Transformative Marketing Education: Drivers, Outcomes, and Research Agenda
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The perseverance and agility to be transformative marketing educators have been identified to be critical for the future of marketing education. In developing this observation further, this study conceptualizes the transformative marketing education (TME) concept and defines it. Furthermore, adopting a management educational institution perspective, this study proposes a framework for the implementation of TME. The proposed framework identifies the drivers of TME to be the marketing education triad, comprised of the management education institution, the marketing learners, and the external environment. The study identifies the outcomes of implementing TME as fourfold: (a) an interdisciplinary activity, (b) a value-creating activity, (c) an insights-centric activity, and (d) a “brain retrain” activity. The study also offers some variables that could moderate the outcomes of implementing TME. For the drivers and outcomes, this study offers propositions that can be tested. In addition, potential strategic implications of the TME outcomes are identified as (a) personalizing marketing education, (b) enhancing student engagement, and (c) establishing closer stakeholder connections. The study concludes by identifying a research agenda for TME.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it