Marketing practice has changed rapidly in recent decades. Global competition has intensified, product life cycles have shortened, and digital technologies have made information more accessible to both firms and customers. In many industries, products and services are easy to copy and price differences are quickly visible, which makes it difficult to compete on product features or cost alone. As a result, many firms have turned their attention to the idea of creating and managing customer value as a central source of advantage. Rather than asking only how to sell more products, managers increasingly ask how their offerings can create superior value in the lives and processes of their customers.
Within this context, the notion of a customer value‑driven marketing strategy has gained prominence in both academic and managerial discussions. Kotler and Armstrong (2018) describe marketing as a process of creating value for customers and building strong customer relationships in order to capture value from customers in return. In their view, effective marketing begins with a deep understanding of customer needs and wants, continues with the design of a value‑driven strategy to serve chosen segments, and is implemented through integrated marketing programs that deliver the intended value proposition. This perspective positions customer value not as a narrow financial measure, but as a guiding principle for segmentation, targeting, positioning, and the design of the overall marketing mix.
At the same time, the concept of market orientation has become an important way to describe how firms organize themselves around customer needs. Narver and Slater (1990) define market orientation as a business culture that is composed of customer orientation, competitor orientation, and interfunctional coordination, all directed toward creating superior value for buyers. Their empirical work shows that firms with a stronger market orientation tend to achieve higher profitability over the long term. Market orientation therefore provides an important behavioral and cultural foundation for any attempt to build strategy around customer value. It suggests that value‑driven marketing strategies are unlikely to be successful unless they are supported by organizational norms and processes that consistently focus on understanding and responding to markets.
Despite this apparent consensus on the importance of customer value, the term itself is used in many different and sometimes inconsistent ways in the literature. Some authors view customer value mainly as a trade‑off between perceived benefits and perceived sacrifices. Others emphasize the emotional, symbolic, or experiential aspects of value. Still others focus on value as a process that unfolds over time, or as something that is co‑created by firms and customers through their interactions. Without a clear understanding of what “customer value” means, it becomes difficult to design, implement, and evaluate marketing strategies that claim to be value‑driven. This conceptual ambiguity creates a risk that “customer value” is used as a loose slogan rather than as a well‑defined strategic construct.
The purpose of this paper is to clarify the concept of customer value and to explore how it can be used as the basis for a coherent marketing strategy. The paper reviews key contributions to the customer value literature and relates them to broader developments in marketing thought. It begins with foundational ideas about value‑driven marketing and market orientation. It then examines how the concept of customer value has been defined and developed by different authors. The paper also considers more recent perspectives on value co‑creation and service logic that challenge traditional, firm‑centric views of value delivery. Finally, it discusses how customer value can be translated into practice through customer relationship management (CRM) and the design of value propositions in business markets.
More specifically, the paper addresses the following research questions. First, how have key authors in the marketing literature defined and conceptualized customer value, and what are the main similarities and differences between these perspectives? Second, how does the idea of a customer value‑driven marketing strategy relate to the concept of market orientation as developed by Narver and Slater (1990)? Third, in what ways do service‑dominant logic and service logic, as articulated by Vargo and Lusch (2004) and Grönroos (2008), extend or challenge traditional views of value in marketing? Fourth, how can insights from these theoretical streams be translated into practical tools and frameworks for implementing customer value‑driven strategies, particularly through CRM and value proposition design?
The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. Section 2 outlines the foundations of value‑driven marketing and market orientation, drawing primarily on Kotler and Armstrong (2018) and Narver and Slater (1990). Section 3 provides a detailed examination of the customer value construct, using the work of Zeithaml (1988), Woodruff (1997), Holbrook (1999), and Woodall (2003) to build a synthesized working definition. Section 4 discusses modern perspectives on value co‑creation and service logic, as developed by Vargo and Lusch (2004) and Grönroos (2008), and explores their implications for how value is understood in marketing. Section 5 focuses on the practical implementation of customer value‑driven strategies through Payne and Frow’s (2005) CRM framework and Anderson et al.’s (2006) discussion of customer value propositions in business markets. Section 6 integrates these insights into a conceptual framework and outlines key implications for managers and researchers. Section 7 concludes the paper by summarizing the main arguments and highlighting directions for further research.
Foundations: Value‑Driven Marketing and Market Orientation
Value‑Driven Marketing Strategy (Kotler & Armstrong, 2018)
Kotler and Armstrong (2018) put customer value at the heart of marketing. They describe marketing as a process that starts with understanding customer needs, then moves to designing a customer value‑driven strategy, building an integrated marketing program, and finally building strong relationships that allow the firm to capture value in return. In this view, marketing is not only about selling what the firm has already produced. It is about shaping what the firm offers so that it creates value for customers and for the firm.
A customer value‑driven marketing strategy is built on segmentation, targeting, and positioning. First, the firm splits the market into groups of buyers with different needs or behaviors. Second, it chooses which segments to target. Third, it decides how it wants its offer to be seen by those target customers. The result is a clear value proposition, that is, a statement of how the product or service will deliver benefits that matter to customers. Kotler and Armstrong (2018) stress that the marketing mix (product, price, place, and promotion) should be designed so that it supports and delivers this value proposition.
This process means that customer value is not an afterthought. It guides which customers to serve, what benefits to offer, and how to communicate and deliver those benefits. A customer value‑driven marketing strategy is therefore a way to connect customer understanding with competitive positioning and with the design of the firm’s offerings.
Market Orientation as a Strategic Foundation (Narver & Slater, 1990)
Narver and Slater (1990) describe market orientation as a business culture that helps a firm create superior value for its customers. They identify three main parts of market orientation. Customer orientation means that the firm understands current and future customer needs and tries to meet them in a way that builds long‑term satisfaction. Competitor orientation means that the firm understands current and potential competitors, including their strengths, weaknesses, and strategies. Interfunctional coordination means that all departments, not only marketing, work together to create value for customers.
Narver and Slater (1990) test their ideas in a study of business units and find that a stronger market orientation is linked to higher profitability. This result holds even when they control for other factors. They conclude that market orientation is a key driver of performance because it keeps the firm focused on creating superior value in a changing market.
Their work shows that strategy does not exist only on paper. It is supported or blocked by the culture of the firm and by the way information flows across departments. A firm that lacks market orientation may talk about customers but may not have the routines needed to understand them or respond to them effectively.
Linking Value‑Driven Marketing and Market Orientation
Market orientation and customer value‑driven marketing strategy fit closely together. Market orientation describes how a firm behaves and how it treats market information. A value‑driven strategy describes how the firm uses that information to make choices about segments, targets, positioning, and value propositions.
If a firm is market‑oriented, it is more likely to identify what different customers value, how competitors perform, and where there are unmet needs. It can then design focused value propositions and marketing programs that address those needs better than rivals. If a firm is not market‑oriented, its value‑driven claims may rest on guesswork. For this reason, a strong market orientation is a natural foundation for any customer value‑driven marketing strategy.
The Concept of Customer Value
Perceived Value as a Trade‑Off
Zeithaml (1988) offers a simple but powerful definition of perceived value. She defines it as the consumer’s overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given. In practice, this means that customers compare perceived benefits with perceived sacrifices.
Benefits can include quality, features, performance, and other advantages. Sacrifices can include price, time, effort, and risk. Zeithaml (1988) also notes that different customers may define value in different ways. For some, value is “low price.” For others, it is “what I get for what I give” or “quality for the price I pay.” In all cases, value is a higher‑level judgment that brings together several aspects of the offer.
This trade‑off view is useful for strategy because it links to pricing, product design, and communication. A firm that wants to raise perceived value can try to increase perceived benefits, lower perceived sacrifices, or both. At the same time, the model treats value mainly as a balance of functional benefits and costs at a point in time. It does not explore deeper goals or long‑term experiences in much detail. Later authors respond to this gap.
Customer Value as a Means–End Chain
Woodruff (1997) offers a richer view of customer value as a means–end chain. He defines customer value as the customer’s perceived preference for, and evaluation of, product attributes, attribute performances, and consequences that help or block the achievement of customer goals and purposes. Product attributes are the means. Customer goals and purposes are the ends. Between them are usage consequences.
Woodruff also draws a clear line between desired value and perceived value received. Desired value is what the customer hopes to get from the product in future use. Perceived value received is what the customer believes he or she has actually obtained after using the product. The gap between these two shapes satisfaction and future behavior.
This model has strong strategic implications. It suggests that firms should begin with the customer’s goals and work backward. Instead of starting with the product and asking what features to offer, managers should ask what customers want to achieve, what consequences help them reach those goals, and which attributes support those consequences. A value‑driven strategy, in this sense, is one that aligns product attributes and service processes with customer goals.
Multidimensional Consumer Value
Holbrook (1999) argues that consumer value is multidimensional and experiential. He defines it as an interactive, relativistic, preference‑based experience. By interactive, he means that value arises from the relationship between a consumer and an object. By relativistic, he means that value depends on the situation, the person, and comparisons with alternatives. By preference‑based, he means that value reflects what the consumer likes or prefers.
Holbrook builds a typology of eight value types using three basic dimensions: extrinsic versus intrinsic, self versus other, and active versus reactive. For example, efficiency and excellence are extrinsic and self‑oriented. Status and esteem are extrinsic and other‑oriented. Play and aesthetics are intrinsic and self‑oriented. Ethics and spirituality are intrinsic and other‑oriented. Each type captures a different way in which consumption can be valuable. A piece of clothing, for instance, might give efficiency (practical use), status (signal of success), and aesthetics (visual pleasure).
For marketing strategy, Holbrook’s work shows that value is not limited to functional performance or money. It can involve fun, identity, social approval, beauty, or moral values. A customer value‑driven strategy should therefore decide which value types it wants to offer and how those types fit target segments.
Types and Stages of Value
Woodall (2003) reviews the customer value literature and notes that the term “value” is often used loosely. He proposes a structured way to talk about “value for the customer” by identifying different value types and linking them to stages in the buying and usage process.
He distinguishes, among others, transaction value, acquisition value, use value, and redemption value. Transaction value refers to the pleasure or satisfaction from the deal itself at the point of purchase, for example when a customer feels happy about a discount. Acquisition value focuses on the trade‑off between benefits and price at the moment of buying. Use value refers to the benefits that arise during use over time. Redemption value relates to value after use, such as resale or trade‑in value.
Woodall’s analysis shows that customer value is not a single, fixed thing. It can appear at different times and in different forms. For strategy, this means that a firm needs to be clear about which type of value it wants to influence and measure. A company focused only on low price may raise acquisition value but may not deliver strong use value. A company that offers durable, easy‑to‑repair products may create high use and redemption value even if transaction value feels less exciting.
Synthesis and Working Definition
The views of Zeithaml (1988), Woodruff (1997), Holbrook (1999), and Woodall (2003) share several key themes. All see value as subjective and located in the mind of the customer. All treat value as comparative, involving trade‑offs or comparisons with other options. All accept that value can vary across people, situations, and time. At the same time, each author adds something specific: Zeithaml focuses on the benefit‑sacrifice balance, Woodruff on links to customer goals, Holbrook on multiple experiential and symbolic dimensions, and Woodall on types and stages of value.
For this paper, a practical working definition is needed. Based on these authors, customer value can be defined as the customer’s overall evaluation of the benefits and sacrifices linked to a product, service, or experience, where these benefits and sacrifices are multidimensional and connected to the customer’s goals over time. This definition keeps the trade‑off idea, includes functional, emotional, social, and ethical aspects, and recognizes that value changes across the customer journey. It gives a clear base for discussing what a customer value‑driven strategy should focus on.
Modern Perspectives: Value Co‑Creation and Service Logic
Service‑Dominant Logic and Co‑Creation
Vargo and Lusch (2004) introduce service‑dominant logic as a new way to think about value. In a traditional goods‑dominant view, firms make goods that contain value and then deliver them to customers in exchange for money. In service‑dominant logic, service is the basis of exchange. Service is the use of skills and knowledge for the benefit of another.
A central idea in service‑dominant logic is that value is co‑created by many actors, including firms, customers, and partners. Firms do not create value alone and then pass it on to customers. Instead, customers always take part in creating value through how they use products and services, how they combine them with other resources, and how they interpret their experiences. Value is realized in use, not only in exchange.
This view shifts the focus of marketing strategy. Instead of treating customers as passive recipients, it sees them as active participants. Firms need to design their offerings, interactions, and networks so that they support customers in creating value in their own contexts. For example, a fitness app does not create value simply by having features. It creates value when users adopt it, combine it with their routines, and use it to reach health goals.
Service Logic and Value Facilitation
Grönroos (2008) develops a related idea known as service logic. He argues that value is finally created in the customer’s world, for instance in the daily life of a consumer or in the operations of a business customer. The firm cannot create value for the customer by itself. Instead, it can offer value propositions and provide resources and interactions that help customers create value.
In this view, the customer is the main value creator. The firm’s role is to facilitate value. It does this by designing its services, processes, and interactions so that they fit the customer’s own processes. When the customer and the firm interact, value can be jointly created, for example in a service encounter, in a support call, or on a digital platform. But the final judgment about value rests with the customer.
Service logic asks managers to think carefully about how offerings fit into customer processes. A business buyer might use an industrial solution as part of a wider production system. A consumer might use a mobile app as part of a daily routine. A service logic view suggests that firms should understand these processes and shape their offerings to support them.
Strategic Implications for Value‑Driven Strategy
Together, service‑dominant logic and service logic change how firms should think about a customer value‑driven strategy. First, they move focus from one‑time transactions to ongoing processes and relationships. Second, they stress that customers are not passive targets, but active participants in value creation.
For strategy, this means that firms should design customer journeys, touchpoints, and platforms that support co‑creation. Examples include self‑service portals, user communities, co‑design activities, and flexible service contracts. Firms should also think about wider service ecosystems, where value emerges from interactions among many actors, such as partners and other customers.
A customer value‑driven strategy informed by service‑dominant logic and service logic will pay attention not only to what the firm offers, but also to how customers will actually use those offerings, how they will interact with the firm, and how the firm can support their efforts to reach their own goals.
From Concept to Practice: Implementing a Value‑Driven Strategy
CRM as a Strategic Process
To move from ideas to action, firms need systems and processes. Payne and Frow (2005) argue that customer relationship management (CRM) should be seen as a strategic approach. They define CRM as a cross‑functional process that aims to improve shareholder value through good relationships with key customers and segments.
Their framework includes several main processes. The strategy development process links the overall business strategy to a clear customer strategy. It answers questions about which customers to focus on and what kind of relationships the firm wants. The value creation process looks at how the firm can create value for customers and how it can gain value from them in return. This involves designing offerings, experiences, and interactions that support both sides.
The multichannel integration process deals with how the firm manages interactions across channels such as salespeople, websites, call centers, and social media. The goal is to give customers a consistent and satisfying experience. The information management process covers the collection, storage, analysis, and use of customer data. Finally, performance assessment measures customer outcomes (such as satisfaction, loyalty, and retention) and firm outcomes (such as revenue, profit, and customer lifetime value).
This view of CRM fits a customer value‑driven strategy well. A firm that uses CRM in this way can identify which customers are most valuable, which dimensions of value they care about, and how their value perceptions change over time. It can then adjust its offerings and interactions to keep creating and capturing value.
Value Propositions in Business Markets
Anderson, Narus, and Van Rossum (2006) focus on customer value propositions in business‑to‑business markets. They define a value proposition as a clear, and where possible quantified, statement of the benefits a supplier will deliver to a specific customer or segment compared with alternatives. They argue that many firms rely on weak value propositions that use vague claims, such as “high quality” or “excellent service,” or that list many benefits without showing which ones matter most.
To improve practice, they describe three basic approaches. The all‑benefits approach lists all benefits that managers can think of. It is easy to create but often includes benefits that customers do not care about. The favorable points‑of‑difference approach compares the supplier’s offer to competitors and lists where it is better. This is more strategic, but it can still be long and may not focus on what the customer values most.
The resonating‑focus approach is the one they recommend. In this approach, the supplier identifies a small number of value elements that will create the greatest impact for the customer and that the supplier can deliver better than rivals. These elements are then highlighted and, where possible, quantified in business terms, such as cost savings or revenue gains. This approach forces suppliers to understand the customer’s business deeply and to focus on what really matters.
For a customer value‑driven strategy, resonating‑focus value propositions are attractive because they align closely with customers’ key goals and pains. They avoid generic claims and instead highlight a few specific benefits that truly matter in context.
Integrating CRM and Value Propositions
CRM and value proposition design can work together to support a customer value‑driven strategy. CRM systems and processes help firms collect and analyze data about customers, including their needs, behaviors, satisfaction, and profitability. This information feeds into decisions about segmentation, targeting, and interaction design.
Based on this insight, firms can develop resonating‑focus value propositions for important segments or individual accounts, following Anderson et al. (2006). CRM data can then be used to test and refine these value propositions over time. For example, the firm can track whether customers who receive a certain value proposition show higher satisfaction, greater usage, or higher lifetime value.
Multichannel integration within CRM ensures that the chosen value proposition is communicated consistently across touchpoints and that the promised value is actually delivered in practice. Performance assessment allows the firm to see whether the strategy is working and to adjust when needed.
In this way, CRM provides the structure and information needed to design and manage value propositions, while clear value propositions give direction to CRM activities. Together, they help turn customer value concepts into concrete practices.
Toward an Integrated Framework of Customer Value‑Driven Marketing Strategy
Integrating Market Orientation, Value Concepts, and Service Logic
The literature discussed in this paper can be combined into an integrated framework of customer value‑driven marketing strategy. At the base of the framework is market orientation, as described by Narver and Slater (1990). Market orientation provides a cultural and behavioral foundation. It ensures that the firm systematically gathers, shares, and uses information about customers and competitors. Without this foundation, efforts to build value‑driven strategies may rest on assumptions rather than insight.
On top of this foundation sit the conceptualizations of customer value from Zeithaml (1988), Woodruff (1997), Holbrook (1999), and Woodall (2003). These works clarify what customer value is and how it can be understood. They show that value is subjective, multidimensional, and linked to customer goals across time. They also highlight that value can be experienced at different stages, from the purchase decision to use and eventual disposal. For strategy, this layer of the framework helps firms avoid vague talk of “value” and instead think carefully about which benefits and sacrifices they target and how these relate to customer goals.
The next layer comes from service‑dominant logic and service logic, as set out by Vargo and Lusch (2004) and Grönroos (2008). These perspectives shift attention from value as something produced and delivered by the firm to value as something created by customers in use. They argue that firms can only offer value propositions and facilitate customers’ value‑creation processes. This adds a dynamic and relational element to the framework. It suggests that a value‑driven strategy must focus on designing interactions, processes, and service systems that support value co‑creation in real contexts.
Finally, at the implementation level, the framework includes CRM and value proposition tools, as described by Payne and Frow (2005) and Anderson et al. (2006). These tools connect conceptual ideas about value and co‑creation to the firm’s structures and processes. CRM organizes how the firm collects and uses customer data, manages interactions across channels, and measures outcomes. Value propositions express, in clear and focused terms, how the firm aims to create superior value for specific customers or segments.
If we describe this framework in sequence, it starts with a market‑oriented culture that seeks to create superior value. It then uses rich concepts of customer value to define what “superior” means in different contexts. Service and co‑creation logic shape how the firm thinks about where and how value emerges. CRM and value proposition design then translate this into specific strategies and programs. The outcome of this chain should be improved customer value, stronger relationships, and better firm performance, which in turn support continued investment in market orientation and value‑driven practices.
Managerial Implications
The integrated framework suggests several clear implications for managers who want to adopt a customer value‑driven marketing strategy. First, managers should clarify their firm’s understanding of customer value. Rather than using the term loosely, they should define which dimensions of value are central for their target segments and at which stages of the customer journey. This may involve research to understand functional, emotional, social, and ethical benefits, as well as different types of value such as acquisition and use value.
Second, managers should work to strengthen market orientation across the organization. This involves not only the marketing department, but all functions. Mechanisms for sharing customer insight, coordinating responses, and monitoring competitors should be in place. Incentives and training may be needed to support a culture that values long‑term customer relationships and continuous learning about markets.
Third, firms should invest in CRM capabilities that go beyond simple contact management. They need systems and processes that can integrate data from multiple channels, analyze it, and support decisions about segmentation, targeting, and interaction design. These capabilities are crucial for tailoring offers and experiences to the value priorities of different customers.
Fourth, managers should adopt resonating‑focus value propositions, especially in business markets. Instead of broad claims, they should identify and quantify the few value elements that matter most to key customers and that the firm can deliver better than others. These value propositions should be tested and refined using CRM data and customer feedback.
Finally, managers should design offerings and processes in line with service and value co‑creation logic. This means thinking through how customers will use the firm’s products and services, how they will interact with the firm across channels, and how the firm can support their value‑creation activities. This may involve self‑service options, co‑design activities, or communities where customers can share knowledge and experiences.
Implications for Research
The integrated framework also points to several areas where further research is needed. One area is the measurement of multidimensional customer value in real settings. While the conceptual work of Holbrook (1999) and others sets out rich value dimensions, there is still a need for robust, practical scales that firms can use to measure different types of value across segments and touchpoints.
Another area is the link between value co‑creation practices and long‑term performance outcomes. More empirical studies are needed that connect specific co‑creation activities, such as user communities or co‑design, to metrics like customer lifetime value, share of wallet, or firm profitability. This would help managers decide where to invest.
A third area involves digital and omnichannel contexts. As customers switch between online and offline channels and interact with platforms and ecosystems, the processes of value creation and co‑creation may change. Research could explore how market orientation, value concepts, service logic, and CRM tools need to adapt in such settings, and how firms can manage value across complex customer journeys.
Conclusion
This paper has examined the idea of a customer value‑driven marketing strategy by drawing on key contributions from the marketing literature. It began by outlining the foundations of value‑driven marketing and market orientation. Kotler and Armstrong (2018) frame marketing as a process of creating value for customers and building strong relationships, while Narver and Slater (1990) show that a market‑oriented culture, focused on customers, competitors, and interfunctional coordination, is associated with superior performance. Together, these works suggest that firms should place customer value at the center of their strategies.
The paper then explored how customer value has been conceptualized. Zeithaml (1988) describes value as a trade‑off between perceived benefits and sacrifices. Woodruff (1997) treats value as a means–end chain linked to customer goals over time. Holbrook (1999) adds emotional, social, and ethical dimensions, and Woodall (2003) distinguishes several types of value across the buying and usage process. From these views, a working definition of customer value was proposed as the customer’s overall evaluation of multidimensional benefits and sacrifices in relation to goals over time.
Next, the paper discussed modern perspectives on value co‑creation and service logic. Vargo and Lusch (2004) argue that value is co‑created by multiple actors and realized in use, while Grönroos (2008) distinguishes between customer value creation and firm value facilitation. These ideas shift focus from products and transactions to interactions, processes, and service systems. They imply that firms should design offerings and touchpoints that support customers’ value‑creation activities rather than assuming that value is delivered in a one‑way flow.
Finally, the paper showed how customer value‑driven strategies can be implemented using CRM frameworks and value proposition design. Payne and Frow (2005) present CRM as a strategic process that aligns customer insight, value creation, multichannel integration, and performance assessment. Anderson et al. (2006) propose the resonating‑focus value proposition as a way to communicate and deliver the specific value elements that matter most to particular customers. Together, these tools help firms turn abstract value concepts into concrete practices.
The integrated framework developed here suggests that a customer value‑driven marketing strategy rests on a market‑oriented culture, a clear and rich understanding of customer value, a service‑based view of value creation, and robust CRM and value proposition tools. For managers, this means being explicit about what “value” means for their customers, building the capabilities to understand and support that value, and measuring outcomes over time. For researchers, the framework highlights the need for further work on measuring multidimensional value, linking co‑creation to performance, and adapting value‑driven strategies to digital and omnichannel contexts.
By grounding strategy in a clear, customer‑focused understanding of value and by aligning culture, processes, and tools around this idea, firms can improve their chances of building strong, profitable relationships in competitive markets.
References
Anderson, J. C., Narus, J. A., & Van Rossum, W. (2006). Customer value propositions in business markets. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 90–99.
Grönroos, C. (2008). Service logic revisited: Who creates value? And who co‑creates? European Business Review, 20(4), 298–314. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340810886585
Holbrook, M. B. (1999). Introduction to consumer value. In M. B. Holbrook (Ed.), Consumer value: A framework for analysis and research (pp. 1–28). Routledge.
Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2014). Principles of marketing (15th ed.). Pearson.
Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400403
Payne, A., & Frow, P. (2005). A strategic framework for customer relationship management. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.167
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036
Woodall, T. (2003). Conceptualising “value for the customer”: An attributional, structural and dispositional analysis. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 2003(12), 1–42.
Woodruff, R. B. (1997). Customer value: The next source for competitive advantage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(2), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02894350
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means–end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298805200302
Nick, Founder & CEO of Wiener Squad Media
Nick is the visionary founder and CEO of Wiener Squad Media, based in Orlando, FL, where he passionately supports Republican, Libertarian, and other conservative entrepreneurs in building and growing their businesses through effective website design and digital marketing strategies. With a strong background in marketing, Nick previously ran a successful marketing agency for 15 years that achieved seven-figure revenue before an unfortunate acquisition led to its closure. This experience fueled his resolve to create Wiener Squad Media, driven by a mission to provide outstanding digital marketing services tailored specifically for conservative-owned small businesses.
Holding a Master of Science in Marketing from Hawaii Pacific University (2003), Nick is currently furthering his education with an MBA to enhance his problem-solving skills and ensure that past challenges don’t repeat themselves. He firmly believes in the marathon approach to business growth, prioritizing sustainable practices over quick fixes like investor capital. Committed to employee welfare, Nick maintains a starting wage of $25 per hour for his staff and caps his own salary at $80,000 plus bonuses.
At Wiener Squad Media, our values are based on the Five Pillars of Giving – protecting the First and Second Amendments, Sanctity of Life, supporting our military, veteran, and first responder heroes, and making sure no shelter dog is left behind by finding each one a forever home. At Wiener Squad Media, we are not just about success but also about making a positive impact on society while achieving it.
Outside of work, Nick is an avid political activist who engages in discussions supporting conservative values. He volunteers at local animal shelters, participates in pet adoption events to help find all unwanted dogs a forever home. Committed to nurturing the next generation of entrepreneurs, Nick dedicates time to coaching and mentoring other aspiring conservative business owners, sharing his wealth of knowledge and experience in the industry.
0 Comments