Read this chapter, which provides an overview of business-to-business buying behavior. This chapter discusses how B2B markets differ from B2C markets, types of B2B buyers, buying centers, and stages of the B2B buying process. The chapter wraps up with a discussion of international B2B markets, e-commerce, and ethics in the B2B market. From this reading, you will learn what a buying center is and will be able to name the members of buying centers and describe their roles. Pay special attention to the concepts of the decision-making unit (DMU) and the purchase process.
Ethics in B2B Markets
Learning Objectives
- Explain how the ethical dilemmas B2B marketers face differ from the ethical dilemmas B2C marketers face.
- Outline the measures companies take to encourage their employees and executives to act in ethical ways.
It's
likely that every topic we have talked about so far in this chapter has
an ethical dimension to it. Take procurement, for example: unlike B2C
markets, offering customers free dinners, golf games, and so forth is
very common in B2B settings. In many foreign countries, business and
government buyers not only expect perks such as these but also actually
demand bribes be paid if you want to do business with them. And firms
pay them, even though some countries prohibit them. (The United States
is one such country.) Which countries have a penchant for bribery? In a
report called the "Bribe Payers Index," Transparency International, a
watchdog organization, annually ranks the likelihood of firms from the
world's industrialized countries to bribe abroad. The top five countries
are shown in Table 4.3 "Transparency International's Bribe Payers
Index".
Table 4.3 Transparency International's Bribe Payers Index
1. Russia
2. China
3. Mexico
4. India
5. Italy
Or
take, for example, the straight-rebuy situation we discussed earlier.
Recall that in a straight rebuy, buyers repurchase products
automatically. Recently, Dean Foods, which manufactures the Silk brand
of soy milk, experienced a lot of negative press after the company
changed the word "organic" to "natural" on the labels of its milk, and
quietly switched to conventional soybeans, which are often grown with
pesticides. But Dean didn't change the barcode for the product, the
packaging of the product, or the price much. So stores kept ordering
what they thought was the same product - making a straight rebuy - but
it wasn't. Many stores and consumers felt as though they had been duped.
Some grocers dropped the entire Silk lineup of products.
And
remember Intel's strategy to increase the demand for its chips by
insisting that PC makers use "Intel Inside" stickers? Recently Intel
paid a competitor more than a billion dollars to settle a court case
contending that it strong-armed PC makers into doing business
exclusively with Intel. (Does that make you feel less warm and fuzzy
about the "Intel Inside" campaign?)
What
Dean Foods and Intel did might strike you as being wrong. However, what
is ethical and what is not is often not clear-cut. Walmart has a
reputation for using its market power to squeeze its suppliers for the
best deals possible, in some cases putting them out of business. Is that
ethical? What about companies that hire suppliers abroad, putting U.S.
companies and workers out of business? Is that wrong? It depends on whom
you ask. Some economists believe Walmart's ability to keep costs low
has benefited consumers far more than it has hurt the suppliers of
products. Is it fair to prohibit U.S. companies from offering bribes
when their foreign competitors can?
Clearly,
people have very different ideas about what's ethical and what's not.
So how does a business get all of its employees on the same page in
terms of how they behave? Laws and regulations - state, federal, and
international - are an obvious starting point for companies, their
executives, and employees wanting to do the right thing. The U.S.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) often plays a role when it comes to B2B
laws and regulations. The FTC regulates companies in an effort to
prevent them from engaging in unfair trade practices that can harm
consumers and hamper competition.
Further,
companies that sell to the government must, by law, follow very strict
ethical guidelines. These companies tend to make such guidelines their
policy because it is easier to make sure that the federal regulations
are followed all of the time than only when selling to the government.
Companies
are also adopting ethics codes that provide general guidelines about
how their employees should behave. Many firms require employees to go
through ethics training so they know what to do when they face tricky
ethical dilemmas. Large corporations have begun hiring "chief ethics
officers" to ensure ethics are properly implemented within their
organizations. The Business Marketing Association has also developed a
code of ethics that discourages bribery and other practices, such as
disparaging a competitor's products unfairly, and encourages treating
one's suppliers equitably.
Figure 4.12

Click
on the following link to read the Business Marketing Association's
entire code of ethics:
http://www.marketing.org/i4a/pages/Index.cfm?pageID=3286.
As
for Walmart, you can't fault the company's procurement practices.
Walmart's purchasing agents aren't allowed to accept a lunch, dinner,
golf game, or so much as a cup of coffee from potential vendors. Walmart
is not the only company to have implemented such a policy. More and
more firms have followed suit because (1) they realize that perks such
as these drive up product costs and (2) they don't want their buyers
making decisions based on what they personally can get out of them
rather than what's best for the company.
All
things equal, companies want to do business with firms that are
responsible. They don't want to be associated with firms that are not.
Why is this important? Because that's what consumers are increasingly
demanding. A few years ago, Nike and a number of other apparel makers
were lambasted when it came to light that the factories they contracted
with were using child labor and keeping workers toiling for long hours
under terrible conditions. Nike didn't own the factories, but it still
got a bad rap. Today, Nike, Inc., uses a "balanced scorecard". When
evaluating suppliers, it looks at their labor-code compliance along with
measures such as price, quality, and delivery time. During crunch
times, it allows some Chinese factories latitude by, for example,
permitting them to adjust when employees can take days off.
Similarly,
Walmart has developed a scorecard to rate its suppliers on how their
packaging of products affects the environment. Walmart does so because its customers are
becoming more conscious of environmental damage and see value in
products that are produced in as environmentally friendly a way as
possible.