This
reflection blog is prepared with my thoughts and analysis of Dr. Ferrell’s
article, “Marketing Ethics”. The general
topics to be addressed will be bolded below.
One last requirement before we dive into this: The reader must enjoy reading the content.
Guidelines.
“Overbilling
clients, deceptive sales methods, fraud, antitrust, and price fixing are all
marketing ethics risks” (Ferrell). I
think that Dr. Ferrell is lumping quite a few areas simply upon the marketing
aspect of an organization, but for the purposes of this discussion, we accept her premise. Would ethical
guidelines and training make an organization behave ethically? I don’t think that ethical guidelines make as
much a difference to marketers as the public would want to believe. Ethics within an organization are going to
start with individuals and the slowly percolate upward into the organizational
culture. However, if rewards are freely
given for performance and not “doing the right thing”, then the risk of
unethical behavior will increase.
Balancing Success with Ethics.
Does
an organization feel that it has to win at all cost? Apparently many do. “The rewards for meeting performance goals
and the corporate culture, especially for coworkers and managers, have been
found to be the most important drivers of ethical decision making”
(Ferrell). Winning the Super Bowl is a
financial bonanza for the winning team. Based
upon that, there is a cutthroat culture within the NFL. Every single NFL team has been fined, lost
draft picks, or suffered personnel suspensions based upon violating NFL
rules. The old adage, “If you are not
cheating, you are not trying”, seems to apply here and is what makes balancing
the need to win with ethical behavior a difficult thing to accomplish. If an ethical, but poor performing marketing
manager is admonished for his performance, while his unethical colleague gets
praise for being a high performer, what is the message that is being sent out
by leadership?
Tracking.
I
was disappointed that Dr. Ferrell’s article did not address tracking the buying
habits of consumers without their knowledge or consent. It is a simple right or wrong answer and it
is definitely wrong. Let me share with
you an example of how deeply technology has been used to undermine our privacy,
and how marketers are using it to their own ends.
My
example will be broken into two parts.
The first part is easy to understand, while the second appears to have
no easy answer. I was overseas and sent
an email to my wife discussing how we needed to upgrade from a gasoline-powered
motor home to a diesel-powered motor home.
Immediately, she was inundated with ads regarding deals on motor homes,
every time she signed into the internet.
While the filters for my overseas location were stronger, I too began to
get ads regarding diesel motor homes.
All of this happened without running a single search with an online
platform. Of course, one will say that
personal information is sold on the internet.
Okay. But, reading and acting upon someone’s
email? Is that ethical?
The
second part is even more troubling. My
wife and I had a conversation in our house without being online or on the
phone. We talked about what it would be
like to buy a fabulous house in a country like Belize (Central America), where
a $500,000+ home could be purchased for well under $100,000. We both started getting ads for great real
estate deals in Belize. Again, this was
before any online research had been performed.
Now, I ask the reader, how did that happen? I don’t want to go out on a tangent and give
my theories about it, but simply to say that tracking of consumer information
is wrong and it violates our 4th Amendment rights as U.S. Citizens.
Leadership Plans.
Communication
is key. Placing ethical leaders in key
positions is another way to have oversight on an operation and in doing so,
preventing unethical behavior. Dr.
Ferrell cited Jeff Immelt as a leader who gets it. According to Mr. Immelt: “One thing that keeps me up at night is that
among the 300,000-plus GE employees worldwide, there are a handful who choose
to ignore our code of ethics. I would be
naïve to assume a few bad apples don’t exist in our midst” (Ferrell).
Dr.
Ferrell cited Jeff Immelt’s words to hold his company up as an example of good
ethical conduct and intent. Is that a
joke? Jeff should probably look in the
mirror to find unethical behavior. How
about making huge money off of trade deals with Iran, while Iran was busy
killing U.S. soldiers in Iraq? Is that
ethical Jeff? Or, because GE was one of
former president Obama’s favored companies, GE made billions and paid no
federal corporate tax? Is that
ethical? Do good intentions outweigh an
organization’s actions? The road to Hell
is paved with good intentions. Personally,
I don’t buy GE products anymore. They
have veered away from being an American company to a global company. Good for them. People ought to know where a company’s
loyalty is before they spend their hard-earned dollars on their products. If they know where a company stands and still choose to buy their products, then good for
them.
Conclusion.
I
would like to conclude this foray into marketing ethics by saying that in our
instant gratification society, it appears
to be easier and more likely for people to choose the easy wrong versus the
hard right. What does that
mean? It means that human nature plays a
big part in the ethical conduct of organizations. If one feels that taking shortcuts is easier,
more profitable, more rewarding, and there is little chance of being caught,
they will do so. Not everyone would do so, but a good number of people would. Unpopular oversight can
help as can extensive corporate investment in ethical training. I compare ethical training to safety training. Everyone recites the proper words regarding
safety, but without constant reinforcement, the urge to do the right and safe
thing diminishes. It is the same with
ethical behavior in an organization.
V/r
John D. Hescott
Reference:
Ferrell,
Linda (Unknown) “Marketing Ethics”
No comments:
Post a Comment