Marketing Theories #2

Summary #2

What is, or Should Be, the Relationship Between Marketing and Society?

·         This concerned for marketing’s impact on the environment. There are criticism that marketing has been poorly utilize the scarce environmental resources and alleged disregard for public welfare. (Globe and Shaw 1975, Sethi 1979, Kangun 1974) – Pg 5

·         Three issues were focused on (Zikmund and Stanton, 1971) – Pg 5:

1.      Process of extracting resources from the environment to use in creation of products, marketing placed a burden on some non-renewable resources such as petroleum, also the lost of recreation utility due to heavy use of forestry resources also caused criticism.

2.      Direct impact to environmental quality resulted from use of products by consumers has caused criticism to marketing

3.      Disposal of many products impair / strain the environment

·    CONCLUSION: Marketing was criticized for indirectly for environmental issues resulted from heavy extraction of non-renewable resources, disposal of products or lost of recreation utilities as a result of forestry to produce goods.

·         Other environmental issues (Crosby and Taylor 1982) – Pg 6:

1.      Excessive packaging makes waste collection more difficult and costly

2.      Nonreturnable cans and bottles encouraged consumers to litter

3.      Waterways becoming increasingly polluted, tainted by runoff from garbage disposal sites

·         Upton Sinclair 1906 – raised potential harmful effects of product consumption – deplorable sanitary conditions in meat packing industry. Only in 1960s, product safety issue became a paramount issue – Pg 6

1.      1962 Thalidomide used by pregnant women caused birth defects

2.      1965 GM’s Corvair was inherently dangerous to drive – Unsafe at Any Speed by Ralph Nader

·         Marketing discipline refined its focus to concentrate on marketing’s overall treatment of specific groups of consumers (Pg 6):

1.      Elderly consumer – How marketing should respond positively to these changes (e.g.Phillips and Sternthal 1977, Schewe 1985, French et al 1983)

2.      Young consumer – Marketings’ relationship with children as consumers, esp. persuasive effects of TV Ads (e.g.McNeal 1987, FTC Staff Report on TV Ads to Children 1978, Popper and Ward 1980)

3.      Ethnic minorities – Blacks, Hispanics who spend large amounts in consumer goods market – critics have questioned marketing treatment of these prominent minority groups (e.g. Andreasen 1982, Sturdivant 1968)

4.      Foreign consumer – Marketers under attack for supposedly taking advantage of consumers in less developed countries when marketing becomes more global in perspective (e.g. Nestle’s promotion of infant foruma, Post 1985)

·         Increasing interest in consumer complaining behavior (Czepiel, Rosenberg and Suprenant 1980, Day and Landon 1977). Negative word-of-mouth by dissatisfied consumers (Richins 1983). Appropriate managerial responses to consumer complaints (Resnik and Harmon 1983) – Pg7

·         Another aspect of interest – governmental regulations, governmental scrutiny, product liability issues (Morgan 1982) and advertising regulation (Dunn 1981) – Pg 7

·         Emergence of the MACROMARKETING THOUGHT. Basically analyzes the impacts and consequences of interactions between marketing system and social systems .– Pg 7

CONCLUSION:

Marketing should NOT be blame for its impact on society? (Levitt 1958) or New theoretical foundations needed to help marketing cope with the social consequences of its functions?

Marketers must join forces with consumer advocates and public policymakers to forge new visions or marketing’s responsibility to society and society’s responsibility to marketing. So, stronger theories needed to address this difficult issue. Pg 7