History of marketing

[7] The contemporary definition of 'marketing' as a process of moving goods from producer to consumer with an emphasis on sales and advertising first appeared in dictionaries in 1897.

Mosaic patterns in the atrium of his house were decorated with images of amphora bearing his personal brand and quality claims.

[20] David Wengrow has argued that branding became necessary following the urban revolution in ancient Mesopotamia in the 4th century BCE, when large-scale economies started mass-producing commodities such as alcoholic drinks, cosmetics and textiles.

These ancient societies imposed strict forms of quality control over commodities, and also needed to convey value to the consumer through branding.

She has shown that amphoras used in Mediterranean trade between 1500 and 500 BCE exhibited a wide variety of shapes and markings, which provided information for transactions.

Moore and Reid, for example, have argued that the distinctive shapes and markings in ancient containers should be termed proto-brands rather than modern brands.

[26] Nevertheless, recent research suggests that China exhibited a rich history of early marketing practices; including branding, packaging, advertising and retail signage.

[28] Eckhart and Bengtsson have argued that during the Song dynasty (960–1127), Chinese society developed a consumerist culture, where a high level of consumption was attainable for a wide variety of ordinary consumers rather than just the elite (p. 212).

The rise of a consumer culture led to the commercial investment in carefully managed company image, retail signage, symbolic brands, trademark protection and the brand concepts of baoji, hao, lei, gongpin, piazi and pinpai, which roughly equate with Western concepts of family status, quality grading, and upholding traditional Chinese values (p. 219).

As early as 1380, Johann Fugger travelled from Augsburg to Graben in order to gather information on the international textile industry.

Eighteenth century advertising showed a high level of sophistication in its execution and ability to reach mass audiences.

[33] In a major review of consumer society, McKendrick, Brewer and Plumb found extensive evidence of eighteenth century English entrepreneurs inventing modern marketing techniques, including product differentiation; sales promotion; loss leader; planned obsolescence; fashion magazines; national advertising campaigns, fancy showrooms, and concentration on elite taste-setting customers.

English pottery makers Josiah Wedgewood (1730–1795) and Matthew Boulton (1728–1809) were the pioneers of modern mass marketing methods.

He also inferred that selling at lower prices would lead to higher demand and recognised the value of achieving scale economies in production.

He also practiced planned obsolescence and understood the importance of 'celebrity marketing' – that is supplying the nobility, often at prices below cost and of obtaining royal patronage, for the sake of the publicity and cudos generated.

However, gradually retail shops introduced innovations that would allow them to separate wealthier customers from the lower classes and peasants.

Another solution, that came into vogue from the late sixteenth century was to invite favoured customers into a back-room of the store, where goods were permanently on display.

Yet another technique that emerged around the same time was to hold a showcase of goods in the shopkeeper's private home for the benefit of wealthier clients.

However, as transportation systems improved from the mid nineteenth century, the economy became more unified allowing companies to distribute standardised, branded goods at national level.

[49] Other theorists agree that Smith was simply codifying implicit knowledge that had been used in marketing and brand management from the early twentieth century.

One study suggests that relationship marketing is really a sub-component of large scale movements of the value-added process rather than a separate era or framework.

Keith's notion of distinct eras in the evolution of marketing practice has been widely criticised and his periodisation described as "hopelessly flawed".

[90] Other critiques of Keith's work have pointed out that the so-called "production era" fails to align with historical facts and have also suggested that it is a myth.

[95][88] Another study, which examined 15 of the top selling marketing texts, found that the although the incidence of repeating Keith's eras was waning, it had not been replaced by Fullerton's periodisation, nor any other more meaningful framework.

Grundey summarised five different periodisations in the history of marketing, as shown in the following table, as a means of highlighting the general lack of agreement among scholars.

[114] Several scholars have attempted to describe the evolution of marketing thought chronologically and to connect it with broader intellectual and academic trends.

A school of thought refers to an intellectual tradition or a group of scholars who share a common philosophy or set of ideas.

These schools borrowed heavily from economics and were largely concerned with aggregate demand and lacked a focus on the individual firm.

[131] The institutional school focused its attention on the agents of market transactions, specifically those organisations active in the intermediary channel system, such as wholesalers and retailers.

"[139] While the management school continued to borrow from economics, it also introduced ideas from the new and emerging fields of sociology and psychology, which offered useful insights for explaining aspects of consumer behaviour such as the influence of culture and social class.