ideas.</p><p>　　The interaction approach to understanding industrial marketing stresses that success does not come solely from the manipulation of marketi

37、ng mix elements but through long-term relationship building whereby the bond between buyer and seller becomes so strong that it effectively acts as a barrier to entry for out-suppliers (Ford et al., 1986). Gronroos (1990

38、) argues that the marketing mix approach is too limited, stating:</p><p>　　Defining marketing according to the marketing mix approach is like using a list of objects as a definition. Such a way of defining a

39、 phenomenon can never be considered the most valid one.</p><p>　　While Gronroos criticizes the way of dealing with a phenomena by using a number of elements, many researchers in the 1980s and 1990s still lov

40、e to use and to extend the number of the Ps; from 4Ps to six, seven or more Ps, Judd (1987) has found five Ps. Brookes (1988) has also added customer service as a fifth P. Kotler (1986) has found six Ps (public relations

41、 and politics). Booms and Bitner (1982) have found as many as seven Ps in service marketing (people, physical evidence and processes). The</p><p>　　Gummesson (1995, 2000) found 30 relationships in marketing.

42、 He commented:</p><p>　　More characteristics of the R’s can be found. The business world is complex and consequently the R’s are multidimensional. This complexity has to be treated with respect; every effort

43、 to squeeze the relationships into a simple scale or matrix will curtail their validity. Other authors may have a somewhat deviant approach to the definition and the content of RM.</p><p>　　We agree with Gum

44、messon and Gronroos that such a list is not the way to treat a new paradigm or to define a phenomenon. Adding a new number of elements, categories, components, or Ps is not enough to offer a fundamental improvement in ma

45、rketing. Moreover, a list of elements does not fit all situations under all conditions and it never takes account of, nor includes, all relevant components.</p><p>　　At the same time we disagree with those r

46、esearchers and writers who attack the meaning, philosophy, and importance of the marketing mix approach. The marketing mix is still valid and helpful in all industries (e.g. service as well as manufacturing). If a compan

47、y does not have the right price, product/service quality, promotion and place or any other right marketing mix elements, it cannot create or achieve the right relationship with a customer. The right marketing and relatio

48、nship mix of compon</p><p>　　The aim of Zineldin’s (2000) recent work is neither to add new Ps or Rs, nor to calculate how many Ps or Rs should be included when we treat a marketing issue.</p><p&g

49、t;　　Gronroos (1990) wonders:</p><p>　　In fact, it is almost unbelievable how the 4P’s model, which represents a never thoroughly tested belief from the world of consumer packaged goods of the 1950s and 1960s

50、 is still today widely considered the marketing model for the 1990s.</p><p>　　Our personal answer is simple. Practitioners of management and marketing still believe in the validity of 4Ps. Give them the free

51、dom to believe and improve, reconsider and renew the temple instead of destroying it. Indeed, companies have to use the 4Ps to create customer relationships:</p><p>　　Relationship marketing combines elements

52、 of general advertising, sales promotions, public relations and direct marketing to create more effective and more efficient ways of reaching customers. It centers on developing a continuous relationship with customers a

53、cross a family of related products (Copulsky and Wolf, 1990).</p><p>　　Fitchett and McDonagh (2000) are supporting our view, stating that:</p><p>　　Some of those initially responsible for defini

54、ng and expanding the RM concept as an alternative to the “exchange”-based paradigm of marketing (as RM converts choose to describe marketing thought before RM) will no doubt take a certain degree of comfort and pride in

55、seeing their call for a paradigm shift being realized today. Such elation is, we propose, ill founded</p><p>　　But the coming of age of marketing through RM has not been revolutionary. The fairly painless tr

56、ansition from exchange to relationship is testimony to the extent to which the two opposing paradigms are in fact compatible and, below the rhetoric, rather similar. As a radical paradigm RM has most certainly failed and

57、 furthermore, it is incapable of offering any such development.</p><p>　　Instead of asking students, teachers, marketers, researchers and managers to neglect or forget, and thereby abandon their basic market

58、ing management roots and a 30-year-old theory (to be gone with the wind), thinkers have to ask and encourage them to keep the basic concept and try to reconsider, modify or improve it, because it is still valid in practi

59、ce as well as theoretically. The key issue in consideration of whether or not a particular P or R element should be included in the organization’s</p><p>　　The important issue is not to neglect them, whether

60、 the 4-Ps approach or some other method is used to conceptualize the decision-making areas of marketing ... The strength of the 4-Ps approach is that it represents a memorable and practical framework for marketing decisi

61、on-making and has proved useful for case study analysis in business schools for many years.</p><p>　　The lack evident in the approach is not in the four or 12Ps. If thinkers, teachers, students or practition

62、ers only pay considerable attention to the four generic categories rather than undertake a full analysis of their sub-activities, components, and the related inter-relationships between the elements, they will of course

63、argue that the marketing mix approach does not capture the full extent and complexity of marketing, nor does it explicitly recognize the essence of relationships between a fi</p><p>　　Indeed, there is no abs

64、olute reasonable answer or reason why these P extensions cannot be incorporated within the traditional 4Ps framework.</p><p>　　If one focuses one’s attention and undertakes a full analysis of the above menti

65、oned elements, one can find many relationships involved in them. Each of the 4Ps is a collection of sub-activities and has the potential to stimulate and create relationships with customers as well as with suppliers and

66、 dealers, etc. For example, people, processes and physical evidence can be discussed under product:</p><p>　　Marketing is the establishment, maintenance and enhancement of mainly long-term profitable relatio

67、nships with customers and other stakeholders. This is achieved by an on-going mutually beneficial exchange process, including the fulfillment of promises, and is facilitated by the application of the marketing mix (Glynn

68、 and Barnes, 1996).</p><p>　　Building and keeping a long-term relationship can be discussed under promotion, which includes personal selling, advertising, display, and servicing. Alliances and networks inclu

69、ding vertical integration and franchising can be discussed under channels of distribution (place) that include all activities and logistic functions that need to be considered in marketing the available product or servic

70、e. Channels of distribution, of course, include relationships with intermediaries (e.g., agent, wholes</p><p>　　Juttner and Werli (1995) have discussed the relationship between marketing mix and the gaining

71、of new customers and keeping the existing customer base (relationship philosophy). They pointed out:</p><p>　　1. Product policy. This is the value of a product or service is determined by the interaction bet

72、ween buyer and seller. The complexity of this relationship hence leads to a higher density of values and the integration of multiple service aspects- even in manufacturing goods.</p><p>　　2. Pricing policy.

73、The fact that every single relationship should be treated as an investment for the company shows “customer lifetime value” as the guiding criterion for pricing policies. This lifetime value reflects the value of the indi

74、vidual customer over time.</p><p>　　3. Communication mix or promotion. Communication messages do not primarily deal with the features of the products, but address directly individual customer characteristics

75、 and preferences. Additional customer information gained in each new contact (transaction) or “personal selling and contacts” is collected and saved in a “customer information file”. The increasing importance of new i

76、nformation and communication technologies for the implementation of relationship marketing can therefore be e</p><p>　　4. Distribution system or place. This is a critical variable and has to be assessed for

77、its value-generating potential. Exploiting this potential can result in either a reduction of barriers for relationship maintenance or an enhancement of future customer contacts. The superior idea for designing distribu

78、tion systems is the individualized delivery – “customizing distribution”. Also, a distribution system influences the way and manner in which the important customer contact takes place – the “m</p><p>　　We ar

79、gue that the modern relationship movement leads organizations back to the pre-twentieth century with the global scale of the twenty-first century through the 1960s (i.e. the Borden and Kotler 12 and then 4Ps).</p>

80、<p>　　Back to the future</p><p>　　The relationship concept, as well as the marketing concept, focuses on satisfying customers’ wants and needs. This modern (or old!) marketing concept on the other hand

81、 seeks way to build long-term customer relationships. Indeed, this movement, labeled “relationship marketing”, leads companies back to the early nineteenth century when retailers knew each customer personally, understood

82、 and satisfied their needs, but on the global scale of the twenty-first century.</p><p>　　Importantly, reading the historical perspective of how markets evolve towards the relationship approach, you might wo

83、nder what all the fuss is about. Shouldn’t all organizations have been practicing relationship marketing for centuries? The answer is perhaps surprisingly, no. A close relationship with customers, suppliers and other inv

84、olved parties has its limitations and disadvantages. Some organizations avoid the dependence on specific or few subcontractors, suppliers, or distributors. There a</p><p>　　The right combination of product o

85、rientation, sales orientation, and marketing or customer orientation is the cornerstone in creating, developing and enhancing long-term customer relationships. If a company does not have the right product/service quality

86、, promotion, personal selling, advertising, display, and servicing, it cannot create or achieve the right relationship with the right customer. Some, though not all, markets return to the earlier stages. In some cases

87、, radical new product tech</p><p>　　Central to the traditional marketing concept is exchange, which seeks to achieve satisfaction for the customer and the marketing organization, including its employees, sha

88、reholders, and managerial satisfaction.</p><p>　　Even if the basic philosophy underlying the relationship management approach is that the basis of all marketing and management activities should be the establ

89、ishment of mutually beneficial relationship with customers, the main goal is (still) to create exchanges.</p><p>　　It should also consider the importance of the marketing mix approach, including its main as

90、well as sub-components and activities. Also, the relationship concept should be considered as a generic category that includes a collection of sub- activities or components.</p><p>　　As a matter of fact, the

91、re are many common grounds between the traditional or transactional marketing and relationship orientation:</p><p>　　The philosophy that marketing strategies must be based on known consumer needs has come to

92、 be known as the marketing concept. This view, which began to win wide acceptance in the mid- 1950s, seems so logical today that one wonders why marketers did not turn to it sooner .</p><p>　　The relationshi

93、p marketing concept integrates marketing into each phase of the business. This is not a new concept. This concept was stated clearly in 1952 by one General Electric executive:</p><p>　　Marketing, through its

94、 studies and research, will establish for the engineer, the design and manufacturing person, what the customer wants in a given product, what price he or she is willing to pay, and where and when it will be wanted.</p

95、><p>　　The marketing imperative was and is still the creation and retention of satisfied customers in a deregulated, complex and competitive environment. Both traditional and relationship approaches reflect the

96、 need to create an integrated cross- functional focus for marketing.</p><p>　　永恒的科特勒和博登的理論：關(guān)系營(yíng)銷(xiāo)和4P營(yíng)銷(xiāo)理論實(shí)質(zhì)</p><p><b>　　簡(jiǎn)介</b></p><p>　　建立關(guān)系指的是用適當(dāng)?shù)姆椒ㄅc他人進(jìn)行交流和溝通。與他人建立關(guān)系歷來(lái)被用來(lái)

97、處理日常復(fù)雜的生活。關(guān)系營(yíng)銷(xiāo)是最古老的營(yíng)銷(xiāo)方式之一，也是我們最知之甚少的。這是一個(gè)寬泛的課題，許多學(xué)者和研究者從不同的角度探討過(guò)它，關(guān)系營(yíng)銷(xiāo)也變得越來(lái)越流行，每一位營(yíng)銷(xiāo)者和管理者都在使用，但對(duì)其定義就仁者見(jiàn)仁智者見(jiàn)智了。</p><p>　　在過(guò)去的十年中，關(guān)系營(yíng)銷(xiāo)地位舉足輕重，這種新定位營(yíng)銷(xiāo)與傳統(tǒng)營(yíng)銷(xiāo)、交易營(yíng)銷(xiāo)大相徑庭。關(guān)系營(yíng)銷(xiāo)的旨在建立一個(gè)客戶關(guān)系，開(kāi)始就要讓顧客滿意而且要留住老顧客；而交易型營(yíng)銷(xiāo)旨在提高銷(xiāo)售

98、業(yè)績(jī)和開(kāi)發(fā)新客源。許多學(xué)者都花大量的時(shí)間和精力批判和抨擊傳統(tǒng)的營(yíng)銷(xiāo)組合理論。成功并非僅來(lái)自于對(duì)營(yíng)銷(xiāo)組合元素的應(yīng)用，而是在買(mǎi)方和賣(mài)方之間建立長(zhǎng)期穩(wěn)定的關(guān)系（福特等。1986）。營(yíng)銷(xiāo)組合方法極有限。市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷(xiāo)組合的方法無(wú)法滿足市場(chǎng)。辛奈迪指出營(yíng)銷(xiāo)組合理論是不能隨意應(yīng)用到其他服務(wù)領(lǐng)域的，拉菲克和艾哈邁德（1992）認(rèn)為，這種對(duì)4P營(yíng)銷(xiāo)理論的批評(píng)可以外延至工業(yè)營(yíng)銷(xiāo)。他們認(rèn)為4P營(yíng)銷(xiāo)理論沒(méi)有充分考慮到與建筑工業(yè)買(mǎi)賣(mài)方建立長(zhǎng)期穩(wěn)定的關(guān)系的重要性。&l