Modifying markets: Consumerism and institutional work in nonprofit marketing

Abstract

The rise and development of markets under neoliberal consumerism represents a topical theme in marketing theory and is at the heart of emergent discussions on market system dynamics. While the nonprofit market sector represents a major part of the economy and is an important locus for alternative market discourses, prior studies tend to focus on well-represented groups of actors, such as corporations or consumers. Moving beyond the dyad of producers and consumers, the present study contributes to recent discussions on institutional work by examining and problematizing the role of nonprofit organizations (NPOs) as agents of market system dynamics. A qualitative discourse analysis of nonprofit marketing, conducted at one of Sweden’s largest NPOs, reveals the institutional work aimed at modifying the market for health and fitness according to alternative cultural values of, for instance, inclusiveness, democracy, and collectiveness. In particular, the article draws attention to ethical institutional work in markets, which enables organizations to strategically switch managerial focus between disparate institutional demands for purposes of creating and maintaining hybrid forms of legitimacy. However, ethical work also problematically entwines nonprofit with commercial values of profit maximization. The study contends that nonprofit consumerism thus works as a double-edged sword and may spur commercialization and market diffusion in society at large.

Government at (Institutional) Work: The State and Market Dynamics

“…For example, prior literature has examined how consumers work to expand the scope of available products and services (Scaraboto and Fischer 2013), and how organizations work to strategically reconfigure market arrangements and consumer preferences (Humphreys and Carpenter 2018). However, the role of the state in these efforts has been largely overlooked, despite increased attention on expanding analyses to include a greater range of market actors (Baker, Storbacka, and Brodie 2019; Yngfalk and Yngfalk 2020). A dominant theme within research on market shaping is the malleability and permeability of market boundaries, with attention focusing on how marketers and consumers generate shifts in market scale and scope (Chimenti 2020; Dolbec and Fischer 2015; Giesler 2008, 2012; Humphreys 2010 a ; Humphreys and Carpenter 2018; Scaraboto and Fischer 2013; Thompson 2004).…”

“…Marketing and consumer research have embraced the view of markets as social institutions wholeheartedly (Baker, Storbacka, and Brodie 2019; Handelman and Arnold 1999; Humphreys 2010 a ; Yngfalk and Yngfalk 2020). The power of institutional perspectives stems from the focus on the reciprocal influences that exist between market actors and the broader system of which they are a part (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Meyer and Rowan 1977; Scott 2008; Selznick 1996).…”

Institutional Work: A Review and Framework based on Semantic and Thematic Analysis

“…In its simplest form, failure is an unintended consequence of IW. Consequently, failed disruption reinforces existing institutional arrangements (Lok & de Rond, 2013;Yngfalk & Yngfalk, 2019). On the other hand, Herepath and Kitchener (2016, p. 1,134) demonstrate that failed repair work might lead to the 'institutionalization of misconduct. '…”

“…Several authors propose new dimensions to the IW taxonomy (Hampel et al, 2017;Zvolska et al, 2019). In particular, the framework by Perkmann and Spicer (2008) serves as the foundation for several later studies (e.g., Yngfalk & Yngfalk, 2019). New IW types are presented in three ways.…”

“Sometime in the future”—The technology entrepreneur as utopian market hero

“…Rather, social good results from profit seeking within the market rather than independent from it (King and Gish, 2015; Shamir, 2008). As the introductory quote of this section illustrates, contemporary managerial discourses have undermined the division between the business and social sector, reconciling market profits with the common good (Dey and Steyaert, 2010; Yngfalk and Yngfalk, 2020). America Online founder Steve Case (2005) puts it succinctly in a Wall Street Journal article:Too many people still act as if the private sector and the social sector should operate on different axes, where one is all about making money and the other is all about serving society.…”