ECONOMIC DIPLOMACY SEMINAR – EDS 2008Fužine, Croatia

MARKETING PARADIGM SHIFTWorldview and Servant Marketing Model

Prof. dr. Miodrag HitrecAssociate Professor, Marketing Department

University of Zagreb, Graduate School of Economics and Business,

Dražen Glavaš, BS, MA, CMCProfessor, Private Business College Vern’, ZagrebPresident, Partner Business Association, Zagreb

e-mail: drazen.glavas@partner.hr

This paper was presented at theInternational Conference, An Enterprise Odyssey: Economics and Business in the

New Millennium 2002, University of Zagreb, Graduate School of Economics & Businesss, Zagreb, June 27-29, 2002

MARKETING PARADIGM SHIFT

Worldview and Servant Marketing Model

1. INTRODUCTION

In March 2002, ARTHUR ANDERSEN was indicted on charges of obstructing justice. In

August 2002, ENRON pleaded guilty to money laundering. The WORLDCOM story

continued the fraud chain including: ADELPHIA COMMUNICATIONS, TYCO, and

IMCLONE SYSTEMS. A recent issue of FORTUNE magazine (Sept. 9, 2002) is entitled The

Greedy Bunch - meet the 25 companies with the greediest executives. Among them are Lou

Pai former ENRON division head who cashed out $270 million and Dennis Kozlowski former

CEO of TYCO who cashed out $258 million before their companies fell. In the last year

FORTUNE and and other business magazines have been writing about greed, failing ethics,

and mistrust. The year before the title story of FORTUNE (July, 2001) was God and Business

- the Surprising Quest for Spiritual Renewal in the American Workplace. In this paper we

challenge economies and particularly marketing based on “Greed.” Our intention is to show

the deeper underlying worldview, paradigm that produces “Greed” and to explore a different

alternative - economy and marketing based on “God.”

We live in a “global village” where the only constant is change. The computer power doubles

every 18 months (Moore’s Law) and globalization is quickly spreading around the world

creating more and more complex cultural and human relationships. September 11th turned

another page in world history bringing an emphasis on security as well as many other

consequences that are not yet evident. The most significant was/is the war in Iraq. Our world

is divided, argues Harvard scholar Samuel Huntington1, not so much by geographical

boundaries as by religious and cultural traditions, by people‘s most deeply held beliefs –by

worldviews. Huntington predicted a clash between the worldviews of three major traditional

civilizations: The Western world, the Islamic world, and the Confucian East. Political

scientist James Kurth, (Huntingtons former student) challenged him arguing that the most

significant clash would be within Western civilization – “between those who adhere to a

Judeo-Christian framework and those who favor postmodernism and multiculturalism.”2

Charles Colson, former presidential aide to Richard Nixon, believes Kurth is right. “And the

reason this conflict within Western culture is so significant is that Western culture may soon

1 Huntington, S. P. (1998): The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, Touchstone Books, London2 Colson, C.; Pearcy, N. (1999): How Now Shall We Live?, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, IL, pp. 19.

2

dominate the globe. … Across the globe, people are complaining about what one French

politician described as a ‘U.S. cultural invasion.’”3 John Pilger puts it even more harshly

quoting an article in Washington Post. “In an article entitled ‘Unilateralism is the key to our

success’, Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post described the world in the next fifty

years as one without protection against nuclear attack or environmental damage for the

citizens of any country except the United States; a world where ‘democracy’ means nothing if

its benefits are at odds with American ‘interest’; a world in which to express dissent against

these ‘interest’ brands one a terrorist and justifies surveillance, repression and death.”4

The environment in which “modern” marketing has developed and which it had influenced

throughout the last ten years is rapidly changing. The mutual relationship of marketing and its

environment may be looked at by merely noticing what is visible. Yet, it is possible to look

more deeply, examining its foundations by trying to understand how worldview influences

marketing. This is our intention in this paper. This paper touches on a wide range of topics

thus there is not always a satisfactory explanation for everything. Comprehensive

explanations and arguments may be found in other works which we refer to in this study.

Many people are disturbed by the recent high-profile meltdowns, but by which ethical norms

in our postmodern, pluralistic global world do we judge these corporate frauds (enronisms) or

Naomi Klein‘s5 well documented brand-name secrets and transnational corporations scandals

(Nike sneakers have been traced back to the abusive sweatshops of Vietnam, Barbie‘s little

outfits back to the child laborers of Sumatra, Starbucks‘ lattes to the sun-scorched coffee

fields of Guatemala, and Shell‘s oil back to the polluted and impoverished villages of the

Niger Delta.)? How do we know what is right and wrong? Deeper moral and ethical questions

are louder and louder in the global market economy. The UN‘s Global Compact promoted by

Kofi Annan, Hans Küng‘s World Ethos6 and other global ethics initatives are trying to provide

some answers. The answer to the question what is right and wrong depends on our worldview.

2. WORLDVIEW7

3 Ibid., 19-20.4 Pilger, J. (2002): The New Rulers of the World, Verso, London, pp. 10.5 Klein, N. (2001): No Logo, Flamingo, London, pp. xviii.6 Küng, H. (2001): Globale Unterhehmen – globales Ethos, Frankfurter Allgemeine Buch, Frankfurt am Main7 Another way to define worldview is through essential answers to the following seven questions:1. What is prime reality – the really real? To this we might answer God, or the gods, or the material cosmos. 2. What is the nature of external reality, that is, the world around us? Here our answers point to whether we see the world as created or autonomous, as chaotic or orderly, as matter or spirit; or whether we emphasize our

3

“A worldview is a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true or

entirely false) which we hold (consciously or subconsciously, consistently or inconsistently)

about the basic makeup of our world.”8 Other synonyms of worldview include: “mental

infrastructure”, “religious assumption”, “metanaration”, “cultural story”, Marxist call a

worldview “ideology” and scientist a “paradigm”.

Stephen Covey in his bestseller “Seven Habits of Highly Successful People”9

compares a paradigm with a city map. Maps explain the reality we see around us. It will be of

little help to have a map of Vienna (on which by mistake is printed Zagreb) in finding a

certain location in Zagreb. We can work hard on our behavior (trying more, working harder,

speeding up etc.) or attitudes (positive thinking, developing self confidence, motivation, etc.)

but this will not help us arrive at the desired destination in Zagreb. The problem is that we

have a wrong city map. Looking at the wrong map we interpret the reality around us wrongly.

Covey talks about two kinds of maps that we carry in our heads, one showing the “reality”

(the things as they are) and the other “values” (the things as they should be) through which we

interpret everything that we experience. The way we see things determines our thinking and

behavior. Our worldviews determine our values.

An excellent history of the worldview concept was provided by David K. Naugle in his book

“Worldview.”10 Some authors11 talk about three basic worldview archetypes: NATURALISM

subjective, personal relationship to the world or its objectivity apart from us.3. What is a human being? To this we might answer: a highly complex machine, a sleeping god, a person made in the image of God, a “naked ape.”4. What happens to a person at death? Here we might reply personal extinction, or transformation to a higher state, or reincarnation, or departure to a shadowy existence on the “other side.”5. Why is it possible to know anything at all? Sample answers include the idea that we are made in the image of an all-knowing God or that consciousness and rationality developed under the contingencies of survival in a long process of evolution.6. How do we know what is right and wrong? Again, perhaps we are made in the image of God whose character is good, or right and wrong are determined by human choice alone or what feels good, or the notions simply developed under an impetus toward cultural or physical survival.7. What is the meaning of human history? To this we might answer: to realize the purpose of God or the gods, to make a paradise on earth, to prepare a people for a life in community with a loving and holy God, and so forth. Dr. James Sire in his book “Universe Next Door- a Basic Worldview Catalog” asks those questions to each of the worldview described: Theism, Deism, Naturalism which includes Marxism, Nihilism, Existentialism, Eastern Pantheistic Monism, The New Age and Postmodernism. Cited in: Sire, J. (1997): The Universe Next Door – A Basic Worldview Catalog, InterVarsity Press, Dovners Grove, IL, pp. 17-18. Other authors use different questions: 1. Who am I? Or, what is the nature, task and purpose of human beings? 2. Where am I? Or, what is the nature of the world and universe I live in? 3. What’s wrong? Or, what is the basic problem or obstacle that keeps me from attaining fulfillment? In other words how do I understand evil? 4. What is the remedy? Or, how is it possible to overcome this hindrance to my fulfillment? Cited in: Walsh, B. J.; Middleton, J. R. (1984): The Transforming Vision, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL, pp. 35.8 Sire., pp. 16.9 Covey, S. (1995): Sedam navika uspješnih ljudi, Mozaik knjiga, Zagreb, pp. 17-18.10 Naugle, D. K. (2002): Worldview – The History of a Concept, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI11 Miller, D. L. (1998): Discipling Nations – The power of Truth to Transform Cultures, YWAM Publishing, Seattle, WA, pp. 256-258.

4

or secularism (Naturalism sees reality as “ultimately physical”), BIBLICAL THEISM

(Reality is “ultimately personal” because it has been created by the personal God) and

ANIMISM (Animism views reality as essentially spiritual, “animated” by spirits).

Darrow L. Miller analyzes the influence of worldview on development. As an illustration we

can look at how those three above mentioned worldviews understand history and what

consequences this understanding has in development work. Miller asks two questions: The

first is ontological: “Where have we come from?” The second is teleological: “Where are we

going?” Animism answers both questions with a resounding, “No-where!” To the animist,

life is like a wheel, a series of endless cycles: birth, marriage, death; spring, summer, etc.

Human soul travels from one life to another in a continuing process of a reincarnation.

History does not have any meaning. Naturalism (secularism) answers the question where are

we going with an emphatic, “To the grave!” Its symbol is the hourglass. Time and resources

are running out. And while the secularist can indeed see time passing in a way the animist

cannot, he has no transcendent historical perspective. Secularism has no answers to life’s

ontological and teleological questions. Built upon Judeo-Christian theism, the development

ethic introduces a radical concept of time – that it is linear, with past, present, and future.

History is open, also; God, angels, and men can intervene to change its course. It’s no

wonder, then, that cultures rooted in this ethic expect that life can get better, that progress is

possible in the material world. These societies have hope for the future, a sense of optimism, a

sense of ambition, action, and discovery. History is going somewhere.

What is the major worldview challenge today? Some scholars12 believe that the major

conflict of our day is theism versus naturalism. Before we look at main characteristics of

those two worldviews and their implication on marketing we need to have a historical context.

We could start with 1450 and the invention of the printing press by Guttenberg but instead we

will start with May 24, 1543. A few hours before his death Copernicus (1473-1543) published

his only scientific work , On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres about heliocentric

theory. This started the first major paradigm shift replacing the Medieval Ptolemeic theory of

the world and opening a new page of the Renaissance history. “Kepler (1571-1630) building

on the work of Copernicus, was creating something new in which truth was not required to

gain favor in God’s eyes. … It remained for Galileo (1564-1642) who first used the telescope

as an instrument of science (died in 1642 the year Isaac Newton was born) to make visible the

12 Colson, C.; Pearcy, N. (1999): How Now Shall We Live?, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, IL, pp. 20.

5

unresolvable contradictions between science and theology, that is, between intellectual and

moral points of view. … Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo put in place the dynamite that

would blow up the theology and metaphysics of the medieval world.”13

One of the consequences of these discoveries was the deenthronement of man and Earth from

the privileged center in the universe. This thinking changed human relationship toward

religion and started the chasm between reason and faith. Suddenly there were two sources of

truth: Church and science. Unfortunately the moral decay14 of clergy during those years also

contributed to it. Dr. Hans Küng, who played a major role in the writing of the documents of

Vatican II, in his new book The Catholic Church – a Short History notes how Martin Luther

(1483-1546), Augustinian monk, furthered this change when he posted his ninety-five theses

in Wittenberg in 151715: “From the perspective of the present day we can understand the

Reformation better as a paradigm change: a change in the overall constellation of theology,

church, and society. No less then the Copernican revolution in the change from a geocentric to

a heliocentric picture of the world, Luther’s Reformation was an epoch-making change from

the medieval Roman Catholic paradigm to the Protestant-Evangelical paradigm: in theology

and the church it was a move away from the all too human ecclesiocentricity of the powerful

church to the christocentricity of the gospel.”16

Some of the most important figures during the “shift” period from theism to naturalism are:

Francis Bacon (1561-1626); Thomas Hobs (1588-1679); Rene Descartes (1596-1650); John

Locke (1632-1714); Isaac Newton (1642-1727); David Hume (1711-1766); Adam Smith

(1723-1790); James Watt (1765 inventions of steam engine); Imanuel Kant (1724-1804);

Georg Hegel (1770-1831); Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

13 Postman, N. (1993): Technopoly – The Surrender of Culture to Technology, Vintage Books, New York, NY, pp. 30-32. Postman wrote a brilliant and provocative book about the influence of technology on our lives.14 “The Renaissance popes maintained celibacy for their church with an iron hand, but no historian will ever discover how many children these holy fathers fathered, living in monstrous luxury, unbridled sensuality, and uninhibited vice. Three example may suffice: … The crafty Alexander VI Borgia (was pope from 1492-1503, italics ours), Machiavelli’s model, who made his way into office with simony in the grand style and had four children by his mistress (and also other children by other women when he was still a cardinal), excommunicated Girolamo Savonarola, the great preacher of penitence, and was responsible for authorizing his burning in Florence.” Cited in: Küng, H. (2001): The Catholic Church – A Short History, Modern Library, New York, NY, pp. 119-120.15 “In 1517 he (Pope Leo X, from 1513-1521, italics ours) failed to see the significance of an epoch-making event which was to usher in the end of the universal claim of the pope in West as well. As professor of biblical theology in Wittenberg, an unknown Augustinian monk who had been in Rome a few months previously and who saw himself as a loyal Catholic published ninety-five theses against the trade in indulgences aimed at financing the gigantic new St. Peter’s, which was now built. His name was Martin Luther.” Cited in Ibid., pp. 120. 16 Ibid., pp. 126-127.

6

3. NATURALISM

This paper is too short to do justice to a worldview such as Naturalism, but we will just offer

a brief overview for purpose of discussion:17

1. Matter exists eternally and is all there is. God does not exist;

2.The cosmos exist as a uniformity of cause and effect in a closed system;

3. Human beings are complex “machines”; personality is an interrelation of chemical and

physical properties we do not yet fully understand;

4. Death is extinction of personality and individuality;

5. History is a linear stream of events linked by cause and effect without an overarching

purpose;

6. Ethics is related only to human beings.

Some problematic questions arise when we ask about meaning and purpose. Does

naturalism give a foundation to think of ourselves as worthy? On what basis? Unique maybe,

but even gorillas are unique. Can a being that just exists by accident be valuable?

The main problem with naturalism is the meaning and purpose of human life. And if we do

not have any purpose then we do not have any responsibility and it does not matter how we

live. In morality, naturalism results in relativism. If nature (cosmos) is all there is, then there

is no transcendental source of moral truth and people are left to make up their own rights and

wrongs, according to their subjective or cultural criteria. Instead of morality, we have

situational ethics. Dostoyevski (and before him Nietzsche) rightly maintained that everything

is allowed if there is no God. Most naturalists (secularists) cannot live logically within their

own system. Some ended up in Nihilism18: Nietzsche, Hemingway committed suicide, Beckett

wrote black comedies, Kafka and others. Existentialism came as an answer to nihilism. As dr.

Sire puts it”…the essence of existentialism’s most important goal is summed up in one phrase

– to transcend nihilism.”19

If we are just cosmic accidents without purpose a logical conclusion is well put by

Leslie Newbigin: “If I do not know the purpose for which human life was designed, I have no

basis for saying that any kind of human life-style is good or bad. It is simply an example of

human life as it is. Judgment about what is good or bad can only be personal hunches. Each

person will be entitled to her own. They will be, as we say, personal beliefs; and since there is

no objective fact by which to test them, pluralism operates.”20 17 Sire., pp. 62.18 See Sire on Nihilism, pp.74. 19 Ibid., pp. 95.20 Newbigin, L. (1989): The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI, pp. 16.

7

The World that was created in the hundred years after the Enlightenment is a world of

causes and affects. Everything is understood and explained in the terms of the fundamental

law of physics. “In the context of a growing scientistic and mechanistic world view, it was

almost inevitable that the ultimate goal of life would be something which could be

mechanistically produced and mathematically quantified – namely economic growth.”21 We

have come to realize that economic growth does have definite ecological, social and

psychological limits. Today we know from “particle physics” that the ultimate elements of

what we call matter are not material. And the development of “quantum physics” has shown

that the concept of a purely mechanical system operating without purpose is mistaken. There

are no “value-free facts” and a mechanical universe!

Naturalism is important for our discussion because: 1. Marxism is “one of the most

historically significant forms of naturalism”22 that impacted socialist countries of former

Eastern Europe for more then 45 years, and 2. because it dominates universities, colleges and

high schools in the capitalist West and provides the framework for most scientific study.

Understanding the predominant worldview (ideology) that has been influencing countries in

transition and the global market economy might help in answering the question: Why is there

a profound gap between the economies in transition and competitive democracies? Although

this is not our main question we hope that our paper will be a small contribution to this

discussion as well. Behind the fallen Berlin wall there is still a shadow. Juraj Kušnierik and

Milan Čičel in their research paper Shadows of the Past – The impact of communism on the

way people think in postcommunist society23 provide a helpful summary of some of the

consequences that communism had on the present business culture:

-Fear of social problems. The social situation is perceived as something unalterable.

An individual is a mere helpless subject of the economic (and political) environment.

People often say; “There is nothing we can do to change the situation.” Responsibility

for one’s own life is rare.

-Lack of creativity in economic activities. An unwritten rule of communist economic

activities was: “Anything not allowed is forbidden.” The postcommunist societies of

Central and Eastern Europe are still not mobile and creative enough to properly handle

the complexities of a free-market economy.

-High risk avoidance. The majority of the population would prefer safer, although less

effective, ways of economic activity before riskier, but more profitable, ones.21 Walsh. pp. 136.22 C Stephen Evans cited in Sire, pp. 65.23 Kušnierik, J.; Čičel, M. (1995): Shadows of the Past, SEN, Bratislava, pp. 20.

8

-Strong remnants of a collectivist culture. Individualism is still treated as something

strange, almost evil. Social “empathy” with the unemployed is strong and officially

supported by most of the political parties. Trade unions are quite influential, although

strikes are rare (with Poland as an important exception).

-Hierarchical thinking. Many companies, especially the larger, (formerly) state owned

ones cling to outmoded hierarchical models of management. That causes many

problems in the new, changed situation in which more up-to-date, team based

management models fit much better. Also, people in the lower levels of a management

hierarchy tend to be passive, feeling they cannot influence anything or very little.

-Biased ethical values. It is very clear in the attitude to work, employers, customers

and the State. Work, although officially glorified under communism, is still

understood as a necessary evil. There are big problems with discipline, quality control,

financial mismanagement, etc. Employers, whether state or private, are perceived as

potential enemies who exploit their employees. That is why cheating them is not seen

as such a bad thing after all. Customers are not “always right” This is particularly

evident when dealing with the bureaucratic monsters or state administration and big

state-owned companies. Customers or clients are treated like intruders who disturb the

peace and comfort of the employees. And finally, the State is still recognized as an

economic enemy, taking unjustified taxes from its subjects. That is why tax evasion is

generally justified in public opinion.

After the bankruptcy of modernity and the fall of communism (both predominantly based on

naturalism) McLuhan’s “global village” arrived. “It is neither inclusive nor intimate and

participatory,”24 says Majid Tehranian from Harvard University. Globalization is the new

stage at which modern marketing plays a significant role. The emerging globalization theories

are new and much of the literature concerning them has appeared only since the late 70s and

80s. “Accordingly, globalization theory distinguishes itself from longer established

worldwide perspectives in that it takes as its primary unit of social analysis the entire globe,

which it treats as a single social system.”25 Immanuel Wallerstein understands the modern

global system as first and foremost an economy,26 specifically a capitalist economy27 based on

24 Tehranian, M. (Spring 1995): Global Communication and Its Critics, Journal of Communication, 45.2: 185-193.25 Beyer, P. (1994): Religion and Globalization, Sage Publication, London, pp. 14.26 Ibid., pp. 16.27 “This new kind of capitalism is in significant ways different from the one on which Karl Marx and Max Weber fashioned their accounts. … Often referred to as neo-liberalism, the new capitalism has become, since the

9

market trade and commodification. For Wallerstein, the capitalist world-economy is now the

global social context that conditions all other aspects of social life, namely polities and

cultures. But this new global context is full of paradoxes. Charles Handy28, a Fellow of the

London Business School, points out the paradox of intelligence in which know-how and

knowledge is the new source of wealth. The new paradox of work (the export of unproductive

work mainly to China, outsourcing, more part-time jobs, working from home – a redefinition

of the work as we know it), the paradox of Organizations, the presence of “virtual

corporations” which can be no more than temporary project groups or corporations which are

merely a “nexus of contracts” in the words of Oliver Williamson of Berkley (cited in Handy),

organizations will organize without the need to employ and an organizing organization will

look differently from an employment organization.

The challenge for marketing is how to answer some of the paradoxes:

increase of material wealth vs. increase of poverty; “In 1960, the income of the richest

20 percent of countries in the world was 30 times the income of the poorest 20 percent. In

1991, according to the United Nations Development Program, that figure had risen to 61

to 1. … The net worth of the 358 billionaires on the planet listed by Forbes in 1994 was

equal to the combined income of the bottom 45 percent of the whole world’s population

(2.35 billion people).”29

increase of global power/s vs. increase of global terrorism; “A comparison of Western

expenditure on foreign aid and the military is startling. In 1991, all major aid donors spent

3.55 percent of their GNP on military expenditures but gave only 0.34 percent to their

GNP for economic aid. In 1992, world military spending was $815 billion, which was the

combined income of 49 percent of the world’s people.”30 This trend has increased

dramatically after September 11th

increase of knowledge and information vs. inaccessibility of knowledge and

information for many people; Five news agencies – Associated Press, United Press

International, Reuters, Agence France Press, and the Russian International Telegraph

Agency (former TASS) – control about 96% of the worlds news flows. An estimated 96%

of all computers in the world are in the more developed countries. The less developed

decline of the political left, so much the mindset of the West that many are prepared to agree with Margaret Thatcher’s famous remark that ‘there is no alternative.’” Cited in Heslam, P. S. (2002): Globalization – Unravelling the New Capitalism, Grove Books Limited, Cambridge, pp. 11-12.28 Handy, C. (1994): The Age of Paradox, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, pp. 18-40. 29 Sider, R. J. (1997): Rich Christian in an Age of Hunger, Word Publishing, Dallas, TX, pp. 25.30 Ibid., pp. 32.

10

countries, which account for about 80% of the world population, only own about 20% of

the world media. “Unless we mean by communication that one side speaks and other side

passively listens, to speak of ‘global communication’ may be therefore considered a

hyperbole’31 writes Majid Tehranian.

increase of pollution vs. environmental protection; Rio de Janeiro 1992, Kyoto 1997,

Johannesburg 2002 - Rio+10

increase of corruption (and organized crime) vs. anti-corruption efforts and

activities; “The losses of the modern society caused by psychological problems, violence,

ignorance, crime, drugs, destruction of the environment, and other destructive activities,

are somewhere around 10,000 billion USD a year. These figures speak for themselves“32

4. NEW MARKETING PARADIGM

Social issues and social responsibilities, cultural diversity, environmental concerns and cause

related marketing are becoming a central focus in consumer decision making. Respect,

dignity, security, loyalty, – old-fashioned qualities are in demand for a new-fashioned

economy. We are living in a Service Economy (Jim Gilmore and Joe Pine talk about the

Experience Economy33 that we are now entering). In an economy built on service, our success

will depend on our ability to educate, empower, and ennoble others and ourselves - but with

compassion providing experience. In a network economy relationship marketing represents a

natural step that focuses on building and enhancing sustainable relationships to customers but

we must first ask for permission (permission marketing) to get close to people (we already

have the term “intimate business relationship”). If marketing is authentically concerned with

meeting real consumer needs and concerns, it should also carefully evaluate how decisions

impact and affect consumer expectations and quality of life. We need a new marketing

paradigm. We will briefly look at three new marketing concepts: Integrated Marketing

Communication (IMC)34, Philip Kotler’s35 new Holistic Marketing Concept and Servant

Marketing Model36.

31 Tehranian., pp. 186.32 Nefiodow, L. A. (1996): Der Sechste Kondratieff, Rhein-Sieg Verlag, Sankt Augustin, pp. 101.33 Pine, B. J.; Gilmore, J. H. (1998): Welcome to the Experience Economy, Harvard Business Review, Reprint 98407.34 Schultz, D. E.; Tannenbaum, S. I.; Lauterborn, R. F. (1994): The New Marketing Paradigm – Integrated Marketing Communication, NTC Business Books, Chicago, IL35 Kotler, P.; Jain, D. C.; Maesincee, S. (2002): Marketing Moves, Harvard Business School Press, Boston MA36 Hitrec, M.; Glavaš, D. (2002): Principles and Technology of Modern Marketing in a “Servant” Economy, in: International Conference on ‘An Enterprise Odyssey: Economics and Business in the New Millennium 2002, Proceedings, University of Zagreb, Graduate School of Economics & Business, Zagreb, June 27-29, 2002, pp. 248-249.

11

IMC: “What happened to the orderly world of the Four P’s? They turned into Lauterborns

Four C’s. The new catechism said: Forget Product. Study Consumer wants and needs. You

can no longer sell whatever you can make. You can only sell what someone specifically wants

to buy. Forget Price. Understand the consumer Cost to satisfy that want or need. Forget Place.

Think convenience to buy. Finally, forget Promotion. The new word is Communication. …

For integrated marketing communications to really take hold, old assumptions must exit,

assumptions about the role of advertising and sales promotion, about the organization of

advertising and public relations departments, about agencies and what they do, about the

media, and most of all, about accountability. … Our concept of integrated marketing

communications is based on the need for a continual exchange of information and experiences

between the marketer and the customer. The marketer seeks and stores information on each

individual customer in a database. The customer, through transactions, surveys, and other

methods is encouraged to communicate back to the marketer. Thus the fields of experience of

both become greater and more useful to both parties. This relationship approach is central to

our philosophy of integrated marketing communications. …The ability to collect, store,

access, and manipulate data, to turn data into information and apply it, in the laboratory, on

the manufacturing floor, in the marketing department, and yes, in the home, changed

everything.”37

Start with the customer and work back to the brand, - IMC challenges the marketers.

“Why is this revolutionary?” asks Susan Jones direct marketing specialist. “Not because it is a

new or controversial concept but because a whole culture of agencies, in-house departments,

and consultants has grown up around the notion of separation for advertising, direct

marketing, sales promotion, and public relations efforts, rather than the harmonious customer-

centered planning process that IMC requires.”38

HOLISTIC MARKETING CONCEPT: Marketing expert Philip Kotler in his latest book calls

marketers to deconstruct, redefine, and stretch marketing. “Marketing Moves presents a new

framework for conducting marketing strategy and operations. We replace the selling concept,

and the later marketing concept, with the holistic marketing concept. Our framework calls for

integrating three types of management: demand management, resource management, and

network management. … We no longer believe that the marketer’s job is limited to managing

37 Shultz., pp. 11-13, 28.38 Jones, S. (1998): Creative Strategy in Direct Marketing, NTC Business Books, Chicago, IL, pp. 8.

12

the Four Ps or to determining segmentation, targeting, and positioning. … To succeed,

marketers must acquire skills in exploring, creating and delivering value. They must develop

a cognitive understanding of their customers, assemble the core competencies needed in their

business, and partner with collaborators that can deliver the other competencies needed for

success. … And this is the point of the holistic marketing concept: Companies must redesign

their business from a customer-driven starting point, so that they gather deep knowledge

about customers and then have the capacity to offer customized products, services, programs,

and messages.”39

The importance of the customers’ needs (and wants) was long been neglected by mass

marketing. Marketing gurus Jack Trout and Al Ries started the “Positioning Era”40 in the

seventies already then pointing out that positioning happens in the CUSTOMER’S MIND

(not in the minds of a company or advertising executives). New marketing realities in the

90ties took some by surprise. The new word is EMPOWERMENT – customers can easily

check all the available options (quality, prices, competition, and even the social responsibility

of the company) on the global market, they are better informed and can communicate back

their opinion.

Customer-centered planning, cognitive understanding of the customers, customer-

driven starting point, customers’ needs, - behind these new marketing buzz words are there

real concerns for real human needs or are they just new slogans for the selfish profit

maximization regardless of any ethical or ecological consequences? What about the famous

Marlboro cowboy, is it an all time marketing success or all time marketing failure? Our

worldview plays a significant role in answering this question. The hierarchy of human needs

is not the same if we believe that a human being is just an accident of random purposeless

forces, or a person created in the image of God. Abraham Maslow developed probably the

most famous hierarchy of needs. Maslow claims that all humans have the same basic set of

needs. His famous pyramid arranges them in hierarchical order.

1. Physical needs (food, water, warmth, sleep. etc.)

2. Security (physical and psychological safety)

3. The need to belong (to love and be loved, to be part of a group of other human

beings)

4. The need for esteem (self-satisfaction)

39 Kotler., pp. x, xi, 46, 162, 164.40 Ries, A.; Trout, J. (1986): Positioning, Warner Books, New York, NY

13

5. The need for self-actualization (quest for intellectual understanding, self

expression, purpose in life, creativity, aestheticism)

Maslow’s model is too simplistic. Newer reserach has shown that with the satisfaction

of material needs humans will not automaticly move towards higher level needs. Quite the

opposite, many are searching for the fulfilment of their needs with greater material

consumption on all levels of needs including the level of self actualization. It is not so well

known that Maslow moved his pyramid one step further. “Maslow was right when he

postulated that there was a hierarchy of needs, that when you had enough material goods you

moved your sights to social prestige and then to self-realization. If it stopped there, however,

life would remain too self-centered, too egotistical. The hierarchy needs another step. Maslow

recognized this himself toward the end of his life. In the preface to Toward a Psychology of

Being, he accepted that he had been mistaken, that self-actualization is not the ultimate end,

and that we need something “bigger than we are, to be awed by and to commit ourselves to.”41

We agree with Maslow that we need something or someone bigger than we are

because if nature (cosmos) is all there is, then there is no transcendental source of moral truth

and people are left to make up their own rights and wrongs, according to their subjective or

cultural criteria. The result of that is a world of war, hatred, lust, greed, competition,

imperialism and environmental destruction. Today’s crisis is a worldview crisis. Harvard’s

social analyst Daniel Bell writes: “The real problem of modernity is the problem of belief. To

use an unfashionable term, it is a spiritual crisis, since the new anchorages have proved

illusory and the old ones have become submerged. … What holds one to reality, if one’s

secular system of meanings proves to be an illusion? I will risk an unfashionable answer – the

return in Western society to some form of religion.”42 A spiritual crisis requires a spiritual

solution. That brings us to the theistic worldview.

5. BIBLICAL THEISM

The basis of the theistic understanding of life and human beings is God’s creation. We shall

consider this within the framework of Biblical Theism. Theism answers some of Sire's

questions as follows43:

1. God is infinite and personal, transcendent and immanent, omniscient, sovereign

and good;

41 Handy., pp. 275.

42 Walsh., pp. 146.43 Sire., pp. 21-38.

14

2. God created the cosmos ex nihilo to operate with uniformity of natural causes in

an open system;

3. Human beings are created in the image of God and thus possess personality, self-

transcendence, intelligence, morality, gregariousness and creativity;

4. Human beings can know both the world around them and God himself because

God has built into them the capacity to do so and because he takes an active role in

communicating with them;

5. Human beings were created good, but through the Fall the image of God became

defaced, though not so ruined as not to be capable of restoration through the work

of Christ God redeemed humanity and began the process of restoring people to

goodness, though any given person may choose to reject that redemption;

6. For each person death is either the gate to life with God and his people or the gate

to eternal separation from the only thing that will ultimately fulfil human

aspirations.

There are a few reasons why we put the Servant Marketing Model in the Christian theistic

worldview: it is embedded in the foundation of European culture, we do not know well other

worldviews, personal conviction that this worldview most comprehensively answers the basic

questions about ultimate reality, life, human beings, moral and purpose. We prefer the term

Biblical Theism because the word “Christian” has become packed with so many conflicting

interpretations and emotional reactions that the word itself gets in the way of understanding

our points. In addition church history is unfortunately rich with examples where the terms

Christian and biblical were not the same. After the 4th century, when it became the official

religion in Constantin’s empire, Christianity significantly departed from its biblical roots.

What are the fundamental needs of human beings as creatures made in the image of God? Dr.

Miroslav Volf from Yale University in his book Work in the Spirit – Toward a Theology of

Work suggest four “fundamental, anthropologically grounded needs and points out their

relation to the Spirit of God:

1. The most fundamental of all human needs is the need for communion with God

2. The need for solidarity with nature

3. The need for fellow human beings

4. The need for personal development

…All four fundamental needs are grounded on the single, underlying universal need,

15

the need for the new creation, which is the kingdom of freedom. In relation to the need

for God, the kingdom of freedom is a kingdom of perfect fellowship with God, of

seeing “face to face” and of understanding as fully as one is ‘fully understood’

(1Corinthians. 13:12). In relation to the need for solidarity with nature, it is the

kingdom of peace between human beings and nature liberated from corruptibility and

the kingdom in which human beings jointly participate with nature in God’s glory

(Romans 8:19, Isaiah 11:6; 65:25). In relation to the need for fellow human beings, it

is the kingdom of unadulterated fellowship with one another, of pure “love, which

binds everything together in perfect harmony” (Colossians 3:14). In relation to the

need for personal development, it is the kingdom in which life is “realized only to be

opened up to as yet unrealized possibilities.” … For Jesus said, “Seek first his

kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well” (Matthew

6:33).44

In the Bible we do not only find a new picture of a man, but also we find the root of this new

picture in a new picture of God. The God of the Bible is not a static Eastern god, nor an active

and thinking logos of the Greek thought. He is in an active relationship with his creation and

we see him working. The Old Testament speaks of a God who works: “In the beginning God

created…” Only in the Judeo-Christian worldview do we find a God who works. One of the

human tasks from the beginning was to work and take care of the “garden,” which shows that

the purpose of human existence from the beginning included work. “The Biblical tradition

does not see a working man and the creator God as competitors, but as partners … and this

partnership is a fundamental aspect of the Christian understanding of work by which a man in

his daily work is cooperator Dei. This is the last and all encompassing meaning of human

work.”45

In the New Testament Jesus preached and proclaimed the kingdom of God.

Throughout history theologians have struggled with the definition and meaning of the term

kingdom of God. The importance of the kingdom is stressed in the Lords prayer that Jesus

taught his disciples “your kingdom come” (Mathew 6,10). In Mathew 6,33 we read: “But seek

first his kingdom and his righteousness…” The story of Nicodemus illustrates the “radical

nature of the calling into the kingdom.”46 Jesus answers that “no-one can see the kingdom of

44 Volf, M. (1991). Work in the Spirit – Toward a Theology of Work, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 152-154.

45 Volf, M. (1991): Budućnost rada-rad budućnosti, pojam rada u Karla Marxa i njegovo teološko vrednovanje, Hrvatsko filozofsko društvo, Zagreb, pp. 105.46 Halteman, J. (1995): The Clashing Worlds of Economics and Faith, Herald Press, Scottdale, PA, pp. 46.

16

God unless he is born again.” (John 3,3) For Nicodemus, although he was a famous religious

teacher in his time, only a new mind-set, a new worldview, could help him to see the

kingdom. “The new birth of which Jesus spoke is equally important today because of the

secular mind-set that is so pervasive in our time. Only a new worldview can free one from the

power of the world’s mold”47.

Dr. James Halteman in his book “The clashing Worlds of Economics and Faith”48 compares

some characteristics of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of this World:

KINGDOM OF GOD KINGDOM OF THIS WORLD

-The total welfare of people -Individual freedom symbolized in the right of

private property

-Christian love -Self-interest with some moral restraints

-Cooperation -Competition

-Need based voluntary sharing -Auction price system

-Church involvement in norm setting -Limited government

and discipling

This is a simplified model that can not explain all the complexity of the theological

term, kingdom of God that “is here but yet to come” and its relationship to economic systems

in the world. But this model illustrates the radical difference in the value system of those two

kingdoms based on different worldviews. In the context of this tension we can easier

understand some biblical requirements like: giving (Mt 5,42); forgiveness (Mt 6,14);

peacemaking (Mt 5,9); love (Mt 5,44); compassion (Mt 7,12). Committed believers live in

this tension like a “pilgrims and strangers” in this world. In comparison with secular systems

especially the prevailing market economy and capitalism which is primarily based on

naturalism some of these things might sound idealistic and utopistic. But is this so?

Adam Smith (1723-1790), the “father” of the market economy, in his work The

Theory of Moral Sentiments developed the idea of moral sympathy. “For Smith, the ‘invisible

hand’ that guided economic activity toward harmonious ends was helped along by the moral

sense described as ‘sympathy.’ In other words, market economies needed to have a moral of a

‘sympathetic’ base before the common good could be served by pursuit of individual self

interest.”49 Today’s global capitalism is predominantly based on the neo-liberal, deregulated47 Ibid., pp. 47.48 Ibid.49 Ibid., pp. 122-123.

17

economy (Anglo American model) called “turbocapitalism” in which the shareholders profit

is the main goal. The German (social market economy) and Japanese (economic ‘empire

building,’ unique to their culture) models are different, but they were successful in building

rich but relatively equal societies. In 1987, then Austrian Minister of Agriculture, Josef

Riegler50 began to prepare a model of economic and social policy designed to bring about

Equilibrium between economic, environmental and social aspects: Eco-social-market

economy. Dr. Franz Josef Radermacher in his insightful book Balance oder Zerstörung51 sees

this model as the only one for the sustainable development of our world. We are briefly

mentioning these market economy models because former socialist countries are joining the

global capitalist market and the question is which model will they adopt.

Michael Novak puts it well: “Today, the formerly socialist nations of Eastern Europe

(including the former USSR) are confronting, quite directly, the need to develop the moral

and cultural habits necessary to undergird their dreams. …they discovered that democracy

alone was not enough: The people will not be happy merely to vote every two years or so;

they want and demand an economic system that enables families to “better their condition.” It

is not utopia they are asking for – just tangible progress. But … the hardest lesson, is that they

cannot have either democracy or capitalism unless they acquire the appropriate moral habits

and (of course) adapt both their institutions and their laws.”52 Here we ask Novak what are

these moral habits of global unrestrained capitalism he is talking about? Naomi Klein gave us

a well documented and researched answer about the “morals” of multinational corporations,

John Pilger documents the “morals” of IMF, World Bank and the most powerful capitalist at

that time in drawing up the plan for ‘market economy’ in Suharto’s Indonesia. One of such

moral questions in our global world is the annual death of 8,8 million people from hunger.

Benjamin Barber makes a point:

It is not capitalism but unrestrained capitalism counterbalanced by no other system of

values that endangers democracy. My criticism of McWorld is aimed at what may be

called economic totalism. If the political totalism of the fascist and communist world

once tried, at horrendous human costs, to subordinate all economic, social, and

cultural activity to the demands of an overarching state, the economic totalism of

unleashed market economics seems now to be trying (at costs yet to be fully reckoned)50 Friewald-Hofbauer, T.; Scheiber, E. (2001): The Eco-Social-Market Economy, Ökosoziales Forum Österreich, Wien51 Radermacher, F. J. (2002): Balance oder Zerstörung, Ökosoziales Forum Europa, Wien

52 Novak, M. (1993): The Catholic Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, The Free Press, New York, NY, pp. 8.

18

to subordinate politics, society, and culture to the demands of an overarching market.53

It might be worthwhile to include in this discussion the classic work of Max Weber “The

Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism”54 in which he analyzes the beginning of

capitalism. Weber observed that the members of religious groups that formed out of the

Reformation had a strong sense of personal responsibility in their work that was needed in the

beginning of capitalism. The reason was religious – the personal relationship with God which

is a core value in Protestantism. Luther’s translation of the word “Beruf” (calling) contains a

religious conception – the conception of a God-given task – it put professional, secular work

on the same level as the spiritual work of the clergy. Weber concludes that this “moral

justification of worldly activity was one of the most important results of the Reformation.”55

The religious cause was a strong support for capitalism that was later lost and gave primacy to

the “mighty cosmos of an economic system growing out of technological and industrial

revolution,” that did not need such support anymore. In his book “The Catholic Ethic and the

Spirit of Capitalism” Michael Novak criticizes Weber’s thesis. “To put it simply, Weber

detected something new, a novel Geist or spirit or cultural inspiration, some new complex of

social attitudes and habits. He may have erred in calling it Protestant. But he did not err in

identifying a moral and cultural dimension internal to capitalism. ... he identified something

new in economic history and glimpsed its moral and religious dimensions. …he suggested in

advance why Marxism, both as an explanatory theory and as a vision of paradise, was

doomed to fail: Its resolute materialism excluded the human spirit.”56

To close our discussion we see that there is a need for a moral and ethical framework of

capitalism or market economy. Novak is right in pointing that former socialist countries of

Eastern Europe in transition need to acquire the appropriate moral habits and (of course)

adapt both their institutions and their laws. To restate Daniel Bell: “The real problem of

modernity is the problem of belief. To use an unfashionable term, it is a spiritual crisis, since

the new anchorages have proved illusory and the old ones have become submerged. … What

holds one to reality, if one’s secular system of meanings proves to be an illusion? I will risk

an unfashionable answer – the return in Western society to some form of religion.”57 A

spiritual crisis requires a spiritual solution. We think that only in the service of God and 53 Barber, B. R. (1996): Jihad vs. McWorld, Ballantine Books, New York, NY, pp. 295.54 Weber, M. (1992): The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Rutledge, New York, NY55 Ibid., pp. 40.56 Novak., pp. 8-9.57 Walsh., pp. 146.

19

others can one truly increase social harmony. “This transcendent self-interest is foolishness to

those who are not believers.”58 And many believers are often not optimistic about the world’s

progress toward social justice and harmony and sustainable development without the spiritual

understanding and experience of the “radical nature of the calling into the kingdom.” We are

called to “not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but to be transformed by the

renewing of our minds (Romans 12,2).” As a result we believe not only that we will be able to

test and approve what is God’s will, but that we will be able to understand the difference

between the building of the tower of Babel with one universal language (representing

globalization) and Pentecost where the particularities of many languages are united through

one historical fact, that of the death on the cross. If Jesus Christ is not Lord of all he is not

Lord at all.

6. SERVANT MARKETING MODEL59

“Caring for persons, the more able and the less able serving each other, is the rock upon

which a good society is built.” Robert K. Greenleaf60

“Love is the killer app” Tim Sanders61

The Servant Marketing Model is based on three elements: 1. LOVE (To live in love is life’s

greatest challenge62); 2. KNOWLEDGE (Life long learning, learning organizations, TQM;

etc.) 3. NETWORK 63 (In the 21st century our success will be based on our networks and our

58 Halteman., pp. 124.59 Is explained in more details in other works: Hitrec, M.; Glavaš, D. (2002): Principles and Technology of Modern Marketing in a “Servant” Economy, in: International Conference on ‘An Enterprise Odyssey: Economics and Business in the New Millennium 2002, Proceedings, University of Zagreb, Graduate School of Economics & Business, Zagreb, June 27-29, 2002, pp. 248-249. Hitrec, M. (2002): Servant marketing u zaštiti, Visoka škola za sigurnost na radu, IPROZ, Zagreb60 Greenleaf, R. K. (1977): Servant Leadership, Paulist Press, Mahwah, NJ61 Sanders, T. (2002): Love is the Killer App, Crown Business, New York, NY62 Jesus was crucified, Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. were shot - to mention just a few. Dr Leo Buscaglia in his bestseller book Love comments: “ Love has been ignored by the scientists. It’s amazing. … This is shocking because it is something we all know we need, something we’re all continually looking for, and yet there’s no class in it. It’s just assumed that it comes to us by and through some mysterious life force.” Cited in Buscaglia, L. (1996): Love, Ballantine Books, New York, NY, pp.7.

Dr Siegfried Buchholz, management consultant, paraphrased the first letter of the apostle Paul to the Corinthians (Chapter 13) for business: If I would be able to speak all the languages and would be a perfect communicator but could not love people, I would only produce noise and would never reach others. If I love people, I will have patience with them, I will treat them fairly, I will not always demonstrate my own superiority, I will not talk down to others, I will talk with them – not to them. If I love people, I can understand their feelings, I do not always seek my own advantages, I can control my ego, I will not dump my anger on others. If I love people, I will not be resentful, I will not always remind others of their mistakes, I will not rejoice when others fail but will rejoice when others succeed. If I love people, I will never give up on them, I will trust them and I will give them credit. I will give them hope and encouragement. 63 Metcalfe’s law: the cost of the network expands linearly with increase in network size, but the value of the network increases exponentially. (http://www.mgt.smsu.edu/mgt487/mgtussue/newstrat/metcalfe.htm)

20

partnerships)

SERVANT MARKETING MODEL: SERVICE: Seek and serve the real human needs and

wants and try to satisfy them with the contents of your offer, deliver a compelling experience;

(not only promotion and communication) but EDUCATION: Educate and empower people

to be wise in their decisions, providing true data, facts, information about you (as

organization/enterprise/institution etc.), your activities and offer; (not only place and

convenience to buy) but RELATIONSHIP: Relate and love people/customers, develop a

long term relationships, enable them to use/spend/enjoy/participate, retain your customers;

(not only price and consumer cost) but VALUE: Add value to the contents of your offer

(product, service, message, other) having in mind a person’s well-being and social

responsibility; and finally establish: ACCOUNTABILITY: Be accountable (economically,

ethically and ecologically); NETWORKING: Network and share, in the 21st century our

success will be based on our networks and our partnerships; TRANSPARENCY: Be

transparent!

MARKETING MODELS

4P’s MODEL 4C’s MODEL SERVANT MODEL

PRODUCT CONSUMER NEEDS SERVICE

PROMOTION COMMUNICATION EDUCATION &

EMPOWERMENT

PLACE CONVENIENCE TO BUY RELATIONSHIP

PRICE CONSUMER COST VALUE

(PEOPLE) ACCOUNTABILITY

(PERFORMANCE) NETWORKING

TRANSPARENCY

Different attributes of servant and conventional marketing are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Attributes of the servant and conventional marketing

21

SERVANT MARKETING CONVENTIONAL MARKETING

1. WIN-WIN 1. WIN-LOSE2. FUNCTIONS AS A COMMUNITY OF INTERRELATED PARTS

2. FUNCTIONS IN AN ATOMISTIC, INDIVIDUALISTIC MODE

3. LOVE IS A COMMITMENT AND IS UNCONDITIONAL

3. LOVE IS A FEELING AND IS CONDITIONAL

4. SERVANT LEADERSHIP 4. LEADERSHIP AT ANY PRICE5. EMBRACE 5. EXCLUSION6. TRANSFORMATION 6. EXPERIENCE7. PERMISSION 7. INTERRUPTION8. LIFE TIME VALUE 8. IMMEDIATE TRANSACTION9. SENSE-AND-RESPOND 9. MAKE-AND-SELL10. SELFLESS 10. SELFISH

7. CONCLUSION:

We hope that this paper is another small step of a journey back to the future. It goes BACK to

the originally intended meaning of the Greek word oikonomia (economics) – the responsible

and careful stewardship of the oikos (household) of God for the good of all. That is the

FUTURE!

Are we economists ready for this journey in the New Millennium?

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Barber, B. R. (1996): Jihad vs. McWorld, Ballantine Books, New York, NY

2. Barnett, J., (1987): Wealth & Wisdom - A Biblical Perspective on Possessions, Navpress,

Colorado Springs, CO

3. Beyer, Peter. (1994): Religion and Globalization, Sage Publication, London

4. Bible, (1990): The Holy Bible, International Bible Society, Hodder and Stoughton,

Dunton Green, Sevenoaks

5. Blanchard, K.; Peale, N.V. (1988): The Power of Ethical Management, William Morrow

& Co., New York, NY

6. Brooks, J. (1985): Origins of Life, Lion Publishing, Icknield Way, Tring, England.

7. Burkett, L. (1990): Business by the Book, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN.

8. Buscaglia, L. (1996): Love, Ballantine Books, New York, NY

9. Chewning, R.C. (1989): Biblical Principles & Business: The Foundations, Navpress,

Colorado Springs, CO

22

10. Chewning, R.C. (1991): Biblical Principles & Public Policy: The Practice, Navpress,

Colorado Springs, CO

11. Collins, J. C.; Porras J. L. (1997): Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary

Companies, Harper Business, New York. NY

12. Colson, C.; Pearcy, N. (1999): How Now Shall We Live?, Tyndale House Publishers,

Inc., Wheaton, IL

13. Covey, S. (1995): Sedam navika uspješnih ljudi, Mozaik knjiga, Zagreb

14. Dawkins, R. (1976): The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press, Oxford

15. Durbešić, P.; Čižek, J.; Hitrec, M.; Kulier, I.; Vajić, I.; Winkler, K. (1992): Organsko-

biološka proizvodnja hrane (Organic-Biologic Food Producing), in the book Hrvatski

farmer, Globus, Zagreb

16. Elul, J. (1984): Money and Power, Inter Varsity Press, Downers Grove, IL

17. Friewald-Hofbauer, T.; Scheiber, E. (2001): The Eco-Social-Market Economy,

Ökosoziales Forum Österreich, Wien

18. Greenleaf, R. K. (1991): Servant Leadership, Paulist Press, New York, NY

19. Halteman, J. (1995): The Clashing Worlds of Economics and Faith, Herald Press,

Scottsdale, PA.

20. Handy, C. (1995): The Age of Paradox, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

21. Heslam, P. S. (2002): Globalization – Unravelling the New Capitalism, Grove Books

Limited, Cambridge

22. Hill, A. (1997): Just Business: Christian Ethics for the Marketplace, InterVarsity Press,

Downers Grove, IL

23. Hitrec, M. (1981): Temelji i učinci promocijskog komuniciranja (The Foundations and

the Efficiencies of the Promotional communication), Deph, Zagreb

24. Hitrec, M. (1990): Economic Aspects of Promotion of Public Safety and Quality of

Life, in Yugoslavia Your Partner in Occupational and Public Safety and Environmental

Protection, IRMO/Vatrotehna, Zagreb.

25. Hitrec, M. (1992): The Business Model of Connecting SMEs, Wholesalers, Retailers

and Consumers (Poslovni model povezivanja male privrede, trgovine i potrošača),

CROMA/UNIDO, Zagreb

26. Hitrec M.; Husnjak M.;0 Radačić M. (1999): Marketing in the Veterinary – Modern

Opportunities and Activities (Marketing u veterinarstvu – suvremene mogućnosti i

zadaće), Croatian Veterinary Chamber and Faculty of Veterinary, Poreč-Zagreb.

23

27. Hitrec M.: Romac Ž. (2000): Family Run Organic Farms in Croatia-Organization and

Business Aspects, IFOAM, Basel.

28. Hitrec M.; Romac Ž. (2001): Organsko-biološka proizvodnja hrane – Poslovni model

(Organic/biological food production-Business Model), symposium, Majke za prirodni

zakon, Zagreb

29. Hitrec, M.; Glavaš, D. (2002): Principles and Technology of Modern Marketing in a

“Servant” Economy, in: International Conference on ‘An Enterprise Odyssey:

Economics and Business in the New Millennium 2002, Proceedings, University of

Zagreb, Graduate School of Economics & Business, Zagreb, June 27-29, 2002, pp. 248-

249.

30. Hitrec, M. (2002): Servant marketing u zaštiti, Visoka škola za sigurnost na radu, IPROZ,

Zagreb

31. Horx, M. (2000): Die acht Spharen der Zukunft: Ein Wegweiser in die Kultur des 21.

Jahrhunderts., Signum-Verlags, Wien, Hamburg

32. Huntington, S. P. (1998): The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order,

Touchstone Books, London

33. Jones, S. (1998): Creative Strategy in Direct Marketing, NTC Business Books, Chicago,

IL

34. Kesić T. (1999): Consumer Behaviour , ADECO, Zagreb

35. Kosanović S.; Bussard A. (2001): The Problem of Corruption in SME’s in Croatia,

Ruke/Integra research paper: Zagreb, Bratislava

36. Kotler P.; Levy, L. (1989): Social Marketing Strategy for Changing Public Behaviour,

The Free Press, New York, NY

37. Kotler, P.; Andersen, A.R. (1996): Strategic Marketing for Non-profit Organizations,

Prentice-Hall, London

38. Kotler, P.; Armstrong, G. (1999): Principles of Marketing, eight ed., Prentice-Hall

International Editions, London

39. Kotler, P. (1999): Marketing Management – Analysis, Planning, Implementation and

Control, Prentice-Hall International Editions, Millennium Ed., London

40. Kotler, P.; Jain, D. C.; Maesincee, S. (2002): Marketing Moves, Harvard Business School

Press, Boston MA

41. Küng, H. (2001): Globale Unterhehmen – globales Ethos, Frankfurter Allgemeine Buch,

Frankfurt am Main

24

42. Küng, H. (2001): The Catholic Church – A short History, Modern Library, New York,

NY

43. Lebow, R.; Simon, W. L. (1997): Lasting Change: the Shared Values Process that

Makes Companies Great, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY

44. Lokin, B. (2000): Hrvatska 2015. (Croatia 2015), Golden Marketing, Zagreb

45. Miller, D. L. (1998): Discipling Nations – The power of Truth to Transform Cultures,

YWAM Publishing, Seattle, WA

46. Naugle, D. K. (2002): Worldview – The History of a Concept, Wm. B. Eerdmans

Publishing Co., Grand

47. Nefiodow, L. A. (1996): Der Sechste Kondratieff, Rhein-Sieg Verlag, Sankt Augustin

48. Negroponte, N. (1996): Being Digital, Vintage, New York, NY

49. Newbigin, L. (1989): The Gospel in a Pluralist Society, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing

Co., Grand Rapids, MI

50. Novak, M. (1993): The Catholic Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, The Free Press, New

York, NY

51. Pilger, J. (2002), The New Rulers of the World, Verso, London

52. Pine, J. II; Gilmore, J. H. (1999): The Experience Economy: Work Is Theatre & Every

Business a Stage, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA

53. Postman, N. (1993): Technopoly, Vintage, New York, NY

54. Previšić, J.; Došen-Ozretić, Đ. (1999): Međunarodni marketing (International

Marketing), Masmedia, Zagreb

55. Previšić, J.; Bratko, S. eds. (2001): Marketing, Sinergija, Zagreb

56. Radermacher, F. J. (2002): Balance oder Zerstörung, Ökosoziales Forum Europa, Wien

57. Ries, A.; Trout, J. (1981/86): Positioning: the Battle for your Mind, Warner Books, New

York, NY

58. Rush, M. (1983): Management: A Biblical Approach, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL

59. Sanders, T. (2002): Love is the Killer App, Crown Business, New York, NY

60. Schultz, D. E.; Tannenbaum, S. I.; Lauterborn, R. F. (1994): The New Marketing

Paradigm: Integrated Marketing Communications, NTC Business Books, Lincolnwood,

IL.

61. Sider, R. J. (1997): Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger, Word Publishing, Dallas

62. Sire, J. W. (1997): The Universe Next Door, InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL

63. Smith, A. E. W. (1968): Mans’ Origin, Mans’ Destiny, Harold Shaw Publisher, Wheaton,

IL

25

64. Stott, J. R. W. (1978): Christian counter-culture, Inter-Varsity Press, IL

65. Tamasy, R. J. (1995): Jesus Works Here, Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville, TN

66. Volf, M. (1996): Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Exploration of Identity,

Otherness, and Reconciliation, Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN

67. Volf, M. (1991): Work in the Spirit – Toward a Theology of Work, Oxford University

Press, Oxford

68. Volf, M. (1991): Budućnost rada-rad budućnosti, pojam rada u Karla Marxa i njegovo

teološko vrednovanje, Hrvatsko filozofsko društvo, Zagreb

69. Walsh, B. J.; Middleton, J. R. (1984): The Transforming Vision, InterVarsity Press,

Downers Grove, IL

70. Weber, M. (1992): The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Rutledge, New

York, NY

26