Commentary

Marketing Theory
11(4) 503–505
The double helix of ª The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
marketing: The DOI: 10.1177/1470593111418805
mtq.sagepub.com
complementary
relationship between
marketing history and
marketing theory

Jagdish N. Sheth
Emory University, USA

Abstract
This brief note explores the complementary relationship between the history of both marketing
thought and marketing practice and the development of marketing theory, a relationship best
described as a double helix.

Keywords
double helix of marketing, marketing history, marketing theory

The history of marketing thought and the development of marketing theory are inherently
intertwined like the double helix in biology. In other words, marketing theory is shaped by mar-
keting history and at the same time, marketing theory shapes the history of marketing.
This is for at least three reasons. First, marketing as a discipline and practice is contextual
(Sheth and Sisodia, 1999). As the market context changes so do the perspectives and the prac-
tices. Markets are defined as the interplay between customers, competition and the marketer. All
three entities change their market engagement over time and sometimes abruptly. For example
competition has become more global with the liberalization of markets and the reduction of
trade, investment and tariff regulations. Competition from multinationals headquartered in
emerging economies such as China, India, Russia and Brazil is reshaping markets. Similarly,
customers are changing due to demographic shifts such as an aging population and the growth of
working women households. Aging redefines market needs and working women households
redefine resources.

Corresponding author:
Jagdish N. Sheth, Goizueta Business School, 1300 Clifton Road, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
email: jag@jagsheth.com

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on June 30, 2015

504 Marketing Theory 11(4)

Finally, the marketer also changes its market offerings and its market approaches over time. New
products, new price bundles, new advertising claims and new channels are invested and marketed.
Change in the context redefines marketing history and encourages development of new
concepts for marketing theory often resulting in a paradigm shift. In Marketing Theory: Evo-
lution and Evaluation, Sheth et al. (1988) articulated how 12 schools of marketing thought
historically emerged as a consequence of market evolution, ranging from the commodity, the
functional and institutional theories of marketing, to buyer behavior, inter-organization, and
managerial schools of thought.
And the journey has continued. Since the 1980s, at least three new marketing perspectives have
emerged: market orientation, competitive strategy and relationship marketing. Each one has made
a significant contribution toward theory development.
Second, markets are more complex than the universe. This sounds preposterous but it is true.
The universe seems to be bound together by only two key perspectives: relativity and rebirth.
Understanding markets, on the other hand, calls to mind the proverbial five blind men and the
elephant. Unlike the universe, markets are defined and understood from multiple perspectives:
each one is correct in its own right because it is validated either by face validity or by empirical
support. For example scholars have developed a product perspective (if you build it, they will
come) often useful in technology-driven industry. Examples include the internet; cell phones espe-
cially in emerging markets; the iPod in the music industry; and the Kindle in e-books.
Similarly, another group of scholars has developed a customer centricity perspective, with
compelling logic and empirical support from the superior financial performance delivered to the
marketer. Finally, we are now taking a societal perspective or what is referred to as the triple
bottom line (profit, planet and people) redefining the role and purpose of marketing. It seems that
all three perspectives are right, and, therefore, we end up saying ‘it depends’. In short, context
matters and pluralistic perspectives are welcome.
A third dimension of the market is that it is more unpredictable than the weather. Markets fool
the best of market researchers and the best of marketing managers. For example 65% of all market
successes are by accident and 30% succeed despite flaws in the original marketing plans. In other
words, if the marketer had followed the playbook, the new product would have failed. However,
the company had the courage and the capability to improvise and adapt which resulted in mar-
keting success by accident. Examples include the Mustang car, social media and on-line shopping.
Unpredictability of market outcomes does not allow dogma to prevail. It encourages impro-
visation and a willingness to embrace new concepts and new realities. For example with the rise of
emerging markets such as China and India, we are now questioning the traditional colonial mindset
in marketing and instead, inventing, discovering or designing new products anchored to new
marketing objectives of affordability and accessibility (Immelt et al. 2009). We are also rethinking
whether such fundamental marketing concepts as differential advantage, market segmentation and
resource advantage are useful for emerging markets.
Does marketing history shape marketing theory or vice versa? The answer is yes, just as atti-
tudes shape behavior and behavior shapes attitudes. It is the age-old chicken and egg question. The
answer is the complementary relationship between marketing theory and history of marketing: the
double helix of marketing.

References
Immelt, J., Govindrajan, V. and Trimble, C. (2009) ‘How GE is Disrupting Itself’, Harvard Business Review
87(October): 56–65.

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on June 30, 2015

Sheth 505

Sheth, J.N. and Sisodia, R.S. (1999) ‘Revisiting Lawlike Generalizations’, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 27(Winter): 71–87.
Sheth, J.N., Gardner, D. and Garrett, D. (1988) Marketing Theory: Evolution and Evaluation. New York: John
Wiley.

Jagdish N. Sheth is the Charles H. Kellstadt Professor of Marketing in the Goizueta Business School
at Emory University, Georgia, USA. Before joining Emory, he had taught at the University of Southern
California, the University of Illinois, Columbia University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Professor Sheth is universally recognized for his scholarly contributions in the fields of consumer behavior,
relationship marketing, competitive strategy and geopolitical analysis. He has published more than 200 books
and research papers in different areas of marketing and business strategy. Many of these are considered classic
sources. In addition to being a prolific author and the recipient of prestigious academic awards, Professor
Sheth has consulted for numerous industries and corporations in the United States, Europe and Asia.
[email: jag@jagsheth.com]

Downloaded from mtq.sagepub.com at UNIVERSITE LAVAL on June 30, 2015