Prof McDonald is the Academic Adviser to the City
Digital Marketing Academy.
THE
FUTURE OF MARKETING
In
a paper published in the UK’s leading academic journal, I cited fifty scholarly
references testifying to the fact that marketing’s bright beginnings in the
1960s were not built on, that the academic community had become largely an
irrelevancy, and that practitioners in the main have failed to embrace the
marketing concept and the proven tools and techniques of marketing.
In the arid desert of marketing as a
discipline, however, there still exists a wonderful oasis of very professional,
market-orientated organisations that practice marketing
as I teach it, as a fully accountable
discipline which drives corporate success. So, let me attempt to summarise
briefly why some of the poisonous slurs thrown at our
discipline are, in the main, ill-judged and
ill-founded and why we can be proud of the exemplary standards demonstrated by
our leading companies.
CONSUMER
SOVEREIGNTY AND THE MORAL FOUNDATIONS
OF
MARKETING
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, there was
a growing consciousness of the problems that mass consumption brought with it.
A movement was formed which quickly Greening of America, Theodore Roszak’s The Making of a Counter Culture and Alvin Toffler’s Future Shock were published at that time.
The basic message articulated was that the people could no longer be thought of
as ‘consumers’ - some aggregate variable in the grand marketing design. Such
feelings had led to a view that capitalism presented an unacceptable face in
promoting an acquisitive and materialistic society. As a more visible manifestation
of such activity, marketing was singled out for attention for playing on
people’s weaknesses – by insidious means persuading the consumer to do things without
which their lives would be incomplete.
This argument deserves closer examination,
for it confuses needs with wants. But, even worse, it involves the notion of a
defenceless consumer, a characterisation that any scrupulous marketer must
reject. For no matter what ‘marketing’ is performed, the consumer remains free
to make choices – either between competing products or
not to buy at all. Indeed, it could be argued
that by extending the range of choices that the consumer has available,
marketing is enhancing consumer sovereignty
rather than eroding it. Although promotional
activity may persuade an individual to buy a product or service for the first
time, promotion is unlikely to be the persuasive factor in any subsequent
purchase, when the consumer will act from first-hand experience of the product.
MARKETING
ETHICS
Several
specific issues have formed the focus of the debate on the ethics of marketing
including:
• the
contribution of marketing to materialism
• rising
consumer expectations as a result of marketing
pressure;
and
• the use
of advertising to mislead or distort
Marketing, it has been suggested, helps to
feed the materialistic
and acquisitive urges of society, and in turn feeds on them itself.
Of course implicit in such criticism is the value judgement that
materialism and acquisitiveness are in themselves undesirable.
and acquisitive urges of society, and in turn feeds on them itself.
Of course implicit in such criticism is the value judgement that
materialism and acquisitiveness are in themselves undesirable.
The argument is that marketing raises the
level of consumer expectations. More than simple aspirations, there is desire
to acquire a specific set of gratifications through the purchase of goods and
services, fuelled by marketing’s insistent messages. Further, if at the same
time the individual lacks the financial resources with which to
fulfil such expectations, then marketing
inevitably adds to a greater awareness of differences in society, and to dissatisfaction
and unrest among those finding themselves in this situation, as those
apologists for the street riots in August claimed.
The counter-argument here is that marketing
itself does not contribute to rising expectations and thus to social and
economic disparity; it merely makes people aware of and better informed about
the differences that already exist in society. In this respect, it can be
claimed that its effects are beneficial, since it supports, even hastens, pressures
for fairer distribution. It can also be argued that materialism is not a recent
phenomenon correlated with the advent of mass marketing.
CONSUMERISM
Closely connected with the ethics of
marketing is that of consumerism (in the sense of the existence of a consumer movement
and consumer activists). Ironically, this
movement is pro-marketing; it wants the
marketing approach to business implemented in a sincere rather than cynical
spirit. The ‘cynical’ implementation, which consumerists claim has been too
widely practised, is no better than high-pressure salesmanship or misleading puffery.
The ‘sincere’ implementation of a marketing based approach entails respect for
each individual consumer served. Better marketing has always emanated from a
deep understanding of consumer expectations combined with the consumer’s right
to be informed and
protected and to enjoy a higher quality of
life.
Most of the outstanding marketing skills on
which most theory is based still reside in the FMCG sector. Whilst certainly
adopted by leading industrial companies such
as GE and 3M, and by some of the top
retailers such as Tesco and Sainsbury, in the main marketing has yet to storm
the citadels of B2B and service sectors which
account for the majority of the UK’s GDP. In
these, marketing is merely communications and a parody of best practice. For
example, in the financial and
insurance sectors, very few brands have
managed to create a complete set of perceptions in people’s minds. The large
majority of consumers still cannot differentiate between the brands of major
banks, building societies and insurance companies, in spite of the billions of pounds
spent each year on image advertising.
Emeritus Professor Malcolm McDonald
Malcolm, author of 43 books, was Professor of Marketing and Deputy
Director Cranfield School of Management, is a graduate in English from Oxford University,
in Business Studies from Bradford University Management Centre, has a PhD
from Cranfield University and a D.Lit from Bradford University .
His extensive industrial experience includes a number of years as Marketing
Director of Canada Dry.
He is Chairman of Brand Finance plc and five other companies. He spends
much of his time working globally with the operating boards of the world’s
biggest multinational companies.
In 2006 he was listed by the Times as one of the country’s top ten
consultants
He is Visiting Professor at Henley, Warwick, Aston and
Bradford Business Schools and Emeritus Professor at Cranfield.
So Prof MacDonald believes that "... marketing ... supports, even hastens, pressures for fairer distribution." That seems pretty implausible. Do we see Marketeers calling for less inequality? I have not noticed them. Has the distribution of wealth become fairer during the last twenty years - years in which marketing has become more prominent? No - its become less equal.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the evidence for this odd claim?