Examining the unintended consequences of marketing

Abstract

While many firms engage in successful marketing activities with outcomes beneficial for both the firm and its stakeholders, a number of situations occur where these successful outcomes impact in an unanticipated negative fashion on consumers, society and other stakeholders. This article examines the importance of firms evaluating the entire network of exchanges. Such evaluations of the firm and other stakeholders are steps toward ensuring that any unintended consequences of marketing activities are not only considered, but are also appropriately addressed.

What causes imbalance in complex service networks? Evidence from a public health service

“…As mentioned in the findings section, in line with SDL each of these factors reflect actions and institutional logics in the form of rules, norms, and beliefs that enable and constrain balance. As a consequence, these findings support the view that actions and institutions of one actor might both facilitate and hinder the creation of value for other often loosely coupled actors in complex service networks (Frow and Payne, 2011;Fry and Polonsky, 2004;Plé and Cáceres, 2010). The case evidence, however, suggests that the impact of actions and institutions of one actor are intensified by similar actions and institutions of other actors.…”

Purchase power: An examination of consumption as voting

“…In evaluating the interests and concerns of various stakeholders, firms take into account complex interconnecting networks of exchanges among such groups. And during the exchange, firms may misjudge or ignore the effect of their behaviour on other parties and/or the environment due to self-interest, or may not have the market mechanisms available to control the (un)known effect (Fry & Polonsky, 2004;Mundt, 1993). Thus, while the expectation is of positive, intended outcomes, there are also negative, unintended consequences of marketing activities on a number of stakeholders, which a firm may choose to ignore or address when faced with negative consumer voting.…”

“…However, many have questioned consumer voting because it seeks to embrace the very market system and commercial spaces that are deemed so problematic (Carducci, 2006;Heath & Potter, 2004). Consumption has been blamed for environmental problems, unfair trade practices and human and animal welfare concerns, with a growing number of situations highlighting where the successful marketing activities of individual firms impact detrimentally upon consumers, society or other stakeholders in an unanticipated fashion (Fry & Polonsky, 2004).…”

From conspicuous to considered fashion: A harm-chain approach to the responsibilities of luxury-fashion businesses

“…These often unintentional harms or 'moral externalities' (Gowri, 2004), as they are defined, have received only limited attention within the marketing literature (cf. Desmond & Crane, 2004;Fry & Polonsky, 2004b). Part of the problem is that marketing research tends to adopt an organisational perspective to evaluate 'positive' externalities such as the benefits associated with CSR and the firm (McWilliams, Siegel, & Wright, 2006).…”