Consumer (People), Technology and Marketing in the 21st Century

MANG6262: Marketing in the 21^st Century has relayed key themes that sets the basis for critical and reflective thinking. While there were various themes that were discussed over the course of 6 weeks, the author has presented a critical discourse on Consumer and Technology to exemplify contemporary marketing issues. This final post serves to address these two themes and how it implicates Marketing in the 21^st Century. Upon addressing this, the author hopes to conclude the module by a critical reflection and how it will impact him as a marketing practitioner.

From the narrative of prosumption, the term coined by Toffler (1980 cited Ritzer et al., 2012) has seen itself rising from the discourse of the traditional dichotomy of production and consumption. While we reflect on the development of this narrative, it strikes a thought provoking question on its acceptance in the marketing discipline. Though it was believed to be a primordial term that has gained much scholarly attention today (Ritzer et al., 2012), the inertia on the acceptance of this terminology was still evident. As we strive to identify the reasons behind this inertia, Molesworth (2016) believes that this may validate academic research. He further reiterates that this may not entirely be a new theme that emerged as the critical discourse has always been within critical consumer research. Perhaps, there may be some validity in his idea of possibly dropping the term consumer altogether and focusing on people instead (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Facebook comment on post on Prosumption by Molesworth (2016)

Marketing being a multi-disciplinary subject allows Anthropology, “study of human societies and cultures and their development” (Oxford Dictionaries, 2016) to find its way in marketing. From the development of this discipline, Ethnography eventually find its way in marketing research till the term “Netnography” was finally developed by Kozinets (2002). This may very well be the turning point in marketing research where the rise in the Web and social media permits the adoption of netnography in really understanding people (consumers). As Kozinets (2002, p.61) argue, recognizing the importance of online communities and the need to understand and identify “tastes, desires, relevant symbol systems, and decision making influences of particular consumers and consumer groups” are the two main reasons behind the development of this marketing research methodology. While this corroborates with the ideology behind prosumption, it seems that the inertia of dropping the term consumers all at once may be evident.

This extends the argument to technology, where Ritzer et al. (2012) believe that the development of technology as part of social change (technological determinism) has warrant scholarly attention to prosumption. As we have discussed, the risk of technological determinism is a double edged sword that may implicate Marketing in the 21^st Century. Belk’s (2014) argument on digital changes such as dematerialization and re-embodiment have shed light on how technology determines the dynamic of marketing (or is it?). While the need to understand how the extended self in the digital world is vital, it is as important to divulge ourselves in the very nature of technology. This begs the question of whether technology has transformed marketing or vice versa. For instance, when dematerialization occurs, does technology inform marketing of its implications? (see example on Bruce Willis’ attempt to allow inheritance of his Apple iTunes music collection) Or when multiple identities are being presented in the digital sphere, how does marketing extract the very nature of consumers? These rhetoric permits a deeper and critical discourse beyond contemporary marketing issues being presented as buzzwords of digital marketing, marketing analytics or big data etc.

Ultimately, the two themes being discussed here were just a snippet of MANG6262: Marketing in the 21^st Century. As we started out the journey by mapping the key themes involved, consumer and technology seem to strike the author the most as he believes that it’s central to the marketing discipline. The idea behind the assessment through blogging seem dubious to the author initially. However, as we immerse ourselves within the themes, it was a realization that blogging is merely a medium that allows critical and reflective narration of the knowledge we cultivate. In that, appreciation of the knowledge was beyond the assessment of this module. The Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on Digital Marketing purports to instill an interaction between network of online learners from all over the world. Instead, the MOOC allowed us to appreciate face-to-face (F2F) interaction more in a lecture theatre setting as there are several drawbacks behind the technology. Despite this, the themes discussed were definitely relevant and did play a role in our thought processes in presenting our arguments in the blogs. This was also supplemented by the interaction on the Facebook group where the diversity of culture allowed us to have a more coherent view. With the delivery of this module, it develops confidence in stepping into the dynamics of marketing, how it is constantly evolving. Despite marketing theories being laid out for many years now, there are clearly more room for critical, innovative, creative and reflective narration behind those theories.

References:

Belk, R.W., 2014. Extended Self in a Digital World. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), pp.477–500. Available at: http://jcr.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/3/477.abstract.

Kozinets, R. V, 2002. The field behind the screen : Using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), pp.62–72. Available at: http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935.

Molesworth, M., 2016. Facebook Comment on post on Prosumption. Available at: https://www.facebook.com/groups/347325115434584/permalink/655713244595768/?comment_id=655941111239648&notif_t=group_comment&notif_id=1478862380362982.

Oxford Dictionaries, 2016. Definition of Anthropology. Oxford Dictionaries. Available at: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/anthropology.

Ritzer, G., Dean, P. & Jurgenson, N., 2012. The Coming of Age of the Prosumer. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(4), pp.379–398. Available at: http://abs.sagepub.com/content/56/4/379.short.

Technological Determinism: Love it, Hate it.

The pervasiveness of technology in the 21^st century has allowed the risk of technological determinism that has been embedded in most of us as we live in the digital age. In that, we fail to realize the wider implication that has bestowed upon us. This resonates along with how Thackara (2006) believes that there is no room for naiveté where we know new technologies have unforeseen outcomes. This presents an argument towards how technology may act as a double edged sword that most of us may be blinded to. The nature of this argument does not suggest the rejection of technology, but instead taking a step back to divulge in the very nature of technology.

The narrative behind extended self in the digital world presented by Belk (2014) exemplifies how technology drives digital consumption, ultimately impacting the nature of one self and nature of possessions. Dematerialization of possessions was one of the five changes in the digital world that he presented in his article. For instance, traditionally how we used to own music by buying CDs at the record store, while today, they are electronically downloaded (purchased) or even streamed through providers such as Spotify through a freemium model. This raises the question of ownership of such digital consumption objects (DCO) where they are merely binary which act as an intangible possession to oneself. This issue was brought to light by Bruce Willis’ attempt to allow his daughters to inherit his music collection on Apple’s iTunes (Child, 2012). Here, we are able to unlock the very nature of technology, in a sense that digital ownership may be questionable. This resonates along with other digital possessions that we may have such as photos, videos, messages etc. that may be stored in the cloud where we simply negate the wider implication that it may have.

The extension of this argument could be brought to the rise in the use of social media, where Belk (2014) presents this as part of Re-embodiment; the second change in the digital world. While traditionally, our identities only exist offline, the digital age has induced a challenge in maintaining multiple identities. From a personal experience, the author grew up in a conservative Muslim family, where restrictions of relationships are strictly adhered to. Therefore, (not so conservative) photos being posted online was kept private from family members until he decided to “clear” his pasts and share an “acceptable” persona to his family members and relatives. This was in parallel to how Odom et al. (2011 cited Belk, 2014) described one of the teenage informant’s reaction to his mother’s response to his photos and messages posted online. In that, we create multiple identities that serve different audiences. Belk (2014) argues the illusion of control of our multiple online identities extends the feeling of those identities being apart of us.

While it may seem trivial, the implication of this may be extended to our careers as well. It was reported that 60% of hiring managers screen their candidates online to ensure the “right” qualification of the job (Cain, 2016). This does not suggest that we should just privatize our presence online, but instead ensuring that our personas are maintained “clean”. This begs the question of authenticity of our true self, where Hood (2012 cited Belk, 2014, p.483) describes the “authorship of actions requires the illusion of a unified sense of self”. He further reiterates that this illusion brings us to please ourselves rather than the situation. In a sense, multiple identities are merely an illusion that we create to satisfy ourselves rather than please possible hiring managers. This raises ambiguity in such that we are blurring the lines between our offline and online personas as well. Again, this exemplifies the nature of technology in a way that we do not question how, in any way, would simply having a social media profile, could implicate our lives.

While evidently the nature of this argument may be skewed, the purpose of this narrative does not suggest the rejection of technology. There is certainly enough evidence to support the celebratory discourse of technology. For instance, on Saturday morning, in Southampton, United Kingdom (U.K.), at about 1000hrs, the author attended a wedding that was held in Singapore at 1800hrs from over 10,000km away. The author presented himself at the wedding through FaceTime and congratulate the newlyweds on their blissful marriage (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: The author’s presence in a wedding held in Singapore from Southampton, UK, through FaceTime

With the development of technology, it makes it possible for one to be at two places at once. It was only once upon a time in a science fiction movie (or novel) where this may seem impossible. But today, such developments may seem frivolous to us. While this may only be one in a million of evidences of the celebratory discourse of technology, the above critical discourse of the risk of technological determinism hope to question the true nature of technology.

References:

Belk, R.W., 2014. Extended Self in a Digital World. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), pp.477–500. Available at: http://jcr.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/3/477.abstract.

Cain, Á., 2016. 60% of hiring managers look up candidates online — here’s how to make sure your Facebook profile doesn’t cost you a job. Business Insider. Available at: http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-to-make-sure-your-social-media-accounts-dont-cost-you-a-job.

Child, B., 2012. Bruce Willis to fight Apple over right to leave iTunes library in will. The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/sep/03/bruce-willis-apple-itunes-library.

Thackara, J., 2006. In the Bubble: Designing a Complex World, MIT Press. Available at: https://books.google.com.sg/books?hl=en&lr=&id=yuM68Q8WJUIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=in+the+Bubble:+designing+in+a+complex+world&ots=G4vISI6v11&sig=xufkCYC8SIEEOXJL-6F8pSngDEo#v=onepage&q=in the Bubble%3A designing in a complex world&f=false.

The Fall of Production-Consumption Dichotomy and the Rise of Prosumption

Figure 1: “Prosumption” typed in word processor; unrecognized

Toffler (1980 cited Ritzer et al., 2012, p.1) defines prosumption as “the combination of production and consumption”. While this term has existed for over three decades now, the body of knowledge surrounding what we know about production and consumption could arguably be a delusional divide that never really existed. Ritzer et al. (2012) argue that this term is primordial and have always existed. However, could we simply dismiss traditional dichotomies that surrounds production-consumption?

The rise of the Web and social media was cited as one of the social changes that granted the term prosumption much scholarly attention (Ritzer et al., 2012). Kotler (1986) built upon Toffler’s work and argues the implication for marketers which suggests the prominence of prosumption. While these scholars agree upon the prominence of prosumption, it begs the question of where we are in terms of marketing academic discipline and practice’s acceptance on the terminology. Why do business schools still deliver the idea of production and consumption as separate entities? Why do consumer research still exists in marketing departments? Shouldn’t it be called prosumer research instead? This brings the argument to where we are in Marketing in the 21^st Century. The whole notion behind production and consumption are in parallel to how Toffler (1980 cited Kotler, 1986) describes three waves in human history (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: Toffler’s Paradigm adapted from Kotler’s (1986) The Prosumer’s Movement: a new challenge for Marketers

Ritzer et al. (2012) argue that the paradigm suggests that both Toffler and Kotler were way ahead of their times considering the context that they were describing in the 1980s. Three decades later, we are seeing the rise of the Web and social media that acts a catalyst to this “movement”. While the prominence of this is prevalent in our era, it seems that there is so much inertia in the acceptance of this terminology.

Grocery shopping could be used as a basis to understand prosumption. During the first wave, most households were reliant on growing their own crops or hunt for their own food for survival. In this case, they produce and consume their own groceries per se. During the second wave, very much impacted by the Industrial Revolution, people work in factories to produce goods that they do not consume. Instead, they use what they earn from working in factories to buy the groceries available in markets. Finally, in the third wave, is what we are almost seeing today. People engaging back in prosumption by growing their own crops again or even hunting (or fishing), both as a form of leisure due to the preference of using their time. However, could we simply argue that this is the same for every consumption activity other than grocery shopping? For instance, if we were to adopt the same concept and apply it to household furniture, it will very much be similar. It seems that it goes on as a cycle where traditionally, men were expected to be au fait with carpentry (first wave), buys furniture (second wave) and now we have the rise of do-it-yourself (DIY) furniture (i.e. IKEA) (third wave).

The emphasis for “almost seeing” what Toffler and Kotler describe the third wave may be questionable. Not every household will in fact grow their own crops or hunt for food or decides to buy IKEA furniture in this era. But social changes such as the rapid development of technology may very well act as a strong catalyst for the third wave (Kotler, 1986). For instance, consider 3D printing in the near future where the possibilities are endless. Marriott (2015) describes the possibility of fashion using 3D printing that may be inculcated in our daily lives. If technology permits such essentials, that will be the perfect epitome of prosumption. It may be for this reason that explains the inertia for acceptance of this terminology as we have not fully experience the existence of prosumption. While self-checkout tills and factory lines are closely similar to the notion of prosumption where there may not be any significant differences, how does this implicate Marketing in the 21^st Century? This extends the argument to how marketers are eager to understand and reduce every consumer to one dimension in a spreadsheet. As how Gabriel and Lang (2015) describes in their book The Unmanageable Consumer, the typology of consumers does not suggest that it could ever be reduced to one dimension. Relative to prosumption, it further corroborates the fragmentation of consumers.

It is evident that we cannot simply dismiss traditional dichotomies of production-consumption. There is enough evidence as to why “prosumption” is termed as unrecognized when typed on word processors. Till the day the wriggly red underline does not appear, it may very well be the day where we simply print our food, clothes and houses.

References:

Gabriel, Y. & Lang, T., 2015. The Unmanageable Consumer Third Edit., SAGE. Available at: https://books.google.com.sg/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ZBtiCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=unmanageable+consumer&ots=12oihfbr9k&sig=gX-uhY6A4oLMzgegPvibyvTXGkU#v=onepage&q&f=false.

Kotler, P., 1986. The Prosumer Movement : a New Challenge For Marketers. NA – Advances in Consumer Research Volume 13. Available at: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/6542/volumes/v13/NA-13 [Accessed November 9, 2016].

Marriott, H., 2015. Are we ready to 3D print our own clothes? The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2015/jul/28/are-we-ready-to-print-our-own-3d-clothes.

Ritzer, G., Dean, P. & Jurgenson, N., 2012. The Coming of Age of the Prosumer. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(4), pp.379–398. Available at: http://abs.sagepub.com/content/56/4/379.short.

Prologue.

Welcome back fellow digital explorers.

Upon exploring the evolution of marketing for the past two years in Singapore, I have landed in UK, Southampton to further immerse in the depth of marketing knowledge.

The past two years have been a fruitful journey with a focus on digital and analytics, including a six month stint with Nielsen Singapore and a dissertation titled “Bridging the data skill gap: An exploratory study of the (marketing) analytical talent in Singapore”.

Various themes of marketing were explored from research to communications to corporate social responsibility (CSR), just to name a few. The knowledge and experience gained from immersing in these themes struck a valuable realisation that the evolution of marketing  is inevitable. This was one of the key motivation that landed me here in Southampton.

“Marketing in the 21st Century” is the stepping stone for this leg of this journey. As I embark on exploring contemporary marketing issues, this blog serves not only to explore the retrospective of contemporary marketing but also prospectives of these issues. More specifically, the themes will revolve around consumers and technology that is believed to be the heart of marketing. While it is vital to acknowledge the delusional divide between theory and practice, relevant theoretical perspective serves as a perceptual lens that will ultimately create a basis of argumentation on some of these issues. Therefore, please do not hesitate to share your ideas on some of these issues as they will be deeply appreciated.

On that note, stay tuned to this space for an intellectual exchange of contemporary marketing issues!

Integration & Engagement

References:

Costa, C., 2014. Hangout#6 with Cristina Costa.

Costa, C. & Torres, R., 2011. To be or not to be , the importance of Digital Identity in the networked society. Available at: http://eft.educom.pt/index.php/eft/article/view/216/126.

Shakir, E., 2014. Ebrahim’s LinkedIn Profile. Available at: http://sg.linkedin.com/pub/ebrahim-shakir/42/958/4b1 [Accessed December 17, 2014].

Flawed concept?

The argument with regards to the “openness” of the Internet has sparked many different views based on the differing perspectives, be it in terms of a content producer or even the audience itself. I must admit the #crossover between the group in Singapore and UK really broaden the scope of the subject! (Credits to Ebrahim for the suggestion!)

As I took on the subject in a general approach, it was fascinating to gain insights from the group in UK. It was clear that most of us had a skewed argument of the subject. For instance, I was intrigued by Sophie’s Vlog, which covered different aspects of the “openness” of the Internet. However, what caught my attention was Andy’s view when he revealed the “flaws” in the concept of “open access”. As we are all grateful of the benefits that we are able to reap from the concept, it is crucial not to disregard the flaws. I supported his stand on this as he introduced “predatory publishers” in his argument. As I looked further into this, I chanced upon another upsetting discovery of “publication bias” in health research:

Initially it struck my mind that “open access” may very well be the solution to this prevalent problem. However, upon further research, a study by PMC (2012) revealed that majority of the “open access” publications were funded by the industry itself. This in turn, could lead to “preferential publication” which supports the industry products (medicine). Therefore, the aspects of “open access” which includes the high cost and low incentives that the authors may receive from negative publications may not be the solution to “publication bias”.

These real issues with “open access” really question the viability of the concept. However, I do believe that it is essential to embrace the positive aspects of this concept as it could still be brought further in the future.

References:

Collins, S., 2014. access to online materials. Available at: http://sophiecatherinecollins.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/access-to-online-materials/comment-page-1/#comment-30 [Accessed December 10, 2014].

Nature, 2012. Predatory Publishers are corrupting open access. Available at: http://www.nature.com/news/predatory-publishers-are-corrupting-open-access-1.11385 [Accessed December 10, 2014].

PMC, 2012. Publication bias: What are the challenges and can they be overcome? Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3341407/ [Accessed December 10, 2014].

Sugden, A., 2014. Open Access Journals. Good, Evil, Or Not-As-Dramatic? Available at: https://andysugden.wordpress.com/2014/12/07/open-access-journals-good-evil-or-not-as-dramatic/comment-page-1/#comment-32 [Accessed December 10, 2014].

TED, 2012. Ben Goldacre: What doctors don’t know about the drugs they prescribe, TED. Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_goldacre_what_doctors_don_t_know_about_the_drugs_they_prescribe/transcript?language=en.

Comments made on:

Collins, S., 2014. access to online materials. Available at: http://sophiecatherinecollins.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/access-to-online-materials/comment-page-1/#comment-30 [Accessed December 10, 2014].

Sugden, A., 2014. Open Access Journals. Good, Evil, Or Not-As-Dramatic? Available at: https://andysugden.wordpress.com/2014/12/07/open-access-journals-good-evil-or-not-as-dramatic/comment-page-1/#comment-32 [Accessed December 10, 2014].

Digitization, the underlying factor

Interactive Web Visualisation by amattox mattox

“One of the most important properties is its openness” – Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web

These were the exact words of the Internet pioneer when he addressed the first Knowledge Conference held in Dubai on 7^th December 2014 (The National 2014). As we immersed in the argument for and against “openness” of the Internet, these words by the inventor himself, held my thoughts as he addressed the audience, pleading to keep the Internet “open, free and accessible”.

The value of the argument is not intentionally degraded by introducing the address made by the Internet pioneer himself. However, it is imperative to understand that the whole concept behind the World Wide Web was to share the knowledge and embrace the cultural differences in the world (The National 2014).

From a content producer’s perspective, the argument is iterative. Weighing the advantages and disadvantages of having to produce materials freely available online is challenging. For instance, the argument for “open access” in academia is prevalent as they are bounded by the cost, quality control and sustainability of their work (Edanz 2013). This argument is parallel in the context of creative works as well. I believe that there are underlying factors that lead to the possible emergence of more “paywalls” in the future.

The growth of “digitization” is believed to be one of the reasons for the possible occurrence (The Drum 2013). BBC (2013) revealed that Robert Cailliau, the unheralded other half who invented the World Wide Web, mentioned that “the idea of dealing with the value of information” has been around for 20 years. From the interview, they revealed that he supported the idea of “pay-as-you-go” model for online content. This is a huge contrast to the prevailing view of the “other half” of the inventor of the World Wide Web.

Again, the tendency of “evading” the real value of the argument was not done purportedly. I believe the idea of “openness” of the Internet is contextual upon the content that is built. For instance, the media industry are building “new models” to compensate for the growth of “digitization” (BBC 2013) and therefore, it only make sense to charge for content that used to be offered through “prints”. In the context of academia or creative works, it is still subjective upon the producers’ belief of what they are trying to achieve ultimately.

References:

BBC, 2013. Are the days of free content on the net numbered? Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24759239 [Accessed December 9, 2014].

Edanz, 2013. Advantages and Disadvantages of Open Access. Available at: http://www.edanzediting.com/blog/advantages_and_disadvantages_open_access#.VIbBaIsVdlI [Accessed December 9, 2014].

The Drum, 2013. 90% of online content to be held behind paywalls in three years media company survey suggests. Available at: http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/04/12/90-online-content-be-held-behind-paywalls-three-years-media-company-survey-suggests [Accessed December 9, 2014].

The National, 2014. World Wide Web inventor makes plea to keep internet free and open. Available at: http://www.thenational.ae/uae/technology/world-wide-web-inventor-makes-plea-to-keep-internet-free-and-open [Accessed December 9, 2014].

Divulgence of ethics

The ethical issues that were discussed by my peers covered a broad spectrum of the topic. As we diverged our thoughts in two different perspectives mainly education and business use of social media, it was clear this subject was a divulgence of the ethical aspect of the “medium” that we are exposed to every single day.

As I took on a business perspective of the subject, I was intrigued by some of the insightful thoughts of my peers. The question of “morality” was reiterated by Sherdale (2014) when she discussed about “unreported endorsements” by Walmart. Kelly (2014) reinforced the idea by revealing the concept of “paid reviews” on user-generated content (UGC) sites that may question the “genuinity” of the content. These ideas struck me on what exactly was the motivation of businesses to undertake such questionable strategies to gain publicity.

This brought me back to the module on “Strategic Marketing Decisions” delivered by Dr. Bev (2014). He explained that “brand advocacy” was what companies were ultimately trying to achieve.

Customer Purchase Funnel by Meltwater

This “organic” content that Marketers are hungry for (Meltwater 2014) is what motivates such undertakings. Even though this concept does not address the “insensitivity stunts” pulled off by some companies, it was another concept that was introduced indirectly in the module through PR, a free medium. “Awareness” that is achieved through such stunts generates the “buzz” that the company desires. This was explained very well by Sara (2014) in her reflective post on “controversy sells”.

Ultimately, businesses must be aware of the line drawn between “influencers” and “brand advocates” (Convince and Convert 2014). I believe that blurring this line is when ethical issues are raised as it dilutes the “organic” content of social media. From this infographic by Zuberance, it clearly defines what are the distinct differences!

References:

Convince and Convert, 2014. Social Media Influencers versus Brand Advocates Infographic. Available at: http://www.convinceandconvert.com/content-marketing/social-media-influencers-versus-brand-advocates-infographic/ [Accessed December 8, 2014].

Goh, S., 2014. Don’t “Flog” Around! Available at: https://eladrehs.wordpress.com/2014/12/05/dont-flog-around/comment-page-1/#comment-16 [Accessed December 8, 2014].

Hulbert, B., 2014. Strategic Marketing Decisions: Lecture 2 Value of Customers.

Lee, S.D., 2014. Reflection: Social media can make or break your business. Available at: http://saradanlee.wordpress.com/2014/12/08/reflection-social-media-can-make-or-break-your-business/ [Accessed December 8, 2014].

Meltwater, 2014. How PR Impacts and Benefits from Brand Advocacy. Available at: http://www.meltwater.com/public-relations-blog/pr-brand-advocacy/ [Accessed December 8, 2014].

Wee, K., 2014. Unethical issues when businesses uses social media the wrong way. Available at: http://kellysayswee.wordpress.com/2014/12/05/unethical-issues-when-businesses-uses-social-media-the-wrong-way/comment-page-1/#comment-33 [Accessed December 8, 2014].

Comments made on:

Goh, S., 2014. Don’t “Flog” Around! Available at: https://eladrehs.wordpress.com/2014/12/05/dont-flog-around/comment-page-1/#comment-16 [Accessed December 8, 2014].

Wee, K., 2014. Unethical issues when businesses uses social media the wrong way. Available at: http://kellysayswee.wordpress.com/2014/12/05/unethical-issues-when-businesses-uses-social-media-the-wrong-way/comment-page-1/#comment-33 [Accessed December 8, 2014].

The question of “Morality”

Social media has become a powerful tool for businesses to deliver a message to its’ consumers. “Amplification” is one of the elements that are being created through social media (Forbes 2014). However, some of the ethical issues that they face may bring detrimental effects on the brand (Insider 2012). I believe that one of the most significant issues would be the exploitation of others’ misfortune.

Urban Outfitter’s Tweet

Kenneth Cole’s Tweet

These are just some of the unethical tweets where companies use to exploit the misfortune of others for the benefit of gaining publicity. I believe that this strategy undertaken by such companies should be avoided. Companies must be aware that the full control of their brand is no longer in their hands (Forbes 2014). The development of the Web has shifted the power of the brand to its consumers. Even though the “buzz” created may be strong, the brand may be tarnished.

Personally, I feel that it has become a norm for companies to adopt such strategy and only to “apologize” for their “insensitivity” later on. I believe that such occurrences will recur, as there is no law that governs the use of such “insensitive” stunts by companies. Despite the “backlash” some of these companies received from the digital sphere, they are still maintaining the same strategy:

Kenneth Cole tweets, again

Huffington Post (2013) reveals that Kenneth Cole explained that this was purportedly done to engage consumers. The company even hires a crisis management firm to deal with the “backlash” that it receives. The controversy that is built upon such inappropriate tweets have created the “buzz” and even boosted their company’s performance. It is indeed an upsetting trend.

This issue has clearly taught us that as powerful as how social media can be, some companies may exploit the most out of it regardless of ethics. Once a controversy is sparked, the “amplification” of such tweets may be endless. “#hasjustinelandedyet” is a prime example of such amplification. As we have discussed the issue of “authenticity” in the previous post, it is vital for businesses to understand this concept as well. I do uphold the belief as quoted by Simon Sinek (2009) that “people don’t buy what you do, they buy why you do it”. But when the question of ethics arises, companies will be questioned upon their morality.

References:

Bam, K.F., 2014. The true concept of “Authenticity.” Available at: https://bamsoton.wordpress.com/2014/12/04/the-true-concept-of-authenticity/ [Accessed December 4, 2014].

Forbes, 2014. The Explosive Growth Of Influencer Marketing And What It Means For You. Forbes. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylewong/2014/09/10/the-explosive-growth-of-influencer-marketing-and-what-it-means-for-you/ [Accessed December 5, 2014].

HuffingtonPost, 2013. Kenneth Cole: Offensive Tweets Are Simply Good Business Strategy. HuffingtonPost. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/kenneth-cole-twitter_n_3881085.html [Accessed December 5, 2014].

Insider, B., 2012. The 9 Biggest Brand Fails Exploiting Hurricane Sandy. Business Insider. Available at: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-9-biggest-brand-fails-exploiting-hurricane-sandy-2012-11?IR=T&op=1 [Accessed December 5, 2014].

Sinek, S., 2009. TED: How great leaders inspire action. Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action?language=en#t-188800 [Accessed December 4, 2014].

The Independent, 2013. PR executive Justine Sacco apologises after losing job over racist Aids “joke” provoked #HasJustineLandedYet Twitter storm. The Independent. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/pr-executive-justine-sacco-apologises-after-losing-job-over-racist-aids-joke-provoked-hasjustinelandedyet-twitter-storm-9020809.html [Accessed December 5, 2014].

The true concept of “Authenticity”

The development of an “authentic” online professional profile is multi-dimensional. Most of the ideas that were shared among my peers were pretty insightful. Some details of the development of the “authenticity” aspect were discussed in specifics. While others, took a rather broad approach on the subject.

I was intrigued by some of the analogies introduced by my peers. Specifically, Sara (2014) built the concept upon a “product” on the shelves of a supermarket, while Zoe (2014) used the concept of “advertising”. These concepts triggered my curiosity upon what is truly an “authentic” profile, which makes it unique and successful. This led me to look deeper into it and I was inspired by a concept introduced by Simon Sinek (2009) on “the Golden Circle” in a talk he gave on “How great leaders inspire action”:

By adopting this concept, I was able to present the ideas in the following diagram:

“The Golden Circle” adapted from Simon Sinek (2009)

Little did we realize the importance of “starting with why”. Simon (2009) mentioned that “people don’t buy what you do, they buy why you do it”. Upon bringing this concept forward, I realized that “recruiters” buy the “authenticity” of your profile. This is further supported by some of the video CVs that were shared among my peers. The “authenticity” of these candidates was the main reason why they were successful.

I believe that this powerful concept puts things in a clearer perspective. Of the millions of profiles out there in the digital sphere, we realized that achieving “authenticity” is a challenge. This concept is not only evident in terms of employability, but in many different aspects as well. The whole idea of “marketing” may also be built upon this concept, as explained by Simon (2009) in the video!

References:

Lee, S.D., 2014. Personal Branding – your career insurance! Available at: http://saradanlee.wordpress.com/2014/12/03/personal-branding-your-career-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-9 [Accessed December 4, 2014].

Review, H.B., 2013. The Future of You. Harvard Business Review. Available at: https://hbr.org/2013/01/the-future-of-you/ [Accessed December 3, 2014].

Sinek, S., 2009. TED: How great leaders inspire action. Available at: http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action?language=en#t-188800 [Accessed December 4, 2014].

Sinek, S., 2014. Start With Why. Available at: https://www.startwithwhy.com [Accessed December 4, 2014].

Yee, Z., 2014. Online meets Offline. Available at: http://zoeyeeze.wordpress.com/2014/12/03/online-meets-offline/comment-page-1/#comment-13 [Accessed December 4, 2014].

Comments made on:

Lee, S.D., 2014. Personal Branding – your career insurance! Available at: http://saradanlee.wordpress.com/2014/12/03/personal-branding-your-career-insurance/comment-page-1/#comment-9 [Accessed December 4, 2014].

Yee, Z., 2014. Online meets Offline. Available at: http://zoeyeeze.wordpress.com/2014/12/03/online-meets-offline/comment-page-1/#comment-13 [Accessed December 4, 2014].