“道”与“共享价值”对营销战略重点的再塑
Readjusting the Focus of Marketing Strategy by Tao and Shared Value
摘要: 营销战略遭遇挑战和失败,概因其战略重点存在偏差,诸如短期财务指标、定量管理评价、单极局部利益等,导致营销生态失衡与零和结局。在营销战略探讨中长期被忽视的中国哲学提供了颇有助益的解决思路。通过文献梳理和案例分析,老子的“道”与迈克尔•波特和马克•克雷默的“共享价值”可以整合为一个营销战略生态系统模型,旨在再塑营销战略重点。该理论模型的创新在于将中国哲学思想与西方营销理论的优势加以融合,强调战略一体化——响应差异化与竞争优势——企业社会责任之间的“阴阳”互动。核心领导团队要把营销战略重点从股东利益最大化和短期数字指标,调整为兼顾内、外部利益相关者之间的动态均衡,以期塑造一个着眼于全局的、具有远见的营销战略生态系统,最终实现多赢的、可持续发展的结果。
Abstract: The marketing strategies are encountering more and more challenges. The problem has arisen, because of deviations in its focus, such as short-term financial indicators, quantitative management evaluation, and a focus on local and head office interests; all of which contribute to, the imbalance of marketing ecosystems and ultimately zero results. However, the theory underpinning Chinese philosophy, which is long-neglected in the discussion of marketing strategy, potentially provides quite helpful solutions. Through a literature review and case analysis, Laozi’s “Tao” and Porter & Kramer’s “Shared Value”, can be integrated into a model of marketing strategy ecosystem, capable of reframing the focus of marketing strategies. The proposed theoretical model is an attempt to integrate the advantages of Chinese philosophy and Western marketing theory; and emphasizes the Yin & Yang interaction between and interdependence of strategic integration and responsive differentiation strategies. The proposed framework, requires core leadership teams to adjust the focus which informs their marketing strategies, from one which seeks to maximizes shareholders’ interests through short-term quantitative indicators, to a frame which supports a dynamic equilibrium between internal and external stakeholders. Such a focus provides renewed shape to their marketing strategy ecosystem; and ultimately, to support win-win and sustainable development results.
文章引用:马湘临, AlanFish. “道”与“共享价值”对营销战略重点的再塑[J]. 现代管理, 2019, 9(5): 606-613. https://doi.org/10.12677/MM.2019.95075

参考文献

[1] Dunphy, D.C., Griffiths, T. and Benn, S. (2007) Organizational Change for Corporate Sustainability: A Guide for Leaders and Change Agents of the Future. 2nd Edition, Routledge, London.
[2] Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2011) Shared Value: How to Reinvent Capitalism and Unleash a Wave of Innovation and Growth. Harvard Business Review, 89, 62-77.
[3] Collins, J.C. and Porras, J.I. (1996) Building Your Company’s Mission. Harvard Business Review, 65-77
[4] Fairholm, M.R. (2004) A New Sciences Outline for Leadership Development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25, 369-383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] Beer, M., Boselie, P. and Brewster, C. (2015) Back to the Future: Implications for the Field of HRM of the Multistakeholder Perspective Proposed 30 Years Ago. Human Resource Management, 54, 427-438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[6] Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2006) Strategy and Society: The Link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78-92.
[7] 乐学. Uber遭到集体起诉: 美国女乘客声称遭到司机攻击[Z]. 腾讯科技.
http://tech.qq.com/a/20171116/005629.htm, 2017-11-16.
[8] 陈华. 百思买上海三家门店今日将关闭[Z]. 网易科技.
http://tech.163.com/11/0222/07/6TFT3Q42000915BD.html, 2011-02-22.
[9] 李林蔚. 路虎中国终于道歉了![Z]. 上观新闻. https://www.jfdaily.com/news/detail?id=73238, 2017-12-07.
[10] Evans, P.L. (1999) HRM on the Edge: A Duality Perspective. Organization, 6, 325-338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Fiske, A.P. (2000) Complementarity Theory: Why Human Social Capacities Evolved to Require Cultural Complements. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 76-94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[12] Fang, T. (2011) Yin Yang: A New Perspective on Culture. Management and Organization Review, 8, 25-50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] Li, P.P. (1998) Towards a Geocentric Framework of Organizational Form: A Holistic, Dynamic and Paradoxical Approach, Organization Studies, 19, 829-861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[14] Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991) Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper Perennial, New York.
[15] Basadur, M. (2004) Leading Others to Think Innovatively Together: Creative Leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 103-121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[16] Beschorner, T. (2013) Creating Shared Value: The One-Trick Pony Approach. Business Ethics Journal Review, 1, 106-112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[17] Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L.J. and Matten, D. (2014) Contesting the Value of Creating “Shared Value”. California Management Review, 56, 130-153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[18] Dembek, K., Singh, P. and Bhakoo, V. (2015) Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical Concept or a Management Buzzword? Journal of Business Ethics, 137, 231-267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[19] Wojcik, P. (2016) How Creating Shared Value Differs from Social Responsibility. Journal of Management and Business Administration: Central Europe, 24, 32-55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[20] Fish, A.J. and Wood, J. (2017) Promoting a Strategic Intervention to Balance Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility-Missing Elements. Social Responsibility Journal, 13, 78-94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[21] Lao, T. (1998) Tap Te Ching. Translated by Waley, A. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, Beijing.
[22] Huang, A. (1998) The Complete I Ching: The Definitive Translation from the Taoist Master. Inner Traditions, Rochester, New York.
[23] Palmisano, S. (2006) The Globally Integrated Enterprise. Foreign Affairs, 85, 127-136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[24] Chung, B.P. (2014) Sustain Values to be the First Choice. Vietnam Investment Review, 15.
[25] Bartlett, C.A. and Ghoshal, S. (1998) Organizing for Worldwide Effectiveness: The Transnational Solution. Cali-fornia Management Review, 31, 54-74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[26] Copleston, F. (2003) A History of Philosophy: Greece and Rome, Volume 1. Continuum, London.
[27] 崇珅. 日媒: 美国式资本主义迎来转折点[Z]. 参考消息网.
http://www.cankaoxiaoxi.com/finance/20190822/2388886.shtml, 2019-08-22.