Marketing: Practice and Academia ―Toward a New Dimension of Exchange―②

Continuing from last time, we welcomed Professor Shuzo Abe of Waseda University, a Specially Appointed Professor who has focused on analyzing consumer behavior and building highly accurate, predictable theories within academia, as our guest. Together with Professor Satoshi Hikita, formerly of Toyo University, who has engaged in theoretical research applicable to reality based on his practical experience as a businessperson, they discussed the intersection of academia and practice, as well as new forms of exchange.

---

The Intersection of Academia and Practice

Hikita: Is there anything you particularly feel about the academic world?

Abe: In academia, numerous papers are published, and just keeping up with them is challenging. However, there isn't sufficient organization or systematization of knowledge regarding which papers are relevant to one's own work or how they relate to each other. Instrumentalism tends to weaken this aspect, so I believe academia should strive to develop more sophisticated theories.

Hikita: I agree with your critique, Abe-san. Furthermore, I believe the drawbacks of instrumentalism affect business people just as much. Why? Because while it's true that something being usable is important, in a sense, this represents an excessive, narrow-minded instrumentalism.

For example, when you catch a cold, you take medicine; when your head hurts, you take this medicine; when your stomach feels off, you take that medicine. There are specific medicines effective for each symptom. However, if you take them simultaneously, you don't know what effects might occur. That's why you need pharmacists who can point out the dangers of drug interactions. But pharmacists are probably not academics. Partial optimal solutions don't necessarily lead to overall optimal solutions, and the fallacy of composition isn't just something academics or scientists consider – isn't it equally relevant for business practitioners?

It's not Aristotle speaking, but within praxis, techne (technique) must be linked to phronesis—what we call practical wisdom in Japanese—deep knowledge about how to actually apply it. I believe it's crucial to make practitioners aware of this.

Abe: Since studying at an American university, I've pursued research as an academic that doesn't directly connect to the practical world. However, my perspective has gradually shifted based on my environment. For about ten years now, I've taught Consumer Behavior and Marketing Research at Meiji University's professional graduate school, and later MBA students at Waseda University. In undergraduate classes, students are completely passive. They just stare down at their desks and never look up, which makes the instructor feel utterly powerless. However, MBA students clearly demonstrate a strong desire to learn, so you can't disappoint them. This has made me increasingly conscious that what I explain as knowledge must also connect to practical application.

Hikita: Indeed, MBA practitioners study diligently, but perhaps the substance of that study also requires scrutiny. Keio Business School offers courses teaching scientific methodology. What are your thoughts on the significance of studying and researching the philosophy of science, which might seem unrelated to practical business at first glance?

Abe: That's excellent. It helps them organize and re-examine their own work. When people focus solely on one thing, they tend to pay little attention to other areas and rush to get results, which rarely leads to good outcomes.

The MBA students who come to me are generally not strong in statistical analysis, but I guide them to conduct statistical analysis and synthesize their findings into a thesis. Software is advancing rapidly now, so we can use excellent tools like AMOS for covariance structure analysis. However, without a solid foundation, you might make significant misunderstandings at critical points and only achieve limited results. Even the most basic concepts won't become truly useful unless they are systematically positioned and organized. I believe the philosophy of science helps build that foundation.

Approaches to Cultural Differences

Hikita: We often use the term "rationality." The Kojien dictionary defines it as "conforming to reason" or "efficient without waste," but this is very unclear. It's used in various contexts like organizational rationality or economic rationality, serving as a major criterion for selection and rejection. Yet, depending on the situation, contradictions can emerge in various ways. How far can we really go in organizing and solving problems using the concept of rationality? I suspect that once you reach a certain paradigm, a different kind of rationality might emerge. What do you think?

Abe: That's a difficult question. For instance, determining which position in the philosophy of science is correct rarely yields a conclusion; it's considered an unsettled problem. This is because pursuing rationality in one aspect can lead to irrationality in another. Falsificationism is said to have this problem. Falsificationism insists that knowledge should be constructed solely from non-inductive elements, which is highly consistent in that sense. However, it also carries the irrationality of rejecting even the modification of knowledge based on new information. Ultimately, rather than solving problems solely through rationality, we must gather the wisdom of diverse human perspectives, don't you think?

Hikita: Often, a method is adopted where a certain rationality is set a priori, and reasoning proceeds deductively from there. For example, the classical economics system is constructed by positing the economic man. In mathematics, setting axioms creates a kind of system. When we speak of an elegant system, it evokes a sense of something higher, but is your position that you do not necessarily endorse such an idea?

Abe: I don't mean to say that basic propositions are meaningless unless empirically verifiable, or that models rationally maximizing utility are worthless. Still, I believe there are significant limitations to approaches that place strong premises on theory and then prescribe what ought to be normatively.

Hikita: So, you don't particularly aspire to elegance, then? (laughs)

Abe: I do admire it (laughs). The work of systematizing various theories to make them more elegant is not worthless; I believe it's something we shouldn't discard.

Hikita: Chasing the bluebird or envisioning elegance is full of romance. While not explicitly stated in marketing theory, I still feel there exists a kind of a priori axiom.

The concept of marketing originated in America, but isn't there a significant difference between that and marketing activities conducted in Japan? American-style marketing fundamentally incorporates competitive concepts—the idea of competitive advantage. In Japan, however, I sense a business culture rooted in coexistence rather than competition. This naturally alters the application of American-style theories and frameworks for consumer behavior. Unlike the US, Japan has the concept of "sanpo yoshi" (benefit for the seller, benefit for the buyer, benefit for society). Consequently, the ultimate value for companies may diverge somewhat from the American perspective.

Abe: Much theoretical research is conducted in the United States, and when scholars develop these theories, they present them as universal models. However, when these theories don't work well in Japan, we can't simply dismiss them by saying Japan is a special case. I believe theories developed in America are the first batters at the plate, but they represent a specific model of American culture. Bringing them to Japan and adapting them to the Japanese context transforms them into a distinct model—a Japanese-specific model.

Of course, researching how Japan and America differ, or discovering differences with countries beyond Japan and America, is a major goal. But to build more universal theories about human behavior or consumer behavior, we must look more broadly and universally. Therefore, it's not that Japan's situation is strange; rather, it's important to always maintain the perspective that perhaps Japan is more universal, and America is actually the special case.

Marketing theory began with imports, but we must not forget Japanese elements; we must consciously consider them. This is not narrow nationalism; I believe that pursuing this rigorously will lead to the construction of a superior model.

Collaboration between Practitioners and Researchers

Hikita: When it comes to international comparisons, the focus often tends to be on how Japanese and American citizens differ. However, what's truly important is the perspective of whether theories based on America or theories based on Japan possess greater generality, or whether they can explain more fundamental and basic aspects.

Abe: We must avoid superficial comparisons and delve deeper. Two commonly used consumer behavior models are Fishbein's and Ajzen's. They suggest that actions and intentions aren't solely determined by attitudes; they also arise from the desire to conform to subjective norms. For example, even if you personally like Mercedes-Benz, if your spouse says, "You'd be trying too hard to show off if you drove a Mercedes," or if it's unpopular within your company, you'll factor that into your decision to buy.

I conducted an international comparative study with Professor Bagozzi. It was based on the hypothesis that Japanese consumers would be more concerned about their surroundings, but the results showed no difference. Since this was a comparison of students at fast-food restaurants, it cannot be generalized to other settings, but it shows that hypotheses and results can sometimes be reversed. In other words, we can use Fishbein's model for comparison and also modify it.

Hikita: I sometimes wonder why Mao Asada is so popular even though she didn't win a medal at the Sochi Olympics. Perhaps it's because she focused not on winning, but on striving for the best performance possible. In sumo, even if a yokozuna wins by a quick start, their reputation can suffer. In consumer behavior research, have you ever sensed such values that transcend mere winning or losing?

Abe: In the American academic world, there's a mindset that publishing in a well-known journal is winning. Researchers narrow their themes to fit what's publishable there. Even at academic conferences, editors-in-chief and editors gather to advise on how to write for greater appeal. That might not be inherently bad, but it pushes researchers toward appealing approaches—even if it diverges from their core interests—because without immediate recognition, they struggle to secure research funding or achieve tenure. Ultimately, I believe each researcher should make these judgments for themselves.

Hikita: Actually, I fundamentally believe separating practitioners from researchers is a mistake...

Abe: I've only walked the path of a researcher, but even in the practical world, when developing a product, you don't do everything from start to finish alone. Even in research papers, co-authorship is becoming more common these days. I think it's essential to actively pursue collaboration between practitioners and researchers. This needs to expand not just domestically but internationally, but I believe it's crucial to produce results while firmly protecting your core expertise.

Hikita: Meeting people and talking face-to-face doesn't just increase the amount of information; it changes how you receive stimulation entirely. Consciously creating such opportunities is vital. And especially for budding scholars or researchers, I recommend reading the classics that have endured historically. Pioneers all grew through their struggles, and that legacy connects directly to today. Additionally, cultivate empathy—the imagination to see things from another's perspective—which is fundamental to marketing. Reading books on the philosophy of science might seem like a detour, but it ultimately connects to theory and practice. You're bound to be stimulated by it.

Abe: It will absolutely be useful (laughs).

Hikita: Thank you for everything today.

[End]

---

*The full text is available on the Hideo Yoshida Memorial Foundation website.