WorkshopWeek 3© post-it notes by Dean HochmanUTS 2.docx

Workshop
Week 3
© post-it notes by Dean Hochman
UTS 24736 Marketing Communications
SPRING 2019
Facilitators: Dr. Valeria Noguti & Dr. Kaye Chan
1
Assignment #1 (Individual)
Cover Page
Campaign Brief Description (note: differently from what is
stated at the assignment guidelines, this part does not go in the
critique part, it is just the description of the communications
piece you choose)
Critique Part:
Category Positioning and ‘Involvement by Motivation’ Grid
Target Customers
Marketing Communications Strategy and Objectives
Creative Strategy and Tactics
Workshop today: we will work on Target Customers and the
‘Involvement by Motivation’ Grid (also used in Assignment #2)
2

Copyright © UTS
Identify buyer groups likely to be targeted with each ad (put ‘X’
when you think the audience is targeted with the ad):
3Ad 1Ad 2Ad 3Ad 4Ad 5Ad 6Ad 7Ad 8Non-usersLoyals to
Competitors (Other-Brand)Other-Brand SwitchersOwn Brand
SwitchersOwn Brand Loyals
Copyright © UTS
Ad 1
4
Assume you have to buy the product to participate
Copyright © UTS
Ad 2
5
Copyright © UTS
Ad 3
6
Copyright © UTS
Ad 4
7

Copyright © UTS
Ad 5
8
Copyright © UTS
Ad 6
9
Copyright © UTS
Ad 7
10
Copyright © UTS
Ad 8
11
Copyright © UTS
Motivations (from last lecture; also see assignment #2 “notes
for the campaign plan”)
Informational: ‘’negative” (want to remove a problem)
Problem removal
Problem avoidance

Incomplete satisfaction
Approach-avoidance
Depletion (weaker driver than the previous 4)
Transformational: positive (gratifying; makes feel good)
Sensory gratification
Intellectual stimulation
Social approval (i.e., can show off)
Power-status (i.e., competence and control)
(Rossiter & Percy)
12
Copyright © UTS
Exercise: Packaged BREAD
‘Involvement by Motivation’ Grid
Is this product category high (search and conviction required
prior to purchase) or low involvement (trial experience
sufficient)?
What is the main motivation leading consumer choice in this
category?
13
Low Involvement
High Involvement
Informational Motivation
Transformational Motivation
Copyright © UTS
Wrapping up
Individual assignment introduced
Target Customers and the ‘Involvement by Motivation’ Grid
discussed

Next week: Further exercises
14
Copyright © UTS
Lecture
Week 2
Buyers and
Marketing Communications
© Rustic Look Pencils by Anderson Mancini
1
SPRING 2019
Subject Coordinator: Dr. Valeria Noguti
1
Subject Structure
MC Strategy
Integrated MC and Budgeting
Creative Strategy
Media Strategy
Evaluation and Metrics
Introduction to MC
MC Industry

Buyers
#1: Advertising, sponsorship
#2: Direct marketing, personal selling, sale promotion, field and
experiential marketing, placement, exhibitions, packaging,
licensing
#3: Digital, PR
2
Copyright © UTS
Foundations
Managing Marketing Communications
Marketing Communications Mix
Figure 2.1 A linear model of communications
Source: Based on Schramm (1955) and Shannon and Weaver
(1962).
3
Copyright © UTS
Figure 2.2 The influencer model of communications
Source: From Essentials of Marketing Communications, Pearson
Education (Fill, C. 2011) figure 2.2, p. 39.
4
Reprocess information to influence others, e.g., communicators
such as influencers
Respected as expert authorities in a subject matter, e.g.,

dentists, lawyers
Copyright © UTS
Figure 2.4 The interactional model of communications
5
CHALLENGE TO GET YOUR MESSAGE RECEIVED AS
INTENDED
Copyright © UTS
Consumer Effects
Motivations
Memory: awareness
Attitudes
Decision Making
Depending upon:
Involvement: high or low; product, category, or communications
Type of user:
New User (of category)
Loyal
Multi-brand loyal
Brand Switcher
Loyal to Competitor (Other-brand loyals)
***
Copyright © UTS
Motivations
Informational: ‘’negative” (want to remove a problem)
Problem removal
Problem avoidance

Incomplete satisfaction
Approach-avoidance
Depletion
Transformational: positive (this is pleasant)
Sensory gratification
Intellectual stimulation
Social approval
Power-status
(Rossiter & Percy)
7
Copyright © UTS
Figure 3.3 Memory and information storage
Memory
8
Copyright © UTS
Figure 3.4 A standard decay curve
9
Copyright © UTS
Brand Awareness
Recall
Recognition
10
© Walking on Erg Chebbi, Morocco by Dimitri B.
Copyright © UTS

10
Figure 3.6 The three-component attitude model
Attitudes
11
Copyright © UTS
Figure 3.7 A consumer’s decision-making framework
Consumer Decision Making
12
Copyright © UTS
Figure 3.8 The buyphases of organisational buying decisions
Organisational Buyer Decision Making
13
Copyright © UTS
Table 3.2 The main characteristics of the buyclasses
Organisational Buying - Types
14
Copyright © UTS
B2C
vs

B2B
15
From Chapter 1
Copyright © UTS
Figure 3.11 Marketing communications approaches for the two
levels of involvement
MC in High vs Low Involvement
16
Copyright © UTS
17
Copyright © UTS
18
Copyright © UTS
Buyer Journeys
19
Copyright © UTS
Circular Journey
20

Copyright © UTS
21
Copyright © UTS
***
Customer Experience (CX)
CX is the set of connections a customer has with a brand via
touchpoints. CX maps are built to visualise touchpoints.
Online touchpoints: include video views, mobile and desktop
content consumption, social media, e-commerce transactions,
chatbots, and connected IoT (Internet of Things) devices (e.g.,
Alexa).
Offline touchpoints: include in-store, in-branch, outdoor, and
experiential advertising, and sampling.
https://www-warc-
com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/content/article/bestprac/what_we_kn
ow_about_customer_experience/122499
Variations on CX maps include product consumption (post
purchase), interaction with advertising (pre purchase) and other
moments. Can also go from very detailed to not so detailed, or
focus on some moments and not others.
22
Copyright © UTS
Consumer Experience Journey Maps (CXJMs)
Milk example:
research in the US showed that kids loved drinking milk and
ranked milk the same as pizza, as a top favourite food
key touchpoint failure: when kids reached into the refrigerator

for a snack or beverage, milk was not top of mind
solution: targeted kids directly; used catchy slogan “Milk It”;
used kid influencers
(Shimmel & Lorent 2017, ADMAP)
23
Copyright © UTS
Purchase Journey Map - Touchpoints
(example for product in FMCG category)
24
https://www-warc-
com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/content/article/Five_tips_for_market
ing_through_the_customer_journey/112289
Copyright © UTS
Involvement by Motivation Grid (Rossiter & Percy)
25
Copyright © UTS
Wrapping up
Buyers and Marketing Communications discussed
Project Product explained
Next week: Marketing Communications Strategy
26
Copyright © UTS

Lecture
Week 3
Marketing Communications
Strategy
© Rustic Look Pencils by Anderson Mancini
1
SPRING 2019
1
Subject Structure
MC Strategy
Integrated MC and Budgeting
Creative Strategy
Media Strategy
Evaluation and Metrics
Introduction to MC
MC Industry
Buyers
#1: Advertising, sponsorship
#2: Direct marketing, personal selling, sale promotion, field and
experiential marketing, placement, exhibitions, packaging,
licensing
#3: Digital, PR
2

Copyright © UTS
Foundations
Managing Marketing Communications
Marketing Communications Mix
Top 20 Advertisers
Australia
2019 Financial Year
Total Estimated Spend ($M)
3
https://www.adnews.com.au/news/the-top-20-advertisers-in-
australia-for-2019
Copyright © UTS
Australian Advertising 2019
4
https://www.adnews.com.au/news/the-top-20-advertisers-in-
australia-for-2019
Copyright © UTS
Global advertising spending from 2010 to 2019 (in billion U.S.
dollars)

Global advertising spending 2010-2019
Note: Worldwide; 2010 to 2018
Further information regarding this statistic can be found on
page 8.
Source(s): GroupM; ID 236943
2
Copyright © UTS
Spending in billion U.S. dollars
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* 399.26
418.28 434.04 451.14 467.58 485.17 503.67
521.38 543.71 563.02
Largest global advertisers in 2017, by ad spending (in billion
U.S. dollars)
Largest global advertisers 2017
Note: 2017
page 8.
Source(s): Advertising Age; OnlineMarketing.de; ID 286448

Copyright © UTS
Samsung Electronics Procter & Gamble Co. L'Oréal
Unilever Nestle 11.2 10.5 8.6 8.5 7.2
Advertising spending in the world's largest ad markets in 2018
(in billion U.S. dollars)
Advertising spending in the world's largest ad markets 2018
Note: Worldwide; June 2019; estimates; current prices
page 8.
Source(s): Zenith; ID 273736
4
Population:
Canada => ~ 37 million
Australia => ~ 24.5 million
US => ~ 327 million
Sweden => ~ 10 million
China => ~ 1400 million
Ad $ per capita:
$292
$506
$703
$400
$62

Copyright © UTS
Column2
United States China Japan United Kingdom
Germany Brazil France South Korea Australia
Canada Italy Indonesia IndiaRussia Spain
Switzerland Mexico Belgium Netherlands Sweden
229.68 87.08 43.18 27.5 24.92 13.47
13.26 12.89 12.43 10.78
9.0399999999999991 9 8.93 7.48 6.51 6.13
5.1100000000000003 5.1100000000000003
4.8099999999999996 4

Year-over-year change of advertising expenditure in selected
countries from 2016 to 2018
Ad spend growth 2016-2018, by country
Note: Worldwide; January 2018; forecast; current prices;
worldwide data based on 12 major markets
page 8.
Source(s): WARC; Website (adobomagazine.com); ID 276805
Year-over-year change
Russia:
16: $6.6 bi
17: $8.7 bi
18: $9.7 bi
World Cup…
UK:
15: $28.6 bi
16: $26.5 bi
17: $25.6 bi
18: $26.5 bi
Brexit ref 2016
Copyright © UTS
2018

IndiaRussia China Australia United States Brazil
Worldwide United Kingdom Italy Japan
Germany France 0.13100000000000001
0.11899999999999999 0.08 6.4000000000000001E-2
5.0999999999999997E-2 5.0999999999999997E-2 4.7E-2
3.5000000000000003E-2 3.4000000000000002E-2 0.03
2.3E-2 1.0999999999999999E-2 2017
Germany France 0.152 0.317 4.7E-2
8.5999999999999993E-2 3.3000000000000002E-2 0.129
0.03 -3.5000000000000003E-27.0000000000000001E-3 -
0.01 1E-3 -1.2999999999999999E-22016

Germany France 6.5000000000000002E-2
6.4000000000000001E-2 4.4999999999999998E-2
5.8000000000000003E-2 8.5000000000000006E-2
3.4000000000000002E-2 3.7999999999999999E-2 -
7.2999999999999995E-2 4.2000000000000003E-2
0.14199999999999999 2.5000000000000001E-2
8.9999999999999993E-3
Distribution of global advertising expenditure from 2015 to
2020, by media
Global advertising expenditure 2015-2020, by media
Note: Worldwide; 2015 to 2018
page 8.
Source(s): Dentsu Aegis Network; ID 245440
2
Copyright © UTS
Digital

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* 2020* 0.246 0.318
0.35599999999999998 0.38500000000000001
0.41399999999999998 0.438 TV
2015 2016 2017 2018 20 19* 2020* 0.42
0.38300000000000001 0.36599999999999999
0.35399999999999998 0.34100000000000003
0.33200000000000002 Newspapers
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* 2020* 0.124 0.104
9.0999999999999998E-2 0.08 7.0999999999999994E-2
6.3E-2 Out of home
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* 2020*
6.9000000000000006E-2 6.3E-2 6.3E-2 6.3E-2
6.3E-2 6.2E-2 Radio

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* 2020*
6.6000000000000003E-2 6.5000000000000002E-2 6.3E-2
6.2E-2 0.06 5.8000000000000003E-2 Magazines
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* 2020*
6.9000000000000006E-2 6.3E-2
5.6000000000000001E-2 0.05 4.4999999999999998E-2
4.1000000000000002E-2 Cinema
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019* 2020*
5.0000000000000001E-3 6.0000000000000001E-3
6.0000000000000001E-3 6.0000000000000001E-3
6.0000000000000001E-3 6.0000000000000001E-3
Share

Table 5.1 An audience interpretation of marketing
communications strategy
Target x Communications Goal
10
Copyright © UTS
Figure 5.3 The direction of a marketing communications pull
strategy
Pull Strategies
11
Copyright © UTS
Figure 5.4 The direction of a marketing communications push
strategy
Push Strategies
12
Copyright © UTS
How do Marketing Communications (Marcoms) contribute to
profit?
Profit = (Price – Cost) x Unit Sales
Which can you influence through Marcoms?

13
Copyright © UTS
Sales & Market Share Objectives
Can sales and market share be used interchangeably?
Market share is relative to competitors:
In growing markets:
↑ Sales => Market Share: no change
↑ Sales => Market Share ↓ (competitors’ sales are gr
In declining markets:
↓ Sales => Market Share: no change
↓ Sales => Market Share ↑ (e.g., competitors are leaving the
market)
Sales always important objective!
If market share is used as an objective, the competitive
landscape needs to be identified
14
Copyright © UTS
Marketing Communications Objectives
15
Marcoms need to align with corporate objectives;
Some campaigns designed to promote corporate objectives
Primary objectives
Intermediary objectives, conducive to the ultimate objectives
For long term, sustainable achievement of primary objectives,
behavioural objectives are important: e.g., loyalty
Copyright © UTS

Awareness as an Objective
16
Example: promote important/new attribute
Novelty, POS activity
High involvement ads
(faster effect);
Classical conditioning (may be slower to build effect)
Example: radio which is cheaper than tv, support WOM
Provide a lot of information such as a good website, allow
experimentation, invest in salespeople, etc
Copyright © UTS
SMART Objectives
17
Copyright © UTS
Category Positioning (mental partitioning)
18
(Rossiter & Percy 2018)
Copyright © UTS
Automobiles
Regular Sedans
European
cars

Large
Medium
SUVs and other truck-like vehicles
Japanese cars
Korean cars
American
cars
Small
High-priced
Medium-priced
Chevrolet Monte Carlo
Ford Focus
Chrysler Sebring

Low-priced
Category Positioning (mental partitioning)
Defining your market
What is the true market that your brand competes in?
If consumer wants to satisfy thirst: what options are available?
Build a category positioning
19
Copyright © UTS
Perceptual Mapping
20
Copyright © UTS
Positioning Strategies
Product features: Aldi “Good Different”
Price/quality: Private label products (e.g., Woolworths Select =
good value)
Use: After Eight chocolate
Product class dissociation: Dove is “not soap”
User: Lynx/Axe (from teen repositioned to uni guy “Find your
magic”)
Competitor: Avis ”we are number 2, we try harder”
Benefit: Wash and Go shampoo
Heritage or cultural symbol: Patek Philippe watches
21
Copyright © UTS

The Economist
22
Problem: getting people to subscribe at full price
Research: problem caused by targeting wrong consumers
Readers: loyal, open-minded and comfortable when challenged
Non-readers: lack of awareness or misconception about content
(what do you think about the publication?)
Task: encourage new audiences to re-evaluate their
understanding of the brand, ie.e, get the right target market
(open-minded people, comfortable when challenged, “globally
curious”) to do this re-evaluation so that they would subscribe;
need to screen out the wrong target (someone not likely to read
it)
Objective:
Main: sell x number of subscriptions, ROI of x%, increase
retention rate to 25%
Intermediary:
increase by x% the number of people in the UK that find the
brand interesting
decrease by x% the number of people in the UK that find the
brand boring and dry
Budget: only £10,000
***
Questions:
What is the positioning strategy used?
What is the buyer group the campaign is targeting?
What are the direct competitors (partitioning)?
How is the campaign contributing to profit? Price, cost, unit
sales?
Why did it reach the results it did?

23
Copyright © UTS
Wrapping up
Marketing Communications Strategy discussed
Next week: Integrated Marketing Communications & Budgeting
24
Copyright © UTS
Workshop
Week 4
© post-it notes by Dean Hochman
SPRING 2019
Facilitators: Dr. Valeria Noguti & Dr. Kaye Chan
1
Assignment #1 (Individual)
Cover Page
Campaign Brief Description (note: differently from what is
stated at the assignment guidelines, this part does not go in the
critique part, it is just the description of the communications

piece you choose)
Critique Part:
Category Positioning and ‘Involvement by Motivation’ Grid
Target Customers
Marketing Communications Strategy and Objectives
Creative Strategy and Tactics
Workshop today: we will work on Marketing Communications
Strategy and Objectives (also used in Assignment #2)
2
Copyright © UTS
Choosing a communications piece for Assignment #1
The communications piece should be delivering a more
complete message by itself, such as a print ad, a radio ad, a
video (online or tv), one social media post with it’s hashtags,
text, and image(s)/video, one outdoor, one guerrilla marketing
campaign execution such as the Economist ice-cream stunt we
discussed in the lecture, etc.
Do not pick a picture of packaging, or a picture taken of a
website.
If you think it is necessary, you can include more than one
execution of the same type of communication, such as 2 or 3
Facebook posts if they are all slight variations that would help
interpret the same campaign, e.g., each post having a different
flavour, or using a different actor to deliver the same message.
Follow the definition of product provided in the assignment
guidelines
3
Copyright © UTS
Questions from a student:

Do we have to take one single product which is a meat
substitute or we can talk about a brand as a whole which creates
meat substitute products. For instance, Taking your example
from the assignment description, the brand is VBites Cheatin’
which has one of the product i.e. “Beef Style Slices”. So do we
have to talk about one particular product or can talk about the
brand as a whole which is totally into selling meat substitute
products.
EITHER WAY, YOU WILL WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE
BRAND. WHETHER YOU DISCUSS ONE PARTICULAR
PRODUCT ONLY WILL DEPEND ON THE
COMMUNICATIONS PIECE THAT YOU SELECT. IF YOU
SELECT A PIECE THAT HAS ONLY ONE PRODUCT, THEN
DISCUSS THAT PRODUCT. IF YOU SELECT A PIECE THAT
HAS SEVERAL PRODUCTS, THEN YOU DISCUSS THE
WHOLE SET. THE BRAND WILL IN GENERAL BE THE
MOST IMPORTANT, BUT YOU CHOOSE WHETHER YOU
TALK ABOUT THE RANGE IN GENERAL (OR CATEGORY)
OR ABOUT ONE PRODUCT ONLY.
4
Copyright © UTS
If a meet substitute brand/ product does not position themselves
as a meet substitute brand in their communication, they might
be positioning themselves as healthy protein alternative or
environment friendly etc without telling that it’s a meat
substitute in their advertisement though the nature of the
product is same as meat substitute. Is that ok?
IF IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE BRAND IS TRYING TO BE A

MEAT SIMILAR, IT IS OK. E.G., FALAFELS ARE NOT
OKAY TO CHOOSE BECAUSE THEY DON’T INTEND TO BE
LIKE MEAT EVEN THOUGH THEY COULD PLAY THAT
FUNCTION OF ADDING PROTEIN TO A VEGETARIAN
MEAL OR REPLACING MEAT BALLS FOR EXAMPLE. A
SIMPLE VEGGIE PATTIE IS NOT OKAY AS IT CAN BE
VERY DIFFERENT TO MEAT, SUCH AS SIMPLY
POTATOES, WITHOUT ANY INTENTION OF TASTING OR
LOOKING LIKE MEAT. IF THE VEGGIE PATTIE CALLS
ITSELF A BURGER, THEN IT IS OK. A PRODUCT THAT IS
JUST HEALTHY OR ENVIRONMENT FRIENDLY IS NOT
OKAY IF NOT BRANDED AS SIMILAR TO MEAT.
5
Copyright © UTS
Do we have to analyse only one piece of advertisement from
any of their campaigns across different marketing channels or
we have to talk about the campaign as a whole if they have
different ads from the same campaign or same type of
communication/ message.
YOU HAVE TO CHOOSE JUST ONE PIECE. DIFFERENT
EXECUTIONS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT OBJECTIVES. SO
YOU ARE ASKED TO BUILD A CRITIQUE OF JUST ONE.
BUT NOTE THAT YOUR CRITIQUE WILL BE WAY BETTER
IF YOU INCLUDE MORE CONTEXT IN YOUR DISCUSSION.
FOR EXAMPLE IN THE DISCUSSION YOU CAN CONTRAST
THE PIECE YOU SELECTED WITH PREVIOUS CAMPAIGNS
(EG, HOW IT BUILDS ON THEIR LONG TERM BRANDING,
OR WHETHER THEY HAVE REPOSITIONED, WHETHER
THIS IS GOOD OR BAD, ETC), WITH INFORMATION
ABOUT THE BRAND (IS IT A NATIONAL BRAND, NEW

BRAND, MARKET LEADER, ETC), WHETHER THE
CAMPAIGN IS A RESPONSE OR CONTRASTS WITH A
MAIN COMPETITOR IN THAT SAME MARKET, ETC.
6
Copyright © UTS
Target Audience (put ‘X’ where you think the objective aligns
with the buyer group):
7Short-term (activation) objectivesNon-usersLoyals to Other-
BrandOther-Brand SwitchersOwn Brand SwitchersOwn Brand
Loyals Trial Objectives:CategoryBrandBrand retrialRepeat
Purchase Objectives:Maintain repeat rateIncrease repeat
rateBuy more per occasionBuy less per occasionAccelerate
timingDelay timing
Copyright © UTS
Positioning Strategies (slide from last lecture)
Product features: Aldi “Good Different”
Price/quality: Private label products (e.g., Woolworths Select =
good value)
Use: After Eight chocolate
Product class dissociation: Dove is “not soap”
User: Lynx/Axe (from teen repositioned to uni guy “Find your
magic”)
Competitor: Avis ”we are number 2, we try harder”
Benefit: Wash and Go shampoo (not the attribute or how it
delivers the benefit)
Heritage or cultural symbol: Patek Philippe watches
8
Copyright © UTS

Marketing Communications Objectives (slide from last lecture)
9
Marcoms need to align with corporate objectives;
Some campaigns designed to promote corporate objectives
Primary objectives
Intermediary objectives, conducive to the ultimate objectives
For long term, sustainable achievement of primary objectives,
behavioural objectives are important: e.g., loyalty
Copyright © UTS
From what can be inferred from ads 1 and 2:
10AD 1 (Coca-Cola Energy)AD 2 (Taste the Feeling)What is the
positioning strategy used?
What is the buyer group the campaign is targeting?Does the
campaign have short term objectives? eg trial / repeat
purchasesWhat are the intermediary objectives of the
campaign?What are the direct competitors (partitioning)?How is
the campaign contributing to profit? Price, cost, unit sales?What
is most positive about this ad piece?
What is most negative about this ad piece?
What would you change and why?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wC416q2vREo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xCqmYbXH9w
Copyright © UTS
Wrapping up
Exercises completed on Marketing Communications Strategy
and Objectives
Nex
Reminder: Assignment #1 due in 2 weeks! Report to be both
handed-in at the workshop and uploaded to Turnitin.

11
Copyright © UTS
Market Share Measures
MARKET DEFINITION AND PARTITIONING
CHAPTER 2: PRoFIT, SALES, AND MARKET SHARE
OBJEOTIVES 45
be increasin g anyway as category sales increase; market share
indicates whetherthe-brand is growing faster than the
competition.
2 Flat or Decliníng Markets (Mat
share is less important than sales in
only way sales can increase in a flat o
away from the competition. One mus
lncreases are not the spurious results
that sales are in fact increasing.
Because market share is simply relative sales, the sales
measures describedpreviously are also used to ."ârr." market
share. In using ,ro." o,"".u."r,the manager has to have access to
competitors, or category sales against whichto assess the
brand's own sales.
Market share, like sales, can be me
sales dollars received. The rnanager s
in units reveals how well the brand is

the basic measure of market share
informative because it reflects the e
are in turn usually related to profit.
avenue to profit, for instance, might be
share and an increasing dollar mãrket
course, would apply to its sales trends
purchase alternatives. Actual competiti
always easy to determine. For insiance:
' Recall the example of Heineken beer. Heineken has à 2
percentmarket
share of the u'S' beer market; however, it has a 40 percent share
of theu's' market for imported beers. But does Heineken just
compete withimports or does it {sg compete with quasi imports
such as Lowenbrau
and super-premium u.S. beeis such as r¿i"tr"roui rrro, rr"ìnlten,s
.,true,,
market share is neither2 percent or 40 percent but sorne ngu..ìl
U"t;;.
' Xerox copiers: Does Xerox compete *ittt ull
"opi"r.,
i-nïu¿ing cheaperdesk-top inodels, or maiirly against other
expensive, high-speed, murtipre-copy machines?
' sanka-brand coffee: Does sanka compete with ail coffees, or
just instantcoffees, or just instant decaffeinated coffees ?
' Digital's compurers: Does Digital Equipment corporation
compete with
46 PART 2: MARKETTNG oBJEclvES

IBM for all types of computers, or is Digital's "true" market
currently in
mid-sized computers?
As these examples indicate, market share objectives can be
statistically and
stralegically misleading if they are not based on an appropriate
competitive
market definition.
Partitioning the Overall Market to Find the True Market
(Competitive
Frame)
An analytical technique of great value to managers in deciding
on the "true"
market or "competitive frame'l for a brand is known as
"partitioning" or
;:'#ä.T:ï'.Tålii*î,tll;.ïåìH":ì"iåJiil,lilif üäl;:ff ffi f i
has been applied in many ways by others.
The basic idea of partitioning is that the overall market or
product category
(often industry-defined) can be successively subdivided into
partitions or sub-
markets which increasingly approximate the true market for a
brand or brand-
item (as defined from the consumer's standpoint). As you go
"down" the
hierarchy of partitions, perceived substitutability increases, and
actual brand
or item switching behavior increases. This is shown in Figure
2.3.
Bases for Partitions The partitions that divide a market into sub-

markets
(in consumers' eyes) can be based on a number of factors. Most
often these
are:
I Product forms, where there are distinct physical differences
between
products (for example, large, medium or mini-computers;
margarine in sticks
or cups)
2 Benefits sought, where products vary in the features they
emphasize (for
example, cavity prevention or fresh taste in a toothpaste; status
or price-value
in a pair of jeans)
FIGURE 2.3 Total market partit¡oned into sub-markets in which
each brand or brand-item faces the most
direct competition.
Market
Sub-market' Sub-market
Perceived
subst¡tutes
Actual switching
CHAPTER 2: PBOFIT, SALES, AND MARKET SHARE
OBJECTTVES 47
3 usage situations, where benefits sought in the "same" product
may vary

over usage situations (for example, "special occasion" beers
versus "regular"
beers; family versus adult movies)
4 Brand names, where the brand name signifies a particular
,,image,'or
quality level and various items are available under that brand
name (for
example, Black & Decker versus Rockwell ¡iower tools; Macy's
versus Saks
Fifth Avenue department stores)
Partitioning and "Positioning" Partitioning is one aspect of
"positioning."
A brand can be positioned, either deliberately or by consumer
perception, in
one sub-category or another of the total product category. For
example, New
coke is positioned in the regular cola sub-category of the cola
market and,
more broadly, the soft drink market; Sprite is positioned in the
regular lemon-
lime sub-category.
Later, when we examine brand attitude, we will see that a brand
can further
be positioned within its sub-category with reference to other
brands with which
it competes. This is the second aspect of "positioning."
Here we will focus on the category-membership (competitive
frame) aspect
ofpositioning rather than the brand-differences aspect.
Partitioning is relevant
only to the former.

Determining the order of Partitions The "trick" in partitioning is
deciding
on the order of the partitions. For example, in choosing a
yogurt, do consumers
decide first on a brand nam'e and then on a product benefit such
as flavor? or
do they choose a flavor first and then a particular brand? In
other words, the
yogurt market could be partitioned in at least two different
ways, as shown in
Figure 2.4.
Note the importance of the different partition orders. If the
yogurt market
is pafitioned by consumers in the manner shown in panel (a),
Dannon's main
advertising and promotion objectiie would bq first to convince
consumers to
buy the Dannon brand, then offer flavors that suit "Dannon
lovers." Alter-
natively, if the yogurt market is partitioned by consumers in the
manner shown
in panel (b), Dannon's main advertising and promotion objective
would first
be to appeal to, for example, "strawberry lovers," then convince
these
consumers that Dannon offers better strawberry yogurt than any
other brand.
Fortunately, determination of the correct order of partitions
need not be
left to intuition. As we shall see at the end of this section, there
are various
consumer research measures that can identify the likely
ordering by following
the basic rule mentioned earlier: that perceived substitution and

actual switching
will be greater the lower the partition is in the hierarchy.
lmplications of Partitioning for Setting Market Share Objectives
Implications of partitioning for .setting market share objectives
are best
illustrated by a further example-this time with actual data
(deliberately several
years old to protect company confidentiality). Table 2.4 shows
market share
48 PART 2: MARKETTNG oBJEclvEs
Dannon
strawberry (etc.) Lemon
Strawberry
Dannon (etc.) Light 'n'
Lively
FIGURE 2.4
TABLE 24 MARKET SHARES FOR PERSONAL
DEODORANTSf
1973 1976
Llght'n'Lively
Stráwberry (etc.) Lemon

Lemon
Dannon (erc.) Light'n'
Lively
(a)
Yogurt
(etc.)
(b)
Yogurt
(elc.)
Alternative partitioning of the.yogurt ma(et. (a) Primary
competition between brands followed by
frequent switching between flavors. (b) Primary competition be
veen flavo¡s followed by frequerit
switching between brands.
(/"1(vù
1 Company shares
Gillette
Bristol-Myers
Procter & Gamble
Carler-Wallace
2 Brand Shares
Ban (B-M)
B¡ght Guard (G)
Sure (P&G)
Anid (C-W)

25
13
11
14
21
20
18
I
12
20
4
14
19
17
11
9
t The f¡gures were compiled by Maxwell As-
sociates and reported in Adven¡sing Age, May 9,
1977, p. 68 (used with permission).
CHAPTER 2: pROFtT, SALES, AND MARKET SHARE
OBJECTTVÉS 49
trends for the personar deodorant market several years ago.17
panel I showsmarket shares by company and panel 2 shows

maiket shaîes by brand.
The company share trends arê not very informative ior ttre
a¿ve.tising andpromotion manager responsible for an individual
u.un¿. gut even moreimportantly, the brand share trends are not
very informative either, unless themanager knows how the
deodorant market ii partitione¿. it is the trendsoccurring within
the partitiors that are importánt i". .ãttìrrg market
shareobjectives.
Figure 2.5 shows a re
for personal deodorants.
deodorants has its prima
and those who prefe
lgecjfc type of applicaror from wirhin their preferred
Finally, they select a brand from within the specific
Note that market share tre¡ds no¡/ depend cruciaily on market
definitionvia partitioning. At the time between the market sharL
measurements, 1973and 1976, there was a major crackdown on
aerosol spray containers becauseof fears of damage to the
earth's ozone layer. Spray, íori u lu.ge share ofmarket, from 75
down to 55 percent, despite tt
"
int.á¿u"tion or non-aerosol(pump) sprays which reversed some
of this trend. Non-sprays benefited witha rise in market share
from 25 to 45 percent. Non-spray suusiaia.y products,
FIGURE 2'5 Market structure for personal deodorants. Market
share trends are shown in parentheses. Firstfigure is i973,
second is 1976, an¿ ãnow shows treÀd.
personal
Deodorants

Sprays
Aerosol Pump
(7s aa¡ (o 7',) (s
Brands Brands
5s)(75
Non-sprays
(2s 4s)
SticksRoll-on
Brands
25) (6
Powder
11) (10 e)
ErandsBrands
50 PART 2: MARKETING oBJEcrlvES
roll-on and stick deodorants, benefited simultaneously,
although the other non-
spray alternative, powders, remained fairly constant
in usage'

What if you had been the advertising and promotion manager
for
Procter
& Gamble's Sure brand in 1976?
Sure,aroll-
ondeodorant,shouldbesettingitssightsonlla¡eeincreasetn
market share. This was not at all evicent from
panel 2 in Table 2'4, where
Sure could not be sure that its rise from 4 to ll percent did not
represent a
p"ut ,nur" for the Ut""¿. i" fact, from Figure 2'5' Sure may have
gained a lot
of this increase urv*äv, *ìrh litûe advertising or promotion,
simply by being
in the growing category of roll-ons'
ButSurehasachancetodominatetheroll-
oncategory:Surehasllpercent
rare ofthe roll-on category' Sure shguld
omotion spending heavily ratirer than
ver, the message strategy, instead of
e, should also stress its roll-on product
remind consumers that it is not one of
those "harmful" aerosols.
The market share objective and strategy for Sure
(albeit hypothetical) would

noiù" evident had weïot known how the market was partitioned'
"De-paditioning" as a StrategY
Most product categories te
levels and frequentlY fewe
levels there are, the smalle
become. Partitioning is esse
One could continue to seg
she wanted, Provided the fir
mixes.,,Thiscanbeprofitableinsomeindustries,suchasgovernment
contract
rtitioning
partition
roadly tc
address two or more sub-c
The reason that de-Parti
on being able to offer acom
technological or PsYchologi
the most difficult, but there
and Aqua Fresh toothPaste
the gel form (fresh taste)
interestlng examPle is Mic
premium "image" in an att
together.
However, one must be sure tha nt the combinatio:
of forms or benefits, raising the gical barriers' Fo
example, in 1981, a new non-pre ðalled Gemnisyr

CHAPTER 2: PROFIT, SALES, AND À/ARKET SHARE
OBJECTTVES S.l
combined aspirin with acetaminophen (the Tylenol non-aspirin
ingr-edient) in
an attempt to appeal to consumers in both the aspirin and non-
aspirin partitions
of the pain remedy market. But how many consumers would
want both
ingredients after having learned from past advertising
campaigns that aspirin
and acetaminophen are so different? Another example that auto
manufacturers
have hadproblems with is the concept of a "luxury small car";
luxuriousness
Partitioning Markets for Durables
However, even for durables, customers do change brands or
suppliers and,
more pertinently, they are Iikely to confine their selections to a
sub-set of
similar offerings. Thus, it is still meaningful to partition
markets for these less
frequently purchased products so that the firm can identify
where its true
market is and who its real competitors are.
Durable goods partitioning examples include savin, who has
chipped away
at Xerox by specializing in the small copier sub-market.
Similarly, Midas hai
concentrated on the sub-market of auto muffler buyers who
want firm quotations
and brand name guarantees in the notoriously risky (overall)

auto repair and
service market.
Partitioning is, therefore, a relevant means of market definition
for virtually
any type of product or service. As we shall see shortly, the main
differencã
with durables is that the partitioning measure is likely to focus
on customer-
perceived substitutability rather than, as for packaged goods, on
brand-
switching behavior.
THE POSSIBILITY OF LIMITS TO MARKET SHARE
It is comparatively easy to understand that there is a limit to
sales of a producî
calegory (not everyone wants every product and those who do
want it have
some limit to oonsumption capacity), but it is rather
revolutionary to contem-
plate that there may be a limit to a brand's market share of sales
within the
product-category sales level. After all, isn't it possible for the
firm with the
best brand to retain 100 percent of a market, if first in, or to
gain 100 percent
of it, if a later entry? If there are limits to retainable or
attainable market
1

24736 Marketing Communications
SPRING 2019
ASSIGNMENT #1 (INDIVIDUAL)
Analysis of a marketing campaign for a meat substitute product
Value 30%
Overview
The assignment requires you to analyse a marketing
communications campaign
within a specific product category. In doing so, you will
understand the
managerial decisions that were made with respect to a campaign
and appreciate
the need to plan marketing communications in a comprehensive
and integrated
manner.
Details
Select a communication piece (e.g., TV, digital, or print ad, or
social media ad,
guerrilla marketing material, etc.) from a marketing campaign
related to meat

substitute products.
The product should be designed to resemble meat (any animal
meat, i.e., beef,
chicken, pork, fish, etc.), though it does not have to be intended
to be so similar that
people may not detect that it is not real meat when they taste it.
The piece has to
mention specifically that the product is targeted at replacing
real meat. For
example, VBites Cheatin’ sells “Beef Style Slices” making
prominent in their
packaging that it is “a delicious meat-free alternative”. At the
same time, products
that are not similar to meat are not suitable options for this
assignment. For
example, an ad for a veggie pattie cannot be chosen for this
assignment, unless it
specifically mentions the product is designed to resemble meat.
A veggie burger,
on the other hand, can be used in the assignment as the word
‘burger’ is
associated with the idea of real meat. Overall, any non-real-
meat product that is
labelled with any word that denotes meat can be used for this
assignment, e.g.,
burger, meat, beef, chicken, etc. Usually they appear with
modifying words such as
in the example above “Beef Style”, and most will mention some
related attribute
such as that they are “100% plant based”, or “Vegetarian
product”, or “Vegan”, etc.
The piece can be from anywhere around the world but note that
in case it is not in
English you are required to provide full translation in your

submission. You cannot
choose Beyond Meat, Impossible Foods, or Nuggs, but any other
brand adering to
the description above should be fine. Ask your workshop
facilitator if in doubt.
CantsleepXia
CantsleepXia
CantsleepXia
CantsleepXia
CantsleepXia
2
You are required to develop a critique of elements of the
communication piece
for the brand (i.e., discuss both positive and negative aspects)
in terms of the
communications objectives, creative strategies and tactics used,
as well as the
target customer and category positioning (mental partitioning)
involved. In
particular, look at positioning (market needs) and customer
persona(s).
Essentially you are required to apply many class concepts. Make

sure to
conclude with a paragraph stating overall how successful you
think the campaign
is in reaching the objectives you can infer they want to achieve,
and, discussing
at least one change (specifically to the material you chose for
this assignment)
that you think would make the campaign be more successful
(even if you think it
is already successful) and why.
It is likely that you will not have access to information about
the entire campaign,
so you can make informed inferences by using class content and
researching
industry information and other sources. You might not be able
to consider all the
stages (e.g., objectives and budgeting stages) as you would not
necessarily have
information, however, make an informed guess by stating for
example that they
“appear to” (or “don’t appear to”), and then provide an
explanation to why you
think they “appear to” (or “don’t appear to”).
Formatting requirements
- The report should use standard margins (2.54cm) and 1.5
spacing, 12 size
normal font.
- The report should include a cover page with student name and
number, the
tutorial the student is enrolled in (4pm, 5pm, or 6pm), and the
name of the

brand/product chosen. This should be followed by a page with
the chosen
communication piece details such as an image of a print ad, a
storyboard
snapshot and link to a video ad, etc.
In a new page start the critique, which should contain the
following parts:
• Campaign Brief Description
• Categor Positioning and ‘Involvement by Motivation’ Grid
• Target Customers
• Marketing Communications Strategy and Objectives
• Creative Strategy and Tactics
Include references after the critique. If there are any
appendices, include last.
- Maximum limit of 800 words, excluding cover, chosen
communications piece
information, references, and appendices (if any).
- Appendices should not contain any content expected in the
main body of the
report and should only be included if deemed really necessary.
CantsleepXia
3

Submission requirements
- Hard copy of your assignment at the beginning of the
workshop on the
assignment due date.
- Submit a soft copy on Turnitin via UTSOnline.
- Referencing: if the assignment is not properly referenced in
text and does not
include a references list, marks will be deducted. For further
information on
referencing see UTS Business School Guide to Writing
Assignments.
Other requirements
- Marks will be deducted for late submission of the assignment.
- If there are any unforeseen changes to the information in this
document, they
will be announced on UTSOnline and/or in class. It is your
responsibility to note
any changes.
Marking Criteria
The assignment will be marked using the following criteria:

Conviction (50%) Quality of the argument: strong,
sensible, deep, focused, conclusive
Completeness (40%) How well the topic/issue is covered;
both positive and negative aspects are
covered; supported by reliable
sources/material
Presentation (10%) How well the paper is presented;
written-expression; proper referencing
Timeline
Assignment due in Week 6 – 28 August 2019.
CantsleepXia
29/07/2019 How Clorox moved beyond data to a new human-
centric brand focus | WARC
https://www-warc-
com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/content/article/event-
reports/how_clorox_moved_beyond_data_to_a_new_humancentr
ic_brand_focus/113267 1/10
How Clorox moved beyond data to a new human-
centric brand focus

5 min read
Geoffrey Precourt
Event Reports, ANAMasters of Marketing,
October 2017
SUMMARY
Clorox, the cleaning brand, found marketing success
by combining a focus on data with
tangible
human insights.
Activating the brand purpose "Clorox Champions
a Clean World Where People Can Thrive"
ensured
that it was truly focused on consumer needs.
Previous efforts to enhance the brand's position
through prioritizing tech-driven solutions yielded
strong sales performance but negatively impacted
brand equity.
Through activating the insight that cleaning happens
before minor and major events in life,
Clorox
was able to deepen its brand resonance.
In 2012, after a half-decade in various US
marketing postsfor the Clorox Co.,
Eric Reynolds moved to London to spend almost
ten years as its corporate
VP/GM for Europe, Middle East, Africa, and Asia.
“When I left, TV was still king,” he told the
2,600-plus delegates at the

Association of National Advertisers’ (ANA) 2017
Masters of Marketing
Conference. And digital, at that time,was a not-
very-important conversation.
https://www-warc-
“But, you know what? TV worked.” The
targeting wasn’t very precise, he allowed,
and “at somepoint, someone got up out of the
roomand made a sandwich. So,
we did have someproblems with TV. But the fact was
that if you spent enough
money and if you spent more than your competitors
… you could win.
“We know this story: If you spent enough,
you could make just about anything
work.”
And when Reynolds left Clorox’s Oakland headquarters
for the UK, the primary
product driver was simple and direct:
https://www.ispot.tv/ad/7lp5/clorox-a-clear-choice
Watch this ad:

https://www.ispot.tv/ad/7lp5/clorox-a-clear-choice
https://www-warc-
“We really showed [OxiClean] and Church &
Dwight,” he said, tongue firmly in
cheek. “And we got sued. And we lost.
“But we kept doing it.
“And we got sued by Reckitt Benckiser, another
competitor. And lost.”
But, in defense of the then state-of-the-art advertising,
“It was the kind of stuff
that permeatedthe category: Spray, spray, wipe,
smile, perfect multicultural,
ethnic mom in a perfect kitchen. Those were
real toilets; not computer-generated
graphics. This was amazing stuff.
“And it really, really worked, I guess
because we spent lots of money on it.”
In early2015, Reynolds was appointed as Clorox’s
Chief MarketingOfficer,
requiring a return to the United States. “And
I knew somethingwas afoot.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0j2VgM9dTU
Watch this ad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0j2VgM9dTU
https://www-warc-
In this new position, he took on global
responsibility for all marketing functions,
including brand strategy and management, personnel
staffing and development,
consumer insights, advanced analytics, agency
management, consumer
promotion, digital capabilities, media planning
and buying, commercial
production, and graphic design.
His conclusion: “Everything had changed.”
London, he reminded his audience, “wasn’t a
backwater.” But he’d landed back in
the Bay Area, and straight into “the zeitgeist of
performance marketing.” And it
was clear, he asserted, that the rules of marketing
for consumer packaged goods
(CPG) had changed: A sector that was not
renowned for speed had to pick up the
pace.

“Our industry used to be known for scale. If
we spent enough on TV, we would
win. But those days are over.The new [imperative] is
speed and agility. If we want
our brands to be relevant and exciting to people,
what we better do is learnhow
to get fast.”
The lesson wasn’t just trickling up from the
consumer;it was coming down from
the top. Benno Dorer, who was named as
Clorox’s CEO in late 2014, “was very
clear with what he wanted … ‘There is an
existential crisis in CPG,’ he said. ‘We
are essentially moribund unless we radically change
how we see, think, and work.
We are going to transform Clorox.’”
After 100 years of looking East – specifically,
to New York – as a center of
advertising and media, Reynolds’ team would do an
about-face and start looking
West, to Silicon Valley, for inspiration.
The result: “Over the last threeyears, we've
done almost everything to change
everything.”
https://www-warc-

Initially, the plan was to listen and learn. One
West Coast marketer – from a tech
company Reynolds declined to mention by name –
described how it brought
products to market: “We don’t have marketing run by
marketers. We're engineers.
And we work on growth. Branding is really that
emotional drizzle that you guys
put on top.”
“Emotional drizzle” was tough for Reynolds to
swallow. “I know the TV ads
weren’t great,” he confessed to his ANAmarketing
peers. “But ‘emotional
drizzle’?”
The hard lesson for Clorox’s marketers: West Coast,
tech-focused enterprises
“were finding incredible ways to be creative with
data and technology – to get
down to that human level.”
And that was a powerful change for the Clorox
cleaning brand: “We built on data
science. We brought in new creative partners,” with
FCB and mcgarrybowen
coming on board. “Our agency partners, OMD
and AKQA, ramped things up for
us.
“We made new friends. We brought in capabilities.
We were one of the first
people to bring in the [Data Management

Platform] ... We started to direct
massive amounts of people, time,and energy into
that existential crisis we felt
like we were facing in CPG.”
But the rush to the new was not smooth: “We did a
huge bid earlyon in
programmatic media,” Reynolds admitted. “We bought
trainloads of banner ads
as a major commitment to try to get to
that right person, the right time,very first,
blah, blah, blah.”
Despite the problems that now seemso obvious,
however, the Clorox CMO told
the ANAaudience in Orlando, “It absolutelyworked
marvelously. Between 2014
and 2015 – in that sleepy, old, boring cleaning
category – we grew by double
digits.”
https://www-warc-
But as one set of numbers pointed towards
success, another batch identified
deeper problems. Although sales were growing, a report
from brand consultancy
Prophet identified another, and uglier, quantitative

truth: Out of 400 brands,
Clorox checked in the bottom third, occupying
278th place.
Said Reynolds, “It was really a wakeup call for us
that said, ‘Okay, if we're being so
successful, why is the brand deteriorating?’”
The answer: “A huge case of ‘short-termitis’.
“At a time when we could get down to a
human level, an individual level, we were
so fixated on the data and the technology that
we lost the bigger picture.”
In more detail, Reynolds continued, “In our rush to
get so focused and get so
data-enabled, we realized we were filling those
moments that matter with
cheaply-produced, hollow, vacuous, brand moments.
“This was not storytelling.”
https://www-warc-
The flat, digital messages were every bit as one-
dimensional as the toilet-based
comparisons from the previous decade. The human-

centricity that the brand
knew was part of its DNAwas missing in the
data.
Looking beyond the information in search of
insight, the Clorox team realized,
“We’d missed a really clear pointwith cleaning:
Why, if everybody hatesto clean,
do billions of people around the world clean
every day? Why? Because they have
goals. They want to thrive.
“Cleaning happens before almost anything major, or
minor, happens in life. It
resets the stagefor life's possibilities.
“That insight had been staring us at the face
for years, yet we didn’t see it. We
didn’t activate it.”
https://www-warc-
And the complete transformation of the Clorox brand
camewhen it moved
beyond product shotsand comparisons to focus on
the lives of not just its
existing customers, but the people who might
come to the brand for the first

time.
Explained Reynolds, “We decided to follow them on
their journey – to celebrate
the fact that, even though people hate cleaning, they
love clean.
“We set out to tell that storythrough what we thinkis
a human-centered and
purpose-driven way. And we adopted a new brand
purpose globally: ‘Clorox
Champions a Clean World Where People
Can Thrive.’”
Reynolds’ corresponding mission: “We were not going to
just think, ‘We're the
people that spray things on counters and wipe
with a sponge.’ The question was,
‘How do we bring it to life?’
“This worked because it reflects the very best of
the brand. It is chock-fullof
humanity. None of those folksare actors. We
had film crews filming real people
for days and weeks and days on end to capture
those moments.
“But you know what? [This positioning] doesn’t
just live in film; it can live in
moments outside. We can be more purposeful, we
can tell people, ‘Clean matters’
in things like outdoor media.”
Case in point: Valentine's Day is soon coming
up. “And, empirically,” Reynolds
reminded the ANAaudience “a clean environment is

much more productive to
what we'll call, ‘A successfulrelationship.’”
Watch these ads:
https://www.ispot.tv/ad/IP72/clorox-disinfecting-wipes-clean-
is-the-beginning
https://www.ispot.tv/ad/wGg9/clorox-clean-matters
https://www.ispot.tv/ad/IP72/clorox-disinfecting-wipes-clean-
is-the-beginning
https://www.ispot.tv/ad/wGg9/clorox-clean-matters
https://www-warc-
About the author
Geoffrey Precourt
US Editor, WARC
[email protected] (mailto:[email protected])
Geoffrey Precourt is WARC's US editor. He reports
from key events across North America.
Priorto joining WARC in July 2008, Geoffrey
held senior editorial roles at titlesincluding
Strategy +
Business, Point, Smart Business and Fortune, and

edited the book CMO Thought Leaders.
TOPICS
EMOTION
(http://www.warc.com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au//search/Emot
ion/Emotion)
BRAND POSITIONING
(http://www.warc.com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au//search/Bran
d-positioning/Brand positioning)
mailto:[email protected]
https://www-warc-
com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/search/Emotion/Emotion
https://www-warc-com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/search/Brand-
positioning/Brand%20positioning
https://www-warc-
© Copyright WARC 2017
WARC Ltd.
Americas: 2233 Wisconsin Ave NW, Suite535, Washington,
DC 20007, United States - Tel: +1 202
778 0680
APAC: OUE Downtown 1, #44-03, 6 Shenton
Way, 068809, Singapore - Tel: +65 3157 6200
EMEA: 33 Kingsway, London, WC2B 6UF, United
Kingdom - Tel: +44 (0)20 7467 8100
www.warc.com(https://www-warc-com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au)

All rights reserved including database rights. This
electronic file is for the personal use of
authorised usersbased at the
subscribing company's office location. It may
not be reproduced, posted on intranets,
extranets or the internet, e-
mailed, archived or shared electronically either
within the purchaser's organisation or
externally without express written
permission from Warc.
https://www-warc-com.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/
Unlocking the Power of Integrated Marketing
Communications: How Integrated Is Your IMC Program?
Kevin Lane Keller
Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA
The future of advertising and marketing communications will be
marked by an increasingly diverse collection of new digital
options
added to the traditional media and communication options
already
available to marketers. By taking advantage of the unique
strengths of different communication options, and combining
them
and sequencing them strategically, marketers have the
opportunity
to drive sales and build brands in ways never before possible.
Doing so, however, will require new concepts, new tools, and
new

thinking. Toward that goal, this article describes seven
integrated
marketing communications (IMC) choice criteria that marketers
can use to judge how effectively and efficiently they have
assembled
their IMC programs. The article also outlines five priority areas
for future research to help further guide the successful design
and
implementation of IMC programs.
Marketing communications are one of the most difficult but
crucially important components of modern marketing. In
recent years this challenge has been made even more compli-
cated by the explosion of new digital media options. These
options offer new capabilities and hold much promise for mar-
keters but also bring great complexity to managerial decision
making. To highlight just a few of these new capabilities, mar-
keters can choose to do some or all of the following with their
brands: To draw attention to their brands, marketers now can
reach consumers through mass or targeted ads on Facebook or
other social networks; banner or display ads on third-party
websites; and paid or organic search ads. To shape brand pref-
erence, they can send timely e-mails and use their own web-

sites to provide detailed content. To drive short-term sales,
they can offer promotions and other incentives through tweets,
texts, and targeted e-coupons. And to reinforce long-term
brand loyalty, they can form online brand communities
through their own or third-party social media.
With so many different new and traditional communication
options available—and so many different ways to combine those
options—marketers struggle with how to make good marketing
communication decisions. The upside from sound decision mak-
ing, however, is enormous. Success stories abound of brands
that
have benefited from creatively designed, soundly executed com-
munication campaigns of all kinds: Got Milk? famously turned
around declining sales of milk with clever TV ads reinforced
with
strategically timed and placed radio, out-of-home (OOH), and
point-of-purchase (P-O-P) reminders. More recently, Tough
Mudder benefited from a strictly digital focus via targeted ads
on
Facebook.

At the same time, there are scores of examples of misguided
and/or poorly implemented communication programs that fail
badly in the marketplace. A crucial ingredient for many of the
communication success stories is a well-developed integrated
marketing communications (IMC) program. Some of the world’s
most successful brands have benefited from carefully blending
communication options of all types. For example, Nike supports
its brands with award-winning advertising, selected event and
ath-
lete sponsorship, extensive public relations (PR), and a highly
interactive digital communication program, among other
commu-
nication activities. Unquestionably, one of the most important
topics concerning the future of advertising is how marketers
should design, execute, and evaluate IMC programs.
In recognition of the importance of IMC, the advertising
industry has taken a number of steps over the past three deca-
des to improve its ability to provide the right IMC solutions
for its clients. In the early days, Ogilvy talked about “Ogilvy

Orchestration,” and Young and Rubicam talked about the
“Whole Egg.” Through the years, agencies have acquired spe-
cialized boutique firms to enhance their capabilities in PR,
direct marketing, promotions, and other areas of communica-
tions. Recently, the focus of agency acquisitions has been on
different types of digital communication firms to help their cli-
ents with web design, social media, online tracking, and so
forth. At the same time, internally, agencies have also been
Address correspondence to Kevin Lane Keller, Tuck School of
Business, 100 Tuck Hall, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
03755.
E-mail: [email protected]
Kevin Lane Keller (PhD, Duke University) is the E.B. Osborn
Pro-
fessor of Marketing, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth
College.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be
found online at http://www.tandfonline.com/ujoa.
286
Journal of Advertising, 45(3), 286–301
Copyright � 2016, American Academy of Advertising
ISSN: 0091-3367 print / 1557-7805 online

DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2016.1204967
http://www.tandfonline.com/ujoa
evolving their organizational design and processes, introduc-
ing planners, redefining the role of agency personnel,
and taking many other steps to be more client-, consumer-,
and brand-centric. Despite all the progress these agency steps
have made toward the goal of more effective and efficient
IMC programs, marketers still face a fundamental problem, as
demonstrated by the following hypothetical scenario.
Assume that the marketers of a well-known brand have
carefully conducted a series of research activities to gain a
deeper understanding of their target consumer, the market-
place, competition, and so on. Assume too that they have
crafted a thoughtful, imaginative marketing strategy,
uncovering a potentially powerful new brand positioning in
the process. The marketers of the brand use this new strat-
egy to write a tight communications brief that goes to their
full-service communications agency with the mandate to

develop a thoroughly integrated marketing communications
program to help the brand achieve the desired new posi-
tioning. Their longtime agency works diligently and, after
a certain period of time, unveils its proposed IMC program
with a dazzling display of video, color, and graphics in a
tour de force presentation.
Now what? For all the agency’s well-intentioned bravado, how
do the marketers of the brand judge the communication program
as to whether it actually is well integrated and offers the most
effective and efficient solution to their communications
challenge? Although there will always be uncertainty as to the
fate of any marketing activity—and certainly with marketing
com-
munications—how do marketers make the right decisions to at
least improve their odds and increase their likelihood of market-
place success?
What marketers need is a set of well-grounded, comprehen-
sive criteria by which any proposed IMC program can be sys-

tematically and thoroughly judged. Marketers need to know
which questions to ask to make sure their agency or agencies
have done their due diligence to truly optimize the design of
their IMC program. Unfortunately, such guidance has been
sadly lacking (Assael 2011; Keller 2009). In fact, too often the
idea of IMC was historically equated with communications
reinforcement, in other words, saying the same thing in differ-
ent ways. Although such triangulation can be valuable, as
many now recognize there is much more to a well-designed
IMC program than just communicating the same message in
different ways.
To provide some clarity and assistance for marketers to help
them judge how integrated their marketing communications pro-
grams are, this article outlines a comprehensive, cohesive set of
seven IMC choice criteria that can be called the “Seven Cs,”
given
that all seven criteria begin with the letter C. After providing
moti-
vation and context to the communication challenge and some

background on the main theme of the approach, each criterion is
described and illustrated in some detail. After offering a short
summary, the article concludes by highlighting five key
priorities
for future IMC research.
UNDERSTANDING THE COMMUNICATIONS
CHALLENGE
As noted, the marketing communications environment has
unquestionably changed dramatically. Yet, as will be argued,
many of the conceptual foundations of marketing communica-
tions are still relevant but need to be applied in new or
expanded ways. After describing some of these changes in
today’s communications environment, two broadly robust con-
ceptual models are reviewed that are useful in understanding
how consumers process communications and how they make
decisions.
The New Communications Environment
The past decade has seen technological developments that have
transformed markets and marketing, as both consumers and
firms

have new capabilities that were unimaginable even a few short
years ago. Empowered consumers are meeting equally empow-
ered firms as both groups now have access to seemingly
limitless
information on just about anything or anyone.
As a result, consumers can choose to become as engaged as
they want with a brand, with their influence ranging from only
posting comments and reviews at one end of a continuum to
actively guiding the nature and direction of brand activities at
the
other end. Similarly, firms can choose to become as involved as
they wish with consumers, from hosting their own brand website
at one end of the continuum to actively interacting with
consumers
in product and brand development at the other end. Thus,
consum-
ers and firms can increasingly communicate, relate, and
exchange
anything, anytime, with anyone.
What consumers and firms can do in this new communications

environment, however, does not necessarily equate with what
they should or will do. Answering these more predictive and
nor-
mative questions requires, in part, a thorough understanding of
the
new communication environment characterized by a broader set
of communication options and objectives, as well as a deep
appre-
ciation of the many differences across consumers in the
relation-
ships they seek from brands and their propensity to even engage
with a brand. We outline these two areas next.
Communication options and objectives. Many different
marketing communications options exist that can play different
roles and have different objectives in the marketing of a brand
(Batra and Keller 2016). One popular distinction made by many
marketers and academic researchers (e.g., Stephen and Galak
2012) is between communications which appear in paid media
(traditional outlets such as TV, print, and direct mail), owned
media (company-controlled options such as websites, blogs,

mobile apps, and social media), and earned media (virtual or
real-
world word of mouth, press coverage, etc.). Given the goal of
this
article is to help marketers make better IMC decisions, our
focus
here is on paid and owned media, as those are the areas over
which
marketers have the most direct control and therefore are
responsi-
ble for making the most decisions. In no way does this focus
diminish the importance of earned media to the success of brand
UNLOCKING THE POWER OF INTEGRATED MARKETING
COMMUNICATIONS 287
building and sales. On the contrary, earned media
considerations
can factor into much of the application of the criteria which are
developed in this article. Our discussion, however, will largely
center on issues and examples related to paid and owned media.
To provide a more refined perspective of those communication
options directly available to marketers, Table 1 groups a

number
of paid and owned media communication options into eight
com-
munication platforms, with illustrative examples of each.
At the same time, it is also important to recognize there are
a number of different roles or objectives that any one of these
communication options may be asked to achieve, depending
on the brand situation, characteristics of the target market, and
so on. Table 2 displays a representative taxonomy of eight key
communication objectives. These communication objectives
are relevant to brands at different stages of development, as
well as for consumers with different levels of understanding
and affinity toward a brand, and so on.
Consumer heterogeneity. In describing the new communi-
cation environment, one mistake frequently made by many mar-
keters and pundits is failing to recognize that empowered does
not
necessarily imply enlightened or engaged. In other words, just
because consumers have an opportunity to engage with a brand

does not mean they also have the motivation and ability to do
so.
Moreover, too often digital branding guidelines and principles
are
stated in terms of “the consumer” as if so much homogeneity
existed in the marketplace that consumers could be treated as
one
group (e.g., “Consumers are in charge now. They are no longer
passive but active, and they want a two-way conversation”).
The reality is, as much past research has shown, only some of
the consumers want to get involved with only some of their
brands
and, even then, only some of the time. Clearly, a much more
nuanced view of consumers is necessary to more completely
understand branding in a digital world. Central to that view is a
realization that customers can be highly heterogeneous in how
they think, feel, and act toward brands. For those consumers
will-
ing and able to engage with a brand, marketers can leverage
digital
communications to forge stronger brand ties. For example, mar-

keters can uncover individual consumers’ likes and dislikes and
their unmet needs and wants to provide them with a more
custom-
ized and tailored brand experience. As appealing as such efforts
in
personalization might sound, however, they may also make it
harder to create a strong brand community with shared brand
beliefs and attitudes across consumers. Regardless, the fact also
remains that many consumers will not necessarily want to
engage
with the brand.
In other words, there are fundamental differences in how con-
sumers relate to brands and thus how firms can choose to
commu-
nicate and develop relationships with consumers. A helpful
schematic to understand consumer heterogeneity in this regard
is
the brand engagement pyramid (see Figure 1). The brand
engage-
ment pyramid is a way to portray the level of engagement that
cus-
tomers have with a brand. At the top of the pyramid are those

customers who want to be highly engaged with the brand: They
talk about it, tweet about it, visit its website, reads its e-mails,
and
TABLE 1
Eight Major Marketing Communication Platforms
Platform Components
Advertising � Print and broadcast
ads
� Packaging, outer
� Packaging inserts
� Cinema
� Brochures and
booklets
� Posters and leaflets
� Directories
� Reprints of ads
� Billboards
� Display signs
� Point-of-purchase
displays
� DVDs
Sales promotion � Contests, games,
sweepstakes,
lotteries

� Premiums and gifts
� Sampling
� Fairs and trade
shows
� Exhibits
� Demonstrations
� Coupons
� Rebates
� Low-interest
financing
� Trade-in
allowances
� Continuity
programs
� Tie-ins
Events and
experiences
� Sports
� Entertainment
festivals
� Arts
� Causes
� Factory tours
� Company
museums

� Street activities
Public relations and
publicity
� Press kits
� Speeches
� Seminars
� Annual reports
� Charitable
donations
� Publications
� Community
relations
� Lobbying
� Identity media
� Company
magazine
Online and social
media marketing
� Websites
� E-mail
� Search ads
� Display ads
� Company blogs
� Third-party
chatrooms,
forums, and blogs

� Facebook and
Twitter messages,
YouTube
channels and
videos
Mobile marketing � Text messages
� Online marketing
� Social media
marketing
� Apps
(Continued on next page)
288 K. L. KELLER
so on. At the larger bottom or base of the pyramid, however, are
those customers who want to do nothing more with the brand
than
purchase and consume it; that’s all—in other words, just
“choose
it and use it.” Unfortunately, too many marketers and marketing
pundits overemphasize marketing to customers at the top of the

pyramid at the expense of the often large group of customers at
the base. The key for marketers is to ensure that they
understand,
literally, the shape and dynamics of their brand engagement
pyra-
mid. How many are at the top? How many are at the base? What
is the flow of influence across levels of the pyramid? Does any
flow trickle down? The answers to these questions will have
pro-
found implications as to the role of paid, owned, and earned
media
in the development of an IMC program.
Conceptual Foundations
With this new communications environment and those two
broad sets of communication options and communication
objectives in mind, to be able to assemble the optimal IMC
programs, marketers and their agencies must first have a clear
understanding of how all of these different types of marketing
communications work, as well as how consumers and their
customers make buying decisions in the marketplace. After

reviewing some prior communications research, we next high-
light some basic conceptual foundations with each.
Some prior IMC research. Although prior research has not
provided explicit guidance on how to answer the specific
question
of how integrated a marketing communications program is, it
has
provided many valuable perspectives and insights (for a
compre-
hensive review, see Schultz, Patti, and Kitchen 2011). A few
nota-
ble recent contributions are highlighted here.
Kliatchko (2008) offers a comprehensive historical review
of the IMC concept and critique of the IMC definition and four
pillars. Kitchen et al. (2004) provide valuable conceptual con-
text as to the progress that has been made organizationally
with IMC. Taylor (2005) offers another historical review and
agenda from the perspective of international advertising
research. Reid (2005) provides return on investment (ROI)
evidence as to the IMC process and brand outcomes. Lee and

Park (2007) consider important measurement issues and pro-
pose a scale. Similarly, Ratnatunga and Ewing (2005) consider
the asset value of IMC and the brand capability value it cre-
ates. Zahay et al. (2004) assess how to integrate transactional
and relational data. This research, and those of many others,
has passionately illuminated much about IMC, even if not
addressing the fundamental question of how to judge how well
a communications program is integrated.
Understanding how consumers process communications.
A number of concepts and theories have been proposed to
explain how different communication options work with con-
sumers. These frameworks address all kinds of distinctions in
processing, such as conscious versus unconscious processing,
rational versus emotional processing, and so on. These various
approaches have different pros and cons in terms of their abil-
ity to understand communication effects and guide communi-
cation planning. For our purposes, a processing model is
needed that has both the breadth to usefully explain all eight

communication platforms and the depth to provide insight into
different factors affecting communication success or failure
for communication options within each platform.
One useful type of model in that regard is an information
processing model of communication effectiveness. Informa-
tion processing models of marketing communications focus on
the mental resources and mind-sets a consumer brings to the
reception and processing of a communication for a brand, as
well as the outcomes those communications can produce in
terms of consumer knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors toward
a brand. They can be applied to a wide variety of
TABLE 1
Eight Major Marketing Communication Platforms (Continued)
Platform Components
Direct and database
marketing
� Catalogs
� Mailings
� Telemarketing

� Electronic
shopping
� TV shopping
� Fax
Personal selling � Sales presentations
� Sales meetings
� Incentive programs
� Samples
� Fairs and trade
shows
TABLE 2
Some Key Communication Objectives
Objectives
1 Create awareness and salience
2 Convey detailed information
3 Create imagery and personality
4 Build trust
5 Elicit emotions
6 Inspire action
7 Instill loyalty
8 Connect people

FIG. 1. Brand engagement pyramid.
COMMUNICATIONS 289
communication options and can capture many different styles
of consumer processing. There are many excellent, detailed
summaries of such models (Batra and Ray 1986; MacInnis and
Jaworski 1989; MacInnis, Moorman, and Jaworski 1991;
Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann 1983), so only the essential
ingredients of an information processing model are highlighted
here.
Information processing models of communication effec-
tiveness begin by considering antecedent factors related to
characteristics of the consumer and the content of the commu-
nication itself, as well as the surrounding context of message
reception and how those factors, in turn, influence consumers’
motivation, ability, and opportunity to process a communica-
tion. In other words, three key questions are asked: (1) How
much do consumers want to process a communication? (2) Do

they also have the right kinds of knowledge to be able to pro-
cess it? (3) Will they even have a chance to do so, or are there
factors preventing or inhibiting what they can do?
The actual processing of a communication is characterized
in terms of intensity and direction of processing, in other
words, what aspects of the communication draw attention and
how many thoughts, feelings, judgments, and other effects are
evoked by those aspects. The nature of the processing of the
communication, in turn, determines the changes in brand
knowledge and mental structures that result. These processing
outcomes are critical, as they influence subsequent actions by
consumers and how they process later communications, evalu-
ate brands, make product or service choices, and so on.
To better understand the marketplace implications of the
consumer information processing of marketing communica-
tions, it is helpful also to have a model of the process by which
consumers make their buying decisions, which we turn to next.
Understanding how consumers make buying decisions.

Traditional depictions of the consumer buying-decision pro-
cess—for example, as with the classic Engel, Blackwell, and
Kollat model—viewed consumer buying as a sequential series
of five stages, such as (1) need awareness and problem recogni-
tion, (2) information search, (3) evaluation of alternatives, (4)
purchase, and (5) postpurchase evaluation. Although the basic
structure of these classic “hierarchy of effects models” still has
some merit, they are not always as applicable in today’s world
where consumers make snap buying decisions and collect virtu-
ally any type of information anytime and anywhere.
The consumer-decision journey today needs to allow for
more detailed steps and the more complex, nonlinear paths to
purchase that consumers might follow. The steps in such an
extended model are displayed in Table 3.
Each of these steps is probabilistic, and a successful con-
sumer-decision journey for a brand can be derailed by failure
at any stage, for example, lack of awareness or appreciation of
the brand or an unpleasant product experience at trial. Across

brands and for any one brand, consumers may backtrack, skip
steps, or implicitly or explicitly choose to reject the brand.
The dynamics involved in such consumer-decision journeys
thus involve multiple stages and the potential to move forward
or backward across stages or drop out of the decision process
for a brand altogether.
Mixing and Matching Communication Options
Knowing how consumers process communications and how
consumers make decisions provides essential input into com-
munication planning. In a basic sense, developing the optimal
IMC program requires choosing the best set of communication
options and strategically managing the relationships between
the chosen options (Batra and Keller 2016; Naik 2007; Duncan
and Mulhern 2004).
The overriding theme to our discussion is that in assem-
bling an IMC program to build brand equity, marketers should
“mix and match” communication options—that is, choose a
variety of different communication options which may share

some common meaning and content but which may also offer
different, complementary advantages or be designed with
other communication options in mind (Naik, Raman, and
Winer 2005). By properly mixing and matching communica-
tion options, collectively the “whole may be greater than the
sum of the parts,” as follows.
Mix. In developing the optimal IMC program, marketers
should essentially be “media neutral” and evaluate all commu-
nication options on the basis of effectiveness (e.g., How many
desired effects does a communication create and what commu-
nication objectives does it help the brand achieve?) and effi-
ciency (e.g., At what cost are those outcomes created and
objectives achieved?). Marketers ultimately care only about
achieving their communication objectives and moving con-
sumers along in their decision journey. Any means of commu-
nications that will effectively and efficiently facilitate those
goals should therefore be considered.
TABLE 3

Potential Stages in an Expanded Consumer-Decision Journey
Stage Description of Stage
1 Recognizes a need or want for a product or service
2 Knows about the brand
3 Actively considers the brand
4 Searches and learns more about the brand
5 Evaluates the brand and forms favorable attitudes
6 Arrives at a positive value judgment and willingness to
pay for the brand
7 Develops concrete plans to try the brand
8 Consumes the brand
9 Is satisfied with the brand experience
10 Becomes loyal repeat buyer of the brand
11 Is engaged and interacts with the brand
12 Advocates for the brand actively
290 K. L. KELLER
For example, whether a consumer has strong, favorable,

and unique brand associations for Mountain Dew to “intense,”
“active,” or “high energy” because of a TV ad that shows
young people who “Do the Dew” to fuel their interests or pas-
sions, or because Mountain Dew sponsors its own action sports
Dew Tour events, the impact in terms of Moutain Dew’s brand
equity should be identical unless the associations created are
materially different in some way. On that basis, marketers
should consider all possible communication options in terms
of effectiveness and efficiency to achieve communication
objectives.
In many cases, however, different communication options are
likely to create inherently different effects. For example,
research
has shown that “direct experience” communications (e.g., event-
created ones) can create potentially stronger associations than
can
mass-mediated communications (e.g., through TV ads) (Smith
and Swinyard 1983). TV advertising, on the other hand, may be
better able to show certain product features or express brand-

cre-
ated emotions. Similarly, social media may be stronger at
eliciting
brand engagement than TV advertising, but TV ads may be
designed more easily to create broader brand awareness across
tar-
get market consumers. Mixing thus involves choosing multiple
communication options on the basis of their different
capabilities
and likely communication effects on sales and brand equity.
Table 4 shows an illustrative summary of some possible distin-
guishing characteristics of the eight major communication
platforms.
Match. By virtue of using multiple communication options,
the opportunity for “interaction effects” exist beyond the direct
“main effects” derived from each individual communication
option. Any one communication option can have a number of
dif-
ferent relationships with any other communication options
which
are also being used; it can reinforce the meaning conveyed by

other communication options, complement that meaning, or
enhance their communication effects in various ways. Matching
thus requires strategically choosing and designing
communication
options with other communication options in mind.
Consider Mountain Dew again. Its marketers might choose to
both run TV ads and sponsor active sports events to reinforce
their
“high-energy” message. But then they might take an attention-
get-
ting scene from the TV ad and place it in youth-oriented maga-
zines and online banner ads to drive people to their website to
learn more about the brand. They could also maintain a strong
social media presence to engage their loyal buyers independent
of
their “high-energy” message and TV ads; and they might even
engage in extensive PR activities to convert skeptics concerned
about health and product ingredients.
Many different firms are embracing this broad-based approach
to developing their communications program. When Ocean

Spray
decided to reintroduce the cranberry as the “surprisingly
versatile
little fruit that supplies modern-day benefits,” they used many
dif-
ferent facets of marketing communications to reach consumers
in
a variety of settings. The “Straight from the Bog” campaign
focused on two key brand benefits: that Ocean Spray products
tasted good and were good for you. PR played a crucial role.
Mini-
ature bogs were brought to Manhattan and featured on an NBC
Today morning segment, and a “Bogs across America Tour”
brought the experience to Los Angeles and Chicago. Television
and print advertising featured two growers (depicted by actors)
standing waist-deep in a bog and talking, often humorously,
about
what they did. The campaign also included a website, in-store
dis-
plays, and events for consumers and for members of the
growers’
cooperative itself.

The reality of modern marketing communications is that
there is an enormous and diverse variety of touchpoints
and communication options to help marketers create mem-
orable, enjoyable, and persuasive experiences with consum-
ers. One potentially insightful metaphor for IMC is
painting. Marketers are trying, in effect, to “paint a
picture” of their brands in the minds and hearts of consum-
ers. In doing so, they want the richest, most vivid, and
TABLE 4
Some Defining Characteristics of Eight Major
Communication Platforms
Platform Defining Characteristics
Advertising � Pervasive
� Amplified expressiveness
� Control
Sales promotion � Ability to be attention getting
� Incentive
� Invitation
Events and experiences � Relevant
� Engaging
� Implicit

Public relations and
publicity
� High credibility
� Ability to find hard-to-reach
buyers
� Dramatization
Online and social media � Rich
marketing � Interactive
� Up to date
Mobile marketing � Timely
� Influential
� Pervasive
Direct and database � Personal
marketing � Proactive
� Complementary
Personal selling � Customized
� Relationship oriented
� Results oriented
COMMUNICATIONS 291
most beautiful painting to represent their brand. Accord-

ingly, they would not use only one color or one paintbrush
but rather an entire palette of colors and a wide range of
brushes. Similarly, marketers mix and match to skillfully
combine and blend a broad range of marketing communi-
cations. We turn next to how that can be done.
TABLE 5
Definitions and a Representative Set of Questions to Evaluate
the IMC Choice Criteria
Criteria Definition Representative Questions
Coverage Proportion of the target market reached by each
communication option, as well as how much
overlap exists among communication options.
� How many target market consumers are reached by
the communication options?
� How much overlap exists among communication
options across target market consumers?
Cost The financial efficiency associated with the
communication options and program.
� How much is the total financial cost of
communication options?

� What is the relevant cost per thousand and other
efficiency metrics?
� Are there any relevant nonfinancial costs?
Contribution The inherent ability of a communication option to
create the desired communication effects and
achieve the desired communication objectives,
independent of prior or subsequent exposure to
any other communication options for the brand.
� What are the likely effects of the communication
options and how they will impact communication
objectives?
� What is the likely impact of the communication
options on sales?
� What is the likely impact of the communication
options on brand equity?
Commonality The extent to which a communication option is
designed to create communication effects and
achieve communication objectives that are also
the focus of other communication options.
� How much overlap in meaning exists among

� How much overlap in creative strategy exists among
Complementarity The extent to which a communication option
addresses communication effects and objectives
not addressed by other communication options.
� How much of the consumer-decision journey is
covered by the communication options?
� How many of the communication objectives are
� How much of the desired positioning of the brand is
Cross-effects The extent to which communication options are
designed to explicitly work together such that
interaction or synergy occurs and enhanced
communication effects emerge as the result of
exposure by consumers to both options.
� How many synergies exist among communication
options?
� How does the coordination of the meaning of
communication options appropriately leverage
brand knowledge at different stages of the

consumer-decision journey?
� How does the coordination of the creative strategies
of communication options improve the attention to
and processing of communication options?
Conformability The extent to which communication works
across
target market consumers regardless of their
communications history or other characteristics.
� How well do the communication options work across
consumers with different communication histories?
� How well do the communication options work across
different types of target market consumers?
292 K. L. KELLER
DEVELOPING THE OPTIMAL IMC PROGRAM
In assessing the collective impact of an IMC program, the mar-
keter’s overriding goal is thus to create the most effective and
effi-
cient communication program possible to maximize short-term
sales and long-term brand equity by mixing and matching
commu-

nication options (Keller 2007; Madhavaram, Badrinarayanan,
and
McDonald 2005; Reid, Luxton, and Mavondo 2005). Toward
that
goal, Table 5 provides definitions of seven relevant IMC choice
criteria. Before reviewing each of the IMC choice criteria in
detail,
we first provide a brief overview of how they fit in and relate to
one another.
The first two criteria, coverage and cost, are fundamental mar-
keting criteria related to the efficiency of an IMC program in
terms
of reaching as many members of the target audience as possible
at
the lowest possible cost. The other five criteria focus more on
communication effectiveness and the ability of the communica-
tion program to achieve the desired communication objectives
to
drive sales and/or improve brand equity. The third criterion,
con-
tribution, is concerned with the singular qualities of
communica-

tions and how they work in isolation.
The remaining four criteria deal with different ways that com-
munication options can potentially relate to one another. Com-
monality is when a communication option is designed to create
communication effects and achieve communication objectives
that are also the focus of other communication options. Comple-
mentarity, on the other hand, is when a communication option
addresses communication effects and objectives not addressed
by
other communication options. Cross-effects are when
communica-
tion options are designed to explicitly work together such that
interaction or synergy occurs and enhanced communication
effects emerge as the result of exposure by consumers to both
communication options. The seventh and final criterion,
conform-
ability, occurs when a communication option works well even if
consumers have not been exposed to a communication option
designed to enhance its effects or even if consumers were not
even

originally intended to see, hear, or experience it.
We next define and highlight some key considerations for
each of the seven IMC choice criteria.
Coverage
Coverage captures the proportion of the target market
reached by each communication option, as well as how
much overlap exists among communication options. In
other words, to what extent do different communication
options reach the designated target market, and the same
or different consumers making up that market? If there is
little audience overlap, communication effectiveness is
largely driven by contribution and complementarity. With
little audience overlap, the communications program is
really not integrated; it is more a case of multiple market-
ing communications. Communication program effects
would be very much an additive process, and program
effectiveness would depend on whether the right
communications were being sent to the right audience

members and having the right effects, independent of any-
thing else.
If overlap exists with an audience, however, many more
considerations come into play. Then, the relationship of the
overlapping communication options becomes critical in terms
of commonality, complementarity, and cross-effects. The
sequencing of communications becomes critical too, and the
conformability of any communication option to the particular
spot(s) in the sequences where it is seen.
Understanding the breadth and depth of coverage is thus
critical to assessing the likely success of a proposed IMC pro-
gram. How many people are reached with communications for
the brand, how often, and in how many different ways?
Cost
Marketers must evaluate marketing communications on all of
the other six criteria against their cost to arrive at the most
effec-
tive and most efficient communications program. Quantitative
analysis is essential here in terms of estimating the various

response functions and elasticities that may characterize
different
communication options employed by marketers. All kinds of
tech-
niques can be employed as part of this analysis, for example,
from
experimental A-B comparisons with test-control panels or
markets
with different levels of communication to detailed multivariate
modeling of large databases.
Importantly, the growth of big data allows market researchers
to gain access to many potentially useful new data resources
never
before available. To properly estimate the response functions to
the exposure levels of the different options of an integrated
mar-
keting communication program, however, market researchers
must adopt a fully dynamic, longitudinal view of when and how
cross-effects occur across different media and the temporal
sequences (downstream effects) involved (Smith,
Gopalakrishna,

and Chatterjee 2006; Wiesel, Pauwels, and Arts 2011).
Although response elasticities will depend on many particulars
of the communications, consumers, and setting involved, some
useful benchmarks have emerged through the years. For
example,
a review of academic research found that advertising elasticities
were estimated to be higher for new (0.3) than for established
products (0.1) (Allenby and Hanssens 2005; see also Van
Heerde
et al. 2013; and Sethuraman, Tellis, and Briesch 2011).
Contribution
Contribution is the inherent ability of a communication option
to create the desired response and communication effects from
consumers and achieve the desired communication objectives in
the absence of any prior or subsequent exposure to any other
com-
munication option. In other words, contribution describes the
“main effects” of a marketing communication option in terms of
how it affects consumers’ processing of a communication and
the

outcomes which result.
COMMUNICATIONS 293
As noted, marketing communications can play many differ-
ent roles, like building awareness, enhancing image, eliciting
responses, and inducing sales, and the contribution of any mar-
keting communication option will depend on how well it plays
the particular role(s) it has been assigned. Much academic
research has focused on providing insights into the perfor-
mance of individual types of communications, as summarized
in textbooks on communication topics such as advertising and
promotions (Belch and Belch 2015; O’Guinn et al. 2015),
database marketing (Blattberg, Kim, and Neslin 2008), social
media (Moe and Schweidel 2014), and personal selling (Man-
ning, Ahearne, and Reece 2015).
Contribution needs to consider a number of different factors.
The content of the communication option and the context in
which

it is seen, heard, or experienced, for example, are both critically
important. The information processing model of communication
effectiveness, described previously, can be helpful in
identifying
and interpreting the relevant motivation, ability, and
opportunity
factors that affect how consumers process any proposed commu-
nication option. Similarly, the taxonomy of different types of
com-
munication objectives provides additional benchmarks to assess
communication effects that may emerge at different stages of
the
consumer-decision journey. To assess the contribution of any
communication option, it is important to understand the totality
of
communication effects it creates and all the progress and
accom-
plishments it achieves against the different communication
objectives.
Commonality
Regardless of which individual communication options mar-

keters might consider on the basis of their likely ability to
contrib-
ute, they will also want to consider how to coordinate the entire
marketing communication program such that some communica-
tion options share content and create similar effects.
Commonality
is the extent to which information conveyed by different
commu-
nication options shares meaning or elicits similar effects across
communication options. Although we outline a number of other
important IMC choice criteria, commonality clearly plays an
espe-
cially important role in virtually any well-designed IMC
program
(Moriarty, Mitchell, and Wells 2015).
There are many reasons to focus different communication
options on the most important and differentiating benefits of a
brand. In general, information that is consistent in meaning is
more easily learned and recalled than unrelated information—
though the unexpectedness of inconsistent information some-
times can lead to more elaborate processing and stronger asso-

WorkshopWeek 3© post-it notes by Dean HochmanUTS 2.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to WorkshopWeek 3© post-it notes by Dean HochmanUTS 2.docx

Similar to WorkshopWeek 3© post-it notes by Dean HochmanUTS 2.docx (20)

More from helzerpatrina

More from helzerpatrina (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

WorkshopWeek 3© post-it notes by Dean HochmanUTS 2.docx