Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2159874

1

Authors:

Mr. Isaac Acheampong (ikeygh@yahoo.com) and

Mr. Kwabena Asamoah Asiedu (landi145@yahoo.com)

Affiliation:

Accra Polytechnic – Marketing Department

Post Office Box GP 561

Accra – Ghana

Phone: 02330302662939, 662263

Name of Track: Marketing

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2159874

2

Integrated Marketing Communications:

A customer - focused approach in Marketing Modern Businesses.

Mr. Isaac Acheampong and Mr. Kwabena Asamoah Asiedu

Abstract

This paper explores the concept of integrating Marketing Communications tools by companies as a customer focused means of marketing their businesses. The Marketing communication tools considered include

advertising, sales promotion, public relations, direct marketing and internet/interactive communications. Previously, most companies concentrated mostly on advertising to communicate to their target

customers and seldom used the other communication tools. Some companies used other communication tools but on separate basis which is in contrast to the concept if IMC. This is the premise on which this paper

studied how modern firms use comprehensive integration of marketing communications tools which enhances success through synergistic execution of their marketing communication programs. Available literature

indicates that an effective IMC program ensures a successful marketing of a company’s product/service and improves on their brand image as well as corporate image. This again focuses on finding out whether this could be

proven practically.

Field of Research: Marketing

3

1. Introduction

Companies develop communication messages which send out their intended brand and corporate images. The creation of an Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC)

program helps companies to create single, consistent and unified customer focused messages using electronic, print and outdoor media. An effective and efficient execution of an IMC program ensures that the needed awareness of company’s

offerings is created. It has been argued that IMC is the foundation of new customer-focused marketing efforts for acquiring, retaining, and growing relationships with

customers and other stakeholders (Duncan and Moriarty, 1998).

(Moriarty et al, 1994) indicate that the shift toward the IMC perspective has been hailed as one of the most significant changes in the history of advertising and promotion.

(Kitchen et al, 2004) also add that it is the major communications development of the last decade of the 20th century. In view of this marketing oriented companies work

closely with their agencies to create IMC campaigns as observed by (Belch & Belch, 2004).

2. Literature Review

Various studies point out that, among the various IMC tools, advertising has received

the most attention with respect to its impact on the response process of consumers. The various communication tools that team up with advertising to form the IMC

campaign are dealt with individually and subsequently the strength they produce for a company is also looked at. Explanations on these tools are explained further. Much of the review for this study is sourced from the work of George E. Belch, Professor of

Marketing, San Diego State University and Michael A. Belch, Professor of Marketing, San Diego State University.

Sales Promotion While much theorizing and research has been conducted in an attempt to determine the manner in which advertising impacts the response process of consumers, less attention

has been given to other elements of IMC such as sales promotion, direct marketing, public relations and the Internet. In practice, consumer-oriented sales promotion accounts for an equal or even greater amount of the promotional budget than media

advertising (Belch and Belch, 2004). The increasing reliance on sales promotion is, at least in part, attributable to a greater desire by marketers for measurable and

quantifiable results as well as an increasing emphasis on return on investment (Neslin, 2002).

Mr. Isaac Acheampong, Department of Marketing, Accra Polytechnic, Ghana, Email: ikeygh@yahoo.com

Mr. Kwabena Asamoah Asiedu, Department of Marketing, Accra Polytechnic, Ghana, Email:

landi145@yahoo.com.

4

Advertising

This is the most visible IMC tool that companies employ in their communication programs. The dominant conceptualization of how advertising works from an

intermediate to long-term perspective is through the response hierarchy model (Strong, 1925; Lavidge and Steiner, 1961; McGuire 1978.). As noted by (Weilbacher, 2001), hierarchy-of-effects (HOE) models have been around in the literature of marketing in

one form or another for more than 100 years. Colley’s (1961) what became kown by its acronym as (DAGMAR) which presented an approach to setting and measuring

advertising goals and objectives based on a hierarchical model of response with four stages: awarenesscomprehensionconviction and action. The DAGMAR text was revised by Dukta (1995), for further understanding.

Internet and Interactive Communication Effects Technological advancement has brought about this tool and it has become the fastest growing and most dynamic areas of IMC. Interactive media allow for a back-and-forth

flow of information whereby users can participate in and modify the form and content of the information they receive in real time.

Consumers are able to assume an active rather than passive role in the response process for interactive advertising. (Pavlou and Stewart, 2000) note that the goals of

interactive advertising tend to be similar to the traditional objectives of advertising, which means that many of the traditional measures of effectiveness remain relevant.

However, they note that interactive media also have some properties that expand the range of responses that might be used to measure the effectiveness of these communications as the control of the information flow is shifted from the marketer to the

consumer.

Public Relations/Publicity Effects

The role of public relations as a component of the integrated marketing communications process has changed significantly. The traditional role of earning public understanding and respect, while still important, has been supplemented by a more marketing oriented

approach (Kotler and Mindak, 1978). Some public relations academicians have been critical of the idea of viewing PR as a marketing function and the encroachment of IMC

into this area. (Lauzen, 1991). However, leading practitioners such as (Ries and Ries, 2002) argue that for many companies, public relations is moving toward a new role and becoming more of a marketing function.

Direct Marketing Effects Direct marketing has generally been viewed as a promotional tool that is designed to

elicit some type of behavioral response from consumers in the form of purchase, requests for additional information, or providing a sales lead. As noted by (Duncan, 2005), in direct marketing a response is defined as something said or done in response

to a marketing communication. Direct mail, infomercials, telemarketing, direct response

5

print and broadcast advertising have the same objective which is to generate a response such as requests for additional information or actual purchase. Thus

measures of effectiveness almost always focus on the behavioral response generated by the message. Metrics such as cost per response or inquiry, cost per order (CPO),

orders per thousand etc are just a few of the criteria employed to measure short term effectiveness of direct marketing while measures such as lifetime value of customers are beginning to be used to assess long term effects as noted by (Nash, 2000).

(Brodowsky and Belch, 2002), indicated that, infomercials generally follow a formulaic sequence that assumes a learnfeeldo response sequence. Viewers first learn as

they are shown information about the benefits of the product or service. Next, viewers feelings are evoked through emotional testimonials from those whose lives have improved by using the product or service. Finally, a direct response appeal encourages

viewers to take action and order the product or service.

Strengths in integrating communication tools.

While numerous studies have been conducted to measure the effectiveness of

individual IMC elements, far less attention has been given to examining the synergistic effects of multiple marketing communication tools working together, despite the fact that consumers are likely to receive information from a variety of sources. Indeed, one of the

fundamental ideas behind IMC is that all of a company’s marketing and promotional activities should project a consistent and unified message and image to the consumer.

(Naik and Raman, 2003), wrote that, “a central tenet of the IMC approach, which distinguishes it from the conventional view, is that each medium enhance the

contributions of all other media. This distinction is driven by the potential existence of synergy, that is, the added value of one medium, as a result of the presence of another medium, causing the combined effect of media to exceed the sum of their individual

effects.

The problem of ignoring synergistic or interaction effects of the various IMC tools has been recognized. For example, Weilbacher (2001) argues that hierarchy models of advertising effects really cannot be validated since they are concerned only with

advertising in the form of discrete brand-centered sponsored and content-controlled media messages. He adds that “in addition to advertising, and, in lesser degree from

brand to brand, the total marketing communications program will also include, public relations; a broad range of sales price and point-of-purchase promotional activities; brand websites; direct response marketing; sponsorship programs with athletes or other

celebrities; sponsorship of sporting events and stadia, pop culture events, and classical cultural events and halls; in-store display and sampling programs; movie and TV show

product placements; and who knows what else?”. Weilbacher notes that consumers are constantly immersed in brand-sponsored communications that differ in significant degree from content-controlled advertising messages. He concludes that there is a

6

need to think about the effects of advertising and other forms of marketing communication from an IMC perspective and understand how consumers synthesize

individual IMC inputs into an overall conception of a brand.

3. The Methodology

This study was a survey based, the researchers designed questionnaires which were administered in order to achieve the objectives set for the study. A total of eleven (11)

reputable companies in Ghana were surveyed. One hundred and ten respondents were randomly selected to be interviewed. Each respondent was screened to make sure that

they patronize either the selected company’s services and /or products.

Each question that was asked generally pertained to all the selected companies. The

researchers first looked at the influence of the individual communication tools on consumers. Secondly, the impact of the integrated communications programs of the companies on the purchasing decision making of customers was looked at. As part of

looking at the impact integrating the communication tools, the behavioral tendencies of the respondents were also studied. The behavioral tendencies were how often

consumers are induced to purchase and repurchase the brands of the companies.

The companies selected are part of the Ghana’s club 100 companies. Other factors considered were their market share, brand image and brand identity. The companies

include three telecommunications companies i.e. Mobile Telecommunication Network (MTN), Vodafone Ghana Ltd and TiGO Ghana Ltd. Three banks which included

Barclays bank, UT bank and Zenith bank. There were three insurance companies namely, Vanguard Assurance, State Insurance Corporation (SIC) and Enterprise Life Assurance Company and two manufacturing companies namely Nestle Ghana ltd and

Coca Cola Bottling Company of Ghana.

The study basically tested the usage and the impact of the IMC model of marketing

communications and its impact on marketing brands and also on corporate communications. The various findings are interpreted and discussed.

7

4. Main Findings

This study found out the effects of the individual communication tools of the IMC program on the consumers of the companies. It again found out the impact of

integrating all the communications tools on the consumers.

Table 1. Influenced by Advertisement

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid often 70 63.6 63.6 63.6

very often

26 23.6 23.6 87.3

Don’t Know

9 8.2 8.2 95.5

Not Often

4 3.6 3.6 99.1

Not at all

1 .9 .9 100.0

Total 110 100.0 100.0

Advertising: This communication tool is very popular. As much as seventy respondents

(63.3%) of respondents said they are often influenced by it. This may be due to the fact that it is the commonest tool companies use.

8

Table 2. Influenced by Sales Promotions

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid often 52 47.3 47.3 47.3

very often

26 23.6 23.6 70.9

Don’t Know

11 10.0 10.0 80.9

Not Often

13 11.8 11.8 92.7

Not at all

8 7.3 7.3 100.0

Total 110 100.0 100.0

Sales Promotions: This IMC tool influenced 52 respondents which represents 47.3%

of the total respondents. Twenty six respondents (23.6%) also indicated they are very often influenced by it. This indicates that sales promotions as a tool is very influential.

9

Table 3. Influenced by Internet and Interactive Communications.

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid often 26 23.6 23.6 23.6

very often

21 19.1 19.1 42.7

Don’t Know

46 41.8 41.8 84.5

Not Often

13 11.8 11.8 96.4

Not at all

4 3.6 3.6 100.0

Total 110 100.0 100.0

Internet: The internet was found not to be very influential on people. Only 26

respondents (23.6%) said they are often influenced by the internet. Majority of the respondents did not even know the impact of the internet on themselves. This may be

due largely to the phenomenon of computer illiteracy in most African countries.

10

Table 4. Influenced by Public Relations/ Publicity

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid often 20 18.2 18.2 18.2

very often

35 31.8 31.8 50.0

Don’t Know

27 24.5 24.5 74.5

Not Often

16 14.5 14.5 89.1

Not at all

12 10.9 10.9 100.0

Total 110 100.0 100.0

Public Relations/Publicity: This tool was also found to be very influential as 35

people (31.8%) indicated they were influenced through it. However, 27 people (24.5) could not tell whether they are influenced or not. This is significant as PR/Publicity is a

modern trend in marketing communications.

11

Table 5. Influenced by Direct Marketing

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid often 50 45.5 45.9 45.9

very often

29 26.4 26.6 72.5

Don’t Know

8 7.3 7.3 79.8

Not Often

10 9.1 9.2 89.0

Not at all

12 10.9 11.0 100.0

Total 109 99.1 100.0

Missing System 1 .9

Total 110 100.0

Direct Marketing: Almost half of the respondents 50 people (45.5%) said they were

often influenced by direct marketing. This may be due to the fact that the customers are

directly communicated to for their response. Again this may be due to the fact that, there are no intermediaries. Only 12 respondents (10.9%) were not influenced at all and

eight respondents did not know.

12

Table 6. What are your perceptions of Integrated Marketing Communications?

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid Good 44 40.0 40.4 40.4

very good

57 51.8 52.3 92.7

Don’t know

7 6.4 6.4 99.1

very bad

1 .9 .9 100.0

Total 109 99.1 100.0

Missing System 1 .9

Total 110 100.0

Perception of IMC: The respondents were asked of how they perceive the concept of

IMC in marketing communications. As many as 57 people (51.8%) said they have a

very good perception with only 0.9% responding as very bad. This in the view of the researchers indicates the positive impact of IMC on consumers.

13

Table 7. How often do you recall a communication message?

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid often 16 14.5 14.7 14.7

very often

52 47.3 47.7 62.4

Don’t Know

26 23.6 23.9 86.2

Not Often

11 10.0 10.1 96.3

Not at all

4 3.6 3.7 100.0

Total 109 99.1 100.0

Missing System 1 .9

Total 110 100.0

Brand/Communication Recall (Cognitive Effect): This sought to find out how people

could process the IMC process for decision making. As much as 52 people (47.3%) said

very often they recall through the IMC process with only 3.6% saying not at all. This shows a significant contribution of IMC in modern marketing.

14

Behaviour of Respondents.

The study further found out the behavioral patterns of respondents to the IMC programs of the companies. The following analyses explain them.

Table 8. How often are you induced into trial of a product based on a company’s IMC program?

Frequency Percent

Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid often 23 20.9 21.1 21.1

very often

32 29.1 29.4 50.5

Don’t Know

40 36.4 36.7 87.2

Not Often

6 5.5 5.5 92.7

Not at all

8 7.3 7.3 100.0

Total 109 99.1 100.0

Missing System 1 .9

Total 110 100.0

Trial: The question sought to find out how respondents were induced to try a

product/service through an IMC program. 23 people (20.9%) said often with 32 people

(29.1%) saying very often they are influence to try a product /service.

15

Table 9. How often are you induced to purchase a product based on a company’s IMC program?

Frequen

cy Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulativ

e Percent

Valid often 52 47.3 47.7 47.7

very often

11 10.0 10.1 57.8

Don’t

Know 12 10.9 11.0 68.8

Not

Often 34 30.9 31.2 100.0

Total 109 99.1 100.0

Missing System 1 .9

Total 110 100.0

Actual Purchase: IMC was able to induce almost half of the respondents 52 people

(47.3%) to make actual purchases. This shows that the IMC program speeds up the consumer decision behaviour as some people do not even try the product/service but

just go on to buy.

16

Table 10. How often are you induced to repurchase a product based on a company’s IMC program?

Frequen

cy Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulativ

e Percent

Valid often 24 21.8 22.9 22.9

very often

26 23.6 24.8 47.6

Don’t

Know 49 44.5 46.7 94.3

Not

Often 4 3.6 3.8 98.1

Not at

all 2 1.8 1.9 100.0

Total 105 95.5 100.0

Missing System 5 4.5

Total 110 100.0

Repurchase: The number of people who were influenced to repurchase was only 24

(21.8%). A reduction of over 50% from the initial 47.3% who purchased because of the IMC program. This may be due to a variance in consumer’s expectations and the actual perception after using the product or experiencing the service. Companies must

therefore be consistent in fulfilling their promises.

17

5. Conclusion

Generally the individual communication tools that make up the IMC program were found to be popular among respondents. This may probably be due to the fact that most

companies use them more often. The study further revealed that integrated marketing communications if really implemented has tremendous impact on a company’s ability to influence their customer’s behaviour. On the average, about fifty percent of the

respondents indicated that they are induced to purchase and also repurchase a company’s brand.

Brand recall which is an essential aspect of consumer behaviour as well as trying out products by consumers were also found on the average to have about fifty percentage response from the respondents. These findings indicate the tremendous impact an

effective IMC will have on the fortunes of a business.

The perception of consumers of an IMC program by a company was also found to be

very good. This augurs well for companies since the extent of conception of their brands is very high and their brands also easily get into the evoke set of their audience.

Regardless of the tremendous contributions found from the implementation of IMC, there still persists the problem of measuring its effectiveness. Schultz and Kitchen (2000) acknowledged this problem by stating that “We can’t measure IMC now and it

may be some time before it can be. The problem is that many marketing activities can’t be measured and the value of communication effects and impacts are even more

tenuous.” However, this problem is curbed by measuring the impact of the IMC process. It could be measured through brand recall surveys, enquiries made on the product/service, sales volume etc. It should also be noted that since a variety of

communication tools constitute the IMC process, determining the interactive effects of all of the tools is an arduous task.

18

References

Baker, William E. and Richard J. Lutz 2000, “An Empirical Test of an Updated Relevance-Accessibility Model of Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Advertising, 29,

1 (Spring) 1-15.

Belch, George E. and Michael A. Belch 2004 Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated

Marketing Communication Perspective, 5th edition, New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Irwin.

Dukta, Solomon 1995, DAGMAR: Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising

Results, 2nd Edition, Lincolnwood, IL: NTC Business Books.

Duncan, Tom 2005 IMC: Using Advertising and Promotion to Build Brands, 2nded, New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Irwin.

Greenwald, Anthony 1968, “Cognitive Learning, Cognitive Response to Persuasion and Attitude Change,” in Psychological Foundations of Attitudes, A.G. Greenwald, T.C.

Brock and T.W. Ostrom (eds) New York: Academic Press.

Joan Meyers-Levy, Prashant Malaviya. 1999, “Consumers' Processing of Persuasive

Advertisements: An Integrative Framework of Persuasion Theories,” Journal of Marketing. (63), 45-61.

Kitchen, Philip J., Joanne Brignell, Tao Li and Graham Sprickett Jones 2004, “The Emergence of IMC: A Theoretical Perspective,” Journal of Advertising Research,

(March) 19-30.

Kotler, Philip and William Mindak 1978, “Marketing and Public Relations,” Journal of

Marketing, 42, 4 (October), 13-20.

Lauzen, Martha M. 1991, “Imperialism and Encroachment in Public Relations,” Public

Relations Review, 17, (Fall) 245-55.

Lavidge, Robert J. and Gary A. Steiner 1961, “A Model for Predictive Measurement of Advertisement Effectiveness,” Journal of Marketing, 25 (October) 59-62.

MacInnis, Deborah J. and Bernard J. Jaworski 1989, “Information Processing from Advertisements: Toward an Integrative Framework,” Journal of Marketing, 53 (October), 1-23.

McGuire, William 1978 “An Information Processing Model of Advertising Effectiveness,”

in Behavioral and Management Science in Marketing, Harry L. Davis and Alvin J. Silk, eds. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 156-80.

Moriarty, Sandra E. 1994, “PR and IMC: The Benefits of Integration,” Public Relations Quarterly, (Fall), 39 (3), 38-44.

19

Naik, Prasad A. and Kalyan Raman, 2003, “Understanding the Impact of Synergy in

Multimedia Comparisons, Journal of Marketing Research, 60 (November), 375-388.

Nash, Edward L, Direct Marketing: Strategy, Planning, Execution, (4th Edition), New York, McGraw Hill, 2000.

Neslin, Scott A. Sales Promotion, Cambridge MA: Marketing Science Institute, 2002.

Pavlou, Paul A. and David W. Stewart 2000, “Measuring the Effects and Effectiveness of Interactive Advertising: A Research Agenda,” Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1, (1).

Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo and David Schumann 1983, “Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement,”

Journal of Consumer Research, 10 (September) 135-46.

Ries, Al and Laura Ries 2002, The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR, New York, Harper Business

Strong, Edward K. Jr. 1925, “Theories of Selling,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 9, 75-86.

Vakratsas, Demetrius and Tim Ambler 1999 “How Advertising Works: What We Really Know?,” Journal of Marketing, 63, (January) 26-43.

Weilbacher, William M. 2001, “Does Advertising Cause a ‘Hierarchy of Effects’?,” Journal of Advertising Research, 41,6, 19-26.

Wright Peter 1980, “Message Evoked Thoughts, Persuasion Research Using Thought Verbalizations,” Journal of Consumer Research, 7 (September) 151-75.

20

Appendix I The following questions pertain to the companies listed below……. Kindly tick the

appropriate box for your response concerning the influence of each of the marketing communication tools on you.

Often Very

often

Don’t

Know

Not

Often

Not at

All

Influenced by Advertisement

Influenced by Sales Promotions

Influenced by Internet and Interactive Communications

Influenced by PR/ Publicity

Influenced by Direct Marketing

Appendix II

Often Very often

Don’t Know

Not Often

Not at All

How often do you recall a communication

message?

How often are you induced into trial of a

product based on a company’s IMC program?

How often are you induced to purchase a

product based on a company’s IMC program?

How often are you induced to repurchase a product based on a company’s IMC program?

Q. What is your perception of Integrated Marketing Communications?

a. Good b. V. Good c. Don’t know d. V. Bad