EX TENEBRIS CRESCIT FLOS

BACK


March of the Chains

Chain Stores and Their Philosophy

November 9, 2005

Is This a Takeover?

Is society being taken over by chains, being McDonaldized [1], being turned into a bland sea of conformity and bureaucracy? Are chain stores and restaurants taking over more than the buildings they occupy? Is this so bad? And is there any resistance? Chain stores and restaurants operate by the organizational principles of efficiency, consistency, predictability, automated control, and conformity. McDonald's is the oft-cited vanguard of this movement, which has spread to most sectors of the retail economy. Wal-Mart is the latest focus of complaints, but is it a cause of problems, or merely a symptom? Everywhere, big-box retailers and fast-food restaurants proliferate, sucking up customers and leaving little room for small, local businesses to thrive. This much is obvious, but the mentality goes deeper and affects all aspects of our daily lives. There is no escape, except possibly to move into a small cabin in Montana and become self-sufficient, while writing a manifesto (and hopefully not making any bombs). The march of the chains is unstoppable, or is it?

The Philosophy of Chains

Chain stores and big fast-food restaurants are classic bureaucracies [2]. They desire efficiency and consistency, and to those ends they have a strongly hierarchical organizational structure, and they automate whatever they can, realizing that human variations can hurt consistency. When I go to McDonalds, I expect a consistent product and consistent service regardless of the location. I can get the same food anywhere in the country, and when I pull into the drive-up I know what I am getting. The quality is reasonably good, and the process is simple. This particular chain has succeeded well in attaining its goals. The only problem I ever have is when an employee messes up an order. Perhaps if the process were even more automated, these mistakes would be minimized further. For me, there is a time and a place for this. When I am worn-out and don't want to take a lot of time or have a lot of hassle, the chain fast-food restaurant is the perfect place to go. The efficient bureaucracy works well for consistent, mediocre food. But if I want top quality, a good experience, and something unique, the locally-owned restaurant is my top choice. This type of business is the antithesis of the chain. Efficiency and consistency are sacrificed for creativity and top quality.

Retail chains follow the same philosophy. The same products, similar store layouts, and similar employees can be found in stores nationwide. If I woke up in the middle of a Wal-Mart, a Target, a Barnes & Noble, or any other such store, I would not know which city I was in. Consistency is the rule, and efficiency at the check-out line is always excellent. A great selection of manufactured products can be found, and these stores can easily and cheaply supply many of my basic needs. But what if I want a unique hand-made product or an unknown book with a minuscule print run? These massive, efficient chains cannot supply this need. Big bureaucracies can only do so much.

These philosophies of efficiency and consistency, and the bureaucratic conformity that results, are not limited to chains. Big corporations and big government strive for these goals, sometimes reaching success as they define it. At some point, bureaucratic organizations get so large and bogged down in rules that they lose their efficiency - this is the failing of government. Generally, people have come to expect these goals. Employers want pliant, conforming employees, and customers want businesses to efficiently supply whatever they need or want. I work in a corporate environment organized on the bureaucratic model. Efficiency of production and consistency in product quality are the goals. Production is automated to the extent possible to avoid human failings. These goals, however, do not work so well for research and development tasks, so the organization must encourage creativity in this area or else innovative new products will not be developed. McDonaldization can only go so far.

The Downside

The conversion of our society to the mentality of bland chain stores and restaurants has its ill effects. As I have mentioned, efficiency and consistency clash with individuality and creativity. The chain mentality is uncreative and conformist. It discourages new ideas, and it seeks out the lowest common denominator. The bureaucratic model is good at supplying basic needs to the masses, but it does not cater well to individual taste, no matter how hard it tries. Chain stores get bigger and bigger in order to offer a huge selection, but all they offer is more of the same. How many different mediocre-quality shirts or crummy coffee makers do we really need to choose from? The number of choices is good, but the quality of the choices is not so good, and the process of choosing from among a number of mediocre choices has become stressful for many people [3].

The efficient corporate model also causes serious problems for workers. In the race to the bottom on cost, jobs move overseas where the principles of the chain are implemented in factories where efficiency is the rule and the needs of employees are not considered. People in the United States and other industrialized societies are left out of work, and people in developing countries are ruthlessly exploited in the name of efficiency and consistency. Large chain stores have so much control over their suppliers that there is no alternative to this bureaucratic exploitation. Even in the United States, as the chain mentality gains ground, labor standards drop and unions are broken. The meat-packing industry, whose terrible labor practices were exposed by Upton Sinclair [4] in the early 20th Century, was forced to improve, but now as the chain restaurants have effective control over suppliers, it is now regressing to its previous poor standards [5]. The cost of that hamburger is the exploitation of poor immigrant workers who are not informed of their rights under the weakening, but still present, labor standards in the United States.

The Resistance

In the shadow of the chains, resistance is thriving. Chain stores and restaurants have a few major weaknesses - they have difficulty in creatively adapting to local conditions, they do not serve small niche markets well, and they tend towards a quality level that is mediocre to good and consistent, but not excellent. To truly serve people or produce products with the highest quality and an individual touch, creativity and commitment are required. The best small businesses easily rise to this challenge.

The chains supply some of my needs, but not all. For basic needs, they are great, but I often want items or services to be of the best quality and uniquely designed to cater to my tastes. Only a knowledgeable and creative business can accomplish this. Fine wine and cheese, for example, are best purchased from small businesses that know their products extremely well. These products are never consistent, varying considerably from region to region and year to year, and they are rather fragile. These characteristics are the antithesis of what the chains desire. Chains prefer artifically flavored jug wine and pasteurized process cheese food since they can be produced efficently, cheaply, and consistently. I would prefer to risk some inconsistency and get an artistically made product in which real care was taken. Even the worst of these are better than processed cheese-like stuff. Fine cheese will likely always be a niche market, forever out of reach of the chains (or handled poorly if they try).

Another element of resistance to the chain mentality is the fair trade movement. Generally, small organizations pay people in developing countries a good living to produce a top quality product. Since these people are not being exploited, they tend to be more engaged and interested in what they produce, and these products exhibit excellent artistic quality. They are definitely not consistent. In examining, for example, a group of fair trade baskets, I found that no two were exactly alike, but all were top quality. Of course, they cost more, but it is well worth it. I get a better product, and I am not exploiting people by buying it. Hopefully, fair trade clothing will gain some traction - it would be nice to have an alternative to McDonaldized clothing.

Although many local businesses have suffered at the hands of the chains, many others are thriving. They survive by offering unique products and by having knowledgeable employees. Chains cannot successfully occupy every niche. There will continue to be challenges. For example, Wild Oats offers a good selection of fine artisan cheeses and Barnes & Noble has a good selection of local-interest books which vary depending on the store location. But will the large book chains get into used books? At this point, dealing in used books seems beyond their abilities, so the independent bookstore will continue to serve this market.

What Does the Future Hold?

Will chain stores and fast-food restaurants be a dominant factor in our economy for the forseeable future? I believe they will, barring an economic collapse. But I believe their growth and the spread of their mentality will eventually stall, hampered by the inadequacies of their philosophy. We can already see this in government, where bureaucratic efficiency has morphed into bureaucratic standstill. If this happens to the chain stores, innovative smaller businesses will quickly fill the vacuum. Also, I do not believe big businesses will ever successfully master niche markets which thrive on inconsistency and creativity. Small local businesses, small artistic manufacturing industries, and the fair trade movement will continue to grow in these niches. And even in big businesses, research and development organizations are often given a great deal of autonomy, and the best employees are rewarded by high salaries and a good degree of independence. I work for a bureaucratic company, but an R&D model is superimposed on the organization, and I find that my individual skills and creativity are an asset, rather than a liability like they would be if I worked at a fast-food establishment. As more manufacturing jobs leave the country, the R&D environment will become more important and it will challenge the bureaucratic model.

The march of the chains will continue, but those of us who are creative and innovative will survive, and even thrive, in their shadow.

Sources and Further Reading

[1] Macionis, John J., "Sociology." 10th Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005.
[2] Fudjack, John and Patricia Dinkelaker, "Towards a Diversity of Psychological Type in Organization." http://homepage.mac.com/bahlberg/DiversityOfType/", October 1994.
[3] Schwartz, Barry, "The Paradox of Choice - Why More Is Less." New York: Harper Perennial, 2005.
[4] Sinclair, Upton, "The Jungle." Barnes & Noble Classics, 1995.
[5] Schlosser, Eric, "Fast Food Nation." New York: Harper Perennial, 2002.

BACK



All contents of this site, unless otherwise noted, Copyright 2002-2008 Heather Harrison. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to accredited educational institutions to copy and use this material as desired, in whole or in part, provided that proper credit is given.