Beschreibung:
<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-heading">Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>This paper is a rejoinder to Lusch and Vargo's defense of their service‐dominant logic paper against criticism.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-heading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title><jats:p>The paper responds to Lusch and Vargo's defense and criticism of the initial article primarily through examining the logic of their case.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-heading">Findings</jats:title><jats:p>The paper finds that both the charges and the arguments against the criticism have no merit.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-heading">Research limitations/implications</jats:title><jats:p>The paper offers guidance as to the approach needed to advance the study of service marketing. This rejects the notion that viewing all businesses as service entities is a progressive approach but recommends a disjunctive definition of service, which would throw up service‐categories that needed to be studied in their own right if progress is to be made.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-heading">Originality/value</jats:title><jats:p>The paper suggests that Lusch and Vargo's S‐D‐dominant logic is unlikely to be practically fruitful while remaining theoretically limited.</jats:p></jats:sec>