Úloha vedy a skúsenostnej zložky v rozvoji marketingu
THE ROLE OF SCIENCE AND EXPERIENTAL COMPONENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF MARKETING

Summary/Abstract: The purpose of the paper is to broaden the view on the role of the art and science in marketing discipline. This paper traces the development of the art versus science de-bate, discusses the pros and contras of various scientific approaches. It commences by setting out an oversimplified three-stage model of the „art or science“ controversy, con-tinues with an assessment of the outcomes, implications and concludes by offering some options, that are available to academic marketers. Marketing in Europe is regarded as a special function and section od the theory of enterprise economics, whereas in Anglo-Saxon countries it is considered to be economic discipline sui generis. The potential object of research includes social life as a whole with all types of enterprises, and human being in the centre – that means that the theory of enterprise economics and marketing appear to be in a certain sense a relation against other disciplines. The problem of whether division into individual disciplines, or admis-sibility of interdisciplinary subjects (such as marketing) are meaningful has been often discussed since the 1960s. The complexity of the subject marketing brings about the necessity of „borrowing from other sciences, and this cannot be avoided. The „art versus science“ confrontation was never a straightforward, head-to-head contest. At each stage od the debate, other marketing considerations interposed them-selves and to some extent succeeded in shaping the trajectory of the dispute. In the very early stage, for instance, the debate was not about art or science as such, but about aca-demic delusions and attempts to shake off marketing´s negative „salesperson image“, about the abandonment of its intuitive style for a more professional, progressive ethos. Logically, the second great phase of the debate was ostensibly fought on philosophical terrain – realism versus relativism etc. – but it was actually about the legitimacy or otherwise of diverse, mainly qualitative, alternative research methodologies, proposed by a younger generation of marketing intellectuals. Somewhat paradoxically it could be concluded that the great art – science debate never actually took place – the controversy was always about „marketing: science or non-science?“. Art never came into it. Not a single person in the entire history of the debate attempted to make a case for market-ing as an „art“.

• Details
• Contents