Talk:Market environment

lots of repetition

There was a huge amount of repetition as other editors mention below. I removed a big section that was entirely redundant with PEST analysis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEST_analysis --MexFin (talk) 19:28, 11 September 2022 (UTC) I also deleted another redundancy with SWOT analysis. There is a full article here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWOT_analysis --MexFin (talk) 19:33, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Problems and issues with this article

1. High levels of repetition.

• There are two different sections devoted to the macro-environment, namely Section 2 "macro-environment" and 3.4 "macro-environment"
• The PEST or PESTLE analysis is discussed no less than 3 times - in Section 2 "macro-environment"; in section 3.4 "macro-environment" and also gets its own section in section 3.5 PESTLE analysis (of course this level of repetition in headings also means that the sub-headings: Political, Economic, Social, Technological and Legal are also repeated many times over within the article
• The lead section identifies three environments; (1) micro (internal); (2) internal and (3) macro (external). Surely 1 & 2 are the same?

Solution: These sections need to be collapsed and integrated into a coherent structure. This level of repetition is a real turn-off to potential readers - and in some instances, it is downright confusing, especially when the repeated sections rely on different understandings of core concepts. Curiously, the article ends up discussing three environments (micro, macro and meso), but they are not the same three as identified in the lead. Go figure??

2. Confused conceptual explanations/definitions

• Right from the get-go, the article signals that it is going to be very confused. The article title is Marketing Environment but the lead sentence begins to discuss the business environment. Are they the same thing? Do these terms need definitions? As a reader, I would be wondering whether I have landed on the right page.

• Section 2 (Macro-environment) tells us that the elements are: Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Environmental and Legal, but then immediately launches into a discussion of Demography before getting back on track and then once again straying into new territory with the Natural environment. Where is demography and the natural environment in the list of elements? Are these a new elements? Do they replace other elements which are not really discussed in the section? Why list the elements if there is no intention to discuss them? But, it gets worse - the natural environment and demography are not included in the second discussion and repetitive discussion of the macro-environment, as canvassed in section 3.4. Which section should I believe? Section 2 claims that there are 6 factors (but in reality discusses only five, but they are not the same five as listed) while Section 3.4. sticks to the straight six. If I was a student of marketing, I would be totally bamboozled by all these contradictions!

• There is a certain circularity in the Section 3.4. Macro-environment (the second attempt at this subject). We are told that it is necessary to examine the external environment, but then we are informed that one of the elements of the environment is ... wait for it ... the ENVIRONMENT (Section 3.5.5.)!! So, the environment is an element of itself???

Solution: Define all new concepts, simply and clearly, within the first paragraph under each heading. Ensure that appropriate references are used for definitions. And, then after defining a concept, try to use it correctly. For instance, anyone that bothered to look at a text would probably find that the last E in PESTLE normally refers to the Ecological environment.

3. Balance/ Weight or air-time devoted to sections*

• The environment analysis is worthy of more than 25 paragraphs spread across 3 main headings and 12 sub-headings, but the poor old SWOT analysis gets just two short paragraphs under one sub-heading. Is the SWOT not worthy enough for a main heading of its own? Is it some sort of lesser being? From this relative weight devoted to these two topics, should the reader infer that the SWOT is a poor cousin, to be dismissed with just a few trite wordsZ?

• The meso-environment, which is just tacked on at the end of the article, like some kind of afterthought, and which incidentally lacks a single reference, is the most peculiar thing I have ever head of. It is not mentioned as one of the three environments in the lead section.

Solution: Try to ensure that key subjects receive equal attention. This might mean putting personal preferences to one side. Get rid of pet topics, like meso-environment, which are not canvassed in mainstream marketing texts or articles.

This article is desperately in need of an overarching structure, with headings that lead logically from one point to the next, and build towards a logical conclusion. A strong concluding section would also help to tie it all together.

4. Sequence or logical progression'

• Environmental scanning is heading number 3, but the detailed discussion of the environment comes later at headings 3.4.; 3.5 and all the subheadings 3.5.1. , 3.5.2., ... 3.5.6. Now environmental scanning is an approach to researching and interpreting the operating environment - so this means that the article discusses how to analyse the environment before it actually gets around to telling us, in any detail, what we are supposed to be investigating!!!!

'5. Glaring omissions'

• Incidentally, environmental scanning is just one of the many research methods used by marketing analysts. Do we have any idea why this particular method gets a 'look-in' and other methods are ignored?

Think about:See Marketing strategy#Strategic analysis: tools and techniques for a general discussion of some of the more widely used analytical tools.

6. Focus

• In spite of all the attention devoted to the environmental factors; Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental (or Ecological?), the reader never really gets much of a sense as to why we are examining these factors. We are told over and over again that it is important to consider these things, but the WHY is not very clear.

Solution:There needs to be a determined effort to hook each section back to marketing issues. For example, changes to exchange rates will influence the cost of imported materials, and the prices that can be charged. Changes in socio-demographics can affect customer preferences, change the way that customers transact business, contribute to channel switching etc. These points need to be made, and it is not hard to find them in good books. Changes to the politico-legal environment can change the rules that govern competition - lead to new entrants, market rationalisation and even create entire new categories. Changes in the technological environment can lead to breal-through innovations - new products, new packaging, new ingredients new materials etc. (and it is not just about computer-based technologies as many wikipedia articles would have us believe!)

7. Visual aids

• This article would benefit from some visual aids.

Think about: Wiki Commons has plenty of diagrams of SWOT analyses and other related artwork - flowcharts, tables, graphs etc. Inserting some of these at relevant junctures would help readers to follow what is going on and how different ideas are connected. For example, analysts are often looking to match internal strengths or capabilities with external opportunities and build a strategy around that. This article doesn't really get us close to understanding that. Some of the material on this page such as the dot point lists of factors in each of the environmental factors could readily be developed into tables with column headings such as key considerations, sources of information, interpretation.

BronHiggs (talk) 11:29, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Business studies

Micro environment — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.116.51.238 (talk) 09:46, 10 February 2023 (UTC)