整合营销传播战略与执行的外文翻译.DOC

《整合营销传播战略与执行的外文翻译.DOC》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《整合营销传播战略与执行的外文翻译.DOC（14页珍藏版）》请在沃文网上搜索。

1、外文翻译原文Title: PRODUCT PLACEMENT IN INTEGRATED MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGYMaterial Source: LAPPEENRANTA UNERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Author: LappeenrantaIn order to sufficiently understand the nature of product placement one must also understand the marketing communications environment product placeme

2、nt is part of. The marketing communications mix (also commonly referred to as promotion mix) (Kotler 1997, 604) has evolved along with any other field of business curriculum, and like any other field it has also changed its nature from its origins. (Percy 1997, 1) The change in the marketing communi

3、cation practices has extended to the point where it has been claimed that ”marketing in the 1990s is communication and communication is marketing; the two are inseparable” (Schultz et al. 1994, 45; Schultz in Shimp 1997, 4). The marketing communications mix consists of, but is not limited to, the fi

4、ve major modes of communication: advertising, sales promotion, public relations and publicity, personal selling, and direct marketing. The elements of the marketing communications mix interact with each other with great diversity while also affecting its surrounding framework. Marketing communicatio

5、ns is considered as one of the four Ps of the marketing mix (others being product, pricing, and place / distribution). Public relations has often been regarded as a marketing communications mix element by marketing professionals, a view that has not always been shared in the PR community. One view o

6、f the relationships between marketing, marketing communications, public relations, and advertising as a representative of a marketing communications mix element is illustrated in Figure 5, provided by James G. Hutton. In the past, traditional mass media advertising was the dominating feature In most

7、 companies promotional mix, the fact that caused marketers to rely heavily on their advertising agencies in their marketing communications. The reliance on mass media advertising has been attributed to the past Success of mass production of goods. As similar products were produced in mass quantities

8、 and practically everything that was produced was also sold, marketers came easily to conclusion that consumers were a homogenic group that would be best reached with mass media advertising. (Schultz 1996e, 139-140; Solomon & English 1994, 5 7) At the same time other marketing communications compone

9、nts such as sales promotion and direct marketing were considered merely as auxiliary services that were implemented by an outside operator on ad hoc basis. Similarly, corporations public image and publicity affairs had been outsourced to a public relations agency and were not viewed as integral comp

10、onents in the marketing communications process. (Belch & Belch 1998, 9; English & Solomon 1996, 183) In addition, many marketing organisations kept their marketing communications functions strictly separate with different budgets, different objectives, different views on markets and so on. The corpo

11、rate and product image created by this type of organisation was hardly a consistent one and most often failed to communicate effectively with the desired target audiences. This road started to come to its end during the 1980s as many companies realised the need for a more strategic and cohesive appr

12、oach in their communications.IMC emerged into an environment where marketing communication practices were radically changing. These changes included e.g. 1) reduced faith in mass media advertising (media clutter, rising costs, and negative consumer reaction), 2) fragmentation and demassification of

13、target audiences, 3) increased sophistication, perceptiveness, and interest of consumers, 4) increased reliance on highly targeted communication methods, 5) greater demands imposed on marketing communications suppliers, 6) shift in a balance of power from manufacturers to retailers,7) technological

14、advancements, 8) globalisation of markets, and, 9) increased efforts to assess communications return on investment. (Shimp 1997, 15; Hackley & Kitchen 1998, 1; Kitchen 1996, 7; Erdogan & Kitchen 1998, 369; Tedlow in Cornelissen 2000, 8; Schultz & Kitchen 1997, 13, 18; Eagle & Kitchen 2000, 675; Stew

15、art 1996, 147; Hutton 1996, 155; English Solomon 1996, 189; Pickton & Broderick 2001, 383) These changes have dictated marketing communicators to look for more innovative and more feasible, efficient, and effective mechanisms of communication to reach, persuade, inform and remind consumers and prosp

16、ective customers of their products and services. (Kitchen 1996, 7; Eagle & Kitchen 2000, 683; OLeary 2000, 34; Stewart 1996, 147) integration is a term that has suffered inflation as it has been used in numerous connections. In order to make the term ”integrated marketing communications” more practi

17、cal to use it can be broken into pieces for closer examination. To integrate comes from the Latin verb integrare and means ”to make whole or complete by adding or bringing together parts”. IMC can therefore be interpreted as ”bringing together various techniques for advertising and promoting the pro

18、duct or service to the buyer”. (Rossiter & Percy 1998, 323) The objective of integrated marketing communications is to differentiate and elevate a brand or service above its competitors to achieve brand equity. (McLaughlin 1997, 27) On a concept level IMC has been defined in chapter 1.4. From those

19、definitions the one given by the American Association of Advertising Agencies (the 4As) has been adopted for this thesis: IMC is a concept of marketing communications planning that recognises the added value of a comprehensive plan that evaluates the strategic roles of a variety of communication dis

20、ciplines e.g. general advertising, direct response, sales promotion, and public relations and combines these disciplines to provide clarity, consistency, and maximum communication impact. (American Association of Advertising Agencies in Percy 1997, 3; Belch & Belch 1995, 7; Belch & Belch 1998, 9; Si

21、rgy 1998, 4) Rossiter and Percy have described the essence of IMC with the following three terms: By integrated marketing communications.we mean the 1) selective combination of appropriate types of advertising and promotion Rossiter and Percy use the term advertising and promotion to describe what i

22、s generally called marketing communications in this thesis,2) meeting a common set of communication objectives for the brand and, more particularly, to support a singular ”macropositioning” for the brand, and 3) integration over time with regard to customers.” (Rossiter & Percy 1998, 6-7) When commu

23、nicating with their target groups (customers, clients and other stakeholders) all business enterprises share the same purposes for communication: 1) Informing prospective customers about their products, services, and other related issues; 2) Persuading people to choose particular products and brands

24、, shop in certain sales outlets, attend certain events, and otherwise influence their behaviour; 3) Inducing action from customers so hat their behaviour is directed toward the marketers offering and is undertaken immediately rather than delayed. (Shimp 1997, 10) As these objectives are pursued it i

25、s important to recall the notion of marketing communications that all marketing mix elements (not just the communications mix elements) contain information and, therefore, communicate with consumers. (Ibid., 10-11; DeLozier in Spotts et al. 1998, 216; Pickton & Broderick 2001, 207-208) This is why m

26、arketing communications can be either intentional (e.g. advertising, promotional campaigns, personal selling etc.) or unintentional, when e.g. product feature, packaging, or price symbolises and communicates something to consumers that the marketing communicator may not have intended. (Shimp 1997, 1

27、0-11; Kitchen 1994, 20; Belch & Belch 1995, 7-8; Stewart 1996, 148) In addition to these product-related communications there are also many other unintentional aspects of communications that may have a significant effect on consumers perception of the product or the company. These may include things

28、 like poorly maintained delivery vehicles, unfriendly service, wrongly addressed mail, long customer response times, poor crisis management, and so on. (Meredith 2000, 43; Englis & Solomon 37 1996, 183) The unintentional communication variables raise again the need for integrated marketing communica

29、tions planning. 1) Affect behaviour: “An integrated marketing communications program ultimately must be judged in terms of whether it influences behaviour, but it would be simplistic and unrealistic to expect an action to result from every communication effort. Prior to purchasing a new brand consum

30、ers generally must be made aware of the brand and its benefits and influenced to have a favourable attitude toward it. Communication efforts directed at accomplishing these intermediate, or pre-behavioural, goals are fully justified.”2) Use all forms of contacts: IMC uses all forms of communications

31、 and all sources of brand and company contacts as potential message delivery channels. Contacts would include TV commercials, magazine ads, messages on the Internet, posters on public vehicles, and a virtually endless list of other possibilities.” 3) Start with the customer or prospect: Another impo

32、rtant aspect of IMC is that its process starts with the customer or prospect and then works back to the brand communicator in determining the most appropriate and effective methods through which persuasive communications programs should be developed.” 4) Achieve synergy: Inherent in the definition o

33、f IMC is the need for synergy. All of the communication elements (ads, point-of-purchase material, sales promotion, events etc.) must speak with a single voice. Coordination is absolutely critical to achieving a strong and unified brand image and moving consumers to action. The failure to closely co

34、ordinate all communication elements can result in duplicated efforts or worse yet contradictory messages about a brand being conveyed to consumers.” 5) Build relationships: Successful marketing communications requires building a relationship between the brand and the customer. It can be argued, in f

35、act, that relationship building is the key to modern marketing and that IMC is the key to relationship building.Companies have learned that it is more profitable to build and maintain relationships than it is to continuously search for new customers. This explains the growth in frequent-flyer and ma

36、ny other ”frequency” programs.” (Shimp 1997, 12-15) Ultimately, the IMC implementation may face a barrier in the different dimensions of integration. These dimensions, as already introduced in chapter 2.2, describe the depth of integration within the organisation. It is oversimplified to consider in

37、tegration only in the marketing communications mix. The integration process must also reach the other, deeper dimensions of the organisation. If the more profound integration process is unsuccessful it may threaten the feasibility of marketing communications integration as the gained benefits are lo

38、st in some other part of the organisation. As mentioned, the criticism against the IMC concept has also risen in the academic world. The main concerning issues expressed by the critics include e.g. the lack of academic rigor on the concept, the ahistorical concentration of practitioners and academic

39、s on the concept, and the disturbing lack of commonly agreed upon definition or process description of the IMC concept (Cornelissen 2000, 7-8; Spotts et al. 1998, 210; Schultz & Kitchen 1997, 8, 14; Kitchen & Schultz 1999, 23; Stewart 1996, 147; Hutton 1996, 155). The claimed lack of academic rigor,

40、 or lack of foundation, manifests itself in the superficial debate over responsibility issues and how IMC should be executed, instead of concentration on theory construction and research, as well as development of practically non-existent operational measures (Schultz & Kitchen 1997, 13; Cornelissen

41、 2000, 7-8; Eagle & Kitchen 2000, 671, 675). The IMC critics see the lack of commonly accepted definition of IMC hindering the development of 67these operational measures (Cornelissen 2000, 7-8; Eagle & Kitchen 2000, 667); i.e. it is difficult to measure when it is not commonly agreed upon what to m

42、easure. An additional difficulty in the measurement of integrated programs is brought about by the fact that measurement criteria is dictated by the set objectives of the program, which leaves open the issue of how to measure total program and individual components. Nevertheless, each element needs

43、to be measured in its own right, as well as the objectives, communication, and the integrated outcomes. The truth is that the lack of acceptable evaluation mechanisms is a serious threat for the progression and growth of IMC. (Kitchen & Schultz 1999, 28-29) Pickton and Hartley (1998) have pointed ou

44、t some more barriers to IMC implementation. Among their findings are some points that have been addressed also by the scholars mentioned previously. Pickton and Hartley (1998) see the following as potential IMC barriers: the mind-set, taxonomy and language, structure of organisations, elitism, magni

45、tude of task, manager ability, and dimensions of integration. (Pickton & Hartley 1998, 452-454; Pickton & Broderick 2001, 80-82) These factors are discussed briefly in the following. The mind-set as a barrier to IMC implementation refers to the appreciation of specialisation that has built-up over t

46、he years. Specialisation often overlooks integration, and therefore also the benefits of integration. The problems caused by this mind-set include the fear of change and loss of control felt by the people within the industry, and agency creatives aversion to integration and their lack of willingness

47、 to work across the media and promotional mix. Further, the already mentioned cult of specialisation with the addition of the history, tradition, and experience of companies have been considered as limiting factors to integration. The taxonomy and language as IMC barriers refers to how the promotion

48、al / marketing communications mix is described, i.e. as separate and discrete activities, like advertising, sales promotion, and so forth. This traditional classification is becoming increasingly inadequate as it presents major classification difficulties and neglects the possibility of integration

49、by definition. For example, it is difficult to know where in the mix belong such diverse activities as product placement, endorsements,and other special communications methods. The structure of organisations has been widely recognised as a barrier to IMC (Wightman 1999, 18; Schultz 1998, 20; Eagle & Kitchen 2000, 675), also already in this text. The division of different functions to specialists is a classic problem hindering the attempts for integration. The problems of hierarchical structures, s