Pricing education in the United States of America: responding to the needs of business
| Date | 01 August 1998 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/10610429810229861 |
| Pages | 336-341 |
| Published date | 01 August 1998 |
| Author | Sarah Maxwell |
| Subject Matter | Marketing |
336 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT & BRAND MANAGEMENT, VOL. 7 NO. 4 1998, pp. 336-341 © MCB UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1061-0421
All four Ps are essential to the marketing mix. In fact, they are interdependent. But
is any one more important than the other three? Generally speaking, the answer is
no. (McCarthy, 1978, p. 43)
Despite McCarthy’s claim of equal importance for all the four Ps, price has
tended to receive less attention from marketing educators in the USA. New
evidence, however, indicates that price is beginning to receive more
equitable treatment. It appears that both the earlier lack of interest and the
current resurgence of interest are due to marketing educators responding to
the changing needs of business.
Background
In 1964, Udell reported that only 50 percent of the 135 business managers
surveyed considered pricing to be one of the top five factors of marketing
success. He explained the lack of interest as being due to “the relatively
well-to-do consumers of today (who) are interested in more than just price.
They are interested in product quality, distinctiveness, style and many other
factors which lead to both physical and psychological satisfaction” (Udell,
1964, p. 45).
Responding to the non-price concerns of their customers, businesses in the
1960s focussed on the other elements of the marketing mix. For example, in
a contemporary Harvard Business Review article (Sampson, 1964, p. 105),
the author presented the many “desensitizing factors” which would diminish
the impact of price changes so that “moving up from a low price position is
perhaps safer than we thought.” Responding to the non-price concerns of
business, marketing educators focussed on these desensitizing factors, a
focus which lasted for the next three decades.
The lack of attention to pricing in US marketing education has been
demonstrated by the dearth of upper level courses in pricing. A study by
Snyder and Stanley (1990) of 250 marketing programs indicated that less
than 4 percent included a course in pricing. A subsequent survey of the
marketing courses offered at more than 150 accredited business schools
(Kellerman et al., 1991) indicated that only 1 percent of the courses was on
pricing, considerably fewer than the 70 percent of courses on promotion and
the 25 percent on distribution.
The continuing low priority of pricing in marketing education was
confirmed in a recent study in which academics rated as essential courses in
Marketing Research, Consumer Behavior and Advertising, but not courses in
Pricing (Dodds, 1997). On a five-point scale (1 = essential; 5 = would not be
missed), “product and price management” had a mean rating of 3.52 (s.d.
1.19) and “price management” had a mean rating of 3.76 (s.d. 1.04).
PRICING STRATEGY & PRACTICE
Pricing education in the United
States of America: responding to
the needs of business
Sarah Maxwell
Assistant Professor of Marketing, Graduate School of Business,
Fordham University, New York, USA
This research was made possible by a grant to the Fordham Pricing Center.
Non-price concerns
To continue reading
Request your trial