Consumer Sovereignty, Democracy, and the Marketing Concept: A Macromarketing Perspective

Abstract

Marketing mythology includes a story in which the marketing concept is linked to consumer sovereignty and thus transforms a manager's pursuit of profit into consumer benefits. This story jeopardizes marketing education because it omits the element of individual responsibility and makes unrealistic assumptions about markets. Study of the long forgotten historical origins of this story reveals that the underlying concepts are based upon individual responsibility, and make realistic assumptions about markets. Early contributors to marketing and economic thought provide an alternative perspective for marketing education. Résumé Un des mythes du marketing consiste ä asservir le concept de marketing ä la toute‐puissance du consommateur et, par lä, ä transformer l'appëtit de profits du gestionnaire en avantages pour le consommateur. Ce mythe comporte un risque pour l'enseignement du marketing parce qu'il omet l'ëlëment de responsabilitë individuelle et conduit ä des suppositions irrëalistes ä propos des marchës. L'ëtude des lointaines origines historiques de ce mythe rëvële au contraire que les concepts de dëpart sont fondës sur la responsabilitë individuelle et mënent ä des hypothëses rëalistes sur les marchës. Les premiers thëoriciencs du marketing et de l'ëconomie offrent un autre point de vue par rapport ä l'enseignement du marketing.

Purchase power: An examination of consumption as voting

“…For example, Schwarzkopf's (2010) work, which is also reviewed by Shaw (2010), states that the consumer sovereignty concept is historically important because it helped legitimize specific industries that have come under scrutiny for their negative impact on consumer social welfare. Additionally, Dixon (1992) argues that because marketing discourse and practice are so closely linked to the idea of consumer sovereignty, marketing managers' pursuit of their firms' interests are transformed into consumer benefits, which, in turn, is said to exclude the dimension of individual responsibility from the equation and, thus, lead to unrealistic beliefs about markets. In addition, Adams (1962) suggests that consumer sovereignty depends on market competition, which usually is not perfect and must be fostered through enabling market structures promoted by policy makers.…”

Marketing, Morality and the Natural Environment

“…• Marketing is replete with the discourse of consumer sovereignty (Dixon, 1992;Knights et al, 1994;Christensen, 1995). Contemporary definitions of marketing and the marketing concept tend to be predicated on an implicit belief in the cenfrality of consumer sovereignty, emphasising the need for 'customer orientation', 'customer focus', 'outside-in perspective', 'customer-driven sfrategies', etc.…”

“…It is however based on two critical assumptions: that needs originate from the consumer, and that firms identify and act upon these needs when franslated into consumer demand (Galbraith, 1972;Dixon, 1992;Knights et al, 1994). Both of these have been criticised as empirically inaccurate.…”

“…In terms of consumer sovereignty though, the question of the origin of consumer need remains problematic (Knights et al, 1994) -a point occasionally, though rarely, acknowledged in marketing textbooks (Dixon, 1992).…”

“…Even if needs were objective and existing prior to consumption however, for consumer sovereignty to be upheld, they have to be duly acted upon by companies (Smith, 1990;Dixon, 1992;Knights et al, 1994). Smith (1990) sets out the position that only under perfect competition will firms be passive to the demands of consumers.…”