Marketing and Financial Management: A Dichotomy of Two Academic Disciplines—A Conceptual Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63808/ftd.v2i3.458Keywords:
Marketing management, Financial management, Marketing–finance interface, Strategic resource integration, Digital business transformation, Sustainable organisational performanceAbstract
Marketing and financial management have traditionally developed as separate academic and managerial domains, even though both shape firm value. This conceptual review examines how the two functions can be linked through a clearer set of constructs, mechanisms, and testable propositions. A transparent integrative review protocol was used to identify foundational and recent peer-reviewed work on the marketing–finance interface, marketing capability, customer lifetime value, brand and trademark valuation, cross-functional integration, digital transformation, and sustainable performance. The revised Integrated Marketing–Financial Management Framework (IMFMF) distinguishes marketing capability and financial management capability as functional resources, Strategic Resource Integration (SRI) as the cross-functional decision process that connects them, Digital Business Transformation (DBT) as an enabling condition, and Sustainable Organisational Performance (SOP) as a multidimensional outcome comprising economic, customer, environmental, and social performance. Eight propositions specify direct, mediated, and moderated relationships while recognising trade-offs arising from short-term financial controls, excessive marketing expenditure, weak data quality, and organisational complexity. The framework differs from general strategic-alignment models by focusing specifically on the conversion of customer-related market assets into financially disciplined resource-allocation decisions and by identifying measurable indicators for each construct. It contributes a bounded explanation of when marketing–finance integration is likely to improve performance and offers an implementation sequence based on joint budgeting, shared scorecards, integrated data governance, and post-investment review.
References
[1] Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
[2] Edeling, A., Srinivasan, S., & Hanssens, D. M. (2021). The marketing–finance interface: A new integrative review of metrics, methods, and findings and an agenda for future research. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 38(4), 857–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2020.09.005
[3] Gregori, P., & Holzmann, P. (2022). Entrepreneurial practices and the constitution of environmental value for sustainability. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(7), 3302–3317. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3077
[4] Homburg, C., & Wielgos, D. M. (2022). The value relevance of digital marketing capabilities to firm performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 50(4), 666–688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-022-00858-7
[5] Hoque, M. T., Nath, P., Ahammad, M. F., Tzokas, N., & Yip, N. (2022). Constituents of dynamic marketing capability: Strategic fit and heterogeneity in export performance. Journal of Business Research, 144, 1007–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.02.011
[6] Hsu, P.-H., Li, D., Li, Q., Teoh, S. H., & Tseng, K. (2022). Valuation of new trademarks. Management Science, 68(1), 257–279. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3887
[7] Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2004). Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard Business School Press.
[8] Konuk, S., Doruk, Ö. T., & Önal, Y. B. (2025). An empirical investigation of the relationship between brand value and firm value: Evidence from Turkey. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 30(1), 261–281. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2915
[9] Kumar, V., & Reinartz, W. (2018). Customer relationship management: Concept, strategy, and tools (3rd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55381-7
[10] Mauer, D. C., Villatoro, N., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Brand equity and corporate debt structure. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 49(7–8), 1077–1112. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbfa.12597
[11] Rust, R. T., Lemon, K. N., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 109–127. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.1.109.24030
[12] Saxena, D., Brady, M., Lamest, M., & Fellenz, M. R. (2022). Bridging the marketing–finance divide: Use of customer voice in managerial decision-making. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 25(3), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1108/QMR-09-2020-0113
[13] Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
[14] Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
[15] Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
[16] Yan, Y., & Resnick, N. (2024). A high-performance turnkey system for customer lifetime value prediction in retail brands. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 22(2), 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11129-023-09272-x
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Hazrita Ab. Rahim, Shimin How, Mohd.Faisal Mohd.Basri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.