Why Marketing is Good for Society

About a year ago, Winston Fletcher hatched an idea which has finally come to fruition in the current issue of Market Leader.  He felt that marketing was widely misunderstood, or understood too narrowly  - that it is simply another word for selling or that it is only to do with communication.  We chewed over this thought for some time, concluding that what marketing is and does is a legitimate subject for a full issue of Market Leader – one that that would be of interest to people outside of marketing as well as practitioners.

So this is what  the June issue is about  and here is an extract from my editorial which describes it. If you haven’t received your copy yet, watch out for it and read some genuinely excellent articles to remind yourself why you love doing what you do.

All sides of the political spectrum now agree that capitalism is the most efficient economic system.  The argument has moved to what kind of capitalism we should strive for.  Some years ago Charles Hampden turner and Fons Tromenaars published a fascinating analysis entitled: Seven Cultures of Capitalism’, examining the way capitalism operates in different national cultures: cultures as different as Sweden, Japan and the  US.  Their thesis was that capitalism isn’t value free.  How it is practised is a function of the beliefs and values of the culture in which it operates: from the individualistic, less regulated, buccaneering version practiced in the US (and which we copy in the UK) vs the more cooperative, consensual capitalism of Germany and Sweden. The virtues of the former – primarily innovation- are believed to be worth the downsides - primarily, inequality.

Although many on the left desire it, becoming like Sweden seems fairly unlikely.  Anglo-Saxon culture is not likely to change that dramatically and regulations will be tolerated just so far.  But what could happen as Hugh Davidson argues in the lead article is that consumers increasingly have the power to make capitalism work better.  The crux of his argument is that the marketing principle, properly executed, is the source and guarantee of fairness. Where the marketing principle is virtually non-existent – the financial sector  being the prime example but also utilities and energy - exploitation is inevitable.

In support of the growing power of consumers to contain the worst excesses of companies’ behaviour, David Jones, describes how many companies are re-shaping their strategies to serve customers, the environment and their bottom line.  And an even  more dramatic picture of consumer power is Michael Bayler’s analysis of the digital world.

An increasingly strident voice in the debate is the criticism of advertising in promoting an ‘unhealthy’ (and unhappy) pre-occupation with material goods and this is view that deserves examination.  Jon Alexander and Rory Sutherland debate the two sides of this particular coin, joined by anthropologist Grant McCracken who describes the role of marketing as ‘managing meanings’ in the form of brands  – meanings that the culture itself creates, moulds and transforms. 

 The role for ‘rules’ is examined by Hugh Burkitt. Like any activity, rules are required but the issue is exactly where to draw the line.  Social attitudes change but the  ethical dilemmas are constant and not self-evidently resolved. This is just the beginning of the debate: there is much more to say and we  welcome  contributions for publication in subsequent issues.