From introduction:

The qualifier “social” in “social science” can mean different things in disciplines such as sociology, marketing studies, organization studies, or anthropology. The “disciplines of the social are themselves social practices that simply form another part of the social world”, that is, the differences between the disciplines or their practices can be observed and described. In this regard, one can observe that, e.g., sociology studies social action and social order; organization studies organizations or organizational fields; marketing studies service provision, markets or marketing systems; and anthropology “what makes us human”. As the relevance of sociological concepts and theories for the study of market phenomena has been recognized in marketing studies, I put sociological contributions to the study of culture – and their criticisms – in the center of my analysis.

Does the study of cultural phenomena imply that these phenomena are “there” – waiting for someone who studies them? The examples discussed in this paper give rise to the conjecture that this is not the case. It seems that cultural phenomena are created rather than discovered. Consequently, I argue that cultural phenomena are not, but are made, and are made differently by different approaches, theories, or disciplines. The question then arises how marketing studies can or should address cultural phenomena “created” by other disciplines or if it can or should “create” own cultural phenomena.

The indirect procedure chosen in this paper finds expression in three analytical steps: First, I concern myself with the three basic categories selected for this study (culture, the social, and science); second, I present examples for the “creation” of cultural phenomena; third, I discuss the results of my analysis with regard to the marketing-systems approach. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: The next section introduces the framework of analysis. The subsequent section provides a sketch of the diversified field of study and of the much-debated role of sociology therein. After that, the “creation” of cultural phenomena is described with regard to sociological approaches selected because they express important distinctions or point to important gaps in the study of culture. An interim conclusion connects the preceding part of the paper with the analysis devoted to the discussion of the marketing-systems approach in light of the insights gained from the previous analysis. The paper ends with conclusions and outlook.