Who Invented Marketing?

Some inventions come with a satisfyingly neat answer.

Who invented the telephone? Alexander Graham Bell gets most of the credit, albeit with enough historical arguments attached to keep historians occupied.

Who invented the World Wide Web? Tim Berners-Lee. Lovely. We can all go home.

So, who invented marketing?

Unfortunately, marketing refuses to be that cooperative.

There was no single meeting at which somebody stood up, adjusted their waistcoat and announced:

The real history is much messier – and far more interesting.

People were behaving like marketers long before there were marketing departments, marketing degrees, marketing agencies or indeed anybody unfortunate enough to have “synergy” written in their job description.

Marketing practice emerged gradually from trade, retail, distribution, branding, advertising and human psychology.

Marketing thought came later, when academics and practitioners started trying to understand, organise and teach what businesses had already been doing.

And that distinction completely changes the answer.

Marketing Before Marketing Existed

To understand why nobody invented marketing, it helps to strip away the modern machinery surrounding it.

Forget CRM systems, Meta Ads Manager, brand trackers and the person insisting that the logo needs to be 14% bigger.

At its heart, marketing exists because people exchange things.

A seller has something. A buyer might want it. Somehow the seller needs to communicate value, establish trust, differentiate their offer from alternatives, make the product available and agree an exchange.

None of that required a Chartered Institute of Marketing qualification.

Ancient merchants had reputations. Craftspeople used identifying marks. Traders chose locations where buyers congregated. Sellers negotiated prices, displayed goods attractively and learnt which products particular customers preferred.

It would be anachronistic to declare that every Phoenician merchant was secretly a Brand Manager.

But many of the behaviours that eventually became part of marketing were already present.

The Most Important Distinction: Marketing Practice vs Marketing Thought

This is the bit that makes the whole “who invented marketing?” question much easier to untangle.

I explore the distinction in more detail in What’s the Difference Between Marketing Thought and Marketing Practice?, but it is crucial here.

If we're asking who first practised marketing, the answer disappears into antiquity.

If we're asking who helped create marketing as an academic discipline, we can begin identifying people, universities and dates.

And if we're asking who helped define modern marketing management, Philip Kotler suddenly becomes much more relevant.

Those are three different questions.

Josiah Wedgwood: A Marketer Before There Were Marketers

If you forced me to nominate one historical figure who deserves considerably more attention in the story of marketing, my answer would be Josiah Wedgwood.

Wedgwood founded his pottery business in 1759, more than a century before marketing began developing anything like its modern business meaning.

Yet look at what he was doing.

The Victoria and Albert Museum describes Wedgwood as a pioneer not merely in manufacturing and design but in marketing.

At a time when Staffordshire pottery was not routinely marked by its maker, Wedgwood began stamping his products as a signal of authenticity and quality.

That is branding.

He offered free delivery from his Staffordshire factory to London and replacement of items broken in transit.

That is customer experience and risk reduction.

He recognised the value of being present in fashionable locations and developed showrooms and retail locations in places including London, Bath and Dublin.

That is distribution strategy.

He cultivated exclusivity and status around his products, associated them with fashionable and royal society, understood the signalling value of prestigious customers and used demand from elites to influence wider consumer desire.

That starts sounding suspiciously like influencer marketing several centuries before somebody filmed themselves holding a packet of protein powder next to a ring light.

This is why I think Wedgwood is such an important figure.

He didn't invent marketing.

He demonstrates that sophisticated marketing practice can exist before formal marketing thought catches up with it.

The Industrial Revolution Creates a New Problem: Too Much Stuff

For most of human history, production was relatively constrained.

Then industrialisation changed the economics of making things.

Factories, mechanisation, improved transport and larger urban markets enabled businesses to produce goods on a scale that previous generations could scarcely imagine.

Which created a rather important commercial problem:

Producers increasingly operated at a distance from the people consuming their products.

Growing cities created larger markets. Railways and other transport networks widened distribution. Newspapers and magazines created opportunities for mass advertising. Retailers developed into larger and more sophisticated organisations.

The relationship between maker and buyer became longer, more complicated and more competitive.

That increases the importance of questions such as:

• Who is the customer?
• What do they actually want?
• How much will they pay?
• How do we distinguish our product?
• Where should we sell it?
• How do people know it comes from us?
• How do we create preference when competitors can make something similar?

Sound familiar?

We haven't reached Philip Kotler yet and the marketing department is already beginning to appear in everything but name.

1876: When a Red Triangle Becomes Marketing History

One of the most satisfying milestones in this story is not an academic theory at all.

It is a beer logo.

On 1 January 1876, following the Trade Marks Registration Act 1875, the Bass red triangle became UK Trade Mark No. 1.

It was Britain's first officially registered trade mark.

That doesn't mean Bass invented branding. Businesses had names, symbols, marks and reputations long before the Victorians invented a register for them.

But it represents something important.

A brand identity was now sufficiently commercially important that a formal legal system existed to protect it.

The symbol wasn't merely decoration.

It helped customers identify origin, distinguish the beer from competitors and connect a visual mark with accumulated reputation.

In other words, the brand itself had become an asset.

There is even a story – described as legend by the UK Intellectual Property Office – that a Bass employee waited outside the registration office on New Year's Eve so the company could be first through the door when registrations opened.

If true, that is perhaps the earliest known example of a marketer being irrationally excited about getting the number one position.

Then the Universities Arrived

So far, most of our story has been about marketing practice.

The beginning of the twentieth century is where marketing increasingly becomes something people consciously study.

Pinning down the first marketing course is surprisingly awkward because early teaching often sat under subjects such as economics, distribution, commerce, advertising and salesmanship.

Histories of the discipline often credit E. D. Jones at the University of Michigan with offering one of the earliest US university courses associated with marketing in 1902.

But – brilliantly for an article about ambiguity – it wasn't actually called “Marketing”.

The course was titled:

Roughly nine years later, Ralph Starr Butler at the University of Wisconsin is credited in histories of the field with teaching a course simply called Marketing.

Other universities were meanwhile teaching distribution, advertising, sales and related commercial subjects, while European teaching also contributed to the developing discipline.

This matters because early marketing thought was heavily concerned with distribution.

Modern marketers tend to think first about brands, campaigns, customers and communications.

Early scholars faced a more fundamental question:

Marketing didn't arrive fully formed with four Ps and a funnel diagram.

It grew out of attempts to explain real commercial systems.

Six Moments That Changed Marketing

Rather than pretending there was a single “birth” of marketing, it makes more sense to look at the points where the discipline noticeably changed shape.

The People Who Shaped Modern Marketing

This is usually the point at which lists of “the founders of marketing” become slightly chaotic.

That's because several people genuinely deserve enormous credit – but they were solving different parts of the puzzle.

And this time, rather than hiding them all inside one old composite image, we can actually meet them properly.

Walter Dill Scott: When Advertising Gets Inside Your Head

One major change around the beginning of the twentieth century was the growing involvement of psychology.

Walter Dill Scott studied how psychological principles could apply to business and advertising.

This matters because it moves advertising towards a question that remains fundamental today:

Modern marketers have behavioural science, eye tracking, experiments, conversion data, neuroscience claims of varying quality and roughly nine billion LinkedIn posts about cognitive biases.

Scott was working much earlier in the development of the idea that advertising effectiveness could be analysed in terms of human psychology.

Once marketers start studying attention, memory, motivation and behaviour, the discipline begins moving beyond distribution and selling towards the world we recognise today.

Edward Bernays: And Then It Gets a Bit Sinister

Edward Bernays occupies a fascinating position in this history because his primary field was public relations, not marketing.

But the two overlap heavily when we're talking about behaviour, persuasion, reputation and the construction of meaning.

Bernays published Crystallizing Public Opinion in 1923 and Propaganda in 1928.

He was interested in how public attitudes could be shaped deliberately rather than simply informed.

That idea sits uncomfortably close to some of marketing's darker possibilities.

The ethical debate didn't begin with social-media algorithms.

Technology simply gave the argument better targeting.

David Ogilvy: Advertising Grows Up

When David Ogilvy founded the agency that became Ogilvy in 1948, marketing and advertising were already well-established activities.

His contribution was not invention but professionalisation.

Ogilvy was obsessive about research, consumer understanding, positioning and writing advertising that actually communicated something meaningful about the product.

He rejected the idea that customers were idiots who could simply be shouted into submission.

And he understood an idea that is now central to brand management: every piece of communication contributes to the longer-term perception of a brand.

The industry was gradually accumulating a toolkit:

• customer research;
• behavioural insight;
• segmentation;
• brand positioning;
• creative strategy;
• media planning;
• measurement;
• distribution; and
• product management.

What it increasingly needed was somebody to help organise the whole bloody lot.

Enter Philip Kotler

This is where we finally reach the man who is often described as having invented marketing.

He didn't.

And describing him that way actually undersells what Philip Kotler accomplished.

Kotler trained as an economist and developed a much broader managerial understanding of marketing.

His landmark textbook Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, and Control was first published in 1967.

By then, Wedgwood had been dead for 172 years.

So unless Kotler had developed the world's least efficient time machine, he clearly wasn't the first person to practise marketing.

What he did extraordinarily well was codify it.

He helped bring together ideas from economics, behavioural science, organisational management and existing marketing scholarship into a system managers and students could learn and apply.

Marketing became easier to understand as an integrated organisational discipline concerned with markets, customer needs, products, value, exchange, segmentation and strategy – rather than simply a polite synonym for advertising or selling.

The Difference Between “Inventing” and “Codifying”

Imagine football existed for generations with slightly different rules in different places.

Then somebody came along, organised the rules, explained the system extraordinarily well and produced the textbook everyone subsequently learnt from.

We would rightly consider that person hugely important.

But we wouldn't say they invented the act of kicking a ball.

Kotler's importance is similar.

He became one of the towering figures of marketing thought because he helped make sense of an enormous field of existing practice and scholarship.

His influence is difficult to exaggerate.

His official biography describes him as the “father of modern marketing”, and Marketing Management became one of the world's most widely used marketing textbooks.

That is a better and more defensible description than “the man who invented marketing”.

Marketing Wasn't Invented. It Accumulated.

That's ultimately the story.

Marketing is not a single technology.

It is an accumulation of solutions to recurring commercial problems.

Those questions existed before marketing departments did.

Over time, different professions and disciplines contributed answers.

Economics contributed thinking about markets and exchange.

Psychology helped explain behaviour.

Retailers experimented with distribution and customer experience.

Advertisers learnt how to attract attention and create meaning.

Public relations practitioners studied opinion and reputation.

Statisticians and researchers improved measurement.

Academics organised these ideas into theories.

Managers turned them into processes.

Technology added new channels, data and capabilities.

Then somebody created programmatic advertising and we all briefly lost control of the situation.

So, Who Invented Marketing?

The answer depends on what you mean by “invented”.

And That's Why the History Matters

This isn't just an argument about who deserves their face on the hypothetical Mount Rushmore of marketing.

Understanding how marketing developed helps explain what marketing actually is.

It wasn't born as advertising.

It wasn't born as social media.

It wasn't born as selling.

And it certainly wasn't born when somebody discovered HubSpot.

The channels have changed beyond recognition.

A Wedgwood showroom became a department store.

The department store became a website.

The newspaper advertisement became paid social.

The travelling salesman became an email sequence.

Word of mouth became reviews, creators, Reddit threads and WhatsApp groups.

Now AI is changing the speed at which research, creative, personalisation and customer interaction can happen.

But the underlying questions haven't disappeared.

• Who are we trying to serve?
• What do they value?
• Why should they choose us?
• How do we make that exchange worthwhile for both sides?

Perhaps that's the strangest thing about the history of marketing.

For a discipline obsessed with innovation, some of its most important questions are ancient.

TL;DR