When the long-lasting wave of U.S. consumer activism was taking off thirty years ago, many marketing practitioners did not understand how it had ramifications for their work. Marketing experts were heard to say, "The marketing concept says that we should 'satisfy consumer needs,' so this isn't really a problem for us."

Unfortunately, such a view presumes that all firms follow the modern marketing orientation. Even if they all did, it would not necessarily also be true that many firms satisfying consumer needs would also serve the interests of society at large. And even if they did, when some firms do a good job of following the marketing concept to satisfy consumer needs, many of business' critics wish that the marketers were not involved.

It is part of the business' conventional wisdom that while marketing was just selling many years ago, today, under the modern marketing concept, it combines all facets of the product, price, distribution and communications in order to satisfy consumer needs and wants. It is the "smaller" or unsuccessful firms that might still just look at marketing in terms of selling and all "SUCCESSFUL" firms practice the marketing concept, or so many think. Yet there exist many examples of products or services that do not follow the "marketing concept," but instead, provide features in terms of what designers or engineers say they can produce. For them, marketing remains just selling. Marketing gets "misplaced" because the planners or managers don't ask how the product or service could meet consumer needs.

Such examples are not hard to find. Everyone has looked for a product with certain features and "settled" for something short of what they want. It is not uncommon to hear the store manager state he or she "knows" the customers, so certain products are never stocked. "They're not interested in that kind of thing," the inquiring customer is told, though the manager never tried stocking it and no one ever sought other opinions. These are not all marketing mistakes, though it is easy to see where products such as the failed Apple Newton misplaced marketing while the successful Palm Pilot did not.

Of course, a product is more than the sum of its physical features and a good sales job changes the product itself. And maybe the people who can't find exactly what they want are just out of step with the rest of the marketplace. There might not be enough of them to be considered a viable target market segment. Misplaced marketing does not mean a business will fail, especially if all competitors engage in the same activities, but it can make for some unusual perspectives toward consumers.

U.S. companies often send products to other countries with features designed for satisfying customers in the domestic market without consideration of special concerns of consumers in other nations, as if what satisfies consumers in the U.S. provide the same values around the globe. Many features are added to a product mix because an engineer thought it would be simple and inexpensive to do, not because anyone thought it made the product more desirable for consumers. Expensive electronic items often have simple parts like batteries or lights that are expected to die but are nigh impossible to replace; service hotlines are often not so hot. Customers test doors and walk away, while employees mill about inside the store waiting for the clock to chime on the hour for the posted opening time.

In addition, satisfying consumer needs might be contrary to those of the greater society. Over two decades ago when the first oil shortages forced car companies to offer more efficient products, the solution was to produce smaller and lighter vehicles. But one U.S. company tried to delay, offering a downsized version of its luxury car line but strongly promoting the still available "original" full-sized gas-guzzling version. The affluent consumers who cared not about rising gas costs might have been served, but not the social goal of oil conservation.

Yet the most vexing problem for marketing people comes from those instances that marketing is accused by pundits, activists and public policy makers of being misplaced when it is properly used and applied. Politicians, educators, movie or music producers, cigarette companies, distillers, gun companies, pornographers or others often do a good job of following the dictates of thorough strategic marketing, while many people might wish that, at least for them, marketing was not used.

Instead of marketing, adapting themselves to a marketable image, politicians should be leaders, using marketing theory and practice to, at most, sell their ideas to the public. Schools need to attract students but they still should work to retain academic integrity. Cultural artifacts should grow from the populace, not be designed as per a marketing strategy, or so we are often told. In addition, to critics of the American marketplace, certain products should not be efficiently and profitably delivered to "satisfy consumer needs," no company should maximize its profits with these products, and NEVER should these products even be imagined to be marketed with children as a target segment.

Of course, even if critics believe that marketing is misplaced does not necessarily mean it should be banned, but it could be a source of "problems" (or, at least, a basis for criticisms of various aspects of marketing practice).

So starting with the long-accepted definition of marketing, the marketing concept, the definition of "misplaced marketing" consists of two prongs that are both broad and simple. First, marketing can be misplaced in the sense that it is "lost" or missing when a business, government agency, non-profit organization or other group could (or should) follow the basic dictates of a marketing perspective but does not. In these instances, marketing tools or tactics are used without reference to the strategy or perspectives of a marketing orientation. Second, marketing can be misplaced in the sense of it being used in the "wrong" place. In these instances, it could be "properly" used and applied for a product or service, but amorally, in that the context or products or marketing benefits for consumers might be detrimental to a societal interest or, at least, detrimental to the interests and values posed by critics of business practices.

When I coined the term "misplaced marketing," it was to be a broad perspective for all times that marketing could be misplaced because it is misapplied, misused, abused, or simply the focus of social criticisms. Of course, many firms can be (and are) successful by following a production orientation, depending on either market power or luck. Government and non-profit organizations do not need to be successful in the business sense, but the public might be better served if they did not misplace marketing perspectives in planning activities. And in many cases, firms might be better off (at least in the public relations sense) if they did not use all marketing tools since the marketing could readily become the focus of public criticisms or products or services that various activists do not like. The modern marketing concept might say to "satisfy consumer needs," but misplaced marketing shows that marketing practice does not always put the concept to its best use. And, in the end, consumers or society are not "satisfied."