Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Marketing doctoral programs have evolved to sustain and improve the contributions of the marketing discipline. This research reviews the state of marketing doctoral programs and reports the results of a survey of marketing doctoral directors. The global survey of 251 directors provides a benchmark for describing and evaluating the composition of doctoral programs. Reporting the number of methodology courses and substantive marketing seminars in programs provides the opportunity to reflect upon the importance of each area in preparing students to make a contribution to the discipline. Consumer behavior is the dominant area of concentration with digital marketing and marketing strategy a distant second. The results provide an important foundation in assessing current doctoral programs for directors and all stakeholders to evaluate their program content relevant to the findings.

Keywords

marketing theory marketing doctoral programs marketing scholarship marketing’s relevance marketing discipline drift doctoral program reform

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alderson

(1957). Marketing behavior and executive action. Richard D. Irwin, Inc.

Bartels

(1974). The identity crisis of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 38(4), 73–76.

Bearden

W. O.

Ellen

P. S.

Netemeyer

R. G.

(2000). Challenges and prospects facing doctoral education in marketing. Marketing Education Review, 10(1), 1–14.

Biggadike

R. E.

(1981). The contributions of marketing to strategic management. Academy of Management Review, 6(4), 621–631.

Clark

Key

T. M.

(2021). The methodologies of the marketing literature: Mechanics, uses and craft. AMS Review, 11(3), 416–431.

Clark

Key

T. M.

Azab

(2022). Marketing as an emergent discipline: Commentary on Shelby Hunt’s final contribution to our field. AMS Review, Springer, 12(3), 157–161.

Clark

Key

T. M.

Azab

(2023). Correction to: Marketing as an emergent discipline: Commentary on Shelby Hunt’s final contribution to our field. AMS Review, 13, 167.

Clark

Key

T. M.

Hodis

Rajaratnam

(2014). The intellectual ecology of mainstream marketing research: An inquiry into the place of marketing in the family of business disciplines. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42, 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-013-0362-5

Crittenden

Peterson

R. A.

(2011). Editorial. AMS Review, 1, 1–3.

10.

Eisend

(2015). Have we progressed marketing knowledge? A meta-meta-analysis of effect sizes in marketing research. Journal of Marketing, 79(3), 23–40.

11.

Elbeck

Vander Schee

B. A.

(2014). Global benchmarking of marketing doctoral program faculty and institutions by subarea. Journal of Marketing Education, 36(1), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475313514234

12.

Elhajjar

Yacoub

(2024). Social media research: We are publishing more but with weak influence. PLOS ONE, 19(2), e0297241. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0297241

13.

Fehrer

J. A.

(2020). Rethinking marketing: Back to purpose. AMS Review, 10, 179–184.

14.

Ferrell

O. C.

(2018). Marketing’s identity crisis: It’s complicated. AMS Review, 8(1), 30–38.

15.

Golder

P. N.

Dekimpe

M. G.

J. T.

van Heerde

H. J.

Kim

D. S. U.

Alba

J. W.

(2023). Learning from data: An empirics-first approach to relevant knowledge generation. Journal of Marketing, 87(3), 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429221129200

16.

Helkkula

Arnould

(2022). Developing and renewing marketing as a scientific discipline through reflexive cocreation. AMS Review, 12(3–4), 168–173.

17.

Hunt

S. D.

(2020). For re-institutionalizing the marketing discipline in Era V. AMS Review, 10(3), 189–198.

18.

Hunt

S. D.

Madhavaram

Hatfield

H. N.

(2022). The marketing discipline’s troubled trajectory: The manifesto conversation, candidates for central focus, and prognosis for renewal. AMS Review, 12, 139–156.

19.

Key

T. M.

Clark

Ferrell

O. C.

Stewart

D. W.

Pitt

(2020). Marketing’s theoretical and conceptual value proposition: Opportunities to address marketing’s influence. AMS Review, 1–17.

20.

Kumar

(2015). Evolution of the marketing discipline: What has happened and what to look out for. Journal of Marketing, 79(11), 1–4.

21.

Leeson

(2001). The eclipse of Keynesianism: The political economy of the Chicago counter-revolution. Palgrave.

22.

MacInnis

D. J.

(2011). A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 136–154. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.4.136

23.

Madhavaram

Hatfield

H. N.

(2022). Continuing the manifesto conversation: Toward building a renewal capability for the marketing discipline. AMS Review, 12(3), 188–195.

24.

McAlister

(2016). Rigor versus methodological imperialism. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(5), 565–567.

25.

Moorman

van Heerde

Moreau

C. P.

Palmatier

(2019). Challenging the boundaries of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 83(5).

26.

Mueller

(2010). Redeeming economics: Rediscovering the missing element. Intercollegiate Studies Institute.

27.

Ozanne

J. L.

Murray

J. B.

(1994). An experiential approach for developing conceptual skills in marketing doctoral students. Marketing Education Review, 4(3), 28–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.1994.11488467

28.

Ponder

Lueg

J. E.

(2004). Methodology training for doctoral students: A proposed three-course sequence. Marketing Education Review, 14(2), 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2004.11488866

29.

Price

L. L.

(2022). Folds in historical time and possible worlds for the marketing discipline: A commentary. AMS Review, 12, 162–167.

30.

Reibstein

D. J.

Day

Wind

(2009). Guest editorial: Is marketing academia losing its way? Journal of Marketing, 73(4), 1–3.

31.

Rutz

O. J.

Watson

G. F.

(2019). Endogeneity and marketing strategy research: An overview. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(3), 479–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00630-4

32.

Shaw

A. W.

(1912). Some problems in market distribution. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 26(4), 703–765.

33.

Shaw

E. H.

Jones

D. G. B.

(2005). A history of schools of marketing thought. Marketing Theory, 5(3), 239–281. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593105054898

34.

Sheth

Gardner

Garrett

(1988). Marketing theory: Evolution and evaluation (Wiley Theories in Marketing #12). Wiley.

35.

Stigler

G. J.

(1969). Does economics have a useful past? History of Political Economy, 1(2), 217–230.

36.

Stigler

G. J.

(1983). Nobel lecture: The process and progress of economics. Journal of Political Economy, 91(4), 529–545.

37.

Stigler

G. J.

(1988). Memoirs of an unregulated economist. Basic Books.

38.

Tamilia

R. D.

Ferrell

O. C.

Hopkins

(2020). Marketing channels and supply chain networks in North America: A historical analysis. Springer.

39.

Varadarajan

(2022). A general theory of marketing: Conceivable, elusive, or illusive. AMS Review, 12(3), 177–183.

40.

Vargo

S. L.

Koskela-Huotari

(2020). Advancing conceptual-only articles in marketing. AMS Review, 10, 1–5.

41.

Vargo

S. L.

Peters

Kjellberg

Koskela-Huotari

Nenonen

Polese

Sarno

Vaughan

(2023). Emergence in marketing: An institutional and ecosystem framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 51, 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-022-00849-8

42.

Wieland

Nariswari

Akaka

M. A.

(2021). On managerial relevance: Reconciling the academic-practitioner divide through market theorizing. AMS Review, 11, 252–271.

43.

Yadav

M. S.

(2010). The decline of conceptual articles and implications for knowledge development. Journal of Marketing, 74(1), 1–19.

44.

Yadav

M. S.

(2020). Reimagining marketing doctoral programs. AMS Review, 10(1), 56–64.

45.

Zeithaml

V. A.

Jaworski

B. J.

Kohli

A. K.

Tuli

K. R.

Ulaga

Zaltman

(2020). A theories-in-use approach to building marketing theory. Journal of Marketing, 84(1), 32–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919888477

The Current State of Marketing Doctoral Programs: Trends,Challenges,and Opportunities

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References