Nowadays society asks for marketers to show a more sensible and responsible face towards the consumers, the environment and the society. Corporate Societal Marketing seems to be the response to these demands. But can we consider Corporate Societal Marketing as the moral approach of the traditional marketing? And if we do, how the theories of ethics fit in this new face of marketing? Can the purpose of making profits be associated with a more moral decision –making process in marketing?

Corporate Societal Marketing, Ethics, Utilitarianism, Self – egoism

Marketing is the other word for commercial transactions. Through the years it has become the official mean for exchanges. During the last century and as we have entered the new one, marketing is defined as “identifying and meeting human and social needs” (Kotler 1972). But we always have to bear in mind that marketing also contains the concept of profitability in it.

Marketing has multiple applications in every aspect of everyday life, but companies are the ones that officially implement it as a main device for making profits. That’s why as Kotler said, through marketing “all co

Because as Smith has said that all human actions can ultimately be explained in terms of underlying desires, we can also say that in terms of organizational behavior, the C.S.M is the mean through which companies accomplish their underlying organizational desires. The main desire is off course to make profits!

There are three main theories concerning the ethics. Deontology, utilitarianism and what are called virtue ethics.

mpanies are motivated to turn a private or social need into a profitable business opportunity”. And this is the modern view upon marketing. The traditional model of marketing was considering marketing process, as to be more technical than moral. Its main purpose was to translate demand into production and it didn’t care about the moral issues arising from this procedure. Does it care now?

An example taken from the late 90s illustrates that clearly. In the late 90s there was a great opposition and criticism towards genetically modified food. Eventually all the supermarkets responded by imposing bans on genetic modified ingredients. (Andrew Crane, John Desmond 2002). What that example tells us? At first, it maybe looks as if the supermarkets embraced the views of pressure groups but if they hadn’t do so, they were going to suffer a loss of consumer trust and consequently a loss in their profits. So maybe the firms are adapting C.S.M as a response to the consumers’ social interests but even in that case the underlying reasons are the firm’s welfare in the long run. Doesn’t that indicate us, that the adoption of C.S.M apart from other things is actually a self – orientated practice?

A deontological ethic is an ethic of duty. It concentrates on the act itself and looks at the moral worth of this act. Whatever results from the act is irrelevant. On the other hand utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of the act and considers the degree to which this act promotes its final purpose. According to Benthman’s utilitarian theory “the goal of life is to create as much satisfaction as possible. The moral act is one which produces the greatest satisfaction for the greatest number”. (Mohammed Y.A Rawwas 2001). Consequently utilitarianism “compares all possible options and select the one that promises the best result”. (Mohammed Y.A Rawwas 2001). Finally virtue ethic deals more with the personal moral development of the individual or organization. (Table 1- appendix)

As Friedman (1970) has pointed out, the purpose of an organization is to make money. Additionally as Morgan (1996) has said, “if we treat organizations as living organisms which require the input of financial resources”(Shawn Daly, Mina Marita Mattila, 2001), then it’s easy to understand why they choose to implement C.S.M in order to survive in nowadays markets.

So, nowadays, companies, under the name of Corporate Societal Marketing are implementing this “new” kind of marketing.

Some topics in this essay:
Marita Mattila, SOCIETAL MARKETING, Lane Keller, John Gaski, CORPORATE MARKETING, Adam Smith, CONCLUSION Yes…the, Judging CSM, Societal Marketing, John Desmond, societal marketing, corporate societal, corporate societal marketing, traditional marketing, lane keller 2002, adapting csm, mattila 2001, hoeffler kevin, steve hoeffler, steve hoeffler kevin, kevin lane, kevin lane keller, keller 2002, marita mattila 2001, lane keller,