Reflecting on my earlier post about the classes of products, it would be naive to assume that every company sets as a goal to provide a first- or second-class product, one that delivers benefits that are well worth its price; but it would be equally naive to assume that every company seeks to fall into the lesser classes where customers have to be tricked, pressured, or forced to purchase an item whose price-for-benefit is disadvantageous. There are options in a range of classes for virtually every product, and buyers and sellers gravitate toward one or the other tendency.
The motivations of the buyer are fairly easy to identify: a buyer seeks to find an acceptable product for an acceptable price - even when a buyer is not deliberate in his decision, this remains a consideration. That's not necessarily "the best" product, as people have different opinions about "the best" and a product of lesser quality may be adequate to their needs, or a person who desires the best but cannot afford it can often get by with a second-class product.
The mistakes they might make are related to ethics: in most instances, when buying for their own consumption, any harm is inflicted upon themselves. In instances when the purchaser and the consumer are two different individuals, there is the problem of one person deciding what is "good enough" for someone else, and mistakes can occur where they are wasteful of money in purchasing a product whose quality is more than necessary, or irrelevant to the aspect that makes it serviceable to the user, or when they are conservative of money and furnish the user with an unsuitable product for the sake of price.
The motivations of the supplier are more difficult to identify, and are far more subject to ethical scrutiny because the choice is more deliberate and perpetual. That is, a buyer who makes a poor choice can remedy the problem with their next purchase, whereas the producer of a product (not necessarily the seller, as a retailer has greater flexibility in inventory management) who makes a poor choice often continues to turn out the same product, over and over, insistent that their original choice was appropriate.
If the producer is right in their decision, and the product they produce represents a good value to some (but not all) buyers, then the choice to continue turning out the product is entirely ethical. In this instance, their intentions are honorable (to provide for buyers who haven't the means to obtain the very best some acceptable level of quality at a price they can afford, or perhaps to serve a different set of values as to which product features are important and which are inconsequential).
If the producer is wrong in their decision, and the product they produce does not represent a good value for the price to any buyer, then the choice to continue turning out the product is clearly unethical. In this instance, they realize the inferiority of the product, and must turn to sales tactics to apply pressure or deception upon buyers who would, on their own, recognize the poor value of the product, and convince them to buy it anyway.
My sense is that all three of these situations may bear further consideration, but even so, I have the distinct sense that this brief consideration strikes at the heart of the matter - and that further meditation may elaborate on these basic principles, perhaps uncover a few exceptions, but not likely lead to their contradiction.
No comments:
Post a Comment