Technological and Scientific Developments Have Been Adopted and Used by Marketers - Coursework Example

Technological And Scientific Developments Have Been Adopted And Used By Marketers. Kotler And Achrol Discuss Some Of The Emerging TechnologiesAnd How They Are Being Used For (A) Consumer Experience And Sensory Systems. Name: Institution: Introduction Marketers are expecting an imminent paradigm shift from the traditionally defined marketing roles, functions and operations to a revolutionary technology-driven marketing model. The new model is governed by emerging technologies resulting in a network structure that deviates from the hierarchically-organized exchange paradigm. Rapid technological advancements have affected and influenced changes in almost all spheres of operation in the world today. The emergence of ecumenical technological tools has resulted in massive restructuring to optimize productivity by exploiting the seemingly inexhaustible technological resources that are continually released by scientists and researchers today. The business world has not been left behind in reaping the innumerable benefits offered by the technological windfall of recent years. The rapid rate of technological evolution demands a similarly rapid adaptation strategy for any sector of production in order to enhance its relevance and congruence in the emerging digitized business world. Traditionally, marketing referred to the commercial activities of selling, distributing and promoting business products and/or services in a functionalist paradigm. This nondescript definition evolved to the marketing management and exchange-oriented marketing definition which included product development and customer care. This expanded paradigm also added any other valuable resources such as time, information, ideas and feelings to the originally defined business products or services in the exchange mandate of the contemporary marketer (Achrol and Kotler, 2012). The expanded paradigm has continued to evolve which is credited to rapid changes in information and technology. The resultant marketing model is characterized by a complex network of marketing domains and theories which include consumption experiences, business networks and sustainable development. According to Aschrol and Kotler (2011), this three-tiered framework represents the emergent or future marketing paradigm and it mainly reflects future possibilities based on current developments. According to the two authors, the emergent paradigm consists of three domains; a substructure or sub-phenomena, structure or phenomena and superstructure or super-phenomena. The sub-phenomena represents the most flexible and theoretical domain of the emergent marketing paradigm and it defines the sensory processes of consumers and hence focuses on the fundamental concept of consumption experience (Achrol and Kotler, 2012). The phenomena and super-phenomena domains define the business and societal marketing realms and they are not discussed in this research. The Substructure or Sub-Phenomena Marketing Domain According to Aschrol and Kotler (2011), the emergent marketing paradigm will be defined by scientific and technological revolutions in various fields including; neurophysiology, biotechnology and nanotechnology. The lowest and most flexible level of the emergent marketing paradigm is the sub-phenomena marketing domain (Achrol and Kotler, 2012). This level is dedicated to consumer satisfaction and its main focus is consumption experience and sensory systems. Marketers are obligated to exploit the dominant technologies in the emergent marketing model to tinge the sensory systems of consumers and in the process improve their consumption experience. Neurophysiology and nanotechnology constitute two of the most dominant technologies in the emergent market paradigms and marketers must apply these technologies to improve consumers’ experiences and hence optimize product or service satisfaction (Achrol and Kotler, 2012). Consumption Experience and Sensory Systems According to Aschrol and Kotler (2011), consumer experience is one of the main concepts that have emerged due to the digital era of information technology. Consumer experience is an elemental concept of the core process of marketing which is consumption. In the marketing realm, satisfaction is one of the main elements of consumption. Experiences are incurred during need satisfaction and they describe the different feelings that are picked and filtered by the consumer’s senses in the consumption process (Achrol and Kotler, 2012). Sensory systems act as the channels through which experiences are captured and also as channels for the experiences to travel to the human mind for synthesis. There are different sensory systems or senses which include; visual, hearing, smell, touch, feel, taste and motion (whole body or limb) senses. In order to optimize consumer satisfaction, marketers must understand the nature of consumer experiences during consumption. Neurophysiology and Marketing The human brain is regarded as one of the most complicated structures in the world; this is mainly because of its complex functional properties and operations. Researchers have been trying to link the concept of perception with that of sensation for a long time. These two concepts represent the two functional processes that occur in the human brain and mind (Schultz, 2006). Neuroscientists have managed to delve into these two phenomenal issues by studying the workings of the nervous systems in neuroscience and the study of cognitive processes in neuropsychology (Schultz, 2006). Neurophysiology refers to the link between the two scientific fields and its main focus is the human brain and its operations. Technological innovations have enabled neuroscientists to study and analyze various brain reactions which give insight into the physiology of the human brain. Neurophysiology is enhanced by other scientific developments such as cellular and molecular biology which enables scientists to study the internal workings of the brain in relation to certain consumer experiences such as advertising and brand effects (Schultz, 2006). The study of neurophysiology is based on the fact that the human brain is functionally divided that is, each section in the human brain deals with certain functions or tasks. In order to link the concept of perception with that of sensation, researchers have to understand the inner workings of the brain. Neuroscientists use the biological concepts of cellular and molecular mapping to illustrate the functions of each section of the brain (Schultz, 2006). These mapping methods are used with various brain imaging tools for measuring the physiological responses of the human brain (Schultz, 2006). Marketing research uses non-invasive brain imaging techniques to study consumption experiences. One of the oldest and most effective brain imaging techniques is the electroencephalography, commonly called EEG (Morin, 2011). The human brain is composed of billions of cells called neurons, which are responsible for human cognitive responses. These cells are linked in a complex network of synaptic connections in the neural circuitry (Morin, 2011). Various stimuli cause the neurons to produce and pass minute electrical currents which have multiple frequencies. The neuroelectrical frequencies are referred to as brain waves and they are determined by the state of arousal of the brain. EEG records these brain waves at very small time intervals using electrodes attached to the scalp (Asbury, 2011). The other brain imaging technique is called magneto encephalography or MEG and this is similar to EEG but more effective. The electrochemical activities of neurons create a magnetic field which is captured by MEG and then amplified and mapped to measure physiological response in the brain (Asbury, 2011). This technique is more effective than EEG because it has better spatial and temporal resolution but it is still limited in picking brain waves in the inner sections of the brain (Morin, 2011). The most recent brain imaging technique is the functional magnetic resonance imaging or fMRI and unlike the other two techniques it uses an MRI scanner to map the blood flow in the brain (Asbury, 2011). fMRI is based on the concept that neurons require energy to produce electrochemical impulses. This energy is transported by the blood and fMRI measures the BOLD (Blood Oxygen Level Dependant) signal (Asbury, 2011). BOLD signals are measured as distortions in the magnetic fields of neuronal activity resulting from oxygenated blood flows to aroused neurons. The BOLD signal is regarded as an accurate measure of neuronal activity and due to the fact that this technique is able to capture activity in deeper sections of the brain the technique is deemed to be highly effective (Morin, 2011). The main weakness of this technique is its poor temporal resolution. Recent technological advancements have enabled neuroscientists to combine fMRI and MEG brain imaging techniques to complement each other achieving high success rates in measuring the physiological responses of the human brain (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2014). These technological breakthroughs in brain imaging are very useful to marketers in understanding the experiences of various consumers. Neurophysiology has been used by marketing researchers in various studies especially in the field of advertising (Morin, 2011). These studies aim to evaluate the various consumer-related physiological activities such as how consumers process product information, how they use their memory and how they react emotionally (Cheung, Chan and Sze, 2010). Some marketing researchers have focused on specific physiological assessments on consumers focusing on subjects such as product perception and processing (McClure, et al., 2004). Other marketing researchers have conducted brand-related physiological evaluations to determine; product impact on brand perception, product categorization, judgment and preference (Schaefer and Rotte, 2007; Esch, et al., 2012). Marketers should use this information to tailor the marketing, purchasing and consumption experience in favor of the consumer’s satisfaction. Marketers can use neurophysiology to improve consumption experiences and optimize satisfaction in consumers. Wilson, Gaines and Hill (2008) describe the collective neuromarketing persuasion model in a negative context to illustrate the ethical consequences of neuromarketing. However, marketers can implement this model to improve consumers’ experiences. This involves screening consumers using neuroimaging techniques to evaluate their behaviors and attitudes regarding a product or service (Wilson, Gaines and Hill, 2008). Emergent technologies can capture vital non-conscious affective responses from consumers regarding a certain product. The acquired data can then be used by marketers in the intervention phase of the marketing process. This is where the marketer implements appropriate changes on a product to enhance its quality and appeal and hence optimize its consumption experience. Finally, the outcome phase is implemented where the “improved” product is offered to the consumer. Marketers will still use neuroimaging techniques to capture the resultant cognitive and affective response of the consumer and hence gauge the outcome of the product improvement on consumption experiences (Yoon, et al., 2006). This cycle can be repeated on a specific product to achieve total refinement and hence produce a perfectly modeled product that guarantees optimal consumption experience. This approach can be illustrated with a restaurant example. The marketer can study the customers using modern neurophysiologic techniques such as a combination of fMRI and MEG to ascertain their experiences during the screening phase for a certain specialty meal. This information will help the marketer to decide which course to change depending on various affective responses and behavioral trends (Santos, et al., 2011). The outcome phase will offer a suitable prepared meal that will enhance the consumer’s consumption experience. Another implementation strategy for neuromarketers should be based on the recorded affective effects of a specific consumer’s consumption experience. After studying the various brain sections and their responses to various stimuli, the marketer should be able to tailor products, services and the business environment to optimize a consumer’s consumption experiences (Riemann, et al., 2012). Neurophysiology research has enabled marketers to understand the cognition, perception and sensation attributes in a marketing context (Groeppel-Klein, 2005). By exploiting neurophysiologic knowledge regarding the workings of the human brain and then targeting specific sensations in distinct sections of the brain, the marketer can significantly improve the consumer’s consumption experience and hence optimize product or service satisfaction (Riemann, et al., 2012). This approach has already been implemented by various game manufacturing companies like Sony and Phillips. These companies integrate appropriate neuro-affective features in their gaming systems to optimize the gaming experience for consumers. The marketer should incorporate sense effects in product or service design and even in the business environment to optimize their affective sensation on the consumer (Gulas and Bloch, 1995). For example, modern gaming systems use specially designed sound sense effects like thunder, lightning and breezes whose effects are amplified by vibrations and 3-D viewing creating a real-life sensation for the gamer which greatly improves the gaming experience. Neurophysiology in marketing has resulted in the creation of two conscious business fields; neuro-marketing and neuro-economics (Achrol and Kotler, 2012). Neuro-marketing refers to the application of neurophysiology in marketing and several companies have already capitalized on the idea, these include Bright-House Neurostrategies Group, Neurosense and Mind-Sign Neuromarketing. These companies study the various emotional experiences of consumers when using a product or service using various brain imaging techniques and then use this information to compare the product’s impact with its intended impact. This information can then be used by marketers to develop tailored products that provoke the desired emotions from consumers thereby optimizing consumer experiences. Neuro-marketing can be combined with nanotechnology to induce favorable consumer experiences. Marketing and Nanotechnology Nanotechnology is refers to the technology of producing nanoscale materials. Nanoscale materials are produced using the lowest components of matter; atoms and molecules, which means they are produced from very small scales of between one and one hundred nanometers. Nanometers are very small units of matter that represent a billionth of a meter (Nielsen, 2008). Advances in nanotechnology have resulted in the relatively new field of nanotechnology, molecular nanotechnology. Molecular nanotechnology produces materials and complex systems at the molecular level which ensures that the resultant creations are very precise and dynamic. Nanotechnology is essential in marketing due to the preciseness of the produced materials and the time-efficiency concept of their implementation (Maynard, 2007). Nanotechnology molecular systems can be easily configured to suit various consumer preferences and nanotechnology materials are already in use in many consumer products (Montague, 2004). These products are favored due to the unique properties of nanotechnology materials. A wide range of nanotechnology consumer products are in use and they include: stain resistant clothes, scratch resistant car paint, miniaturized and highly efficient electronics, and lighter stronger sports equipment (Nielsen, 2008). Researchers predict that future nanotechnology consumer products will include: energy efficient lighting, water purification appliances, versatile and time-critical medical solutions, and high powered computers (Nielsen, 2008). The unique properties of nanomaterials are due to the acquired properties of different materials when they are reduced to their sub-microscopic levels (Davies, 2006). Nanoscale materials are produced from ordinary materials such as carbon, copper and silver. These materials behave very differently when reduced to their nanoscale equivalents because they acquire new electrical, optical and mechanical properties in addition to increasing their chemical reactivity (Nielsen, 2008). Nanomaterials have been considered especially useful due to their ability to move very easily through almost anything in nature including the body, water and air. Nanomaterials are usually categorized into the following groups; nanoparticles, nanocomposites, nanoplates and nanorods (The Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004). Marketers can capitalize on nanotechnology in various ways to optimize consumer satisfaction and hence offer favorable consumption experiences. The first strategy is to exploit the innumerable positive characteristics of nanomaterials to create consumer friendly products (Davies, 2006). Nanomaterials have unique properties which can be used to create whole nanoproducts or to add to add quality characteristics to consumer products (Nielsen, 2008). These properties are illustrated by the properties of some of the products that can be created using nanomaterials such as lighter and stronger sports equipment, anti-wrinkle cosmetics products, crease-resistant and stain-resistant clothes, transparent and scratch-resistant sun glasses (Montague, 2004). These consumer products will generate great appeal to consumers and generate favorable experiences when used. Medically, nanotechnology can be used by pharmaceutical marketers to offer highly-effective drugs and time-critical medical procedures (Maynard, 2007). Marketers can also use nanotechnology to creatively induce consumer tastes and preferences. Researchers predict that in future, nanotechnology can develop miniature automated nanodevices that can be incorporated into foods and these can travel to the taste buds and induce favorable taste sensations. These nanodevices can easily travel through the air or body and hence marketers can use them near restaurants to induce hunger desires in consumers thereby influencing them to purchase food. Marketers can also consider and eliminate various consumer physical annoyances and defects that usually undermine product experiences during consumption. Many physical annoyances and defects are referred to as Naturophilia and these include allergies and intolerances which hinder consumers from enjoying some products (Freitas’, 1999). Other examples include; addictions which dictate consumer product preferences, unwanted syndromes which undermine consumer consumption experiences and other psychological; traits that limit positive experiential operability of a consumer. Marketers can target these harmful consumption inhibitors using medically programmed nanorobots to solve these inhibitions and hence improve consumer consumption experiences (Freitas’, 1999). According to Freitas’ (1999), nanorobots can be used to communicate very effectively at very high speeds. The author refers to this advantage in medical procedures but marketers can also exploit this advantage in marketing services to consumers. For example, marketers in the show business can use nanorobots to assess the reactions of the audience and report back to the show promoters in real time. These nanorobots can be programmed to implement both a quantitative and qualitative approach in gauging audience feelings based on their behaviors and then to give a summary regarding the show’s effects on the audience. This information can be used time-critically to decide whether to change the show or to continue depending on the nanorobots’ inferences. In order to optimize consumption experience, nanotechnology can be combined with neuro-physiology to induce desired sensations and emotions in consumers. Neurophysiology is used to determine consumers’ sensations regarding a certain consumption experience. Marketers can combine the two technologies in real time to optimize a consumer’s consumption experience. For example, in the restaurant business, the marketer can use neurophysiologic assessments to gauge a consumer’s experience when consuming the first course of a meal. If the consumer appears to lose appetite, the second course can include taste and appetite-inducing nanorobots which will trigger favorable desires in the consumer and hence optimize the meal’s experience. According to Freitas’ (1999), nanotechnology can be used for trigger almost all desires depending on the consumption context. The author highlights some of these applications in aerial nanorobots which can be used as aerosols with desired marketing impacts on unsuspecting consumers. These chemically engineered nanorobots can travel through the air into the body of a consumer and trigger any intended desire such as sexual intimacy desire if they are programmed to induce behavior related sensations (Freitas’, 1999). Nanotechnology in such settings can easily be implemented with desired results because neuromarketing studies have documented many consumer behaviors related with consumer experiences and preferences. Both nanotechnology and neurophysiology in marketing have raised serious ethical concerns from various rights groups and organizations and even governments (Maynard, 2006). Some of the marketing tactics described above exhibit a pernicious type of marketing which requires consumer protection. Future advances in neurophysiology appear to offer lesser chances of insidious marketing as compared to nanotechnology. Some researchers have suggested that neurophysiologic persuasion marketing models based on the revealed preferences of consumers infringe on the privacy of consumers (Wilson, Gaines and Hill, 2008). The researchers claim that using targeted neurophysiologic techniques based on consumers’ attitudes towards certain products undermines the consumer protection doctrine of free will and limits rational decision making (Dragolea and Cotirlea, 2011). This means that consumers will end up making imposed purchase decisions influenced by neural manipulations eliminating their business right of preference and free will (Wilson, Gaines and Hill, 2008). The resultant hypnotic effect from strategic neural influences will most likely result in impulsive buying and spending beyond the means. Nanotechnology appears to offer the most invasive and harmful marketing solutions for the emergent marketing paradigm. The possible applications proposed by Freitas’ (1999) appear to physically affect the consumption decisions of consumers. Marketers who use nanorobots to induce various taste and desire sensations of a consumer infringe on the physical and bodily privacy of the consumer in addition to dictating the consumer’s preferences. Consumers are supposed to enjoy the privileges of voluntary choice, consent and free will in a marketing context (Dragolea and Cotirlea, 2011). However, the use of aerosol nanorobots to induce product or service desires in a consumer dictates the choice of consumption physiologically for the consumer (Dragolea and Cotirlea, 2011). Other issues have been raised regarding the health and environmental; effects of nanoparticles and products (Environmental Protection Agency Nanotechnology Workgroup, 2007). It appears that nanotechnologists have not conducted enough research to ascertain all the implications of the highly invasive nanoparticles. Relevant and appropriate regulations should be created and enforced to control the use of these technologies in order to balance their advantages with their disadvantages (Maynard, 2006). Conclusion The emergent marketing paradigm is characterized by rapidly evolving technologies which aim to improve consumption experiences and hence optimize the role of the future marketer. The dominant technologies in this realm include the highly effective neurophysiology and nanotechnology in addition to other upcoming developments. These technologies have grown impressively in the last few years although they have not yet attained dependable confidence levels. More research is needed to streamline the application of both technologies and in particular to address the inherent ethical and privacy issues introduced into the marketing paradigm. Although these technologies offer limitless advantages and business opportunities, they appear to harbor serious defects if unregulated (Maynard, 2006). In their pursuit of excellence in marketing, marketers must address consumption experiences in order to optimize satisfaction thereby increasing appeal and purchases. This translates in increased profits and validates s the role of the emergent marketer in an optimal production paradigm. However, it is important to note that very few market researchers have formal training in either of the two dominant technologies; cognitive neuroscience and nanotechnology (Morin, 2011). Therefore, marketers should invest in relevant scholarly empowerment endeavors to ensure strategic adaptation to the emergent technologies. Lastly, marketers should address the identified ethical and privacy concerns because as Kotler and Achrol (2012) suggest, marketing entails more than businesses and consumers; it also about the inherent economic, social and ecological issues that emanate from the context. References Achrol, R. S. and Kotler, P., 2012. Frontiers of the marketing paradigm in the third millennium. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(1), 35-52. Asbury, C., 2011. Brain Imaging Technologies and Their Applications in Neuroscience. The Dana Foundation, Nov2011. [pdf] https://www.dana.org/uploadedFiles/Pdfs/brainimagingtechnologies.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Cheung, M., Chan, A. and Sze, S., 2010. Electrophysiological correlates of brand names. Neuroscience Letters, 485(3), 178–182. Environmental Protection Agency Nanotechnology Workgroup, 2007. Nanotechnology White Paper, Washington, DC, [pdf] www.epa.gov/ncer/nano/publications/whitepaper12022005.pdfwww.epa.gov/ncer/nano/publications/whitepaper12022005.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Esch, F., Moell, T., Schmitt, B., Elger, C., Neuhaus, C. and Weber, B., 2012. Brands on the brain: Do consumers use declarative information or experienced emotions to evaluate brands? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(1), 75–85. Davies, J. C., 2006. Managing the effects of nanotechnology. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies. Dragolea, L. and Cotirlea, D., 2011. Neuromarketing: between influence and manipulation. Polish Journal of Management Studies, [pdf] 3, 78-88. http://pjms.zim.pcz.pl/PDF/PJMS3/NEUROMARKETING%20-%20BETWEEN%20INFLUENCE%20AND%20MANIPULATION.pdf. [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Freitas, R. A., Jr., 1999. Nanomedicine, volume I: Basic capabilities. Georgetown: Landes Bioscience. [pdf] http://kriorus.ru/sites/default/files/nanomed/NANOMEDI.PDF [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Groeppel-Klein, A., 2005. Arousal and consumer in-store behavior. Brain Research Bulletin, 67, 428–437. Gulas, C. S. and Bloch, P. H., 1995. Right under our noses: ambient scent and consumer responses. Journal of Business Psychology, 10(1), 87–98. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2014. New brain-scanning technique shows when and where the brain processes visual information. ScienceDaily, [online] 27 Available at: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140127141758.htm [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Maynard, A. D., 2006. Nanotechnology: assessing the risks. Nano Today, [pdf] 1(2), 22-33. http://www.web.pdx.edu/~pmoeck/phy381/nano%20risks.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Maynard, A. D., 2007. Nanotechnology: the next big thing, or much ado about nothing?. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, [pdf] 51(1), 1-12. annhyg.oxfordjournals.org/content/51/1/1.long [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. McClure, S. M., Li, J., Tomlin, D., Cypert, K. S., Montague, L. M., and Montague, P. R., 2004. Neural correlates of behavioral preference for culturally familiar drinks. Neuron, 44(2), 379–387. Montague, P., 2004. Welcome to nano world: nanotechnology and the precautionary principle imperative. The Multinational Monitor, 25, 16–19. Morin, C., 2011. Neuromarketing: the new science of consumer behavior. Society, [pdf]48(2), 131-135. http://fac.ksu.edu.sa/sites/default/files/neuromarketing_1.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Nielsen, E., 2008. Nanotechnology and its impact on consumers. Consumer Council of Canada. [pdf] http://www.consumerscouncil.com/site/consumers_council_of_canada/assets/pdf/Nanotech_report.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Riemann, M., Castaño, R., Zaichkowsky, J. and Bechara, A., 2012. Novel versus familiar brands: An analysis of neurophysiology, response latency, and choice. Marketing Letters, [pdf] 23(3), 745-759. http://www.sfu.ca/~zaichkow/Novel%20versus%20familiar%20brands.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Santos, J. P., Seixas, D., Brandao, S. and Moutinho, L., 2011. Investigating the role of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in the assessment of brands. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 5(1), 1–8. Schaefer, M. and Rotte, M., 2007. Favorite brands as cultural objects modulate reward circuit. Neuro- Report, 18(2), 141–145. Schultz, W., 2006. Behavioral theories and the neurophysiology of reward. Annu. Rev. Psychol., [pdf] 57, 87-115. http://neuroeconomics.stanford.edu/pdfs/ws06arp.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. The Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering, 2004. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. [online] www.nanotec.org.uk/final/Report.htm [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Wilson, R., Gaines, J. and Hill, R. P., 2008. Neuromarketing and consumer free will. Journal of Consumer Affairs, [pdf] 42(3), 389-410. http://class.classmatandread.net/Physio/neurofreewill.pdf [Accessed 12 Aug 2014]. Yoon, C., Gutchess, A. H., Feinberg, F. and Polk, T. A., 2006. A functional magnetic resonance imaging study of neural dissociations between brand and person judgments. Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (1), 31–40. Read More