Reviewing "The wheel of Retailing – The Marketing Enigma" Literature

There are a number of theories that attempt to explain the evolution of retail enterprises, and the wheel of retailing is probably the most well-known of these, Suggesting that entrants to a new retail market will begin trading as cut‐price, low‐overhead, low‐margin, and low‐status operations ( McNair, 1958 ). Over time, these traders will increase their overheads by offering additional services and product lines, perhaps in better locations, smarter premises, and with more sophisticated marketing communications. These retailers are then more vulnerable to new low‐cost entrants to the market who may be able to undercut the original retailer's prices.

Objectives and Methodology of the Journal

This theory is reviewed & critiqued by many scholars and researchers in the marketing field, but still this wheel remains the biggest marketing enigma. Hence the author of the journal Stephen Brown decided to focus on, to summarise the wheel of literature, secondly to synthesise the current knowledge of the retail institutional change and finally to find its efficiency and deficiency thereby to endeavour the account of it pervasiveness, to deriving to suggest the future research agenda. The main objective of the author is not to present exegesis on retail evolution but to explore and explain the wheel remarkable and unbreakable hold upon the imagination of marketing scholars.   

Findings

	Findings
Summarise Literature of the wheel theory	Most of the (copious) studies of third world retailing have been content to conclude that, firstly, the wheel does not apply therein and, secondly, that this is owing to the contrasts in environmental circumstances. Indeed, these two points are combined in perhaps the best known contribution, Kaynak's (1979) "refined" wheel of retailing. This states, in effect, that the wheel can only revolve when environmental conditions permit.
Synthesise the Retail Institutional Change	Retail institutional change, in short, appears to be the outcome of external environmental influences and a cycle like sequence of inter- and intra-type competition. These hypotheses, however, remain to be tested formally

 Conclusion

In endeavouring to evaluate the 60 year history of the wheel of retailing, one is tempted to conclude that the theory is revered and reviled in almost equal measure. At one extreme, it has been described as 'the most comprehensive theory of innovation yet developed" (McCammon 1963, p. 488) and, at the other extreme, it has been dismissed as having received "more credibility than it probably deserves" (Savitt 1989, p. 336). In truth, neither view is entirely correct. The wheel has manifold weaknesses but it also possesses significant strengths, not least its continuing and powerful grip upon the imaginations of marketing academics. The wheel continues to dominate retailing research. Indeed, a recent but influential analysis of marketing thought concluded that as the wheel is one of the few theories that our discipline can claim to have originated, it "should be nurtured and developed rather than abandoned for borrowed concepts from economics, psychology, or sociology" (Sheth et al. 1988, p. 187, 189).

Personal Opinion form the journal

As a student with garment manufacturing and fashion business background, I am force to conclude that, The wheel theory is a fad by looking at brands like DKNY, PRADA, JJILL, Bensherman, Calvin Kevin and etc. these brands are total reverse to the wheel theory as they carter the higher end market segment and this will create an ample platform to excel in middle and lower segment of market too. On the contradictory wheel theory is evolution of the retail business and clearly cracks the retail pattern and retailer has to ride this wheel at one point of the time in their business, but this theory not suitable for the developed and developing countries specifically in clothing business, as they are very brand conscious, style conscious, If any brand sells for lower segment of market and that brand will be permanently labelled as cheap brand and cant incline themselves to sell to higher and middle segment of market group best examples for such cases are Pepe Jeans, LL bean and Mavi.

To put in nutshell this wheel theory is the pattern of retail evolution as said in the journal this theory has its own weakness and pocess the significant strength too. Hence this journal and the assignment made me curious to start thinking on what business should do after attaining the maturity? How to carter to both (Higher and Lower) market groups?