Purchasing and Marketing of Social and Environmental Sustainability for High-Tech Medical Equipment

Abstract

As the functional capabilities of high-tech medical products converge, supplying organizations seek new opportunities to differentiate their offerings. Embracing product sustainability-related differentiators provides such an opportunity. Our study examines the challenge for organizations to understand how customers perceive environmental and social dimensions of sustainability. To achieve this, the study explores and defines these two dimensions based on, first, a review of extent literature and, second, focus group research within a leading supplier of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning equipment. The study takes place in the Netherlands in seven different types of hospitals and one private imaging center. Five social aspects, together covering eleven indicators, are identified. These are tested via 22 customer perception interviews with key decision making stakeholders (within the hospitals or imaging center) involved in purchasing of MRI scanning equipment.Respondents find environmental and social sustainability dimensions personally relevant, but professionally secondary to cost, performance, and ability to use MRI scanning equipment within organizations' physical infrastructure. Finally, incorporating a product's environmental and social credentials within marketing of MRI scanning equipment enhances the perception of the product offering in decision making stakeholders' minds and provide differentiation.

Supply chain social sustainability for developing nations: Evidence from India

“…A discussion on the dimensions of social sustainability is challenging, given that it is related to a firm's influence on individuals and society well-being (Geibler et al, 2006;Lindgreen et al, 2009). Even when the focus is on the social aspects of sustainability, studies emphasise on e.g.…”

“…Even when the focus is on the social aspects of sustainability, studies emphasise on e.g. "customer health and safety, customer comfort", "ethical production", "product accessibility, and contribution to society" (Lindgreen et al, 2009), the focus is not on connecting different aspects (activities) of supplier, manufacturer, and customer social sustainability to outcomes and measures.…”

Marketing and Environmental Sustainability in the Sport Sector: Developing a Research Agenda for Action

“…Examples included, the consumer profile (Fraj & Martinez, 2006;Ginsberg & Bloom, 2004;Rowlands, Scott & Parket, 2003), consumer influences of purchase choices (Lindgreen et al, 2009), geographical attitudes/perspectives (Christensen et al, 2007;Cleveland et al, 2005;Dougall, 2005;Lindell & Karagozoglu, 2001;Miles & Covin, 2000;Nair & Menon, 2008;Yin & Ma, 2009), consumer consumption logic (Iyer, 1999), and consumer ethical perspectives and limitations (Meriläinen, Moisander & Pesonen, 2000). The literature, thus, encompassed multiple understandings concerning the consumer.…”

“…Keller (1993) noted that consumer perceptions and behaviors arise from marketing initiatives and Hoeffler and Keller (2002) discussed the role of Corporate Societal Marketing (CSM), its growth and impact on brand strength and equity as it can "significantly affect a brand's strength and equity" (p. 78). Lindgreen et al (2009) acknowledged this new realm of marketing noting that customer' product perceptions need to be compatible with their views of ES. According to Saha and Darnton (2005), there is an onus on the consumer to determine companies truly 'living' their ES mantra (remember the earlier discussion on 'greenwashing'?).…”

“…The economic perspective theme and sub-themes included: viability and profitability of green products (Andrews & deVault, 2009), limits of natural resources (Iyer, 1999), economic-to-environmental rationality (Lindell & Karagozoglu, 2001), economic pursuits (Lindgreen, Antioco, Harness & van der Sloot, 2009), financial performance through environmental stewardship (Miles & Covin, 2000), consumers' willingness to pay (Sammer & Wűstenhagen, 2006;Rowlands et al, 2003) and economic assessment of environmental pursuits (Gaterell & Morse (1999). It was noted that green products currently depend on early adopters that are willing to pay a premium (Andrews & DeVault).…”