Ethics in Marketing Research!

A basic role for a marketing researcher is that of intermediary between the producer of a product and the marketplace. The marketing researcher facilitates the flow of information from the market or customer to the producer of the good or service.

Such a situation, with three major players the producer, the customer and the market researcher often sets the stage for conflicts of interest which can give rise to ethical problems. Given the inevitability of ethical dilemmas in marketing research, well-established ethical guidelines are critical.

Today, over $20 billion a year is spent on marketing/advertising/public opinion research services around the world. Spending on marketing research is $6.9 billion in the United States alone.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

During the past two decades, the research market has become highly concentrated, with about 54 percent of the market being held by the 50 largest worldwide organizations. The other half of the market is shared by a thousand or more small research firms. The concentration is even more pronounced in the United States, where the 10 largest firms account for 64 percent of total U.S. spending for marketing research.

Marketing ethics is the area of applied ethics which deals with the moral principles behind the operation and regulation of marketing. Some areas of marketing ethics (ethics of advertising and promotion) overlap with media ethics.

Fundamental Issues in the Ethics of Marketing:

Frameworks of Analysis for Marketing Ethical:

Possible Frameworks:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

i. Value-oriented framework, analyzing ethical problems on the basis of the values which they infringe (e.g., honesty, autonomy, privacy, transparency). An example of such an approach is the AMA Statement of Ethics.

ii. Stakeholder-oriented framework, analysing ethical problems on the basis of whom they affect (e.g., consumers, competitors, society as a whole).

iii. Process-oriented framework, analysing ethical problems in terms of the categories used by marketing specialists (e.g., research, price, promotion, placement).

None of these frameworks allows, by itself, a convenient and complete categorization of the great variety of issues in marketing ethics.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Power-Based Analysis:

Contrary to popular impressions, not all marketing is adversarial, and not all marketing is stacked in favour of the marketer. In marketing, the relationship between producer/ consumer or buyer/seller can be adversarial or cooperative. For an example of cooperative marketing, see relationship marketing.

If the marketing situation is adversarial, another dimension of difference emerges, describing the power balance between producer/ consumer or buyer/seller. Power may be concentrated with the producer (caveat emptor), but factors such as over-supply or legislation can shift the power towards the consumer (caveat vendor).

Identifying where the power in the relationship lies and whether the power balance is relevant at all are important to understanding the background to an ethical dilemma in marketing ethics.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Is marketing inherently evil?

A popularist anti-marketing stance commonly discussed on the blogosphere and popular literature is that any kind of marketing is inherently evil.

The position is based on the argument that marketing necessarily commits at least one of three wrongs:

i. Damaging personal autonomy- The victim of marketing in this case is the intended buyer whose right to self-determination is infringed.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

ii. Causing harm to competitors- Excessively fierce competition and unethical marketing tactics are especially associated with saturated markets.

iii. Manipulating social values- The victim in this case is society as a whole, or the environment as well. The argument is that marketing promotes consumerism and waste.

iv. Marketing has a major impact on our self-images, our ability to relate to one another, and it ruins any knowledge and action that might help to change that climate.

v. Marketing/Advertising creates artificiality and influences sexual attitudes.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

vi. Overall, people are spending tons of money and are usually more depressed.

Specific Issues in Marketing Ethics:

1. Market Research:

Ethical danger points in market research include:

i. Invasion of privacy.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

ii. Stereotyping.

Stereotyping occurs because any analysis of real populations needs to make approximations and place individuals into groups. However if conducted irresponsibly, stereotyping can lead to a variety of ethical undesirable results. In the AMA Statement of Ethics, stereotyping is countered by the obligation to show respect (“acknowledge the basic human dignity of all stakeholders”).

2. Market Audience:

Ethical danger points include:

i. Excluding potential customers from the market: selective marketing is used to discourage demand from undesirable market sectors or disenfranchise them altogether.

ii. Targeting the vulnerable (e.g., children, the elderly).

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Examples of unethical market exclusion or selective marketing are past industry attitudes to the gay, ethnic minority and obese (“plus-size”) markets. Contrary to the popular myth that ethics and profits do not mix, the tapping of these markets has proved highly profitable.

For example- 20% of US clothing sales are now plus-size. Another example is the selective marketing of health care, so that unprofitable sectors (i.e., the elderly) will not attempt to take benefits to which they are entitled. A further .example of market exclusion is the pharmaceutical industry’s exclusion of developing countries from AIDS drugs.

Examples of marketing which unethically targets the elderly include: living trusts, time share fraud, mass marketing fraud and others. The elderly hold a disproportionate amount of the world’s wealth and are therefore the target of financial exploitation.

In the case of children, the main products are unhealthy food, fashion ware and entertainment goods. Children are a lucrative market: “…children 12 and under spend more than $11 billion of their own money and influence family spending decisions worth another $165 billion”, but are not capable of resisting or understanding marketing tactics at younger ages (“children do not understand persuasive intent until they are eight or nine years old”).

At older ages competitive feelings towards other children are stronger than financial sense. The practice of extending children’s marketing from television to the school ground is also controversial.

The following is a select list of online articles:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

i. Sharon Beder, Marketing to Children (University of Wollongong 1998).

ii. Miriam H. Zoll, Psychologists Challenge Ethics of Marketing to Children (2000).

iii. Donnell Alexander and Aliza Dichter, Ads and Kids – How young is too young?

iv. Rebecca Clay, Advertising to children – Is it ethical? (Monitor on Psychology, Volume 31, No. 8 September 2000), American Psychological Association.

v. Media Awareness Network. How marketers target kids.

Other vulnerable audiences include emerging markets in developing countries, where the public may not be sufficiently aware of skilled marketing ploys transferred from developed countries, and where, conversely, marketers may not be aware how excessively powerful their tactics may be. Another vulnerable group are mentally unstable consumers.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The definition of vulnerability is also problematic, For example- when should indebtedness be seen as a vulnerability and when should “cheap” loan providers be seen as loan sharks, unethically exploiting the economically disadvantaged?

3. Pricing Ethics:

List of Unethical Pricing Practices:

i. Bid rigging

ii. Dumping (pricing policy)

iii. Predatory pricing

ADVERTISEMENTS:

iv. Price discrimination

v. Price fixing

vi. Price skimming

vii. Price war

viii. Supra competitive pricing

ix. Variable pricing

Ethics in Advertising and Promotion:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

1. Content:

Ethical pitfalls in advertising and promotional content include:

i. Issues over Truth and Honesty:

In the 1940s and 1950s, tobacco used to be advertised as promoting health. Today an advertiser who fails to tell the truth not only offends against morality but also against the law. However the law permits “puffery” (a legal term). The difference between mere puffery and fraud is a slippery slope- “The problem… is the slippery slope by which variations on puffery can descend fairly quickly to lies.”

ii. Issues with Violence, Sex and Profanity:

Sexual innuendo is a mainstay of advertising content and yet is also regarded as a form of sexual harassment. Violence is an issue especially for children’s advertising and advertising likely to be seen by children.

iii. Taste and Controversy:

The advertising of certain products may strongly offend some people while being in the interests of others. Examples include- feminine hygiene products, hemorrhoid and constipation medication. The advertising of condoms has become acceptable in the interests of AIDS-prevention, but are nevertheless seen by some as promoting promiscuity.

Some companies have actually marketed themselves on the basis of controversial advertising. Sony has also frequently attracted criticism for unethical content (portrayals of Jesus which infuriated religious groups; racial innuendo in marketing black and white versions of its PSP product; graffiti adverts in major US cities).

iv. Negative Advertising Techniques, Such as Attack Ads:

In negative advertising, the advertiser highlights the disadvantages of competitor products rather than the advantages of their own. The methods are most familiar from the political sphere.

2. Delivery Channels:

i. Direct marketing is the most controversial of advertising channels, particularly when approaches are unsolicited. TV commercials and direct mail are common examples. Electronic spam and telemarketing push the borders of ethics and legality more strongly.

ii. Shills and astroturfers are examples of ways for delivering a marketing message under the guise of independent product reviews and endorsements, or creating supposedly independent watchdog or review organizations. For example- fake reviews can be published on Amazon. Shills are primarily for message-delivery, but they can also be used to drive up prices in auctions, such as Ebay auctions.

The Use of Ethics as a Marketing Tactic:

Business ethics has been an increasing concern among larger companies, at least since the 1990s. Major corporations increasingly fear the damage to their image associated with press revelations of unethical practices.

Marketers have been among the fastest to perceive the market’s preference for ethical companies, often moving faster to take advantage of this shift in consumer taste. This results in the expropriation of ethics itself as a selling point or a component of a corporate image.

i. The Body Shop is an example of a company which marketed itself and its entire product range solely on an ethical message, although its products were deceptively characterized and its history was marked by misrepresentations. “The Body Shop’s only real product is honesty…” (Jon Entine in an ethics audit of the company). However the story of the Body Shop ended with increasing criticism of a gap between its morals and its practices.

ii. Green wash is an example of a strategy used to make a company appear ethical when its unethical practices continue.

iii. Liberation marketing is another strategy whereby a product can masquerade behind an image that appeals to a range of values, including ethical values related to lifestyle and anti-consumerism.

“Liberation marketing takes the old mass culture critique consumerism as conformity fully into account, acknowledges it, addresses it, and solves it. Liberation marketing imagines consumers breaking free from the old enforcers of order, tearing loose from the shackles with which capitalism has bound us, escaping the routine of bureaucracy and hierarchy, getting in touch with our true selves, and finally, finding authenticity, that holiest of consumer grails.” -Thomas Frank

Marketing Strategy:

The main theoretical issue here is the debate between free markets and regulated markets. In a truly free market, any participant can make or change the rules.

However when new rules are invented which shift power too suddenly or too far, other participants may respond with accusations of unethical behaviour, rather than modifying their own behaviour to suit (which they might not be able to anyway). Most markets are not fully free- the real debate is as to the appropriate extent of regulation.

Case:

California electricity crisis, which demonstrates how constant innovation of new marketing strategies by companies such as Enron outwitted the regulatory bodies and caused substantial harm to consumers and competitors.

A list of known unethical or controversial marketing strategies:

i. Anti-competitive practices

ii. Bait and switch

iii. Planned obsolescence

iv. Pyramid scheme

v. Vendor lock-in/Vendor lock-out

vi. Viral marketing/guerilla marketing.

Controversial marketing strategies associated with the internet:

i. Embrace, extend and extinguish

ii. Search engine optimisation

iii. Spamdexing

iv. Spy ware/Ad ware.

Further Issues in Marketing Ethics:

Marketing ethics overlaps with environmental ethics in respect of waste problems associated with the packaging of products.

Some, such as members of the advocacy group No Free Lunch, have argued that marketing by pharmaceutical companies is negatively impacting physicians’ prescribing practices, influencing them to prescribe the marketed drugs rather than others which may be cheaper or better for the patient.

Ethically thinking is responding to situations that deal with principles concerning human behavior in respect to the appropriateness and inappropriateness of certain communication and to the decency and indecency of the intention and results of such actions. In other words, ethics are distinctions between right and wrong.

Businesses are confronted with ethical decision making every day, and whether employees decide to use ethics as a guiding force when conducting business is something that business leaders, such as managers, need to instill.

Marketers are ethically responsible for what is marketed and the image that a product portrays. With that said, marketers need to understand what good ethics are and how to incorporate good ethics in various marketing campaigns to better reach a targeted audience and to gain trust from customers.

Marketing ethics, regardless of the product offered or the market targeted, sets the guidelines for which good marketing is practiced. When companies create high ethical standards upon which to approach marketing they are participating in ethical marketing.

To market ethically and effectively one should be reminded that all marketing decisions and efforts are necessary to meet and suit the needs of customers, suppliers, and business partners. Ethical behavior should be enforced throughout out company culture and through company practices.

Marketing Research Ethics:

The two most important factors for research clients in their relationships with research departments/suppliers are client confidentiality and honesty. Each is a question of ethics. Ethics are moral principles or values generally governing the conduct of an individual or group. Ethical behavior is not, however, a one-way relationship. Clients, suppliers, as well as field services, must also act in an ethical manner.

Ethical questions range from practical, narrowly defined issues, such as a researcher’s obligation to be honest with its customers, to broader social and philosophical questions, such as a company’s responsibility to preserve the environment and protect employee rights.

Many ethical conflicts develop from conflicts between the differing interests of company owners and their workers, customers, and surrounding community. Managers must balance the ideal against the practical the need to produce a reasonable profit for the company’s shareholders with honesty in business practices, and larger environmental and social issues.

Ethical Theories:

People usually base their individual choice of ethical theory on their life experiences.

The following are some of the ethical theories that apply to business and marketing research:

i. Deontology:

The deontological theory states that people should adhere to their obligations and duties when analyzing an ethical dilemma. This means that a person will follow his or her obligations to another individual or society because upholding one’s duty is what is considered ethically correct.

For instance, a deontologist will always keep his promises to a friend and will follow the law. A person who follows this theory will produce very consistent decisions since they will be based on the individual’s set duties.

Note that this theory is not necessarily concerned with the welfare of others. Say, For example- a research supplier has decided that it’s his ethical duty (and very practical!) to always be on time to meetings with clients.

Today he is running late. How is he supposed to drive? Is the deontologist supposed to speed, breaking his duty to society to uphold the law, or is the deontologist supposed to arrive at his meeting late, breaking his duty to be on time?

This scenario of conflicting obligations does not lead us to a clear ethically correct resolution, nor does it protect the welfare of others from the deontologist’s decision.

ii. Utilitarianism:

The utilitarian ethical theory is founded on the ability to predict the consequences of an action. To a utilitarian, the choice that yields the greatest benefit to the most people is the choice that is ethically correct.

One benefit of this ethical theory is that the utilitarian can compare similar predicted solutions and use a point system to determine which choice is more beneficial for more people. This point system provides a logical and rational argument for each decision and allows a person to use it on a case-by-case context.

There are two types of utilitarianism: act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism.

Act utilitarianism adheres exactly to the definition of utilitarianism. In act utilitarianism, a person performs the acts that benefit the most people, regardless of personal feelings or the societal constraints such as laws.

Rule utilitarianism, however, takes into account the law and is concerned with fairness. A rule utilitarian seeks to benefit the most people but through the fairest and most just means available.

Therefore, added benefits of rule utilitarianism are that it values justice and doing good at the same time.

As is true of all ethical theories, however, both act and rule utilitarianism contain numerous flaws. Inherent in both are the flaws associated with predicting the future. Although people can use their life experiences to attempt to predict outcomes, no human being can be certain that his predictions will be true.

This uncertainty can lead to unexpected results, making the utilitarian look unethical as time passes because his choice did not benefit the most people as he predicted.

Another assumption that a utilitarian must make is that he has the ability to compare the various types of consequences against each other on a similar scale. However, comparing material gains such as money against intangible gains such as happiness is impossible since their qualities differ so greatly.

iii. Casuist:

The casuist ethical theory compares a current ethical dilemma with examples of similar ethical dilemmas and their outcomes. This allows one to determine the severity of the situation and to create the best possible solution according to others’ experiences.

Usually, one will find examples that represent the extremes of the situation so that a compromise can be reached that will hopefully include the wisdom gained from the previous situations.

One drawback to this ethical theory is that there may not be a set of similar examples for a given ethical dilemma. Perhaps that which is controversial and ethically questionable is new and unexpected. Along the same line of thinking, this theory assumes that the results of the current ethical dilemma will be similar to results in the examples. This may not be necessarily true and would greatly hinder the effectiveness of applying this ethical theory.

Understanding ethical theories will help us better decide how certain unethical practices in marketing research should be resolved. Some of the unethical practices most common among the various groups involved in marketing research.

Research Supplier Ethics:

Unethical research supplier practices range from low-ball pricing to violating client confidentiality.

The ranges are explained as under:

i. Low-Ball Pricing:

A research supplier should quote a firm price based on a specific incidence rate (percentage of the respondents in the sample that will qualify to complete the survey) and questionnaire length (time to complete).

If either of the latter two items changes, then the client should expect a change in the contract price. Low-ball pricing in any form is unethical. In essence, low-ball pricing is quoting an unrealistically low price to secure a firm’s business and then using some means to substantially raise the price.

For example- quoting a price based on an unrealistically high incidence rate is a form of low-ball pricing.

Offering to conduct a focus group at $6,000 a group and, after the client commits, saying, “The respondents’ fees for participating in the group discussion are, of course, extra” is a form of low-balling.

ii. Allowing Subjectivity into the Research:

Research suppliers must avoid using biased samples, misusing statistics, ignoring relevant data, and creating a research design with the goal of supporting a predetermined objective.

One area of research today is so-called advocacy studies. These studies are commissioned by companies or industries for public relations purposes or to advocate or prove a position.

For example- Burger King once used positive responses to the following question in an advocacy study in an attempt to justify the claim that its method of cooking hamburgers was preferred over that of McDonald’s- “Do you prefer your hamburgers flame-broiled or fried?” When another researcher rephrased the question “Do you prefer a hamburger that is grilled on a hot stainless-steel grill or cooked by passing the meat through an open gas flame?” the results were reversed: McDonald’s was preferred to Burger King.

Kiwi Brands, a shoe polish company, commissioned a study on the correlation between ambition and shiny shoes. The study found that 97 percent of self-described ambitious young men believe polished shoes are important. In many cases, advocacy studies simply use samples that are not representative of the population.

For example- a news release for a diet products company trumpeted- “There’s good news for the 65 million Americans currently on a diet.” A company study had shown that people who lose weight can keep it off the sample consisted of 20 graduates of the company’s program, who also endorsed its products in commercials.

When studies are released to the news media, the methodology should be readily available to news reporters. Typically, this information is withheld, often on the ground that the material is proprietary.

A survey done for Carolina Manufacturer’s Service, a coupon redemption company, found that “a broad cross-section of Americans find coupons to be true incentives for purchasing products.” The description of the methodology was available only at a price- $2,000.

iii. Abusing Respondents:

Respondent abuse can take several forms. Perhaps the most common is lengthy interviews. This problem stems in part from the “as long as you are asking questions” mentality of many product managers.

It is not uncommon for clients to request additional “nice to know” questions, or even exploratory questions on an entirely separate project. This leads to lengthy questionnaires, 30-minute telephone or internet interviews, and 40- minute mall-intercept interviews.

As a result of long interviews and telephone sales pitches, more and more Americans are refusing to participate in survey research. The refusal rate for telephone surveys now averages 60-plus percent, an increase of 10 percent over 10 years. Forty-nine percent of the people who do participate say the surveys are “too personal.”

Predictive dialers are tremendous productivity tools for survey research telephone call centers. They remove much of the idle time an interviewer would otherwise spend manually dialing numbers and recording call dispositions, such as no-answer and busy signals.

By definition, predictive dialers dial phone numbers ahead of available interviewers, predicting when an interviewer will become available. Adjusting the pacing manually sets the aggressiveness of this dial-ahead capability.

Obviously, there is strong motivation for call center managers to increase the pacing and minimize the time an interviewer spends between calls. However, this action has undesirable consequences because some respondents are contacted before an interviewer is available.

In most cases, the dialer than places the respondent on hold or disconnects the call. Both actions decrease respondent goodwill.

Interest in a product or service is often discerned during the interviewing process, and the researcher knows the interviewees’ potential purchasing power from their answers to income and other pertinent financial questions.

Although the introduction phase of the questionnaire usually promises confidentiality, some researchers have sold names and addresses of potential customers to firms seeking sales leads. Individuals willing to participate in the survey research process have a right to have their privacy protected.

The state of New York sued Student Marketing Group for selling information on a broad scale to direct marketers. The survey filled out by students included age, gender, religious affiliation, career interests, and grade point average.

The company said that it was gathering the data to provide to universities to help the students gain admission and financial aid. Direct marketers used the information to sell credit cards, magazines, videos, cosmetics, and other products.

iv. Selling Unnecessary Research:

A research supplier dealing with a client who has little or no familiarity with marketing research often has the opportunity to “trade the client up.” For example- if a project called for four focus groups and an online survey of approximately 350 consumers, the research supplier might sell eight groups and 1,000 Internet interviews, with a 400-interview telephone follow-up in 6 months.

It is perfectly acceptable to offer a prospective client several research designs with several alternative prices when and if the situation warrants alternative designs. The supplier should point out the pros and cons of each method, along with sample confidence intervals. The client, in consultation with the supplier, then can decide objectively which design best suits the company’s needs.

v. Violating Client Confidentiality:

Information about a client’s general business activities or the results of a client’s project should not be disclosed to a third party. The supplier should not even disclose the name of a client unless permission is received in advance.

The thorniest issue in confidentiality is determining where “background knowledge” stops and conflict arises as a result of work with a previous client.

Black Box Branding:

Marketing research suppliers have discovered branding. Synovate has over 25 branded product offerings, including Brand Vision and M2M. Maritz Research offers Loyalty Maximizer, and Harris Interactive has TRBC, a scale bias correction algorithm.

Go to virtually any large marketing research firm’s Web site, and you’ll see a vast array of branded research products for everything from market segmentation to customer value analysis.

A common denominator across some of these products is that they are proprietary, which means the firms won’t disclose exactly how they work. That’s why they are also known pejoratively (negatively) as black boxes.

A black box method is proprietary a company is able to protect its product development investment. And if customers perceive added value in the approach, suppliers can charge a premium price to boot. (Black boxes and brand names are not synonymous. Almost all proprietary methods have a clever brand name, but there are also brand names attached to research methods that are not proprietary.)

At least two factors have given rise to this branding frenzy. First, competitive pressures force organizations to seek new ways to differentiate their product offerings from those of their competitors.

Second, many large research companies are publicly held, and publicly held companies are under constant pressure to increase sales and profits each quarter. One way to do this is to charge a premium price for services. If a company has a proprietary method for doing a marketing segmentation study, presumably it can charge more for this approach than another firm using publicly available software such as SPSS or SAS.

Clients have no objective way of determining whether the results of a proprietary method would vary significantly from those of more standard approaches, and neither have we. Go to five different companies that have five different black boxes for choice modeling, for example. Each company claims its method is superior, yet it’s impossible to assess, from a psychometric perspective, which possesses the highest level of validity.

Of course, no one is forcing clients to purchase a black box method, and they can always contact other organizations that have used a supplier’s proprietary method to assess its effectiveness. Often clients will obtain multiple bids on a project so that they can select from a variety of approaches to help them answer their research questions.

Client Ethics:

Like research suppliers, clients (or users) also have a number of ethical dos and don’ts.

Some of the more common client problems are requesting bids when a supplier has been predetermined, requesting bids to obtain free advice and methodology, making false promises, and issuing unauthorized RFPs.

i. Requesting Bids when a Supplier has been Predetermined:

It is not uncommon for a client to prefer one research supplier over another. Such a preference may be due to a good working relationship, cost considerations, ability to make deadlines, friendship, or quality of the research staff. Having a preference per se is not unethical.

It is unethical, however, to predetermine which supplier will receive a contract and yet ask for proposals from other suppliers to satisfy corporate requirements. Requiring time, effort, and money from firms that have no opportunity to win the contract is very unfair. Why more than a single RFP? Some corporations require more than one bid.

ii. Requesting Bids to Obtain Free Advice and Methodology:

Client companies seeking bargain basement prices have been known to solicit detailed proposals, including complete methodology and a sample questionnaire, from a number of suppliers.

After “picking the brains” of the suppliers, the client assembles a questionnaire and then contracts directly with field services to gather the data. A variation of this tactic is to go to the cheapest supplier with the client’s own proposal, derived by taking the best ideas from the other proposals. The client then attempts to get the supplier to conduct the more elaborate study at the lower price.

iii. Making False Promises:

Another technique used by unethical clients to lower their research costs is to hold out a non-existent carrot. For example- a client might say, “I don’t want to promise anything, but we are planning a major stream of research in this area, and if you will give us a good price on this first study, we will make it up to you on the next one.” Unfortunately, the next one never comes or if it does, the same line is used on another unsuspecting supplier.

iv. Requesting Proposals without Authorization:

In each of the following situations, a client representative sought proposals without first receiving the authority to allocate the funds to implement them:

1. A client representative decided to ask for proposals and then go to management to find out whether she could get the funds to carry them out.

2. A highly regarded employee made a proposal to management on the need for marketing research in a given area. Although managers were not too enthused about the idea, they told the researcher to seek bids so as not to dampen his interest or miss a potentially (but, in their view, highly unlikely) good idea.

3. A client representative and her management had different ideas on what the problem was and how it should be solved. The research supplier was not informed of the management view, and even though the proposal met the representative’s requirements, management rejected it out of hand.

4. Without consulting with the sales department, a client representative asked for a proposal on analyzing present sales performance. Through fear of negative feedback, corporate politics, or lack of understanding of marketing research, the sales department blocked implementation of the proposal.

Field Service Ethics:

Marketing research field services are the production arm of the research industry requiring telephone or face-to-face interviews. They are the critical link between the respondent and the research supplier. It is imperative that they properly record information and carefully follow sampling plans.

Otherwise, even the best research design will produce invalid information (garbage in; garbage out). Maintaining high ethical standards will aid a field service in procuring good raw data for the research firm.

Using Professional Respondents:

The problem of professional respondents arises most often in the recruitment of focus group participants. Virtually all field services maintain a database of people willing to participate in qualitative discussion groups, along with a list of their demographic characteristics.

Maintaining such a list is good business and quite ethical. When qualifications for group participants are easy (For example- pet owners, persons who drive SUVs), there is little temptation to use professional respondents.

However, when a supplier wants, For example- persons who are heavy users of Oxydol detergent or who own a Russian Blue cat, it is not unheard of for a group recruiter to call a professional respondent and say, “I can get you into a group tomorrow with a $75 respondent fee and all you need to say is that you own a Russian Blue cat.”

In an attempt to weed out professional respondents, a research supplier may specify that the participant must not have been a member of a qualitative discussion group within the past 6 months. However, dishonest field services will simply tell the professional respondent to deny having participated in a group within the past 6 months.

Data-Collection Code of Ethics:

The Marketing Research Association (MRA) is an association to which may field services belong. The organization is dedicated to promoting excellence in data collection.

To this end, it recently enacted the following code of ethics:

Companies Engaged in Data Collection:

1. Will treat the respondent with respect and not influence a respondent’s opinion or attitude on any issue through direct or indirect attempts, including the framing of questions.

2. Will conduct themselves in a professional manner and ensure privacy and confidentiality.

3. Will ensure that all formulas used during bidding and reporting during the data collection process conform to the MRA/CASRO Incidence Guidelines.

4. Will make factually correct statements to secure cooperation and will honor promises made during the interview to respondents, whether verbal or written.

5. Will give respondents the opportunity to refuse to participate in the research when there is a possibility they may be identifiable even without the use of their name or address (e.g., because of the size of the population being sampled).

6. Will not use information to identify respondents without the permission of the respondent except to those who check the data or are involved in processing the data. If such permission is given, the interviewer must record it, or a respondent must do so, during all Internet studies, at the time the permission is secured.

7. Will adhere to and follow these principles when conducting online research-

i. Respondents’ rights to anonymity must be safeguarded.

ii. Unsolicited e-mail must not be sent to those requesting not to receive any further e-mail.

iii. Researchers interviewing minors must adhere to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).

iv. Before collecting, using, or disclosing personal information from a child, the researcher must obtain verifiable parental consent from the child’s parent.

v. Refer to MRA Internet Ethics Guidelines “Use of the Internet for Conducting Opinion and Marketing Research” for more educational information.

8. For Internet research, will not use any data in any way contrary to the provider’s published privacy statement without permission from the respondent.

9. Will respect the respondent’s right to withdraw or refuse to cooperate at any stage of the study and will not use any procedure or technique to coerce or imply that cooperation is obligatory.

10. Will obtain and document respondent consent when it is known that the personally identifiable information of the respondent may be passed by audio, video, or Interactive Voice Response to a third party for legal or other purposes.

11. Will obtain permission and document consent of a parent, legal guardian, or responsible guardian before interviewing children 13 years of age or younger. Prior to obtaining permission, the interviewer should divulge the subject matter, length of interview, and other special tasks that may be required of the respondent.

12. Will ensure that all interviewers comply with any laws or regulations that may be applicable when contacting or communicating to any minor (18 years old or younger) regardless of the technology or methodology utilized.

13. Will not reveal any information that could be used to identify clients without their written authorization.

14. Will ensure that companies, their employees, and subcontractors involved in the data-collection process adhere to reasonable precautions so that multiple surveys are not conducted at the same time with a specific respondent without explicit permission from the sponsoring company or companies.

15. Will consider all research materials provided by the client or generated as a result of materials provided by the client to be the property of the client. These materials will not be disseminated or disposed of without the verbal or written permission of the client.

16. Will, as time and availability permit, give their client the opportunity to monitor studies in progress to ensure research quality.

17. Will not represent a non-research activity to be opinion and marketing research, such as – the compilation of lists, registers, or data banks of names and addresses for any non-research purposes (e.g., canvassing or fund raising), industrial, commercial, or any other form of espionage, the acquisition of information for use by credit rating services or similar organizations, sales or promotional approaches to the respondent, the collection of debts.

Respondents’ Rights:

Respondents in a marketing research project typically give their time and opinions and receive little or nothing in return. These individuals, however, do have certain rights that should be upheld by all marketing researchers. All potential participants in a research project have the right to choose, the right to safety, the right to be informed, and the right to privacy.

a. Right to Choose:

Everyone has the right to determine whether or not to participate in a marketing research project. Some people, such as poorly educated individuals or children may not fully appreciate this privilege. A person who would like to terminate an interview or experiment may give short, incomplete answers or even false data.

The fact that a person has consented to be part of an experiment or to answer a questionnaire does not give the researcher carte blanche to do whatever she or he wants.

The researcher still has an obligation to the respondent. For example- if a person participating in a taste test involving a test product and several existing products prefers the test product, the researcher does not have the right to use the respondent’s name and address in a promotion piece, saying that “Ms. Jones prefers new Sudsies to Brand X.”

b. Right to Safety:

Research participants have the right to safety from physical or psychological harm. While it is unusual for a respondent to be exposed to physical harm, there have been cases of persons becoming ill during food taste tests.

Also, on a more subtle level, researchers rarely warn respondents that a test product contains, say, a high level of salt. An unwitting respondent with hypertension could be placed in physical danger if the test ran several weeks.

It is much more common for a respondent to be placed in a psychologically damaging situation. Individuals might experience stress when an interviewer presses them to participate in a study. Others might experience stress when they cannot answer questions or are given a time limit to complete a task (For example- “You have five minutes to browse through this magazine, and then I will ask you a series of questions”).

c. Right to be Informed:

Research participants have the right to be informed of all aspects of a research task. Knowing what is involved, how long it will take, and what will be done with the data, a person can make an intelligent choice as to whether to participate in the project.

Often, it is necessary to disguise the name of the research sponsor to avoid biasing the respondent. For example- it is poor research practice to say, “We are conducting a survey for Pepsi; which brand of soft drink do you consume most often?”

In cases in which disguising the sponsor is required, a debriefing should take place following the completion of the interview. The debriefing should cover the study’s purpose, the sponsor, what happens next with the data, and any other pertinent information.

A debriefing can reduce respondent stress and build goodwill for the research industry. Unfortunately, taking the time to debrief a respondent is a cost that most companies are unwilling to incur.

In some business and academic research, the researcher may offer to provide the respondent with a copy of the research results as an incentive to obtain his or her participation in the project. When a commitment has been made to disseminate the findings to survey respondents, it should be fulfilled.

On more than one occasion, we have participated in academic surveys where the carrot of research results was offered but never delivered.

d. Right to Privacy:

All consumers have the right to privacy. All major research organizations, including the MRA, the Council of American Survey Research Organizations (CASRO), the Internet Marketing Research Association (IMRO), the American Marketing Association (AMA), and the Advertising Research Foundation (ARF), have privacy codes.

For example- with online research, lists of potential respondents must have one of two characteristics. Potential respondents must have either a prior opt-in for contact, or they must have an existing business relationship with the sender through which an e-mail contact would not be considered a random, unsolicited e-mail (spam).

Consumer privacy can be defined in terms of two dimensions of control. The first dimension includes control of unwanted telephone, mail, e-mail, or personal intrusion in the consumer’s environment, and the second concerns control of information about the consumer.

Consumer privacy can be viewed in the context of any interaction, profit or nonprofit, between marketer and consumer, including (but not limited to) credit and cash sales, consumer inquiries, and marketer-initiated surveys. The very nature of the marketing research business requires interviewers to invade an individual’s privacy.

An interviewer calls or approaches strangers, requests a portion of their limited free time, and asks them to answer personal questions sometimes very personal questions. Perhaps the greatest privacy issue for consumers today is the role of marketing databases.

A number of laws have been passed in recent years dealing with various aspects of privacy as it relates to the marketing research industry. Diane Bowers, president of the Council of American Survey Research Organizations (CASRO), poses the following questions to marketing researchers-

The Global Research feature explains the Safe Harbor Program and why it is important to global marketing researchers.

Ethics and Professionalism:

Today’s business ethics are actually a subset of the values held by society as a whole. The values that underlie marketing decisions have been acquired through family, educational and religious institutions, and social movements (For example- women’s rights, pollution control etc.).

The marketing research industry consists of – (1) information users (consumer and industrial goods and services producers; federal, state, and local governments; media companies; retailers and wholesalers), (2) marketing research suppliers (custom research firms’ syndicated research firms and limited function research firms), and (3) marketing research supplier service firms.

Users of marketing research can be further categorized as external or internal to the firm.

External users include company vendors and franchisee. The primary internal user of marketing research is the marketing department, which seeks data for decision making in such areas as logistics, sales, promotions, new product development, brand management, and pricing.

Other internal groups and departments using marketing research are senior management, product engineers, finance, manufacturing, human resources management, and legal.

The marketing research industry continues to grow at a steady rate. The size of marketing research departments, however, is shrinking despite growing budgets. This means that research users are relying on external suppliers more than ever. Some of the biggest challenges facing the research industry are maximizing survey participation and completion rates and reaching a representative sample of respondents.

Ethics are moral principles or values generally governing the conduct of an individual or group. The deontology theory says that a person will follow his or her obligations to another individual or society because upholding one’s duty is what is considered ethically correct. In contrast, utilitarian ethical theory maintains that a choice yielding the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people is the choice that is ethically correct.

The casuist theory holds that a decision should be made by comparing a current ethical dilemma with examples of similar ethical dilemmas and their outcomes.

Unethical practices by some suppliers include low-ball pricing, allowing subjectivity into the research, abusing respondents, selling unnecessary research, violating client confidentiality, and using black box branding.

Unethical practices performed by some research clients include requesting bids when a supplier has been predetermined, requesting bids to gain free advice or methodology, making false promises, and issuing unauthorized requests for proposals. Marketing research field services have used professional respondents which is unethical.

Respondents have certain rights, including the right to choose whether to participate in a marketing research project, the right to safety from physical and psychological harm, and the right to be informed of all aspects of the research task.

They should know what is involved, how long it will take, and what will be done with the data. Respondents also have the right to privacy. The level of professionalism in the marketing research industry can be raised through the efforts of organizations such as CASRO and CMOR as well as socially concerned marketing research firms. Researcher certification has been launched by the MRA.

Marketing Research:

Advertising is a big business in this era in India. Indian Advertising industry has witnessed a prominent globalisation. With the inception of various divisions, the advertising industry has undergone a sea change. Indian consumer’s deepening pocket and blooming markets for ad-spends have touched new heights in India.

The Indian Advertising Companies are creating stories and brand experiences in a way that engages and involves. The Best Indian sites offers the names of the top Advertising Organizations in India.

Here is a list of the top Indian websites and a quick glance at them will help you to get the required knowledge about the websites.