Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript offers a comprehensive conceptual exploration of the notion of “value” across philosophy, economics, and marketing, culminating in a synthesis aligned with contemporary debates on sustainability. The work aligns with the journal’s scope, providing an integrative and theoretically grounded overview of a fundamental concept central to multiple disciplines.

1) The historical-philosophical review is thorough but may be overly extensive. The author is encouraged to condense selected parts (especially early Greek philosophy sections) to improve readability and accessibility for a broader audience.

2) Several metaphorical expressions (e.g., references to “sun-shading flocks of black swans”, “doomsday clock”, etc.) are stylistically unconventional for a journal format. A more neutral and concise tone is recommended.

3) The conceptual evolution from G-DL to S-DL, SL, and V-DL is central to the manuscript. Including a simple figure or table summarizing these paradigms would substantially improve clarity and pedagogical value.

4) While the conceptual discussion is strong, readers may benefit from brief, concrete examples illustrating value co-creation, externalities, or the application of V-DL in modern markets.

Author Response

Thank you for your insightful comments which I believe have greatly benefited the quality of my work.

With my warmest wishes for a Happy New Year, I submit my response on each of your observations below.

I apologise as tables and figures do not travel well here so I have attached a .pdf file with all the reviews and responses that preserves formatting and special characters.

 

Response to reviewer 1

 

The manuscript offers a comprehensive conceptual exploration of the notion of “value” across philosophy, economics, and marketing, culminating in a synthesis aligned with contemporary debates on sustainability. The work aligns with the journal’s scope, providing an integrative and theoretically grounded overview of a fundamental concept central to multiple disciplines.

 

Your evaluation and apt summary brought warmth to my heart! I appreciate this assessment. Most of all I appreciate your hard work in reviewing my work.

 

1) The historical-philosophical review is thorough but may be overly extensive. The author is encouraged to condense selected parts (especially early Greek philosophy sections) to improve readability and accessibility for a broader audience.

 

Point taken, thank you! I have condensed the discussion to the necessary (e.g. removed the discussion of alternative translations). Other reviewers have asked to add more detail on contemporary western philosophers’ work. So, to ensure that the philosophy section is not too long and to get to marketing, which is the point of the paper, as soon as possible, I have abandoned the historical approach and adopted a thematic one focused on the foundations of conceptualisations of value in the Western philosophical tradition. Section2 is now “Foundations of conceptualisations of value in the Western philosophical tradition” and the sub-section you referred to is now “Definitions of value” (so that non-interested readers can easily skip all of the foundations or just the definitions) and condensed to the following:

 

2. Foundations of conceptualisations of value in the Western philosophical tradition

…

 

Definitions of value

 

Although in the marketing literature [e.g. 1, 2, 3] the introduction of the philosophy of value is attributed to Aristotle (384 BCE – 322 BCE) it was actually the pre-Socratics (7^th c. BCE)[4-7], with the Protagorean “πάντων χρηµάτων µέτρον ἐστίν ἄνθρωπος, τῶν µέν ὄντων ὡς ἐστιν, τῶν δέ οὐκ ὄντων ὡς οὐκ ἔστιν [8]” (commonly, but misleadingly narrowly, translated [4, 6] as “of all things the measure is man: of those that are, that they are; and of those that are not, that they are not”) who laid its foundations and it was Plato (5^th -4^th c. BCE)[8, 9] who first elaborated on it.

 

Contemporary philosophers [5, 10] concur with Plato [8, 9] and Aristotle [4, 11, 12] in that χρήμα (pronounced chrí̱ma) denotes much more than ‘thing’. It stands for value which encompasses [13]:

1. the satisfaction and benefits derived from using something for a specific purpose (including the resources one controls or has access to);
2. what is realized through the exchange of objects, money, skills, or anything that is perceived as useful for a purpose; and
3. the joy or admiration experienced in relation to an event, an occurrence or an achievement.

The measure [4] of value is ἄνθρωπος (pronounced ánthropos) but not in the narrow sense of the “transient and impulsive whim” [13] of any one person but in the sense of humanity – each and every one but also all of us, past, present, and coming generations all over the world. This view is consistent with Bertrand Russell’s philosophy of value expressed as “[w]e are ourselves the ultimate and irrefutable arbiters of value. … It is we who create value and our desires which confer value” [14]. Russell’s ‘we’ encompasses human perception of the physical world, knowledge of nature and its laws, but also all that human beings can imagine and, by extension, create. So, “everything, real or imagined, can be appraised by us, and there is no outside standard to show that our valuation is wrong” [14]. So, the measure of value is the ability of the collective and indivisible capital - economic, cultural, social [15], symbolic [16], spiritual [17], and semantic [18] capital - to fulfill the aspirations and expectations of the community in which value is formed, exchanged, used, experienced, and enjoyed [13]. In this sense, value is contextual and values-dependent.

Plato [19] equates value with being good, as in a beautiful body, a virtuous soul, simple music and exercise which improve the soul and body, temperance, and everything that makes a life worth living. Plato’s approach thus gives value theory its place in the philosophical field of axiology (also known as normative ethical theory) which encompasses “classifying what things are good, and how good they are” and the related metaethical investigations related to “whether the objects of value are subjective psychological states, or objective states of the world” [20].

 

.

2) Several metaphorical expressions (e.g., references to “sun-shading flocks of black swans”, “doomsday clock”, etc.) are stylistically unconventional for a journal format. A more neutral and concise tone is recommended.

 

Thank you for alerting me to the fact that the black swans and the doomsday clock can be interpreted as manifestations of my poetic streak and not just the technical terms that they are; the former of business and marketing strategy and risk management [21] and the latter of atomic scientists [22]. To correct this misunderstanding I have rewritten the 1^st paragraph of section “5. Conclusions and Prospects” and included both an explanation of the terms and nine new references for anyone wishing to delve deeper into the exciting and growing stream of risk management literature.

 

We live in unprecedentedly complex and globally challenging times to which marketers need to adapt, and fast, if they are to perform their role of facilitating VCC [23]. Recurrent crises have become the new normal; one which appears bleak for the rising numbers of children in regions under protracted conflict [24], threatening to the physical, psychological, and social health and financial security of increasing numbers of people, even in in the most advanced economies [25], and challenging for societies struggling under “greater inequality, rising authoritarianism and rampant misinformation” [26]. Crises, of course, are not unique to the 21^st century. They were, however, as rare as black swans up until 9/11. It took the risk management literature a decade to describe the unpredictable catastrophic events experienced by firms, markets, and economies as ‘black swans’ [21]. Since then, black swans of increasing frequency and intensity have been disrupting operations and compromising planning and decision-making [27]. For multinational corporations (MNCs), back swans amount to the “ [a]pocalypse unleashed” [28]. What used to be “outlier events” [29] have, in the post COVID-19 era, become all too common occurrences threatening the sustainability of businesses of all sizes, governments, and communities as well as that of the planet [29]. Indeed, in January 2025, the scientists studying the Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous (VUCA) nature of the sociopolitical and technoeconomic environment have set the doomsday clock to 89’ to midnight [22] from 90’ just a year ago [30]. The doomsday clock is ticking at the most frightening speed and we now are the closest ever to the total annihilation of civilization as we know it and life on the planet with it [22]. To describe the 2020’s, a new word was needed [31]: permacrisis.

 

 

3) The conceptual evolution from G-DL to S-DL, SL, and V-DL is central to the manuscript. Including a simple figure or table summarizing these paradigms would substantially improve clarity and pedagogical value.

 

Thank you for this very important suggestion. I have added a table (Table 1: Summary of the key understandings of value and the resulting mandates of the main streams of marketing literature and their most prominent sub-streams.) and this is the text introducing it:

 

A synthesis of the key understandings of value in the main streams of marketing literature

 

The conceptualisations of value across the main streams of marketing literature discussed above can be synthesised on the basis of their understandings regarding the nature of value (use, exchange, or experiential value), how it is determined, the emphasis they place on the outcome or the process of value generation and consumption, and the process by which value is generated and consumed. These understandings result in the determination of the role of the seller and the buyer, the role of marketing, the resources involved, and the focus on the firm or the totality of stakeholders acting as an ecosystem. The lines distinguishing the different streams are not always definite and clear and their approaches often converge on some aspects and differ across others. Table 1 summarises the key understandings of value and the resulting mandates of the main streams of marketing literature (G-DL, Services Marketing, and Service-Dominant Logic) and their most prominent sub-streams.

 

 

4) While the conceptual discussion is strong, readers may benefit from brief, concrete examples illustrating value co-creation, externalities, or the application of V-DL in modern markets.

 

This is a valuable suggestion, indeed! I have added the following:

 

Value co-creation (I have also added the definition here for maximum clarity)

… Co-creation, a concept which is “more general [than the earlier co-production, and one]… that encompasses all the specific theoretical and empirical occurrences in which companies and customers generate value through interaction … is [defined as] the joint, collaborative, concurrent, peer-like process of producing new value, both materially and symbolically”[32].

Companies, of course, have been practicing VCC for quite a while before the term was introduced in the marketing vernacular. Nike™, the American sportswear company, has been running the NikeID platform (https://www.nike.com/gb/w/nike-by-you-shoes-6ealhzy7ok) for over 20 years. Users can pick one of almost 100 models of shoes and change the materials and colours of the shoe components and add words to create a totally personalised product. Then they order their design online and they receive them at home for about the same price the shoes sell in the shops. Lego™, the Danish toy company, elicits customer ideas for new products through a dedicated portal (https://beta.ideas.lego.com/). The ideas are presented to the community of Lego fans who vote for the ones they want to see on store shelves. The ones that get 10,000 votes are considered by the company for production as a real LEGO set. The Chinese tech company Xiaomi™ runs an annual designer competition in which users can turn their photos or artwork to themes using the platform’s (https://zhuti.designer.intl.xiaomi.com/theme-competition-2025/home) design tools. Those selected by Xiaomi judges and those voted for by users get cash prizes and are used by the company on their devices. Finally, B2B firms have always been co-designing services, equipment, and complete service and equipment solutions with their customers and suppliers.

 

Externalities

 

… Society can be taken to involve each and every stakeholder group (e.g. suppliers, retailers, competitors, employees, local communities, flora and fauna, future generations) directly or indirectly affected by the externalities (that is, the unintended consequences) of product (a) production (such as resource depletion or air and water pollution), (b) marketing (such as socially harmful advertising or cluttering of roadsides with hoardings and billboards), (c) use (e.g. passive smoking or injuries by faulty products), and (d) disposal (e.g. plastic wrapping polluting the oceans or landfill overload). ….

 

V-DL

Value-Dominant Logic

Survival International, a global movement for Indigenous peoples’ rights, describe their vision as “a world where Indigenous peoples are respected as contemporary societies and their human rights protected” and to achieve this they “stop loggers, miners, and oil companies from destroying Indigenous lands, lives and livelihoods … lobby governments to recognize Indigenous land rights … document and expose the atrocities committed against Indigenous people and take direct action to stop them” [33]. It is not only charities and human rights organisations whose reason to exist is to provide value to those who need it.

“[S]uccessful companies can make [the hard decisions] if they stick to a course that aligns with society’s needs and that delivers value both today and tomorrow. Increasingly, society is looking to business to help shape a better world. People rightly want businesses to share their common values. I welcome this, because it fits with what I have been working on my entire professional life: To seek equity and justice.  …

[Our] mission, one I believe [a pharmaceutical company] is here on this Earth for: to help relieve human suffering on a mass scale. To do that, we must take on projects that are long, risky, and expensive – and we have to do our part to help ensure that these treatments get to everyone who needs them” [34].

These excerpts from the speech Merck’s Ken Frazier, made in acceptance of Chief Executive's 2021 CEO of the Year award are an example of an alternative marketing paradigm, Value-Dominant Logic (V-DL). V-DL places not only value but also fundamental values - such as integrity, compassion, virtue, and moderation [13] - at the heart of the socioeconomic ecosystem. Merck™ the oldest and one of the biggest pharmaceutical companies in the world, has, according to their owned media, been guided for well over a century now by the philosophy of its “modern-day founder, George W. Merck. He said, ‘We try never to forget that medicine is for the people. It is not for the profits. The profits follow, and if we have remembered that, they have never failed to appear’ [34]. And, of course, Merck™ is not the only company built around values and value. “Dole™ – a US corporation established in 1851 – recently stated the Dole Promise, the synthesis of its commitment to nourish people around the world, reducing waste, decrease the environmental footprint and grow value for all stakeholders”[35]. Patagonia™, the outdoor clothing company, supports grass roots activism and charities, reports on efforts to decrease their environmental footprint, supports circular economy efforts by undertaking the repair and resale of its products, and states:

“we made Earth our only shareholder … [i]nstead of ‘going public’, you could say we’re ‘going purpose’. Instead of extracting value from nature and transforming it into wealth for investors, we’ll use the wealth Patagonia creates to protect the source of all wealth” [36].

 

Date of this review

08 Dec 2025 09:32:55

 

 

• References

 

1. Gordon, B.J., Aristotle and the Development of Value Theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1964. 78(1): p. 115–128.
2. Medberg, G. and C. Grönroos, Value-in-use and service quality: do customers see a difference? Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 2020. 30(4/5): p. 507–529.
3. Blocker, C.P. and A. Barrios, The Transformative Value of a Service Experience. Journal of Service Research, 2015. 18(3): p. 265–283.
4. Bonazzi, M., Protagoras, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta and U. Nodelman, Editors. 2024, Stanford University.
5. Mansfeld, J., Protagoras on epistemological obstacles and persons, in The Sophists and their Legacy, G.B. Kerferd, Editor. 1981, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. p. 38–53.
6. Mark, J.J. Protagoras of Abdera: Of All Things Man Is The Measure. World History Encyclopedia, 2012.
7. Kerferd, G.B., The Sophists and their Legacy. 1981, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Πλάτων (Plato), Θεαίτητος: Η γνωσιολογία του Πλάτωνος (Theaetetus: Plato on Knowledge). Αρχαίοι Συγγραφείς. 2015 / [369 BCE], Θεσαλονίκη: Ζήτρος.
9. Plato, Protagoras, B. Jowett, Editor. 2008, Project Gutenberg.
10. Scruton, R., Modern philosophy: An introduction and survey. 2012: A&C Black.
11. Barnes, J., Introduction to The Ethics of Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics. Revised ed. 1976, London: Penguin Classics.
12. Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics. trans. 1954 / [4th century BCΕ], Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Zarkada, A.K. and Y. Melanthiou, Future Management for Sustainable Prosperity – Regenerating Mindsets, Rethinking Strategic Agility. 2026 – in print, Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
14. Russell, B., What I Believe. 2013 / [1925], Routledge: London & New York, NY.
15. Bourdieu, P., The forms of capital, in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, J. Richardson, Editor. 1986, Greenwood: New York, NY. p. 241–258.
16. Bourdieu, P. and L. Wacquant, Symbolic capital and social classes. Journal of Classical Sociology, 2013. 13(2): p. 292–302.
17. Verter, B., Spiritual Capital: Theorizing Religion with Bourdieu against Bourdieu. Sociological Theory, 2003. 21(2): p. 150–174.
18. Floridi, L., Semantic Capital: Its Nature, Value, and Curation. Philosophy & Technology, 2018. 31(4): p. 481–497.
19. Πλάτων (Plato), Πολιτεία (Republic). 2002 / [circa 380 BCE], Athens: Πόλις (Polis).
20. Schroeder, M., Value Theory, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta, Editor. 2021, Metaphysics Research Lab CSLI Stanford University: Stanford, CA.
21. Taleb, N.N., The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. 2010, Random House Publishing Group.
22. Mecklin, J. Closer than ever: It is now 89 seconds to midnight - 2025 Doomsday Clock Statement. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 2025.
23. Zarkada, A.K., Marketing Solutions to the Challenges of a VUCA Environment: What Have We Accomplished and What More Can We Do?, in Marketing Solutions to the Challenges of a VUCA Environment. 2024. p. 1–14.
24. English, J., ‘Not the new normal’ – 2024 'one of the worst years in UNICEF’s history' for children in conflict. 2024, UNICEF: New york, NY.
25. Asonye, C. There's nothing new about the 'new normal'. Here's why. COVID-19, 2020.
26. Anderson, J., L. Rainie, and E.A. Vogels, Experts Say the ‘New Normal’ in 2025 Will Be Far More Tech-Driven, Presenting More Big Challenges. 2021, Pew Research.
27. Hermansson, F., R. Arvidsson, and M. Svanström, Black swans swimming in product streams: method for including unplanned events in life cycle assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2024. 29(10): p. 1818–1826.
28. Gonzales Martinez, R., Apocalypse unleashed: a critical perspective on complexity science, catastrophes, and black swan events in international business. Critical Perspectives on International Business, 2024. 20(1): p. 94–120.
29. Nakazawa, R., Beyond the Black Swan: How the Pandemic and Digital Innovations Intensified the Sustainability Imperative – Everywhere. 2024, Productivity Press: New York, NY.
30. Mecklin, J. A moment of historic danger: It is still 90 seconds to midnight. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 2024. 2024 Doomsday Clock Statement.
31. Bushby, H. Permacrisis declared Collins Dictionary word of the year. BBC News, 2022.
32. Galvagno, M., et al., Theory of value co-creation: a systematic literature review. Managing Service Quality, 2014. 24(6): p. 643–683.
33. Survival International. What We Do. 2025 28/12/2025]; Available from: https://survivalinternational.org/.
34. Chief Executive Ken Frazier: ‘Society Is Looking To Business To Help Shape A Better World’ - Remarks by Ken Frazier, Chief Executive's 2021 CEO of the Year, as prepared for delivery. Chief Executive, 2021.
35. Mahajan, G., et al., Value-dominant logic: organizational principles. European Journal of Marketing, 2023. 57(5): p. 1245–1271.
36. Chouinard, Y. Earth is now our only shareholder. 2022 14/09/2022 29/12/2025]; Available from: https://www.patagonia.com/ownership/?utm_source=em&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=032924_waterproof_packs&utm_klaviyo_id=01GQMSEZBFS4EVN0XWT17JF1ZY&_kx=C6wWb5w05CnmwyrkOY1UzetDRt60iq6vAGrpv71GOr8.YgU9me.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper attempts to review the various conceptualisations of value and to introduce a new definition of value. The author reviews value from ancient philosophy (pre-Socratics, Plato, Aristotle), criticizes capitalism and marketing, examines multiple marketing paradigms, proposes a new definition of value, and connects the definition to global sustainability and sustainable prosperity. The paper is primarily conceptual with no empirical support. The paper is therefore philosophical rather than scientific, which limits its usefulness for marketing practitioners or empirical researchers. Moreover, the paper relies mostly on ancient Greek philosophers and the Western tradition. The exclusion of non-Western theories may create a cultural bias in a paper dealing with global sustainability. Finally, the manuscript is lengthy and sometimes repetitive.

The author must maintain a common way of referring to himself/herself. In some sentences he/she refers to himself/herself as I (‘I propose the universal use of the term ‘) and in others as we (‘In this section we will review’). To avoid such problems, it would be preferable to adopt third-person reference.

Author Response

Thank you for your insightful comments which I believe have greatly benefited the quality of my work.

With my warmest wishes for a Happy New Year, I submit my response on each of your observations below.

I apologise as tables and figures do not travel well here so I have attached a .pdf file with all the reviews and responses that preserves formatting and special characters.

 

Response to reviewer 2

 

This paper attempts to review the various conceptualisations of value and to introduce a new definition of value. The author reviews value from ancient philosophy (pre-Socratics, Plato, Aristotle), criticizes capitalism and marketing, examines multiple marketing paradigms, proposes a new definition of value, and connects the definition to global sustainability and sustainable prosperity.

 

Thank you for the very accurate summary. It pleases me immensely that my message was, indeed, so clearly received.

 

 

The paper is primarily conceptual with no empirical support.

 

Indeed, it is not even a paper, it is an entry for the Encyclopedia; a work of reference as in https://www.britannica.com/topic/axiology or https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/value-theory/

Because it is meant for the Encyclopedia, it is a review of literature with a totally conceptual, critical, and definitional approach and hence totally devoid of any empirical support.

 

 

The paper is therefore philosophical rather than scientific, which limits its usefulness for marketing practitioners or empirical researchers.

 

I have done my best to ensure that it is systematically (so, in a broader sense, scientifically) researched and written. It flatters me that you see it as philosophical, however, although it does have a section on philosophy, most of it is not about philosophy but how philosophy underpins past, current, and emerging marketing theory and how it can guide us in rethinking important problems. I am sorry you did not find it useful, but I hope that colleagues looking for critical reviews of definitions, approaches and their underpinnings, and theories in the context of the socioeconomic system and global issues might find some of the most onerous parts of the background work done for them. Especially for empirical researchers, not having to review definitions but to have solid reviews and fully justified authoritative definitions could be rather helpful. It was actually the lack of consistency in the terminology and insufficient definitions I encountered in my empirical work which motivated me to write this entry for the Encyclopedia.

 

 

Moreover, the paper relies mostly on ancient Greek philosophers and the Western tradition. The exclusion of non-Western theories may create a cultural bias in a paper dealing with global sustainability.

 

I focus on the Western tradition - a choice made explicit even in the section heading (“2. The concept of Value and the Philosophy of Value: a historical overview of the Western tradition” and which has now been changed to “Foundations of conceptualisations of value in the Western philosophical tradition” following another reviewer’s comments) - because marketing, the focal discipline of the entry, is actually a product of this tradition. Ideas such as the Japanese Mottainai, or Sanpo Yioshi, for example, relevant as they might be to value and global sustainability are almost totally absent from the contemporary marketing theory. I have however, acknowledged them where relevant as in here:

 

This conceptualisation is a simplified version of the IMP one [1, 2] and highlights the fact that “ [d]yadic relationships must always have three satisfied parties” [3]: the buyer, the seller, and stakeholders. The idea that exchange relationships involve all stakeholders, and thus need to result in value for the buyer, the seller, and the community, can be traced back to the Omi merchants of Japan in the Edo period (1601 or 1603 to 1868) and the concept of Sampo Yoshi (三方よし) [4-6].

 

Moreover, because of their Aristotelean – Cartesian – Calvinist underpinnings marketing theory and practice are inherently non-sustainable and contrary to Eastern approaches to human relationships and the relationship of humans with nature. This can be seen in concepts such as built in obsolescence and market share or share of stomach/wallet. So, the cultural bias is in the marketing field, which I review, not in the review itself. To ensure that this point is not only explicit but clear to everybody I have gratefully espoused your concern and have added the following explanation at the beginning of section 2.

 

Foundations of conceptualisations of value in the Western philosophical tradition

 

This section reviews the definitions and conceptualisations of value and presents the fundamentals of value theory in a roughly chronological order through the key phases of the Western philosophical tradition. This choice does not imply that the relative contributions of other traditions to a philosophy of value are in anyway less important or not as developed. It simply reflects the ontology and epistemology of the marketing discipline: its underlying assumptions about the relationships of humans with each other and with nature. The approach is adopted because of the fact that the intellectual roots and definitional frameworks of marketing are products of the Western tradition. Eastern and other philosophical traditions have had negligible to no impact on the formation of the conceptual foundations of marketing. There have been sporadic Marxist [7] and post-colonial [8] critiques of the Eurocentrism of marketing. However, the fact remains that the Global South is practically non-existent for the leading marketing journals in which less than 3% of articles published are about the markets and consumers of North America and Western Europe [8]. Even in the rare articles in which the data comes from Asia or Africa, for example, the theories applied to interpret them are firmly situated in European social sciences and humanities and the Western born and bred branch of economics, which have been identified as in need of “radical change” [9]. For this change to materialise, it is imperative that we understand the discipline’s fundamental concepts and their provenance. Value is such a concept; fundamental and permeating philosophy, sociology, psychology, economics, and marketing.

 

I have also made it explicit that it is only the Western tradition that is of relevance elsewhere.

 

I added, at the request of another reviewer a table which I have clearly labelled as “Table 1: Summary of the conceptualisations of value from the perspective of Western Philosophy”.

 

In the Introduction I explain the following:

This entry identifies the ‘simple ideas’ which comprise value and explores the ways in which they have been combined to define ‘value’ for the purposes of marketing science. The marketing discipline is a branch of applied economics which was developed in the late 19^th and 20^th century in the USA and Britain under German influences [10] and grew in the liberal democracy and capitalist framework [11]. Economics, however, is an applied branch of western philosophy so, the path of marketing can be firmly traced back to the Eurocentric, Aristotelian-Cartesian, and Calvinist tradition [11].

 

I clearly acknowledged the bias which can be traced in the reviewed literature as in here:

 

…in the marketing literature [e.g. 12, 13, 14] the introduction of the philosophy of value is attributed to Aristotle …

 

 

Finally, the manuscript is lengthy and sometimes repetitive.

 

I am sorry you felt it was lengthy, and I am afraid, on the basis of the reviewer comments, it is now lengthier. For example, to accommodate my response to your comment on cultural biases above I have added an extra 250 words of text and numerous citations. Moreover, I apologise but, having read the text again from beginning to end numerous times I could not identify the passages you thought were repeated. Given that none of the other three reviewers identified any repetitions – instead they asked for summaries and introductions which are by nature repetitions of key points - I have to resign myself to, sadly, not accommodating this comment of yours much as I would like to.

 

 

The author must maintain a common way of referring to himself/herself. In some sentences he/she refers to himself/herself as I (‘I propose the universal use of the term ‘) and in others as we (‘In this section we will review’). To avoid such problems, it would be preferable to adopt third-person reference.

 

Phrases such as “In this section we will review”, “we can draw on philosophy”, and “we can apply” were left as they were because the ‘we’ refers to the reader and I and the academic community in general so, a change would change the meaning. Same as in “..what we usually call market …” or “We have the models and computing power to consider …”, “…and a natural environment like the one we find ourselves in today…”, and “We live in  unprecedentedly complex…” in which the ‘we’ also refers to humankind in general as well as all scientists.

 

It is intentional that in “I here argue / expand…” I use ‘I’ to make it clear that this is not some consensus in the literature but my opinion / contribution.

 

In all the above cases the 3^rd person (‘the author’ argues, draws on philosophy, reviews, etc) sounds rather pretentious and a potential transformation to passive voice (it is here argued, what is called a market, are reviewed etc) sounds rather old fashioned.

 

Finally, “a four dimensional structure which we here expand from its original application to services”) is changed to ‘I’, thank you!.

 

I have adopted a passive voice approach in the added sections of the introduction, however, to maintain a neutral tone where exposing personal opinions is not needed. Here is an example of the added text:

 

 

…this entry seeks to identify and highlight the underlying conceptualisations of value …

This Encyclopedia entry focuses on ‘value’…

The purpose of this entry is …

The objectives of the entry are…

 

Date of this review

23 Nov 2025 20:39:16

 

 

 

References

1. Ford, D., ed. Understanding Business Markets: Interaction, Relationships and Networks, The Industrial Marketing and Purchasing Group. 1990, Academic Press: London.
2. IMP Group, An interaction approach, in Understanding Business Markets: Interaction, Relationships and Networks, D. Ford, Editor. 1990, Academic Press: London. p. 7–26.
3. Zarkada, A.K. and Y. Melanthiou, Future Management for Sustainable Prosperity – Regenerating Mindsets, Rethinking Strategic Agility. 2026 – in print, Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
4. The Association to Spread the Concept of "Sanpoyoshi" Worldwide. What is Sanpoyoshi? 2010; Available from: http://sanpoyoshi.net/what_en/.
5. Shinohara, Y. and R.C. Kim, Sanpo-Yoshi and Corporate Social Responsibility in Japan. Strategic Analysis, 2022. 46(4): p. 403–415.
6. Nguyen, T.K.G., T. Ozawa, and P. Fan, Sanpo-yoshi, top management personal values, and ESG performance. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 2024. 41: p. 100903.
7. Berger, A.A., Marxism and Marketing, in Marketing and American Consumer Culture: A Cultural Studies Analysis, A.A. Berger, Editor. 2016, Springer International Publishing: Cham, switzerland. p. 47–54.
8. Varman, R., Postcolonialism, subalternity, and critical marketing, in Responsible Marketing for Well-being and Society, M. Saren, et al., Editors. 2024, Routledge. p. 337–354.
9. Hodgson, G.M., From Marx to Markets: An Intellectual Odyssey. 2025, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
10. Jones, D.G.B. and M. Tadajewski, Foundations of Marketing Thought. 2017.
11. Panigyrakis, G.G. and A.K. Zarkada, New Philosophical Paradigms in Marketing: From amoral consumerism to axiological societing, in The Routledge Companion on the Future of Marketing, L. Moutinho, E. Bigne, and A.K. Manrai, Editors. 2014, Routledge: Oxford.
12. Gordon, B.J., Aristotle and the Development of Value Theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1964. 78(1): p. 115–128.
13. Medberg, G. and C. Grönroos, Value-in-use and service quality: do customers see a difference? Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 2020. 30(4/5): p. 507–529.
14. Blocker, C.P. and A. Barrios, The Transformative Value of a Service Experience. Journal of Service Research, 2015. 18(3): p. 265–283.

 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

As areas for improvement in the paper, it is necessary to further investigate and generate more empirical evidence for the proposed model. New case studies should be proposed, and new evidence should be provided for business management. Further progress should be made toward truly sustainable practices, generating realistic and non-ideological proposals.

The AMA's own definition of value in 2017 speaks of the co-creation of value for all stakeholders and for "society in general." Isn't that an example of sustainability?
I also believe that a conceptual diagram visualizing the proposed model should be included to improve the clarity of the contributions made.

Finally, a thorough reflection on the study conducted is also needed, highlighting tangible facts or problems, potential solutions, and the limitations of this study or marketing approach.

Regarding future lines of research, priority should be given to the empirical validation of the theoretical model, developing measurement scales and conducting experiments with consumers. Furthermore, it would be interesting to conduct an intercultural analysis to compare how the hierarchy of values ​​manifests itself in different cultures. For example, applying the theoretical model to cultures with distinct value systems—that is, is the hierarchy of values ​​the same for a consumer in Japan as for one in the United States or Europe?
Finally, the theoretical framework could be improved by engaging it in dialogue with other philosophical currents, such as the pragmatism proposed by John Dewey, where value is not a fixed essence, but something that emerges and is evaluated through practical experience and problem-solving. These aspects, I believe, could enhance the presented approach and lend it greater credibility.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

In general, I consider that the level of of English is more than adequate for a top-level academic publication.

Author Response

Thank you for your insightful comments which I believe have greatly benefited the quality of my work.

With my warmest wishes for a Happy New Year, I submit my response on each of your observations below.

I apologise as tables and figures do not travel well here so I have attached a .pdf file with all the reviews and responses that preserves formatting and special characters.

 

Response to reviewer 3

 

As areas for improvement in the paper, it is necessary to further investigate and generate more empirical evidence for the proposed model.

 

I am sorry but I cannot accommodate this comment as there is no model proposed or tested and hence there is no empirical evidence in this Encyclopedia entry to add to. This is just a review of definitions and conceptualisations of value in marketing and sustainability with the aim of disambiguating the existing ones and proposing a new one bridging the two. The concluding propositions could, potentially, be empirically explored as maybe value co-creation perceptions, processes, and systems. For this idea for further research, I sincerely thank you.

 

New case studies should be proposed, and new evidence should be provided for business management.

 

This is another interesting idea for future research projects I could work on. I truly appreciate this suggestion.

 

Further progress should be made toward truly sustainable practices, generating realistic and non-ideological proposals.

 

I couldn’t agree with you more! We do need a pathway to realistic and truly sustainable practices and to this end this Encyclopedia entry aims to contribute alongside my books and other scholarly works.

 

The AMA's own definition of value in 2017 speaks of the co-creation of value for all stakeholders and for "society in general." Isn't that an example of sustainability?

 

I assume you refer to the definition  of marketing I give in the introduction, namely:

“Marketing is the activity, set of institutions and processes for creating, communicating, delivering and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large” [1] which was approved by AMA Board of Directors in 2007 and reconfirmed in July 2013.

 

I have discussed this definition here:

 

The current definition of marketing specifies that its purpose is to provide “value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large” [2]. Acknowledging stakeholders is an advancement from earlier definitions, but still “the current marketing thinking neglects to articulate or even ponder what marketing on a higher order level as a phenomenon might be … what is the meaning of marketing … beyond exchanging offerings that have value or satisfying needs.” [3]. So, not all value is valuable for everyone and, also, the value of marketing seems to be rather limited.

The meaning of marketing must surely expand to the concern over externalities. It is obvious that ignoring the externalities born by stakeholders is one of the manifestations of marketing amoralism [4]. Yet, it appears that the externalities borne by the ‘third party’ to dyadic marketing relationships are accepted by practicing marketers as well as most academics as inevitable. Even if the externalities are taken into account when planning and executing marketing strategies is not enough of a contribution to the world.

It has been argued that to identify the higher-order purpose of marketing an axiology of value (“the preferential judgement”) built on values (“the relevant criteria on which such a summary judgment rests”) is needed [5].

 

 

I also believe that a conceptual diagram visualizing the proposed model should be included to improve the clarity of the contributions made.

 

I appreciate the suggestion. I have added the following at the end of the entry:

 

“The above propositions can be diagrammatically represented (Figure 1).”

 

Figure 1: Diagrammatic representation of the value ecosystem through which marketing supports sustainable prosperity

 

 

 

Finally, a thorough reflection on the study conducted is also needed, highlighting tangible facts or problems, potential solutions, and the limitations of this study or marketing approach.

 

Thank you for these suggestions. I will definitely follow them when I proceed to empirical tests of the propositions in Section “5. Conclusions and Prospects”.  

 

 

Regarding future lines of research, priority should be given to the empirical validation of the theoretical model, developing measurement scales and conducting experiments with consumers. Furthermore, it would be interesting to conduct an intercultural analysis to compare how the hierarchy of values ​​manifests itself in different cultures. For example, applying the theoretical model to cultures with distinct value systems—that is, is the hierarchy of values ​​the same for a consumer in Japan as for one in the United States or Europe?

 

Thank you very much for these valuable suggestions. I have already studied and published extensively on comparisons of values hierarchies and their impact on B2B negotiations and relationship building, customer experience, managerial performance, and internationalisation process in the construction, retailing, higher education, banking, tourism, and engineering components markets in Japan, Australia, Indonesia, Pakistan, KSA, USA, Turkey, the UK, Russia, Cyprus, and Greece and I will, of course continue on this path with your kind encouragement.

 

The idea that there exists a US of Europe, even a real EU culturally and morally, is indeed fascinating. Currently, my research team and I are working on the perception of the European identity. Maybe you will have the chance to review this work too soon.

 

 

Finally, the theoretical framework could be improved by engaging it in dialogue with other philosophical currents, such as the pragmatism proposed by John Dewey, where value is not a fixed essence, but something that emerges and is evaluated through practical experience and problem-solving. These aspects, I believe, could enhance the presented approach and lend it greater credibility.

You are, of course, absolutely right! I left a lot of modern and contemporary discourses out of the discussion to keep the entry as short as possible. So, your comment sort of frees me to delve deeper.

 

Following your suggestions I have changed the historical for a thematic approach to reviewing the philosophical currents. For example I have added the following to better ground the philosophical discussion in modern and contemporary philosophical schools:

 

 

The measure [6] of value is ἄνθρωπος (pronounced ánthropos) but not in the narrow sense of the “transient and impulsive whim” [7] of any one person but in the sense of humanity – each and every one but also all of us, past, present, and coming generations all over the world. This view is consistent with Bertrand Russell’s philosophy of value expressed as “[w]e are ourselves the ultimate and irrefutable arbiters of value. … It is we who create value and our desires which confer value” [8]. Russell’s ‘we’ encompasses human perception of the physical world, knowledge of nature and its laws, but also all that human beings can imagine and, by extension, create. So, “everything, real or imagined, can be appraised by us, and there is no outside standard to show that our valuation is wrong” [8]. So, the measure of value is the ability of the collective and indivisible capital - economic, cultural, social [9], symbolic [10], spiritual [11], and semantic [12] capital - to fulfill the aspirations and expectations of the community in which value is formed, exchanged, used, experienced, and enjoyed [7]. In this sense, value is contextual and values-dependent.

 

 

Also, a new section covering inter alia pragmatism and the work of Dewey has been added.

 

Intrinsic, extrinsic, and pragmatic value

 

Both the use value and exchange value of object X imply that X serves a purpose for A, the person who owns it, or that, even though it does not meet A’s needs it is perceived as serving a purpose for B who owns Y which is of use to A who is willing to exchange X for Y. Objects X and Y only have value in relation to A and B. The pragmatists, also known as instrumentalists, such as Peirce, James, and Dewey, partially echo the utilitarianism of Hume and Mill, in seeing any object (including theories, linguistic construction, and value systems) as tools for the achievement of a person’s and a society’s objectives [13, 14]. In this sense, pragmatism extends “the Aristotelian ideal of practical wisdom ... combined with Nietzsche’s theoretical scepticism” [14] and results in seeking the truth in its practicality [13, 14], which, in turn, we could extend to mean that value can only be understood as an interpretation of the object in question. Similarly, in the spirit of Hume and following Russell’s extension of Wittgenstein’s theory we could understand value as a ‘logical construction’ interpreting ‘sense-data’, that is “facts about the immediate contents of experience “[14]. This, however, would imply that value is not a quality of the world outside a person but simply a state of the person’s mind which would render ethical judgements (i.e. statements about what is “valuable, … really important, … the meaning of life, or … what makes life worth living, or … the right way of living” [15]) a logical impossibility [15, 16].

Wittgenstein, of course, is not alone in these explorations of axiology and the concept of ‘absolute value’ [15]. Philosophers have for centuries pondered the possibility of an object having an intrinsic value, ‘in itself’ or ‘for its own sake’. This is known as intrinsic value and is distinguished from the instrumental value of things as means to an end, or for the sake of something else to which they are somehow related, which is known as extrinsic value [17]. The idea that something is good just because it is good is first encountered in Aristotle [18, 19] but it was in the late 19^th and early 20^th century that the study of intrinsic value was advanced through questioning its ontology, exploring its being a cognitive evaluation or an emotional response, identifying its dimensions and consequences, and considering its relationship to circumstances and the moral sensitivity of the person perceiving an object as valuable. A common intellectual pursuit has also been to identify objects of intrinsic value [17].

The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic value has been challenged by pragmatist philosophers, such as John Dewey, Arthur Bentley, and Monroe Beardsley, who believed that there cannot be a timeless and universally accepted list of things that are intrinsically valuable. For pragmatists, all value is extrinsic and relative to some other value which we can apply to choose between objects that fulfill “competing desires and ends which are incompatible with one another” [20]. Going past the Manichaeistic dichotomies of the Judeo-Christian modernity (“these time-honoured distinctions—between appearance and reality, theory and practice, knowledge and action, fact and value” [21]) the Deweyan humanists, who “are content to keep their feet planted on terra firma” [21] introduce the concept of pragmatic value: the measure of an object’s (be it a product, idea, belief, or action) usefulness, effectiveness, and practical consequences in solving problems and achieving real-world results.

To decide what is valuable, one would need to examine it against something else of value, which then would have to be assessed against something else. This would result in temporally and tentatively held values and an overall ‘problematic situation’ in which certain ends could justify any means [20, 22]. Moreover, if we accept that there are things which are intrinsically valuable then we run into “the danger of fixing on goals without reasonable regard to their means and consequences” which can lead to a variety of “ills: fanaticism, utopianism, opportunism, and the rest” [22]. What could be acknowledged as having intrinsic value is “productive action [which] is intrinsically creative”, a condition, however, which does not exist in modernity because of the severance of consumption from production and of the act of production from the immediate satisfaction of the person producing the object. Thus, “the mechanical reign” and “frantically accelerated” production results in “most workers find[ing] no replenishment, no renewal and growth of mind, no fulfilment in work” [20]. The utilisation of an artisan’s abilities turns into "’labor,’ drudgery, a task reluctantly performed”, its products are devoid of “esthetic elements”, and their consumers’ “consumptions are accidental ostentation and extravagance, not a normal consummation or fulfilment of activity [20].

“[T]he separation of production and consumption, means and ends,” which lead to class divisions and economic crises [20] have, since 1922 when Dewey made these observations, been accelerating, the inequalities have been rising, and the crises are becoming more frequent and severe. In the post-industrial world, the solidity of products has been substituted by the ethereal ‘culture of the simulacrum’ (a state of being in which the lines between reality and simulation become blurred) [4, 23] and the extraction of surplus value becomes secondary to control of knowledge [24, 25] and monetizable attention. Ultimately, all value becomes subjugated to exchange value “to the point at which the very memory of use value is effaced” [23]. Both the artisan of premodernity and the machinery of modernity are replaced by distributed systems [26] and the value production / consumption ecosystem takes on the characteristics of postmodern consumption, i.e. fragmentation, hyperreality, paradoxical juxtaposition of opposites, tolerance for difference and multiplicity, decentring of the subject, loss of commitment, reversals of production and consumption, and value realisation later in the consumption cycle [27-32]. This results in an amoral approach to value as purely pragmatic and decoupled from values, a point to which we shall return.

 

Summary of the conceptualisations of value from the perspective of Western Philosophy

 

The key points of the above brief presentation of the various conceptualisations of value are summarized in Table 1.

[4]

 

Table 1: A summary of philosophical conceptualizations of value in their broader context

Era	Premodern	Modern / Industrial	Postmodern / Post-industrial
Levels of organization and presentation of concepts [33]	Self-Action (actors possess the power to produce results)	Interaction (results are produced by actions and reactions)	Transaction (attributions of ultimate, final or independent entities, essences or realities are inconsequential)
Nature of value	Intrinsic	Extrinsic	(irrelevant)
Locus of value realisation	Use value	Exchange value	Pragmatic value
Orders of simulacra, running parallel to the successive mutations of the law of value [32]	Counterfeit	Production	Simulation

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

In general, I consider that the level of of English is more than adequate for a top-level academic publication.

 

Thank you!

 

Date of this review

16 Dec 2025 18:16:19

 

 

 

 

References

 

1. American Marketing Association Board of Directors, Marketing, in Common Language Marketing Dictionary. 2013, MASB Marketing Accountability Standards Board.
2. American Marketing Association Board of Directors Definition of Marketing. Marketing Power, 2007.
3. Grönroos, C., Service-informed marketing reform. Journal of Services Marketing, 2024. 38(10): p. 32–43.
4. Panigyrakis, G.G. and A.K. Zarkada, New Philosophical Paradigms in Marketing: From amoral consumerism to axiological societing, in The Routledge Companion on the Future of Marketing, L. Moutinho, E. Bigne, and A.K. Manrai, Editors. 2014, Routledge: Oxford.
5. Smith, C.N., Ethics and the Typology of Consumer Value, in Consumer Value: A Framework for Analysis and Research, M.B. Holbrook, Editor. 1999, Routledge.
6. Bonazzi, M., Protagoras, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta and U. Nodelman, Editors. 2024, Stanford University.
7. Zarkada, A.K. and Y. Melanthiou, Future Management for Sustainable Prosperity – Regenerating Mindsets, Rethinking Strategic Agility. 2026 – in print, Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
8. Russell, B., What I Believe. 2013 / [1925], Routledge: London & New York, NY.
9. Bourdieu, P., The forms of capital, in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, J. Richardson, Editor. 1986, Greenwood: New York, NY. p. 241–258.
10. Bourdieu, P. and L. Wacquant, Symbolic capital and social classes. Journal of Classical Sociology, 2013. 13(2): p. 292–302.
11. Verter, B., Spiritual Capital: Theorizing Religion with Bourdieu against Bourdieu. Sociological Theory, 2003. 21(2): p. 150–174.
12. Floridi, L., Semantic Capital: Its Nature, Value, and Curation. Philosophy & Technology, 2018. 31(4): p. 481–497.
13. Scruton, R., Modern philosophy: An introduction and survey. 2012: A&C Black.
14. Scruton, R., A Short History of Modern Philosophy: From Descartes to Wittgenstein. 2002, Taylor and Francis.
15. Wittgenstein, L., Lecture on Ethics, E. Zamuner, E.V. Di Lascioand, and D.K. Levy, Editors. 2014, Wiley Blackwell: West Sussex, UK.
16. Wittgenstein, L., "Lecture on Ethics" Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, in From Modernism to Postmodernism: An Anthology, L.E. Cahoone, Editor. 1996, Blackwell Publishers: Cambridge, Mass:. p. 191–9.
17. Zimmerman, M.J. and B. Bradley, Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Value, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta and U. Nodelman, Editors. 2025, Stanford University.
18. Barnes, J., Introduction to The Ethics of Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics. Revised ed. 1976, London: Penguin Classics.
19. Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics. trans. 1954 / [4th century BCΕ], Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Dewey, J., Human Nature and Conduct: An introduction to social psychology. 2024 / [1922], Henry Holt and Company: New York, NY.
21. McDermid, D., Pragmatism, in Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, J. Fieser and B. Dowden, Editors. 2025, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
22. Beardsley, M.C., Intrinsic Value. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 1965. 26(1): p. 1–17.
23. Jameson, F., Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. 1990, Durham, NC: Duke University Press Books.
24. Lyotard, J.-F., The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (La Condition postmoderne: rapport sur le savoir). 1984, Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.
25. Harvey, D., The condition of postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. 1989, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
26. Zarkada, A.K., Empowering Digital Transformation. 2025, Springer: Cham, Switzerland.
27. van Raaij, W.F., Postmodern consumption. Journal of Economic Psychology, 1993. 14(3): p. 541–563.
28. Anderson, W.T., The Truth about the Truth: De-confusing and Re-constructing the Postmodern World. A New Coscious Reader. 1995, New York, NY: Jeremy Tarcher/Putnam.
29. Firat, A.F., N. Dholakia, and A. Venkatesh, Marketing in a postmodern world. European journal of marketing, 1995.
30. Proctor, T. and P. Kitchen, Communication in postmodern integrated marketing. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 2002. 7(3): p. 144–154.
31. Firat, A.F. and N. Dholakia, Theoretical and philosophical implications of postmodern debates: some challenges to modern marketing. Marketing Theory, 2006. 6(2): p. 123–162.
32. Baudrillard, J., Symbolic Exchange and Death. 2016, Sage: London.
33. Dewey, J. and A.F. Bentley, Knowing and the Known. 2019 / [1949], American Institute for Economic Research: Great Barrington, MA.

 

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

It has been a pleasure to review your manuscript. Below, please find several suggestions:

 

Abstract

• Reframe the abstract to be descriptive rather than persuasive, clearly stating what the entry covers and how it is structured.
• Remove or soften strong normative language or attribute such claims explicitly.
• Identify the central concepts addressed and conclude with a neutral indication that a normative perspective is discussed.

1. Introduction

• Replace an “indicated research gap” framing with a clear encyclopedic purpose statement that defines the topic, explains its importance, and specifies the entry’s scope.
• Add a brief roadmap paragraph outlining the structure of the entry.
• Clarify conceptual and philosophical boundaries.
• Moderate rhetorical urgency and maintain a neutral, informational tone throughout.

2. The concept of value and the philosophy of value

• Streamline this section to include only the philosophical foundations necessary for understanding how value is used in marketing scholarships.
• Add a concise key terms box or table defining value, values, valuation, and price, as well as distinguishing use value from exchange value.
• Improve signposting by briefly indicating, after each major philosophical distinction, how it maps onto marketing concepts or debates.
• If the discussion relies primarily on Western philosophical traditions, either acknowledge alternative traditions in passing or clearly state the intended scope as a Western genealogy.

3. The concept of value in marketing literature

• Reorganize the section into a reference-style map with short, clearly labeled subsections rather than an extended narrative
• Explicitly label levels of analysis.
• Avoid overly reductive characterizations of earlier paradigms; include at least one balancing sentence acknowledging variation within each stream.
• Add a short “Related traditions” paragraph with a small number of anchor citations.

4. Value in the Context of Sustainability

• Shift from critique or advocacy toward a neutral synthesis of established sustainability-related ideas.
• Clearly define key linking concepts, such as externalities, ecological limits or planetary boundaries, circular economy or regenerative approaches, and wellbeing or quality-of-life perspectives.
• Present disagreements as differences among scholarly streams rather than as definitive judgments.
• Ensure that critiques of sustainability frameworks are balanced, carefully attributed, and situated within existing debates.

5. Conclusions and Prospects

• Replace a speculative “prospects” orientation with a concise summary of current directions and debates.
• Present any proposed definition explicitly as an integrative or normative proposal, not as a field-wide consensus.
• Conclude with a compact recap of the entry’s key distinctions, particularly those related to value-in-exchange, value-in-use, value co-creation, and sustainability challenges.

6. Abbreviations

• Remove duplicate entries and standardize capitalization and hyphenation.
• Confirm that each abbreviation appears in the text and is defined at first use.

General comments

• Add one table or figure to support rapid comprehension.
• Edit for readability by shortening long sentences, reducing rhetorical flourishes, and correcting minor stylistic or grammatical issues.
• Maintain a consistently encyclopedic voice throughout: neutral, factual, balanced, and concise.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Several long sentences, rhetorical phrasing, and minor grammar/typos reduce readability.

Author Response

Thank you for your insightful comments which I believe have greatly benefited the quality of my work.

With my warmest wishes for a Happy New Year, I submit my response on each of your observations below.

I apologise as tables and figures do not travel well here so I have attached a .pdf file with all the reviews and responses that preserves formatting and special characters.

Response to reviewer 4

 

Dear Authors,

It has been a pleasure to review your manuscript. Below, please find several suggestions:

 

Thank you for your hard work and the constructive approach to improving mine!

 

 

Abstract

Reframe the abstract to be descriptive rather than persuasive, clearly stating what the entry covers and how it is structured.

Remove or soften strong normative language or attribute such claims explicitly.

Identify the central concepts addressed and conclude with a neutral indication that a normative perspective is discussed.

 

As this is an invited entry on the specific topic based on my other publications and expertise I first submitted an abstract for review by the editors and following its acceptance I expanded it to an entry. This is why I have left the submitted and accepted Abstract in its entirety. I am a bit hesitant to accept your approach which is more reminiscent of a literature review paper than an entry leading to a reframing and reimagining of the discipline without recourse to editorial advice on policy. Your suggestions will be followed if the final decision of the editors concurs.

 

 

Introduction

Replace an “indicated research gap” framing with a clear encyclopedic purpose statement that defines the topic, explains its importance, and specifies the entry’s scope.

Add a brief roadmap paragraph outlining the structure of the entry.

Clarify conceptual and philosophical boundaries.

Moderate rhetorical urgency and maintain a neutral, informational tone throughout.

 

All your valuable suggestions have been accommodated in the re-written, clearly-structured introduction. The following has been added / re structured.

 

Aim and overview of this entry

 

Despite its centrality in the economic system, value is often described as an elusive concept [1], hard to define in the context of marketing and management [2-5] and even harder to distinguish from other related constructs such as quality, utility, worth, and price. Further confounding the problem, its description as “highly personal and idiosyncratic” [1] positions it in the unreachable realm of hard to research constructs. It is, however, a concept that has been central to philosophy for almost three millennia [6, 7]. I here argue that we can draw on philosophy to expand and synthesise the extant marketing literature and contribute to the disambiguation of the concept of value in a way that can support further development of this exciting, and – pun intended! – highly valuable to understanding human interactions, field of research.

Definitions have been central to human thinking from its earliest recorded products, such as Plato’s attempts to define ‘knowledge’ [8], ‘science’ [9] or ‘love’ [10], to Anselm’s definition of ‘God’ as proof of God’s existence, all the way through the Baconian and Cartesian foundations of modern science, to Tarski’s definition of ‘truth’ [11]. Debates regarding the categorisation and logic of definitions have been central to philosophy [11] and the cornerstone of science [12]. It is generally accepted that by declaring the essential attributes that form a concept’s essential nature [13] and identifying its ‘real’ defining characteristics, what Locke [14] called ‘voluntary combinations of simple ideas’, scientists express their fundamental beliefs about the boundaries of their own discipline and its purpose as well as their prevailing views of the world, life, and morality. So, this entry seeks to identify and highlight the underlying conceptualisations of value in the key streams of the marketing discipline with the help of philosophy and with the aim to contribute to sustainability in its broader sense.

 

Conceptual boundaries of the entry

 

This Encyclopedia entry focuses on ‘value’, a concept that, as demonstrated in the preceding discussion, lies at the heart of marketing but is neither clearly nor functionally defined [15]. “[O]ne man’s idea of gold … is different from another’s … because he has put in, or left out of his, some simple idea which the other has not” [14]. This has not changed since the 17^th century, when John Locke wrote these words. This entry identifies the ‘simple ideas’ which comprise value and explores the ways in which they have been combined to define ‘value’ for the purposes of marketing science. The marketing discipline is a branch of applied economics which was developed in the late 19^th and 20^th century in the USA and Britain under German influences [16] and grew in the liberal democracy and capitalist framework [5]. Economics, however, is an applied branch of western philosophy so, the path of marketing can be firmly traced back to the Eurocentric, Aristotelian-Cartesian, and Calvinist tradition [5]. This entry traces ‘value’ to its roots. It presents a review of the philosophical foundations necessary for understanding how value is used in marketing scholarship. It also identifies the underlying assumptions and definitions of value in the most prominent streams of the marketing literature, roughly reflecting its development in the late 20^th and 21^st centuries. The entry also discusses the concept of value in the context of the permacrisis circumstances of the 21^st century through the sustainability problematization and seeks to identify a potential path for marketing to become the key mechanism contributing to the achievement of sustainable prosperity.

 

Purpose of the entry

 

The purpose of this entry is to provide marketing, management, and social science researchers with a concise review the underlying conceptualisations of value in the most popular streams of marketing thought and their limitations in addressing the permacrisis conditions of the 21^st century with an emphasis on the problems of sustainability and prosperity faced by businesses, economies, communities, and households.

The objectives of the entry are to:

• Map the foundations of contemporary understandings of value in the marketing literature.
• Uncover the underlying conceptualisation of value in the different streams of marketing theory and their limitations in addressing contemporary global problems.
• Present the emerging marketing paradigm centred on value, i.e. value dominant logic
• Discuss the underlying conceptualisation of value in the current theoretical and practical approaches to sustainability and their limitations in addressing practical problems.
• Synthesize the discussion into a map of the value ecosystem and propose a definition of value for marketing capable of supporting a refocusing of the discipline on global sustainability and sustainable prosperity.

 

Structure of the entry

 

First the philosophical foundations of conceptualisations of value which have found their way in the marketing literature are briefly presented with an emphasis on definitions and the distinctions between (a) use value and exchange value and (b) intrinsic, extrinsic and pragmatic value. The philosophical discussion is summarised and linked to the pre-modern, modern, and post-modern contexts.

Then the marketing literature on the concept of value from the customer perspective is reviewed in a roughly chronological order from traditional 20^th century approaches (the Goods-Dominant Logic and Services Marketing) and 21^st century ones (the Service-Dominant Logic and Service Logic). Emphasis is placed to value as meaning, the axiology of customer value, and the problems caused by decoupling value for values which, it is argued, lies at the heart of the so far unsuccessful attempts at sustainability. The discussion is completed by presenting the still emerging Value-Dominant Logic and its implications for marketing and the socioeconomic system redesign for sustainability and global prosperity. The discussion is combines a roughly chronological with a thematic analysis of both philosophy and marketing focusing on value as meaning and the axiology of customer value which brings the marketing literature back into its proper place in the general field of philosophy of value.

Finally, current and emerging values-driven and value-focused approaches to sustainability are reviewed so as to conclude with a new definition of value in the context of marketing which integrates the individual and collective dimensions of value with personal and societal values systems in a way that globally promotes sustainable prosperity.

 

 

The concept of value and the philosophy of value

Streamline this section to include only the philosophical foundations necessary for understanding how value is used in marketing scholarships.

 

I have checked the text again and done the following: (a) added an introduction explaining choices of theories to review and method of addressing them; (b) removed the discussion of translations of the Protagorean ‘man measure’; (c) incorporated ancient and modern philosophies in a thematic rather than historical approach and changed the headings appropriately; and (d) clarified the approach in the entry introduction as shown above.

 

 

Add a concise key terms box or table defining value, values, valuation, and price, as well as distinguishing use value from exchange value.

 

I have added a new section and a Table Summary of the conceptualisations of value from the perspective of Western Philosophy

 

The key points of the above brief presentation of the various conceptualisations of value are summarized in Table 1.

[5]

 

Table 1: A summary of philosophical conceptualizations of value in their broader context

Era	Premodern	Modern / Industrial	Postmodern / Post-industrial
Levels of organization and presentation of concepts [17]	Self-Action (actors possess the power to produce results)	Interaction (results are produced by actions and reactions)	Transaction (attributions of ultimate, final or independent entities, essences or realities are inconsequential)
Nature of value	Intrinsic	Extrinsic	(irrelevant)
Locus of value realisation	Use value	Exchange value	Pragmatic value
Orders of simulacra, running parallel to the successive mutations of the law of value [18]	Counterfeit	Production	Simulation

 

 

I cannot add a table or box of definitions as you requested for the following reasons:

• Value - the whole entry is about the many different (philosophical, sustainability, and marketing) definitions and their limitations leading to my proposed definition.
• Values – this would make another entry, and an at least as lengthy one at that, so thanks for the suggestion; it will be a next project.
• Valuation, and price are also important concepts in marketing, potentially meriting their own entries but beyond my expertise.
• Distinguishing use value from exchange value is covered in the relevant section and summarised in Table 1 (as above).

However, to accommodate your most valid concerns, I have added a small section just before introducing Section “3. “The concept of value in the marketing literature”. In this section (“A note on value and values”) I define values, valuation and price as used in the rest of the discussion and provide some indicative citations as starting points for researchers wishing to further explore the relevant issues which are huge indeed and central to marketing but not this entry. Here is the new sub-section:

A note on value and values

A small digression is needed at this point. In the ensuing discussion the term ‘values’ - a central one in philosophical investigations through time and cultures; one on which there is a vast body of social sciences and, especially, business related literature [15] - is used in its common meaning of fundamentally important beliefs and assumptions of what is right and proper or good and desirable. Personal values develop through interactions [19] within cultural frameworks [20] and result in morals, the “socially agreed upon values relating to conduct” [19] which in turn give life purpose and distinguish it from just living [21]. A detailed discussion of values (such as in the protocol for the analysis of values [22]) is beyond the scope of this entry so, values here will be used to denote statements of commonly held beliefs about value.

Adopting the common use of the term is consistent with the understanding found in marketing literature: values are applied by individuals to determine their course of action regarding what is worth pursuing in life, to align actions with beliefs, and to set priorities [23]. In this sense values act as (a) behavioural motives [24] and restraints [25], (b) a moral compass, (c) bases for attitude formation [26, 27], and (d) measures for judging business practices [28] and behaviours, including consumption ones [29], or valuations [30], i.e. estimations of the value of objects vis-à-vis the monetary expression of the sellers’ valuation, known as price [31-33].

 

 

Improve signposting by briefly indicating, after each major philosophical distinction, how it maps onto marketing concepts or debates.

 

This comment is most gratefully acknowledged and accommodated. I have added signposts such as more sub-headings and introductions and summaries throughout the entry – some of which I have already explained above and some I present in response to the rest of your comments. Please also see the responses to the other reviewers who asked for more specific signposts.

 

The link of philosophy with marketing theory is done in Section 3 “The concept of value in the marketing literature”. I trace the philosophical underpinnings of marketing theories and I have made the links more explicit and directly linked to specific sources as in the following indicative examples which also address your other comments above:

 

 

The subjectivity of value, which Aristotle first identified [34, 35] and the Enlightenment philosophers further elaborated, is acknowledged in the benefits being described as related to both the task or the outcome and the user [1]. As such, they comprise salient intrinsic and extrinsic dimensions of the product. Intrinsic benefits are strategically created or added by the producer and/or seller whilst extrinsic ones are communicated through signals aiming to enhance value perceptions or they are manipulated so as to match customer definitions of value [1]. This approach, which is very common, is the source of the problem of the elusiveness of the concept of value, especially when it comes to its embeddedness in marketing practice and its generally acknowledged critical importance for business performance [36].

 

Because exchange value is the value of an image, however, it was inferred [5] that, like all images, exchange value develops in the way Baudrillard [37] described: from a reflection of basic reality, to masking first reality itself, and then the absence of reality, to eventually bearing no relation to any reality whatsoever, thus, becoming its own pure simulacrum.

 

[38]. Thus, values constrain the exchange episode participants’ value-seeking activities in a way that balances their well-being with that of the other stakeholders, including those Mackie describes as having “morally valid claims to consideration” [39] who might not actively participate in the social structure or might be unable to influence the behaviour of the other stakeholders (e.g. future generations, minorities and marginalised persons, flora and fauna, or the history, monuments, relics, and traditions of one’s community or those of others).

 

So, V-DL echoes the ancient philosophers, such as Protagoras, Plato and Aristotle, as well as contemporary ones working on virtue ethics, such as Alasdair MacIntyre and Elisabeth Anscombe, as it is premised on the assumption that people are fundamentally wise and virtuous [35, 40-48].

 

 

If the discussion relies primarily on Western philosophical traditions, either acknowledge alternative traditions in passing or clearly state the intended scope as a Western genealogy.

 

It clearly does as marketing is a child of Western thought primarily grown in the West and transplanted elsewhere in recent years. To ensure that this point is not only explicit but clear to everybody I have gratefully espoused your concern and have added an explanation at the beginning of section 2 “Foundations of conceptualisations of value in the Western philosophical tradition”. I have also explicitly discussed this geo-philosophical boundary (which was just stated in the section heading before) in numerous places and also acknowledged similarities to other traditions. Some of the most indicative passages I have here pasted for your convenience.

 

2. Foundations of conceptualisations of value in the Western philosophical tradition

 

This section reviews the definitions and conceptualisations of value and presents the fundamentals of value theory in a roughly chronological order through the key phases of the Western philosophical tradition. This choice does not imply that the relative contributions of other traditions to a philosophy of value are in anyway less important or not as developed. It simply reflects the ontology and epistemology of the marketing discipline: its underlying assumptions about the relationships of humans with each other and with nature. The approach is adopted because of the fact that the intellectual roots and definitional frameworks of marketing are products of the Western tradition. Eastern and other philosophical traditions have had negligible to no impact on the formation of the conceptual foundations of marketing. There have been sporadic Marxist [49] and post-colonial [50] critiques of the Eurocentrism of marketing. However, the fact remains that the Global South is practically non-existent for the leading marketing journals in which less than 3% of articles published are about the markets and consumers of North America and Western Europe [50]. Even in the rare articles in which the data comes from Asia or Africa, for example, the theories applied to interpret them are firmly situated in European social sciences and humanities and the Western born and bred branch of economics, which have been identified as in need of “radical change” [51]. For this change to materialise, it is imperative that we understand the discipline’s fundamental concepts and their provenance. Value is such a concept; fundamental and permeating philosophy, sociology, psychology, economics, and marketing.

 

I have also made it explicit that it is only the Western tradition that is of relevance elsewhere.

 

I added, at the request of another reviewer a table which I have clearly labelled as “Table 1: Summary of the conceptualisations of value from the perspective of Western Philosophy”.

 

 

Table 1: A summary of philosophical conceptualizations of value in their broader context

Era	Premodern	Modern / Industrial	Postmodern / Post-industrial
Levels of organization and presentation of concepts [17]	Self-Action (actors possess the power to produce results)	Interaction (results are produced by actions and reactions)	Transaction (attributions of ultimate, final or independent entities, essences or realities are inconsequential)
Nature of value	Intrinsic	Extrinsic	(irrelevant)
Locus of value realisation	Use value	Exchange value	Pragmatic value
Orders of simulacra, running parallel to the successive mutations of the law of value [18]	Counterfeit	Production	Simulation

 

In the Introduction I explain the following:

 

Conceptual boundaries of the entry

 

This Encyclopedia entry focuses on ‘value’, a concept that, as demonstrated in the preceding discussion, lies at the heart of marketing but is neither clearly nor functionally defined [15]. “[O]ne man’s idea of gold … is different from another’s … because he has put in, or left out of his, some simple idea which the other has not” [14]. This has not changed since the 17^th century, when John Locke wrote these words. This entry identifies the ‘simple ideas’ which comprise value and explores the ways in which they have been combined to define ‘value’ for the purposes of marketing science. The marketing discipline is a branch of applied economics which was developed in the late 19^th and 20^th century in the USA and Britain under German influences [16] and grew in the liberal democracy and capitalist framework [5]. Economics, however, is an applied branch of western philosophy so, the path of marketing can be firmly traced back to the Eurocentric, Aristotelian-Cartesian, and Calvinist tradition [5]

 

Where relevant, I have acknowledged other traditions as in here:

 

This conceptualisation is a simplified version of the IMP one [52, 53] and highlights the fact that “ [d]yadic relationships must always have three satisfied parties” [54]: the buyer, the seller, and stakeholders. The idea that exchange relationships involve all stakeholders, and thus need to result in value for the buyer, the seller, and the community, can be traced back to the Omi merchants of Japan in the Edo period (1601 or 1603 to 1868) and the concept of Sampo Yoshi (三方よし) [23, 55, 56].

 

The concept of value in marketing literature

Reorganize the section into a reference-style map with short, clearly labeled subsections rather than an extended narrative

 

I have added the following signposting sub-headings

Value in the Context of Goods-Dominant Logic and the Services Marketing literature

Branding as a manipulation of different forms of value

Product characteristics as expressions of intrinsic and extrinsic value

Product Valuation

Epistemological variations of conceptualisations of value manifestations in the context of consumer behaviour

 

Value in the context of Service-Dominant Logic

Value co-creation

The role of the customer

 

I have also added the following new section:

 

 

A synthesis of the key understandings of value in the main streams of marketing literature

 

The conceptualisations of value across the main streams of marketing literature discussed above can be synthesised on the basis of their understandings regarding the nature of value (use, exchange, or experiential value), how it is determined, the emphasis they place on the outcome or the process of value generation and consumption, and the process by which value is generated and consumed. These understandings result in the determination of the role of the seller and the buyer, the role of marketing, the resources involved, and the focus on the firm or the totality of stakeholders acting as an ecosystem. The lines distinguishing the different streams are not always definite and clear and their approaches often converge on some aspects and differ across others. Table 1 summarises the key understandings of value and the resulting mandates of the main streams of marketing literature (G-DL, Services Marketing, and Service-Dominant Logic) and their most prominent sub-streams.

 

 

Table 2: Summary of the key understandings of value and the resulting mandates of the main streams of marketing literature and their most prominent sub-streams.

Marketing literature stream		Goods Dominant Logic		Services Marketing		Service Dominant Logic
		Traditional	Branding	Traditional	Experiential Marketing
Aspects of the conceptualisation of value
	Nature of value	Use	Exchange	Use & exchange	Experiential	Co-created
	Value is determined	As the balance of benefits and sacrifices			As the balance of expectations and experiences	Phenomenologically
	Emphasis on	Outcome			Process
	Outcome	Tangible product	Perceptions	Service delivery	Customer experience	Integration
	Process	Transaction			Experience	Ongoing
	Role of seller	Embeds value in the product	Embeds value in the brand	Produces value during service delivery	Creates experiences	Provides interaction opportunities
	Role of buyer	Consumes value	Displays value	Experiences value		Determines value
	Role of marketing	Creates value	Crafts value significations	Manages service elements	Manages processes	Facilitates resource integration
	Key resources	Raw materials and technology	Communication	Skills, procedures, physical evidence, and technology		Operand and operant
	Focus	Firm				Ecosystem

 

 

 

Explicitly label levels of analysis

 

I am sorry but I do not understand what you mean here. This entry is just a critical review of the conceptualisations of value in different disciplines and marketing streams.

 

 

Avoid overly reductive characterizations of earlier paradigms; include at least one balancing sentence acknowledging variation within each stream.

 

Point gratefully taken and fully accommodated in the new text as well as through the final editing. As this was done throughout the entry I cannot provide samples.

 

 

Add a short “Related traditions” paragraph with a small number of anchor citations.

 

I am sorry but I am not sure I understand what you mean here. Would the following satisfy your concern?

 

This conceptualisation is a simplified version of the IMP one [52, 53] and highlights the fact that “ [d]yadic relationships must always have three satisfied parties” [54]: the buyer, the seller, and stakeholders. The idea that exchange relationships involve all stakeholders, and thus need to result in value for the buyer, the seller, and the community, can be traced back to the Omi merchants of Japan in the Edo period (1601 or 1603 to 1868) and the concept of Sampo Yoshi (三方よし) [23, 55, 56].

.

 

Value in the Context of Sustainability

Shift from critique or advocacy toward a neutral synthesis of established sustainability-related ideas.

 

Thank you for this suggestion which I will definitely take up in a future entry on sustainability-related ideas. For the purposes of this entry, and in the interest of brevity, the critique of the dominant 3BL approach supports the reconceptualization of value in the context of  marketing the entry proposes. I hope the following re-writing of the introductory paragraph meets the required neutrality concern.

 

“The current approach to sustainability is not sustainable” because the dominant one, the ‘triple bottom line’ (3BL) visually puts social and environmental concerns on a par with profits [54] and is simply a plea to firms to make the small concession of measuring their social and environmental impact alongside their financial performance [57]. The 3BL first accepts that economic activity is simply a mechanism for the actants to generate profits for themselves by exploiting operant and operand resources to their full capacity and then sets the limits of exploitation at just the point before the exhaustion of these resources. There is no concern for value for non-customers, suppliers, society, and the inanimate world. Just as we saw in the review of conceptualisations of value through the marketing literature, even customer value is linked to customer satisfaction which increases the chances of repurchase and loyalty[36, 58-63], which, in turn, lower customer acquisition costs, increase customer life-time value (that is total revenue from the customer for the firm) [64] and, ultimately, maximise profits [65].

 

 

Clearly define key linking concepts, such as externalities, ecological limits or planetary boundaries, circular economy or regenerative approaches, and wellbeing or quality-of-life perspectives.

 

In response to this and another reviewer’s comments I have defined all the terms that I use (e.g. “the externalities (that is the unintended consequences) of product production (such as resource depletion or air and water pollution), marketing (such as socially harmful advertising or cluttering of roadsides with hoardings and billboards) use (e.g. passive smoking or injuries by faulty products), and disposal (e.g. plastic wrapping polluting the oceans or landfill overload) and I have added examples.

 

 

Present disagreements as differences among scholarly streams rather than as definitive judgments.

 

I have rephrased all instances that could be interpreted as judgements to reflect the development of ideas and the limitations of perspectives strictly vis-à-vis the objectives of the entry. You were right, there were numerous instances so I cannot offer examples.

 

 

Ensure that critiques of sustainability frameworks are balanced, carefully attributed, and situated within existing debates.

 

As the purpose of the entry is not to review alternative sustainability frameworks or to discuss the existing debates surrounding sustainability, and because the entry is already on the long side, I will regretfully refrain from expanding the sustainability section. I do appreciate your idea for another entry which I might take up in the future..

 

 

Conclusions and Prospects

Replace a speculative “prospects” orientation with a concise summary of current directions and debates.

 

I truly appreciate this suggestion which will improve readability. I have added a concise summary of current debates in Table 2.

 

 

 

 

Table 2: Summary of the key understandings of value and the resulting mandates of the main streams of marketing literature  and their most prominent sub-streams.

Marketing literature stream		Goods Dominant Logic		Services Marketing		Service Dominant Logic
		Traditional	Branding	Traditional	Experiential Marketing
Aspects of the conceptualisation of value
	Nature of value	Use	Exchange	Use & exchange	Experiential	Co-created use and exchange value
	Value is determined	As the balance of benefits and sacrifices			As the balance of expectations and experiences	Phenomenologically
	Emphasis	Outcome			Process
	Outcome	Tangible product	Perceptions	Service delivery	Customer experience	Integration
	Process	Transaction			Experience	Ongoing
	Role of seller	Embeds value in the product	Embeds value in the brand	Produces value during service delivery	Creates experiences	Provides interaction opportunities
	Role of buyer	Consumes value	Displays value	Experiences value		Determines value
	Role of marketing	Creates value	Crafts value significations	Manages service elements	Manages processes	Facilitates resource integration
	Key resources	Raw materials and technology	Communication	Skills and technology		Operand and operant
	Focus	Firm				Ecosystem

 

 

 

and Figure summarising directions.

Figure 1: Diagrammatic representation of the value ecosystem through which marketing supports sustainable prosperity

 

 

Present any proposed definition explicitly as an integrative or normative proposal, not as a field-wide consensus.

 

Thank you for this! I have accommodated this comment by introducing all propositions with the phrase: “In conclusion, I propose …” and have also removed normative statements such as “Marketing needs to be repositioned as the fundamental value–making tool, as VDL suggests, to enable “the emergence of a positive and sustainable value”, offering “opportunities for humanity at large” [66] to find the way to sustainable prosperity.” even though they were attributed to the authors that proposed them.

 

 

Conclude with a compact recap of the entry’s key distinctions, particularly those related to value-in-exchange, value-in-use, value co-creation, and sustainability challenges.

 

I have accommodated your suggestion in the two Tables and the Figure I have added to the entry and have pasted here in response to your other comments. Thank you, once again.

 

 

Abbreviations

Remove duplicate entries and standardize capitalization and hyphenation.

 

Done, two double entries found in the Abbreviation list thank you! Capitalisation and hyphenation are confirmed correct.

 

 

Confirm that each abbreviation appears in the text and is defined at first use.

 

Confirmed and 2^nd appearances with the full term are only left in subheadings.

Corrections made throughout.

 

 

General comments

Add one table or figure to support rapid comprehension.

 

I have added the two Tables and the Figure as requested and have pasted them here in response to your other comments. Thank you, once again.

 

 

Edit for readability by shortening long sentences, reducing rhetorical flourishes, and correcting minor stylistic or grammatical issues.

 

Done, thank you for the suggestion. I have broken down long sentences and done a final edit and proofreading.

 

 

Maintain a consistently encyclopedic voice throughout: neutral, factual, balanced, and concise.

 

 Done, thank you for the suggestion.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Several long sentences, rhetorical phrasing, and minor grammar/typos reduce readability.

 

Taken care of throughout, thank you for the suggestion. Please refer to the clean copy for the final editing as it is hard to see in the ‘track changes’ version.

 

 

Date of this review

20 Dec 2025 18:57:22

 

 

 

References used in all responses.

 

1. Zeithaml, V.A., Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of marketing, 1988. 52(3): p. 2–22.
2. Edvardsson, B., B. Tronvoll, and T. Gruber, Expanding understanding of service exchange and value co-creation: a social construction approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2011. 39(2): p. 327–339.
3. Kelly, S., P. Johnston, and S. Danheiser, Value-ology. 2017, Palgrave Macmillan: Cham, Switzerland.
4. Mingione, M. and L. Leoni, Blurring B2C and B2B boundaries: corporate brand value co-creation in B2B2C markets. Journal of Marketing Management, 2020. 36(1-2): p. 72–99.
5. Panigyrakis, G.G. and A.K. Zarkada, New Philosophical Paradigms in Marketing: From amoral consumerism to axiological societing, in The Routledge Companion on the Future of Marketing, L. Moutinho, E. Bigne, and A.K. Manrai, Editors. 2014, Routledge: Oxford.
6. Scruton, R., A Short History of Modern Philosophy: From Descartes to Wittgenstein. 2002, Taylor and Francis.
7. Scruton, R., Modern philosophy: An introduction and survey. 2012: A&C Black.
8. Πλάτων (Plato), Θεαίτητος: Η γνωσιολογία του Πλάτωνος (Theaetetus: Plato on Knowledge). Αρχαίοι Συγγραφείς. 2015 / [369 BCE], Θεσαλονίκη: Ζήτρος.
9. Πλάτων (Plato), Πολιτεία (Republic). 2002 / [circa 380 BCE], Athens: Πόλις (Polis).
10. Πλάτων (Plato), Συμπόσιον (Symposium). Βιβλιοθήκη Φέξη Αρχαίων Ελλήνων Συγγραφέων. 1912 / [circa 385BCE], Athens: Fexi (Φέξη). 80.
11. Gupta, A., Definitions, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta, Editor. 2021, Stanford University: Stanford, CA.
12. Yaffe, P., Workings of science. Ubiquity, 2022. 2022(March): p. 1–11.
13. Αριστοτέλης (Aristotle), Ἀναλυτικὰ Ὕστερα (Posterior Analytics). trans. 2015 / [4th century BCΕ], Adelaide: eBooks@Adelaide, The University of Adelaide Library.
14. Locke, J., An Essay concerning Humane Understanding. 1690, Thomas Basset: London.
15. Agle, B.R. and C.B. Caldwell, Understanding research on values in business. Business and Society, 1999. 38(3): p. 326–387.
16. Jones, D.G.B. and M. Tadajewski, Foundations of Marketing Thought. 2017.
17. Dewey, J. and A.F. Bentley, Knowing and the Known. 2019 / [1949], American Institute for Economic Research: Great Barrington, MA.
18. Baudrillard, J., Symbolic Exchange and Death. 2016, Sage: London.
19. Kluckholn, C., Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action: An Exploration in Definition and Classifcation, in Toward a General theory of action, T. Parsons and E. Shills, Editors. 1951, Harvard University Press: Cambridge. p. 388–433.
20. Schwartz, S.H., Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries, in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, M.P. Zanna, Editor. 1992, Academic Press: San Diego, CA. p. 1–65.
21. Pirsig, R.M., Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance: An inquiry into values. 1974, Reading: Vintage.
22. Tubadji, A., Value-Free Analysis of Values, in Encyclopedia. 2020.
23. Nguyen, T.K.G., T. Ozawa, and P. Fan, Sanpo-yoshi, top management personal values, and ESG performance. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 2024. 41: p. 100903.
24. Richins, M.L. and S. Dawson, A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 1992. 19(3).
25. Jägel, T., et al., Individual values and motivational complexities in ethical clothing consumption: A means-end approach. Journal of Marketing Management, 2012. 28(3-4): p. 373–396.
26. Chen, S.-H. and K.-P. Lee, The Role of Personality Traits and Received Values in Persuation: An Elaboratiion Likelihood Model Perspective on Online Shopping. Social Behavior & Personality: an international journal, 2008. 36(10): p. 1379–1400.
27. Pelsmacker, P., W. Janssens, and C. Mielants, Consumer values and fair-trade beliefs, attitudes and buying behaviour. International Review on Public and Non Profit Marketing, 2005. 2(2): p. 50–69.
28. Carrigan, M. and P. De Pelsmacker, Will ethical consumers sustain their values in the global credit crunch? International Marketing Review, 2009. 26(6): p. 674–687.
29. Shaw, D., et al., An exploration of values in ethical consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 2005. 4(3): p. 185–200.
30. Mansori, S., M. Sambasivan, and S. Md-Sidin, Acceptance of novel products: the role of religiosity, ethnicity and values. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 2015. 33(1): p. 39–66.
31. Hustvedt, G. and J.C. Bernard, Effects of social responsibility labelling and brand on willingness to pay for apparel. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 2010. 34(6): p. 619–626.
32. Vock, M., W. van Dolen, and K. de Ruyter, Understanding Willingness to Pay for Social Network Sites. Journal of Service Research, 2013.
33. Li, S. and Z. Kallas, Meta-analysis of consumers' willingness to pay for sustainable food products. Appetite, 2021. 163: p. 105239.
34. Aristotle, Aristotle's Metaphysics, W.D. Ross, Editor. 1924 / [4th century BCE], Clarendon Press: Oxford.
35. Aristotle, The Nicomachean Ethics. trans. 1954 / [4th century BCΕ], Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Medberg, G. and C. Grönroos, Value-in-use and service quality: do customers see a difference? Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 2020. 30(4/5): p. 507–529.
37. Baudrillard, J., Simulacra and Simulation (Simulacres et simulation). 1981 trans 1994, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
38. Williams, B., Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. 1985, London: Fontana Press.
39. Mackie, J.L., Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. 1990, London: Penguin.
40. Πλάτων (Plato), Μένων (Menon). 2013 / [385 BCE], Αθήνα (Athens): Βιβλιοθήκη Φέξη Αρχαίων Συγγραφέων (Fexis Library of Ancient Greek Authors).
41. Mansfeld, J., Protagoras on epistemological obstacles and persons, in The Sophists and their Legacy, G.B. Kerferd, Editor. 1981, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. p. 38–53.
42. Plato, Protagoras, B. Jowett, Editor. 2008, Project Gutenberg.
43. Bonazzi, M., Protagoras, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, E.N. Zalta and U. Nodelman, Editors. 2024, Stanford University.
44. Barnes, J., Introduction to The Ethics of Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics. Revised ed. 1976, London: Penguin Classics.
45. MacIntyre, A.C., How moral agents became ghosts or why the history of ethics diverged from that of the philosophy of mind. Synthese, 1982. 53(2): p. 295–312.
46. MacIntyre, A.C., After Virtue. 3rd ed. Vol. 211. 2007, Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
47. Schneewind, J.B., Modern moral philosophy, in A Companion to Ethics, P. Singer, Editor. 1997, Blakwell: Oxford. p. 147–157.
48. Anscombe, G.E.M., Modern Moral Philosophy. Philosophy, 1958. 33(124): p. 1–19.
49. Berger, A.A., Marxism and Marketing, in Marketing and American Consumer Culture: A Cultural Studies Analysis, A.A. Berger, Editor. 2016, Springer International Publishing: Cham, switzerland. p. 47–54.
50. Varman, R., Postcolonialism, subalternity, and critical marketing, in Responsible Marketing for Well-being and Society, M. Saren, et al., Editors. 2024, Routledge. p. 337–354.
51. Hodgson, G.M., From Marx to Markets: An Intellectual Odyssey. 2025, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
52. Ford, D., ed. Understanding Business Markets: Interaction, Relationships and Networks, The Industrial Marketing and Purchasing Group. 1990, Academic Press: London.
53. IMP Group, An interaction approach, in Understanding Business Markets: Interaction, Relationships and Networks, D. Ford, Editor. 1990, Academic Press: London. p. 7–26.
54. Zarkada, A.K. and Y. Melanthiou, Future Management for Sustainable Prosperity – Regenerating Mindsets, Rethinking Strategic Agility. 2026 – in print, Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
55. The Association to Spread the Concept of "Sanpoyoshi" Worldwide. What is Sanpoyoshi? 2010; Available from: http://sanpoyoshi.net/what_en/.
56. Shinohara, Y. and R.C. Kim, Sanpo-Yoshi and Corporate Social Responsibility in Japan. Strategic Analysis, 2022. 46(4): p. 403–415.
57. Miller, K., The triple bottom line: What it is & why it’s important, in Business Insights, H.B.S. Online, Editor. 2023 / [2020], HBS: Cambridge, MA.
58. Tirtakusuma, C.J.P. and A. Nuvriasari, Experiential Marketing, Value, and Service Quality: Impact on RedDoorz Customer Satisfaction. Economic and Business Horizon, 2025. 4(3): p. 513–524.
59. Grönroos, C., A service perspective on business relationships: The value creation, interaction and marketing interface. Industrial Marketing Management, 2011. 40(2): p. 240–247.
60. Heinonen, K., Reconceptualizing customer perceived value: the value of time and place. Managing Service Quality: an international journal, 2004. 14(2/3): p. 205–215.
61. Helmold, M., Market Segmentation, Targeting, Differentiation and Positioning, in Performance Excellence in Marketing, Sales and Pricing: Leveraging Change, Lean and Innovation Management. 2022, Springer International Publishing: Cham. p. 105–116.
62. Manser Payne, E.H., J. Peltier, and V.A. Barger, Enhancing the value co-creation process: artificial intelligence and mobile banking service platforms. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 2021. 15(1): p. 68–85.
63. Wirtz, J. and C. Lovelock, Services Marketing: People Technology Strategy. 8th ed. 2016, Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific.
64. Zeithaml, V.A., et al., Three decades of customer value research: paradigmatic roots and future research avenues. Journal of Service Research, 2020. 23(4): p. 409–432.
65. Bernhardt, K.L., N. Donthu, and P.A. Kennett, A longitudinal analysis of satisfaction and profitability. Journal of Business Research, 2000. 47(2): p. 161–171.
66. Mahajan, G., et al., Value-dominant logic: organizational principles. European Journal of Marketing, 2023. 57(5): p. 1245–1271.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear authors, thank you for your hard work on improving this manuscript following our suggestions. I consider the updates give the structure to your paper to be publishable. 

I wish you the best in this review process.