MARKETING’S BROADENING DEBATE – THIRTY YEARS LATER

Ricardo José de Ascensão Gouveia Rodrigues (rrodrigues@fenix.ubi.pt)
Universidade da Beira Interior
Departamento de Gestão e Economia
Estrada do Sineiro
6200 Covilhã
Portugal

Paulo Alexandre Oliveira Duarte (pduarte@fenix.ubi.pt)
Universidade da Beira Interior
Departamento de Gestão e Economia
Estrada do Sineiro
6200 Covilhã
Portugal

Mário Lino Barata Raposo (mraposo@alpha2.ubi.pt)
Universidade da Beira Interior
Departamento de Gestão e Economia
Estrada do Sineiro
6200 Covilhã
Portugal

ABSTRACT
In 1969, Kotler and Levy proposed that marketing should be more than a business
activity, and that it should have its scope expanded as to include nonbusiness
organizations. The arguments presented in “Broadening the Concept of Marketing”,
albeit clear-cut and logical, found resistance from some elements of the marketing
scientific community. After several years of debate, the broadened marketing concept
was eventually generally accepted by the marketing scientific community. Nowadays,
it is present in the major marketing manuals (e.g. Kotler & Armstrong, 1996; Stanton
& Futrell, 1994, etc.). But what do today’s marketers, marketing educators and
marketing students think about it?
The purpose of this paper is to assess the extent to which the broadened concept of
marketing has been accepted by the formerly referred groups. Results from three
countries are presented.

Keywords: marketing concept, marketing education, empirical study

2
1. INTRODUCTION
The domain of marketing underwent a number of changes through the years. The
reason for these changes is, according to Bartels (1974), due both to conceptual
aspects, through the introduction of new ideas in the definition of marketing; and to
perceptive aspects related to the applicability of the process of marketing to other
realities.
Until the late 60s, marketing was perceived as an activity/subject exclusively
business/economic-related, which is apparent in the way the American Marketing
Association defined marketing in 1960:
Marketing is the performance of business activities that direct the flow of goods
and services from producer to consumer or user.
At the end of the 60s, it happens what Bartels (1974) calls a perceptive change with
Kotler and Levi’s proposal to broaden the concept of marketing. This proposal
originated a debate reviewed in the next section. After that, the objectives and
hypotheses of this research are set forth. In the third section, we will explain the
methodology used to achieve the proposed goals, followed by the presentation and
discussion of results. Finally, the conclusions of the research are presented and the
limitations of the study are enunciated.
2. MARKETING’S BROADENING DEBATE
Having observed that during the 60s the nonbusiness organisations took on an
increasing role in the US society, Kotler and Levi (1969a) stated that the management
of such organisations was similar to that of businesses, and that nonbusiness
organisations perform all the classical business functions.
They also claim that all organisations (whether profit oriented or not) offer a
“product” to a given “consumer” and seek “tools” to improve its acceptance.
There can be various types of “products”: physical, services, people, organisations or
ideas. As for the “consumers”, there are several publics interested in the products of a
business: suppliers – employees, raw material suppliers, banks, advertisement

3
agencies and consultants –; and consumers as such – clients, directors/administrators,
active audiences, and public in general. The tools used are those of the marketing.
Assuming that organisations are established to act according the interests of particular
groups and that these interests are better served with resort to marketing, Kotler and
Levi (1969a) argue that nonbusiness organisations can not choose between whether to
use marketing given that it is inevitable. They can only opt to use either in a right or in
a mediocre way.
In the same issue in which Kotler and Levi (1969a) defend broadening the domain of
marketing to the nonbusiness organisations, Lazer (1969) also suggests that the new
limits of marketing lie in non-profit markets.
However, for Luck (1969), the broadening is not desirable. This author argues that
according to Kotler and Levi’s (1969a) claims, if someone performs a task in any way
similar to marketing then that is marketing. Therefore, marketing becomes almost
universal and looses its identity.
Luck (1969) proposes that the domain of marketing be confined to the activities the
ultimate goal of which is the market transaction. Marketing should focus on the
market and what characterises markets is buying and selling.
Another of Luck’s arguments is the lack of a specific quid pro quo (something that is
given or received in exchange for another thing), as well as of price and terms of
exchange.
Kotler and Levi’s (1969a) answer to these criticisms did not take long. In their
opinion confining marketing to market transactions is limitative due to two reasons: it
prevented the marketing students to contribute to the sector of society that was
growing the most; and it also prevented the business marketing to be enriched by the
same processes applied to other contexts. As far as the authors are concerned not
expanding the concept of marketing limits both the business and the non-profit sector.
In relation to the absence of a specific quid pro quo, Kotler and Levi (1969a) state that
the crucial point of marketing lies in a general idea of exchange as opposed to a more
restricted idea of market transaction – exchange of a product by another, a product by

4
a service, or either a product or a service for money. They conclude that marketing
describes the efforts made to earn the support of others through the offer of value.
This broad concept of marketing was rapidly adopted by the US marketing academics,
even, according to Graham (1993), with less critical spirit than was to be expected.
Besides discussing the new found role of marketing at the 1970 Autumn Conference
of the American Marketing Association, the July 1971 issue of the Journal of
Marketing was exclusively devoted to its new applications – population problems
(Farley and Leavitt, 1971), social welfare (Feldman, 1971), promotion of social
objectives such as family planning, brotherhood or safe driving (Kotler and Zaltman,
1971), fund raising (Mindak and Bybee, 1971), health services (Zaltman and
Vertinsky, 1971) or recycling solid waste (Zinkmund and Stanton, 1971).
In 1972, Kotler argued that, as far as the boundaries of marketing are concerned, there
are three stages of consciousness:
1. Marketing is essentially a business activity;
2. Marketing is appropriate for all organisations that offer a product (understood
as something of worth to someone), even though no price is demanded;
3. Marketing conforms the attempts made by the organisations to relate to all
their publics. This is the “generic concept of marketing”.
Kotler (1972) also made a small conceptual adaptation in relation to his previous work
(Kotler and Levi, 1969a), arguing that the base concept of marketing is the transaction
(the way how transactions are created, encouraged, made available and valued).
Some other criticisms were still made to the expansion. Luck (1974) mentioned that
any action with a social goal falls in the domain of marketing and therefore marketing
includes almost everything. The same is also stated by Bartels (1974) who adds that if
everything were marketing, then what, until that point, was understood as marketing
would reappear under another name. This author also claims that due to the
broadening, the methodology replaced, in some way, the substance in the content of
the knowledge of marketing.

5
However, Nichols (1974), in a study to marketing educators, concludes that 95% of
the respondents understood that the domain of marketing should include the
nonbusiness organisations; 93% thought that marketing goes beyond economic goods
and services; and 83% agreed that the domain of marketing should include many
activities the final result of which is not a market transaction.
The formalisation of the “victory” of the broadening occurs in 1976, when Hunt
proposes a theoretical framework – the triple-dichotomy model – to include the
broadening. According to Hunt (1976), the domain of marketing has three dimensions
– it can be positive or normative; micro or macro; profit or non-profit.
3. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND HYPOTHESES
The objective of this research is to determine up to which point marketing educators,
practitioners and students are in agreement with it.
According to Kotler and Levi (1969b), the domain, methods and objectives of any
subject are determined by tradition rather than by any other thing intrinsic to its name.
In this sense, given that Kotler is the proponent and supporter of the broadening, he is
also author and co-author of the most important guidebooks on marketing (Kotler and
Armstrong, 2001; Kotler, Armstrong, Saunders and Wong, 1999; to name but a few)
written over the last 30 years. It is expected that everyone who learns marketing has
already interiorised the expansion. This leads us to the first research hypothesis,
which is:
H1: The broadening of the concept of marketing was accepted by marketing students,
practitioners and educators.
On the other hand, it is to be expected that different professional experiences (or the
lack of it, in the students’ case) will lead to different views on the domain of
marketing – practitioners will have more contacts with business marketing whereas
educators and students will be more influenced by the academic literature of
marketing (especially the former). It is important to test if:

6
H2: Marketing students, practitioners and educators respond differently to the
broadening.
Other aspect to take into consideration is that the debate took place in the US, where
the economy and competition were different from the rest of the world, namely in
what respects the economic and social importance of the nonbusiness sector. It can be
expected that respondents with different geographical origins have different opinion
on the broadening of the marketing concept. The third research hypothesis is:
H3: The acceptance of the broadening of the marketing concept has different degrees
according to the geographical origin of the respondent.
Next, the methodology used for testing the hypotheses set forth is explained.
4. METHODOLOGY
With the aim of enquiring marketing practitioners, students and educators, a
questionnaire was developed in which the variables are measured with resort to Likert
(1932) five point scaling, ranging from one – strongly disagree – to five – strongly
agree. It is to be noted, however, that questions ? and ? are presented on a reverse
scale; i.e., the statement means the opposite of what is asked. This practice is
desirable when using Likert scaling.
The instrument of data collection was pre-tested in various publics and problems
related to the comprehension of some questions were identified and promptly
corrected. Given that the adjustments were minor, it was not deemed necessary to
conduct a second pre-test. After this phase, the questionnaire initially written in
Portuguese was translated to English and Spanish in order to allow collecting the
answers of the target groups from each country.
The questionnaire was divulgated by electronic mail. A database containing 1754 e-
mail addresses of teachers from higher education institutions in Portugal, Spain and
Brazil was used. These teachers were asked to fill in a questionnaire and to divulgate
it among their students. Adding to this list, a request to collaborate in this research
was also posted in two moderated electronic mail networks owned by the American
Marketing Association: Elmar and Mkt-PhD.

7
To contact the Marketing practitioners, we requested the collaboration of the
Portuguese Association of Marketing Practitioners (APPM) that was asked to post e-
mails to its members, divulgating the research and the questionnaire.
Bearing in mind the difficulties of enquiring the three groups, it was decided to use
the Internet as a means of distributing the questionnaire and collecting the answers.
To receive the answers, a page was created on the site of the Department of
Management and Economics of the University of Beira Interior1.
The following section deals with the explanation of the analysis of the information
collected as well as the results achieved.
5. RESULTS
5.1. Characterizing the respondents
Until the 4th of February, 284 responses were obtained, but 67 were eliminated from
the analysis, once the respondents were not marketing educators, students or
professionals. This resulted in 217 valid responses.
The geographical origin of the respondents is shown on Table 1.
Table 1 - Geographical origin of the respondents
Geographical
Origin Frequency Percent
Portugal 94 43,3
Spain 37 17,1
Brazil 29 13,4
USA 25 11,5
Rest of Europe 20 9,2
Rest of the World 12 5,5
Total 217 100,0

Table 2 shows the type of respondent (educator, professional or student). All the
student respondents have studied marketing, and all professional respondents have at
least a bachelor degree.

1 Available at: http://www.dge.ubi.pt/pduarte/cem/marketing.htm

8
Table 2 – Type of respondent
Frequency Percent
Student 72 33,2
Professional 38 17,5
Educator 107 49,3
Total 217 100,0

The age of respondents is shown on Table 3.
Table 3 – Age of respondents
Age Frequency Percent
0-20 3 1,4
21-30 101 46,5
31-40 64 29,5
41-50 41 18,9
51+ 8 3,7
Total 217 100,0

The great majority of the respondents (96,3%) have studied after the broadening
debate, when Kotler’s marketing manuals (which included the broadened concept)
were being used in marketing courses.
5.2. Presentation and discussion of the results
The values presented on Table 4 allow the test of H1.
Table 4 – Means and standard deviations
Variable Mean Std. Deviation
Marketing is essentially a business activity 2,42 1,369
Marketing is as important in nonbusiness organisations as it is in
firms 4,30 1,062
Marketing is only relevant in some nonbusiness organisations 2,25 1,292
Marketing techniques help nonbusiness organisations to meet its
objectives 4,22 0,970
Business marketing is very different from nonbusiness marketing 2,98 1,151

9
Table 5 - Test of Homogeneity of Variances by relationship with marketing
Variable Levene Statistic Sig.
Marketing is essentially a business activity 6,825 0,001
Marketing is as important in nonbusiness organisations
as it is in firms 0,183 0,833
Marketing is only relevant in some nonbusiness
organisations 3,721 0,026
Marketing techniques help nonbusiness organisations to
meet its objectives 0,622 0,538
Business marketing is very different from nonbusiness
marketing 0,169 0,845

Table 6 – Analysis of variance by relationship with marketing
Variable F Statistic Sig.
Marketing is essentially a business activity 6,859 0,001
Marketing is as important in nonbusiness organisations
as it is in firms 0,040 0,961
Marketing is only relevant in some nonbusiness
organisations 4,358 0,014
Marketing techniques help nonbusiness organisations to
meet its objectives 1,596 0,205
Business marketing is very different from nonbusiness
marketing 3,922 0,021

10
Table 7– Means and standard deviations by relationship with marketing
Note: standard deviation between parentheses.

Table 8– Differences in means by relationship with marketing
Note: significance level 0,05

Variable
Marketing
Students
(n=72)
Marketing
Professionals
(n=38)
Marketing
Educators
(n=107)
Sample
(n=217)
Marketing is essentially a
business activity
2.76
(1.468)
2.74
(1.408)
2.08
(1.206)
2.42
(1.369)
Marketing is as important in
nonbusiness organisations as it is
in firms
4.29
(0.985)
4.26
(1.057)
4.32
(1.121)
4.30
(1.062)
Marketing is only relevant in
some nonbusiness organisations
2.49
(1.374)
2.53
(1.310)
1.99
(1.186)
2.25
(1.292)
Marketing techniques help
nonbusiness organisations to
meet its objectives
4.14
(1.011)
4.05
(1.038)
4.34
(0.911)
4.22
(0.970)
Business marketing is very
different from nonbusiness
marketing
3.28
(1.116)
2.95
(1.184)
2.79
(1.131)
2.98
(1.151)
Variable Educators vs. Students
Educators vs.
Professionals
Professionals
vs. Students
Marketing is essentially a business
activity   n.s.
Marketing is as important in
nonbusiness organisations as it is in
firms
n.s. n.s. n.s.
Marketing is only relevant in some
nonbusiness organisations   n.s.
Marketing techniques help
nonbusiness organisations to meet its
objectives
n.s. n.s. n.s.
Business marketing is very different
from nonbusiness marketing n.s.  n.s.

11

Table 9 - Test of Homogeneity of Variances by geographic origin
Variable Levene Statistic Sig.
Marketing is essent ially a business activity 5,566 0,000
Marketing is as important in nonbusiness organisations
as it is in firms 1,086 0,369
Marketing is only relevant in some nonbusiness
organisations 1,092 0,366
Marketing techniques help nonbusiness organisations to
meet its objectives 0,676 0,642
Business marketing is very different from nonbusiness
marketing 1,052 0,388

Table 10 – Analysis of variance by geographic origin
Variable F Statistic Sig.
Marketing is essentially a business activity 2,175 0,058
Marketing is as important in nonbusiness organisations
as it is in firms 0,754 0,584
Marketing is only relevant in some nonbusiness
organisations 1,825 0,109
Marketing techniques help nonbusiness organisations to
meet its objectives 0,904 0,479
Business marketing is very different from nonbusiness
marketing 3,869 0,002

12
Table 11– Means and standard deviations by geographic origin
Note: standard deviation between parentheses.

Variable Portugal (n=94)
Spain
(n=37)
Brazil
(n=29)
USA
(n=25)
Rest of
Europe
(n=20)
Rest of
the World
(n=12)
Sample
(n=217)
Marketing is
essentially a
business activity
2,69
(1,399)
2,43
(1,237)
2,41
(1,637)
1,84
(0,898)
1,95
(1,276)
2,33
(1,435)
2,42
(1,369)
Marketing is as
important in
nonbusiness
organisations as
it is in firms
4,17
(1,132)
4,3
(1,102)
4,41
(1,086)
4,6
(0,866)
4,35
(0,988)
4,33
(0,778)
4,3
(1,062)
Marketing is only
relevant in some
nonbusiness
organisations
2,46
(1,276)
2,05
(1,311)
2,17
(1,466)
1,72
(1,021)
2,15
(1,268)
2,67
(1,231)
2,25
(1,292)
Marketing
techniques help
nonbusiness
organisations to
meet its
objectives
4,2
(0,99)
4,38
(1,01)
4,38
(1,083)
4,24
(0,779)
3,95
(0,826)
3,92
(0,996)
4,22
(0,97)
Business
marketing is very
different from
nonbusiness
marketing
3,33
(1,121)
2,62
(0,953)
3,03
(1,267)
2,6
(1,08)
2,6
(1,188)
2,67
(1,073)
2,98
(1,151)

13
Table 12– Differences in means by geographic origin
Notes: significance level 0,1
P-Portugal; S-Spain; B-Brazil; U-Unites States; E-Rest of Europe; W-Rest of
the World
Variable P-S P-B P-U P-E P-W S-B S-U S-E S-W B-U B-E B-W U-E U-W E-W
Marketing is
essentially a
business activity
n.s. n.s.   n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.
Marketing is as
important in
nonbusiness
organisations as
it is in firms
n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.
Marketing is
only relevant in
some
nonbusiness
organisations
n.s. n.s.  n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.  n.s.
Marketing
techniques help
nonbusiness
organisations to
meet its
objectives
n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.
Business
marketing is
very different
from
nonbusiness
marketing
 n.s.    n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s. n.s.

14
As respostas à questão Erro! A origem da referência não foi encontrada., que
conforme foi referido está em escala invertida, sugerem uma discordância geral em
relação ao carácter exclusivamente empresarial do marketing. Os respondentes
entendem que as ONL também fazem parte do objecto de estudo do marketing, o que
é concordante com o alargamento do conceito de marketing.
No entanto, o valor médio da variável (2,70) não se afasta muito da neutralidade
(3,00), o que sugere que a convicção de que o marketing não é uma actividade
exclusivamente empresarial não é muito profunda ou completa. Note-se que é uma
variável com uma variabilidade significativa (desvio padrão de 1,41), o que indica que
o leque de opiniões é bastante diversificado (as respostas variam entre o
Completamente de Acordo e o Completamente em Desacordo).
Por outro lado, o resultado da questão Erro! A origem da referência não foi
encontrada. (média de 4,16) indica que na opinião dos respondentes, o marketing é
tão importante para as ONL como para as empresas. A menor variabilidade das
respostas sugere um maior consenso que na questão anterior.
Para além de considerarem o marketing importante para as ONL, os respondentes
entendem que o marketing serve a todas as ONL. O marketing aplica-se a escolas,
câmaras municipais, ministérios, bibliotecas, hospitais públicos, fundações, corpos de
polícia, ou ainda à UNICEF ou ao Instituto Português do Sangue, como indicam as
respostas à questão Erro! A origem da referência não foi encontrada..
O elevado valor da média da questão Erro! A origem da referência não foi
encontrada. (4,18), bem como a pequena variabilidade que lhe está associada (desvio
padrão 0,99) sugerem que os respondentes têm poucas dúvidas quanto à utilidade do
marketing na eficácia das ONL. As técnicas de marketing são consideradas pelos
respondentes como facilitadoras do alcance dos objectivos (não financeiros nem
económicos) das ONL.
Finalmente, a questão Erro! A origem da referência não foi encontrada. indicia
que os respondentes, embora de forma não demasiado convicta (média de 3,30), vêem
o marketing das ONL como sendo bastante diferente do marketing empresarial.
Numa análise global, as respostas a estas questões apontam no sentido de os
respondentes entenderem que o marketing não é uma actividade exclusiva das
empresas, e que é útil a todas as ONL e uma vez que todas as respostas convergem,
não se rejeita a hipótese de investigação H1.
Para testar a hipótese de investigação H2 realizou-se uma análise da variância às cinco
variáveis referidas no Erro! A origem da referência não foi encontrada., sendo a
amostra dividida em três grupos: estudantes, profissionais e educadores.
Para testar a homogeneidade da variância das variáveis ao longo dos grupos (condição
necessária a este tipo de análise – Norusis, 1993) efectuou-se o teste de Levene (Erro!
A origem da referência não foi encontrada.), o qual conduziu a que a hipótese de
diferenças na variância fosse rejeitada para todas as cinco variáveis.

15
Para melhor compreender estas diferenças realizou-se o teste post-hoc de Duncan para
um nível de significância de 0,05. Este teste permite determinar, para cada variável, os
grupos cujas médias são estatisticamente diferentes das médias dos restantes grupos.
Relativamente à questão 1, a média dos educadores é estatisticamente inferior à média
dos estudantes. Note-se que a média dos estudantes nesta questão é algo superior a 3,
o que sugere que, os estudantes concordam ligeiramente com a natureza empresarial
do marketing, enquanto os educadores discordam claramente. Os profissionais de
marketing têm uma posição neutra, que não é estatisticamente diferente de nenhum
dos outros grupos.
Na questão 3, a média dos educadores é estatisticamente inferior às médias dos outros
dois grupos, indicando que este grupo é o mais convencido da aplicabilidade universal
do marketing nas ONL.
No que toca à questão 5, a média dos profissionais de marketing é estatisticamente
inferior às médias dos outros dois grupos. A interpretação destes resultados indica que
educadores e estudantes estão convencidos de que o marketing das empresas é
bastante diferente do marketing das ONL, enquanto os profissionais de marketing
pensam o contrário.
Tendo em conta estes resultados não se rejeita a hipótese de investigação H2.
Conclusões, limitações
O objectivo desta investigação foi avaliar até que ponto educadores, profissionais e
educadores de marketing concordam com o alargamento do âmbito do marketing
resultante do debate dos finais da década de 1960.
Os resultados indicam que há uma concordância generalizada com o alargamento,
embora os vários grupos encarem o alargamento de formas diferentes.
Os estudantes tendem a acreditar na natureza empresarial do marketing, ainda que
entendam que o marketing é tão importante nas empresas como nas ONL (em todas
elas), e que estas conseguem atingir os seus objectivos mais facilmente utilizando o
marketing. Talvez esta aparente incoerência se deva a um ensino do marketing
demasiado empresarial, isto é, principalmente apoiado na realidade das empresas (até
porque esta é bastante profícua em exemplos interessantes) com algum esquecimento
das organizações não lucrativas.
Os educadores são os que mais estão convencidos de que o marketing não é exclusivo
das empresas, e que é aplicável a todas as ONL.
Os profissionais de marketing, ao contrário de educadores e estudantes, entendem que
o marketing das empresas não é diferente do das ONL.
Estas conclusões devem ser lidas com a devida cautela, uma vez que o estudo
apresenta algumas limitações, nomeadamente o tamanho da amostra, que é bastante
pequeno e o meio utilizado para administrar o questionário.

16
6. Bibliography
Bartels, Robert, (1974), “The Identity Crisis in Marketing”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 38, October, pp. 73-76
Farley, John U. e Harold J. Leavitt, (1971), “Marketing and Population Problems”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 28-33
Feldman, Laurence P., (1971), “Societal Adaptation: a New Challenge for
Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 54-60
Graham, Peter, (1993), “Marketing’s domain: A Critical Review of the Development
of the marketing Concept”, Marketing Bulletin, Vol. 4, pp. 1-11
Hunt, Shelby D., (1976), “The Nature and Scope of Marketing”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 40, July, pp. 17-28
Kassarjian, Harold H., (1971), “Incorporating Ecology into Marketing Strategy: The
Case of Air Pollution”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 61-65
Kotler, Philip, (1972), “A Generic Concept of Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, Vol.
36, April, pp. 46-54
Kotler, Philip e Gerald Zaltman, (1971), “Social Marketing: An Approach to Planned
Social Change”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 3-12
Kotler, Philip e Sidney J. Levy, (1969a), “Broadening the Concept of Marketing”,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, Jan, pp. 10-15
Kotler, Philip e Sidney J. Levy, (1969b), “A New Form of Marketing Myopia:
Rejoinder to Professor Luck”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, July, pp. 55-57
Kotler, Philip e Gary Armstrong, (2001), Principles of Marketing – International
Edition, 9th Ed, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Kotler, Philip; Gary Armstrong; John Saunders e Veronica Wong, (1999), Principles
of Marketing – European Edition, 2nd Ed, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Lazer, William, (1969), “Marketing's Changing Social Relationships”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 33, January, pp. 3-9
Likert, R., (1932), “A method of constructing an attitude scale”, in Fishbein, M (Ed.)
(1967), Readings in Attitude Theory and Measurement, New York: John Wiley
Luck, David J., (1969), “Broadening the Concept of marketing - Too Far”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 33, July, pp. 53-55
Luck, David J., (1974), “Social Marketing: Confusion Compounded”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 38, October, pp. 70-72
Mindak, William e H. Malcom Bybee, (1971), “Marketing's Application to Fund
Raising”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 13-18

17
Nichols, W.G., (1974), “Conceptual Conflicts in Marketing”, Journal of Economics
and Business, Vol. 26, Winter, p. 142
Norusis, Marija J., (1993), SPSS for Windows – Professional Statistics, Chicago:
SPSS
Stanton, William e Charles Futrell, (1994), Fundamentals of Marketing, McGraw-
Hill.
Zaltman, Gerald e Ilan Vertinsky, (1971), “Health Services Marketing: A Suggested
Model”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 19-27
Zikmund, William G. e William J. Stanton, (1971), “Recycling solid Wastes: A
Channels-of-Distribution Problem”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 28-33