The marketing image. Public opinion is a mixed picture and generally quite negative marketing.
This negative image is colloquially expressed by people from all social classes, as an ideology is also made by some analysts, is released as a disqualification by political adversaries, and is propagated widely by the media.
Generally marketing is confused with advertising and also is associated with misleading marketing with advertising, which make false or exaggerated promises
Don’t confusing marketing with sales, in particular with the idea of selling pressure or fraudulent sales, by deception or cheating.
Often attributed to marketing fraud in the quality of products, or you think marketing is the specialty of passing through good what is bad, “selling for a ride”.
Marketing is also associated with the art of makeup, the ability to “dress the monkey with silk.
In short, marketing is often regarded as an activity manipulative, abusing cunning tricks and picaresque.
Another very common idea is to give the marketing intention and ability to create false needs in society, enhance demand superfluous things, and promote consumerism artificial, unnecessary and exaggerated.
Also criticized that marketing is a huge waste of money that is reflected on the prices of products, and therefore that it is consumers who pay the piper.
Often this poor image of marketing is in the streets and in the media to disqualify a product, conduct, event … synthesized under the form of expressions like
“That is pure marketing”
“That is a product of marketing”
“That is just marketing”
Faced with these criticisms can be put forward arguments assertive in defending a positive image of marketing.
For example, we say that fraudulent practices and misleading in some cases may serve to sell short-term but cause losses in the medium and long term, because they end up generating customer rejection.
We can counter the idea that advertising is a waste goes to the price of products, recalling the importance the reliability of brands to consumers.
We refute the idea that marketing creates needs false, clearing the belief that there are only functional benefits arguing for the importance of emotional benefits consumers and symbolic. And we insist on making it more profitable for a company is to address meet the real needs that are identified in the market.
We also repeat the classic definition of marketing Kotler proposed:
“Marketing is a set of principles for choosing target markets, identify consumer needs, develop products and services that meet those needs, and provide value to consumers and profits to the company. ”
That is, against the black legend that the public has marketing, we can insist that it not only brings benefits to enterprises but society and consumers.
To the extent that marketing calls attention to the needs and consumer demands, tends to make more responsible to the companies against their clients. Encourages the continuing search for improvements in products, services and quality of care. Fosters a culture of respect and reciprocal company-customer loyalty. Try loyalty not only to customers with company, but this customer.
Therefore, in a competitive market the Marketing is a tool that, by its nature, tends to improve the business efficiency and, serves as preached from his own philosophy, also tends to improve the quality of life of the population.
All this is fine, is true and also testifies our good faith as marketers. Obviously, with these arguments can defend a happy public face of marketing.
However, it should serve for complacency.
Said years ago a major American consultant, referring to the disclosure of successful marketing experiences:
“The successful marketing public face masks a deep internal malaise.
Companies are now subject to competition exacerbated, too hard to markets and social changes and technological overflowing. And marketing, inevitably, also is under extraordinary pressure.
It is no longer just the excessive demands that fall on him from the companies themselves and from the market, nor is it just the poor image of marketing in society and in companies, with which those responsible Marketers need to live, but also the conflicts and difficulties intrinsic to marketing itself.
The discomfort often feels marketers have to do with the inevitable contradictions of their role:
It’s not easy to identify good market demands and also to reconcile them with the correct identification of their own capabilities of the company.
Also you need to learn from experience, but the reality also requires jettisoning part of that experience to survive the radical changes in the markets and the rules of the game.
Moreover, there are many companies in which, by the fact that there is a marketing department and some marketers, forget the other advantage for marketing, markets and customers.
In some companies the way marketing is like a body strange and there is a reaction of antibodies: disinterest, lack of collaboration, disengaging, lack of budgetary support, eagerly asking for magical results.
Moreover, for marketers is difficult, sometimes, to reconcile the demands of quality, low price and ethics raised by customers with the demands of quick success and profitability for tangible shareholders.
Nor is it easy to reconcile the need for self-criticism and learning consistent with the need to avoid being used as goats atoning for the failures of the company.
Moreover, it needs sufficient adequate information yet is necessary to survive water logging, dispersion, fragmentation, biased and partial obsolescence of the abundant information available.
And also, it is often difficult to get enough and budget support, but at the time, sometimes it is almost impossible to calculate and sufficiently justify the return on marketing investment.
It is clear that not all marketers would justify invoking limitations contradictions inherent in their function or unjust pressures they are apparently the subject companies or markets. Many are still anchored in a marketing limited and obsolete.
Even as some are claiming themselves in a mixture of naïf and lack of shame, as specialists tricks ingenious ideas and dirty tricks, such as those customers who complain, and considered effective for cleverly manipulating the market.
Marketing has a natural vocation, and merits accredited to represent an image engine friendly, ethical, responsible, friendly and empathic, business to customers and the public. Yet to represents to the public often face fierce certain business practices dubious reputation. Not applicable to feel misunderstood, or consider that bad social image of marketing is merely the product of a misunderstanding.
If businesses are sustainable and able to fulfill their full economic and social functions is necessary that marketing is sustainable, ie to demonstrate their maturity, their compatibility with ethics, its commitment to consumers and profitable for companies that are committed for him.
The sordid relationships with some companies market, poor quality of some products and services, selling pressure and misleading advertising, not to its marketing. On the contrary, are often closely related to lack of good personal marketing.
In our environment we must continue working for the development of marketing culture as the main platform for success and sustainability of enterprises.
Developing a strong culture of marketing in companies is not only necessary condition for the existence of a better image just social, but that also has an image of credibility, respect and real support to the marketing within companies. In this good image “internal” marketing is played the effectiveness and profitability.
As Peter Drucker said in 1982: “The commercial has two and only two basic functions: marketing and innovation. Marketing and innovation produce results. All the rest are costs. “
Related posts: