Brilliant observation! There's a rock solid case of positive ROI in pounds and pence.

Thanks for commenting.

I suppose the suitability and sufficiency of any definition depends upon how well it comports with reality. For the purposes of Trey\'s Definition of Marketing, we may gauge reality somewhat by posing a few questions:

1. Is your marketplace made up of people you already know and those you don\'t know? (addresses the not-stranger/stranger component)

2. Is there ever a change in state between stranger/not-stranger and does it reoccur? (if there\'s a change of state that customarily happens, that addresses the \"process\" component)

3. Do prospects or customers interact with you more than once? (this addresses both the \"ongoing\" and \"engagement\" component; for all these questions, kind, quality, quantity, are all variables you supply; at least the definition serves as a reference marker for your discovery)

4. Do your not-strangers ever communicate anything about you to third parties? If they do, do you want them to communicate something good about you? (thus addressing the \"advocacy\" component; so, yes, there are both descriptive and normative elements within Trey\'s Definition of Marketing; that\'s as it should be)

5. Do strangers know your product, service, good, etc. exactly satisfies their problem the very first time they encounter you? Or, do strangers need more than one contact to go from being unaware of you to concluding a transaction? (thus addressing the nurturing component)

Seems like Trey\'s Definition of Marketing might just help you organize, analyze, and communicate your marketing plans.

Have fun.

Thanks for stopping by and commenting. You made me wonder, "what's the definition of 'manufacturing' or 'medicine.'" Then, when I returned to the definition of marketing coupled with your questions, I pictured the endless Amazon search results for the keyword "marketing." Also made me recall the definition of "theology": the study of God. Though the definition is sound it hardly answers all the questions. (In fact, it actually seems to be only the starting point of a whole lot of questions, for to sufficiently answer the question, one must grapple with metaphysics, epistomology, and ethics. Whew, that'd take a while.)

The anecdotal feedback I get from audiences whenever I use Trey's Definition of Marketing suggests that they're at least mildly satisfied with it. Now it's up to practitioners to make dynamic application of the definition as it suits their circumstances and purposes.

No matter what context you're facing, there are people you know (not-strangers) and people you don't know (strangers). Chances are, you probably need more people in the not-strangers category. For strangers to cross the unknown chasm, someone has to do something, therefore there must be some kind of process bridging strangerdom to not-strangerdom. How far one must move from stranger to actually complete a transaction will vary greatly by product, service, market, etc.

Whole books (indeed, whole industries) exist to flesh out the goals, means, ends, application, etc. of marketing. Trey's Definition of Marketing would probably fit well in the mix.

Then again, in our postmodern age, we'll remember the struggle over the meaning of "is" for years to come.

Good point. Thank you for taking time to read and share.