From a historical perspective, the industrial revolution promoted the ideas of a production-oriented firm, whereas the current trends are customer-driven organizations. One continuum along which a company resides is from production-orientation to market-orientation. One of the components of marketorientation is interfunctional coordination (Narver and Slater, 1990). The critical interfunctional relationship between manufacturing and marketing is a "classical problem that afflicts every manufacturing company" (Shapiro, 1977, p. 104). The article, "Can marketing and manufacturing coexist?" asked more questions than it answered and, as a result, laid the groundwork for much-needed research.There are several methods for expanding the frontiers of knowledge in a field including the generation of new theory (described as "bench level" development (Reisman, 1992b, p. 30)). Another method is to expand knowledge incrementally, much like the TQM philosophy of continuing improvement. A third, but less used technique, is to classify the work of others and to identify voids in the field (Reisman, 1992a). When a review of existing literature is conducted, consolidation and classification allows patterns to emerge. The patterns form a framework that leads to the identification of the categories of research that are needed. Within a framework, areas that are overworked, under-worked, or totally empty are noted.In this study, we develop a generic classification framework for interfunctional research, and apply it specifically to the research on the manufacturing-marketing interface. Such a classification framework will help reveal gaps in the literature and, accordingly, gaps in knowledge. What emerges from the classification of the manufacturing-marketing research are some important unanswered research questions.Each of the articles surveyed is positioned in the framework by determining the aspects of the interface with which the research is concerned. Manufacturing-marketing interface research is defined by positioning with respect to three aspects: process versus outcome, level of interaction (strategic,