Vargo, Stephen L., and Robert F. Lusch."Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing.

" Journal of
marketing 68.1 (2004): 1-17.
Critique Prepared by: Farhana Nusrat

This article discusses the evolution of marketing and how it has changed over time. The authors begin
their discussion with the 1900’s and move through the decades to the twentieth century and discuss how
marketing has changed from a good-dominant logic to a service-dominant logic. The article describes how
many theories of Marketing were based on different models formed in the nineteenth century when the
focus was efficiency in the production of output. However, since the nineteenth century, this view has
changed. The article portrays how Marketing has since evolved from that mind set to a more service
centered logic. In this new era, producers are now focusing on customizing offerings and striving to
maximize consumer involvement. This shift of marketing process from producer to consumer helps to
address the consumers, and develops a way to better fit those needs.
This article helped me to have an historical approach and a first view on the development of marketing
schemes. However, I felt that in their way to explain how many theories of Marketing were derived from
Economics, the authors made this paper more inclined to Economics than to Marketing. Use of several
quotations related to Economics, relation between goods and services, and the examples used to explain
different logics made me think of it more of an Economics based article at some points.
The article is a good synthesis of several arenas of Marketing and Economics. The authors confirmed
several theories that I already assumed to be true, and helped me get a more in-depth knowledge on
those theories. Though it was not too complex in most parts, I had trouble understanding some of the
points the authors emphasized. While establishing the theories, the authors did not provide the details of
their reasoning and relevant examples which I believe would have been very helpful for me as a reader.
The authors have used a different approach from traditional ones in this article for their analysis. How the
authors attempted on identifying truths with rational arguments was a new approach to me. Though I
agree with the thinking of the authors in most points, the lack of empirical evidence made me confused
about the findings few times. The authors came up with eight foundational premises (FPs) in the study,
but they did not present any empirical or any other kind of evidence to support those premises. I felt that
their premises could have built stronger message, if they included empirical perspectives of the theories
along with the presented literature reviews and relevant assumptions.
Also, In this article, the authors criticize the marketing scholars which stay with the 4P system. They
mentioned how they find this concept outdated, and how they believe the marketing school must evolve
and follow the service-centered view. I agree with the authors in this point to some extent. However, I
feel that permanently excluding the 4P concept might not be a good idea as well. I believe in the future;
various prospects might appear in the business world where analyzing the situation with 4P for the
starters will help the marketers to proceed further.
In conclusion, I would like to say that reading this article was a learning experience for me as it exposed
me to a new concept of conducting research – i.e. concept based theoretical research. I believe some of
my concerns/questions will be answered when we discuss the article in the class.