Manipulating Consumers is Not Marketing
There
can be little argument that consumers are growing more suspicious of
business. They question its motives and, increasingly, its marketing
which has recently been said to be manipulative. Consumers are ever
more aware of the array of internet pop-ups and exaggerated claims
they receive in an increasingly targeted fashion, especially on
social media channels.
Cass
Sunstein, a Harvard Law Professor and former Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama
administration, recently published an
essay in
the Journal
of Marketing Behaviour,
which argues that manipulation is indeed pervasive in daily life,
both in public and commercial realms, and is especially prevalent in
marketing. Sunstein believes “those who sell products are engaged
in at least arguable forms of manipulation.”
Sunstein
defines manipulation as something that does not sufficiently engage
or appeal to someone’s capacity for reflective and deliberative
choice. But this is problematic. Many choices are made without
reflective deliberation. Furthermore, the notion of consumers making
cognitive and purely rational decisions is a myth at best. Customers
are also becoming more aware of marketing, its motives and its
tactics, from price discrimination and discounts to loyalty
programmes and atmospherics, and may discount it in their decisions.
Nevertheless,
in a
reply article,
I point out that this awareness is understandably leading to
perceptions that marketers are manipulating customers. But marketing
is not, and should not be considered, manipulation. Given the
pervasiveness of the perception that marketers are manipulators, I
suggest that the profession, both academics and practitioners, should
be proactive in changing these viewpoints.
Influence,
don’t manipulate
To
do this, we should turn to the broader definition of manipulation to
examine whether this is what marketing is. According to a definition
used in the psychology
literature,
“psychological manipulation is a type of social influence that aims
to change the perception or behaviour of others through underhanded,
deceptive or abusive tactics.” To say, therefore, that marketing
uses deceit and abusive tactics would be inaccurate.
If
marketers employ covert tactics to manipulate customers, then they
run the risk of being seen as unethical. Take the example of
subliminal advertising, where viewers are exposed to information that
slips below their conscious awareness. Such practices caused moral
outrage in 1957 when it emerged movie goers had been exposed to split
second advertisements of Coca Cola and popcorn without their
conscious knowledge. Such practices have been banned in the U.K. ever
since and it’s still unclear as to whether the practice even works
to influence purchase decisions.
As
we saw in the case of Volkswagen, where customers were falsely led to
believe their cars had lower emissions than they really did,
deception was not only detrimental to the customer relationship but
to the firm as a whole, landing it in legal hot water. Telemarketing
ploys, such as the use of surveys to mask the true intentions of the
caller and then pressing customers to commit to a purchase are widely
shunned.
Change
the perception
To
counter the perception that businesses are deceitful, marketing
should seek to be a social influence, specifically the kind that is
not exerted covertly and does not use deception or abuse to achieve
its aims. Given increasing awareness of marketing tricks among
consumers, marketers need to approach customers with sustainability
in mind. While it is true that the marketers of the 1930s used to
think of their job as directing the flow of products to consumers in
a very one-way fashion, marketing professionals today are coalescing
around the notion of exchange between customers and producers,
focusing on value for the customer. This can be seen in crowdsourcing
and push and pull strategies in social media. L’Oréal for
instance, created
a product in
response to online customer chatter around a new hair style. Exchange
in this way implies agreement and is a status quo that customers not
only accept, but take part in. Crucially, organisations should think
long-term in such marketing efforts.
Most
marketing classes I teach start off with a debate about whether
marketers are filling needs or creating them to sell products. This
is tricky territory. Who could say consumers wanted iPhones until
they were shown the product? Luckily for the profession, the era of
big data gives us a golden opportunity to understand customers more
deeply than ever before, provided the practice is conducted
transparently. Facebook’s famed
experiment in
which it purposefully manipulated users feeds by changing what
appeared in front of them in order to study how this affected their
behaviour, caused widespread condemnation and rightly so.
Management
practices for marketers
Marketers
should aim to create sustained value, considering both the long-term
and short-term motivations in marketing a product or service. This
will mean the closer study of customers, the creation of experiences
not just products and services, developing equitable relationships
with customers and considering the impact of all practices on society
more broadly. Only then, will we be able to counter the perception
that marketing is manipulative.
INSEAD Kownledge
Manipulating Consumers is Not Marketing
Reviewed by Unknown
on
Wednesday, May 04, 2016
Rating:
No comments: