Ben M. Ellis, ?Deepening the Concept of Marketing,? Journal of Marketing, V.37, October 1973, pp. 57-62.
• Exchange is differentiated from other methods of want satisfaction: origination, force, or gift.

• Counterarguments of broadening the marketing concept:
- Marketing has a traditional domain and that these boundaries should be respected.
- Activities should be studied from the perspectives of their primary function.
- Transactions for which the exchange cannot be accurately determined should be excluded from the domain of marketing.

• The test of broadness of a concept should be its value in explaining the existence or behavior of phenomena in a given situation. Or marketing concepts should be employed where they are useful.
• Three dimensions along which the marketing concept can be “broadened”:
- Product (from economic goods and services to anything of value)
- Objective (from profit to any type of payoff)
- Target audience (from consumer to any public that relates to the organization).

• The author feels that the broadening the concept is not useful. If the broadening concept is to be useful in an operational sense, then it should provide means of answering such questions in more precise fashion.

• Deepening means relating abstract ideas to real marketing situations in ways that are useful for micro or macro decision making, or both. (Deepening entails developing operational marketing theories and testing them in real marketing situations.)

• Marketing theories and concepts can indeed be deepened, attained, and supported from academicians, researchers, managers, and editorial staffs.

Arndt, Johan, ?How Broad Should the Marketing Concept Be?? Journal of Marketing (January 1978), pp. 101-103.
Abstract
In evaluating the merits of the broadened marketing concept, the issue is not whether the marketing concept and techniques may be applied successfully to non-business areas, but whether such extracurricular applications should be treated as an integral part of marketing. Such a combined semantic and territorial expansion may threaten the conceptual integrity of marketing, add to the confusion in terminology, and widen the gult between marketing theory and practice. According to this study, marketing is: 1. The social process consisting of, 2. The conception, planning, and implementation of, 3. The total set of activities undertaken as exchanges by, 4. Individuals or organized groups of individuals being actors in the system, 5. In order to bring about the satisfaction of consumer needs for economic goods and services, and 6. The social and environmental effects of those activities.

The author feels that the broadened concept of marketing may turn out to be a blind alley for the discipline. He cites that it will have to imperialistically annex a large slice of what today is known as social anthropology and social psychology and also much of the sociology field.

The author mentions that not all exchanges are marketing exchanges. Marketing will cover only the resolving of the economic needs and wants in society. Marketing will not include exchanges in non-economic areas where participants are non-marketing institutions such as churches, or cultural agencies.

There is conceptual distinction between needs, wants, and demands, on the basis of their level of specificity. See Exhibit 1.
• Supply and demand are matched at the three different levels.

1) Need – the broadest and most basic physiological and psychological requirement for a person’s well-being.
Level of specificity: Low
Matching supply field: Product Group
Influencing factors: Need → Want: internal and external factors plus consumer resources

2) Want
Level of Specificity: Medium
Matching supply field: Product Class
Influencing factors: Want → Demand: internal and external factors plus consumer resources plus competitive influences

3) Demand
Level of Specificity: High
Matching supply field: Brand or Variant
Influencing factors: Competitive Influences

• The higher the level of specificity, the more direct competition, and more alternative competing for the scare resources of the consumer.

• More general level, more indirect and less obvious competition, but often no less important.

Exhibit 2: A Typology of Needs (Kotler’s Dichotomy Parallels)
Time dimension of needs: Short-run and Long-run
Locus of Needs: Individual and Collective
Quadrant 1: Individual VS Short-term: Immediate private needs
Quadrant 2: Individual VS Long-term: Long-run private needs
Quadrant 3: Collective VS Short-term: Immediate collective needs
Quadrant 4: Collective VS Long-term: Long-run collective needs

Marketing Is... ? Shelby Hunt
The call for broadening the marketing concept has forced academia to try and define what exactly is marketing. Hunt takes a philosophical perspective to justify marketing’s scope and appropriately place each marketing activity in the three dichotomies model.

Marketing is a university discipline,. A University is in the “knowledge” business. They manufacture, warehouse and retail knowledge.

Is Marketing is an applied discipline? Hunt argues that research in marketing that focuses on applying marketing knowledge to practical problems, is really market research (the areas of consulting, practitioners, etc.) Consulting research does not create new knowledge. Marketing to be a meaningful university discipline must create new knowledge. This distinguishes it from being wholly an applied discipline.

Is Marketing a Professional Discipline? Proponents argue that marketing research should focus on areas which, over the short and long run, will improve marketing practice and decision-making, and be useful to practitioners. A standard reply to this is that although research many not be relevant today it could become highly relevant in the future. Hunt believes that even as a professional discipline marketing’s ultimate responsibility is towards society and practitioners are only intermediaries. Society, in exchange for the freedom to pursue knowledge, demands objective knowledge that enhances understanding of phenomena. If intermediaries are enabled to make use of that knowledge, it is incidental.

What are Marketing’s Set of Responsibilities? Hunt believes marketing academics owe society the pursuit of objective knowledge ie. truth. Marketing also owes students of the profession, to practice (by supplying students) and to the university (upholding its core mission).

Marketing also prepares students by giving them a leg upon the socio-economic ladder.

Houston, Franklin and Jule B. Gassenheimer, ?Marketing and Exchange,? JM, October 1987.
• Marketing is the study of potency variation resulting from exchange, and exchange is engaged in by an individual for the enhancement of the potency of his or her assortment. Potency enhancement (need satisfaction) is the motivating force behind those human behaviors we call “marketing”. On the other hand, the driving force behind exchange is need satisfaction.

• Necessary and sufficient conditions for exchange:
Necessary conditions:
- at least 2 parties
- something of value
- capable of communication and delivery
- free to accept or reject the offer
- appropriate or desirable to deal with the other party

• The consequences or result of exchanges:
-action (the behaviors, or outward manifestations, in which the entities engage)
-experience (the psychological states that are a consequence of the exchange)
-outcome (the value received in the exchange exclusive of the preceding variables)

• Marketing might be described as the study of potency variation achieved through exchange processes, with exchange being described as the voluntary transfer of value from one entity’s assortment to another’s assortment for the purpose of enhancing the potency of one’s own assortment.

• Exchange relationships (relationship of social distance and reciprocity)
- Generalized reciprocity (e.g. family gift-giving) --- minimum social distance
- Balanced reciprocity (e.g. buying and selling in market) --- intermediate
- Negative reciprocity (e.g. bribery, theft, fraud) --- maximum

Bagozzi, Richard P., ?Social Exchange in Marketing,? Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, Fall, 1975, pp.314-327.
• Exchange is a fundamental and universal aspect of human behavior.
• Two exchange models has evolved are pure or economic exchange and social exchange.
1) Economic exchanges are limited to the buying and selling of material goods and services. The model emphasizes a laissez-faire atmosphere guided by “invisible hand”.
2) Social exchanges have broadened their scope to include virtually all modes of interaction. All sources of rewards and costs are considered crucial to exchange behavior.

• The author comments that the existing exchange model is atheoretical, unrealistic, narrow in applicability, and lacking in its depiction of important facets of man’s behavior.

• The exchange system is a set of social actors, their relationship to each other, and the endogenous and exogenous variables affecting the behavior of the social actors in those relationships.

• The performance of an actor is a function of the difference in role gratification and role strain:
P = f(RG – RS).

• There are 2 marketing behavior levels: micro level and macro level. As a component of the social system, marketing may be viewed as both a cause and consequence of social change.