William D. Perreault and E. Jerome McCarthy were the ones who originally pioneered the concepts of macro-marketing and micro-marketing in their book “Basic Marketing”. The two different concepts have constantly sparked debate in whether or not one is more costly than the other, with several people saying that micro-marketing is actually more cost-efficient? Is that really true? Let’s take a closer look…
Macro-marketing is the overall study of how a society decides to distribute its goods and services. As a whole, it considers how the social issues of things like pollution, advertising, and resources that were misused impact the grand scheme of marketing. It affects the supply and demand for consumers and focuses on the needs of society so as to effectively benefit the flow of goods from the producer to the consumer. Perreault and McCarthy have identified eight different universal macro-marketing functions: buying, selling, transporting, storing, standardization and grading, financing, and risk-taking and sharing market information. These functions are in place to help provide the goods and services that are desired by society and are ideally used to help maximize the use of society’s resources and to minimize environmental damage and waste.
The great thing about macro-marketing is that it doesn’t produce a lot of waste and focuses only on producing what is needed to satisfy the needs of the consumers. Because of this, macro-marketing isn’t as costly as micro-marketing would be. Most people are not going to waste their money on things they don’t want or need and macro-marketing makes it so that certain variables and funds are not going to waste or becoming more expensive for no reason.
Macro and micro-marketing have a mutual/beneficial relationship where one cannot necessarily work without the other. Micro-marketing is primarily focused on the specific actions that marketers take but those actions would not be possible without marketing information that determines target audience needs and financing. On the macro-marketing side of things, there would be no point in collecting data on the effects of marketing within a society without implementing the marketing activity.
In the grand scheme of things…no, not really. As stated previously, it is more so concerned with wasting as little as possible so as to only providing consumers with what they really want, all the while keeping costs and resources at a minimum. In return, this has proven to only use what is needed and satisfying consumers in the most effective way possible. It does a great job of utilizing what is only available at the time and making the most of what they have, with the end-goal being to make the consumer as satisfied as possible! Seems like a pretty resourceful method to me!