Two approaches to market activity
From a marketing point of view, there are two approaches to market activity:
Business -> Consumer (headed by corporate strategy - search for ways to assert themselves and their business principles in a particular industry)
Consumer -> business (at the head of a marketing strategy, as the basis for a corporate one - to satisfy the consumer and do something business and principled for this)

First approach
The first approach involves the use of marketing methods and functions for business purposes, without confessing a marketing philosophy. Purely utilitarian approach. Porter, Ansoff, all strategy literature, Ford, Trump, 999 companies out of a thousand - this is the first approach. Consumer, marketing methods (advertising, promotion) and NLP in the brain hammered business ideas. They cannot but grind - the plants are built, the wells pump oil ... all this needs to be sold somewhere! If there is no need for this, the need for this needs to be formed ("the marketer, do something already so that it stays in the warehouse for sale, I cannot look at these figures in the inventory accounting reports!").

Second approach
The second approach to market activity is the notorious "marketing-oriented company." This is what the marketers, led by Kotler, Rice, marketing Toyota, IKEA, Amazon, Xiaomi, Alibaba, Ozone, are dreaming about. This is embodied in reality, and not the declared "concept of marketing activity", it is all permeated with the goal of "satisfy the consumer."

And here the marketing strategy becomes simply functional, but the strategy that determines all the activities of the corporation, and certainly, it is above the strategy of business units. That is why, if what the company does not need to the consumer - this startup, product, direction will be eliminated, no one even tries to promote something to shove customers in the head.

And this is true, not from the understanding of the need for any excessively large resources for such a hollowing ...

Loss of time is the greatest of losses
than the loss of money, reputation, high costs for pushing into the market nevpihuemy. Time is money, people either carry you money themselves, or you spend time convincing them! And when you persuaded them, spending time and money, it took time - they caught up and overtook competitors, outdated goods, and consumers scattered in lines for new products based on the "marketing concept".

If suddenly you ask why 999 companies out of 1000 confess the first approach to the market, the answer is simple:
... the ability to capitalize is a very simple skill.

The ability to put in your piggy bank, protect and preserve accumulated - the simplest ability in a series of other skills: to see the future, learn and learn new things, trust the aspiring team, empathize with people and try to do something for them, make better life around them. That is why the chosen strategy has not changed for years - the fear of losing accumulated!
That is why it is overwhelmingly more than those for whom marketing is an accumulation tool.

What do marketers do?
If the marketer is the head of the marketing department, but not a strategist (in fact, thinking) or if he is not given - to run! Run to run from where it is used! And run from purely practical considerations - money for yourself and money for marketing, experience and a name not there to get! To form a strategic vision, marketing thinking, to convince the manager is a meaningless task. In these companies they just capitalize; everything is not for the people!