This paper aims to respond to John Rossiter's call for a “Marketing measurement revolution” in the current issue of EJM, as well as providing broader comment on Rossiter's C‐OAR‐SE framework, and measurement practice in marketing in general.
The paper is purely theoretical, based on interpretation of measurement theory.
The authors find that much of Rossiter's diagnosis of the problems facing measurement practice in marketing and social science is highly relevant. However, the authors find themselves opposed to the revolution advocated by Rossiter.
The paper presents a comment based on interpretation of measurement theory and observation of practices in marketing and social science. As such, the interpretation is itself open to disagreement.
There are implications for those outside academia who wish to use measures derived from academic work as well as to derive their own measures of key marketing and other social variables.
This paper is one of the few to explicitly respond to the C‐OAR‐SE framework proposed by Rossiter, and presents a number of points critical to good measurement theory and practice, which appear to remain underdeveloped in marketing and social science.
