ning that recognizes the
added value of a comprehensive plan
that evaluates the strategic roles of a
variety of communications disciplines
(for example, general advertising, direct
response, sales promotion, and
public relations) and combines these
disciplines to provide clarity, consistency,
and maximum communications
impact. (Schultz, 1993a, p. 10)
The weakness of this definition is its focus
on the bundling together of promotional
mix elements so they in essence “speak
with one voice.” Why is this weak? Because,
inevitably, such an approach can
be managed internally (i.e., inside-out
IMC), and this despite the word “strategic.”
Adoption by the AAA and AMA in
America, however, not to mention its inclusion
in most American marketing texts,
meant that across the Atlantic and any
other ocean or sea, IMC has found some
acceptance, even in this simplified form.
Fill (2002, p. 15), for example, in the
United Kingdom, reaffirmed the idea of
consistent communication and strategic
development when he considered that IMC
THE EMERGENCE OF IMC
March 2004 JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING RESEARCH 21
“was a management process that would
reinforce brand propositions.” Notice
though that by 2002, IMC was no longer
just a communication process, but one
associated with management and with
brands. It does seem evident now that
IMC had to become more than an insideout
device for bringing promotional mix
elements together. But, back in 1993,
Schultz (1993a) had already recognized
the necessity for IMC to move beyond
this stage. It is worth considering the following
citation:
IMC is the process of developing and
implementing various forms of persuasive
communications programs with
customers and prospects over time. The
goal of IMC is to influence or directly
affect the behaviour of the selected communications
audience. IMC considers
all sources of brand or company contacts
which a customer or prospect has
with the product or service as potential
delivery channels for future messages.
In sum, the IMC process starts
with the customer or prospect and then
works back to determine and define
the forms and methods through which
persuasive communications programs
should be developed. (Schultz, 1993a,
p. 17)
In this quotation, IMC is no longer insideout,
but outside-in—that is, driven by the
buyers or potential buyers of goods and services.
By 2002, Duncan had developed an
IMC process model shown here as Figure
1. IMC is different from other customercentric
processes in that its foundation is
communication. This is regarded as the center
of all relationships and is envisaged as
a circular process as opposed to a linear
one. The figure reveals an ongoing, circular
process that creates brand value in the
form of sales, profits, and brand equity, and
there is no starting and stopping related to
obtaining, retaining, and growing customers
(Duncan, 2002). Again, he offers an IMC
definition as
. . . a process for managing the customer
relationships that drive brand
value. More specifically, it is a crossfunctional
process for creating and nourishing
profitable relationships with
customers and other stakeholders by
strategically controlling or influencing
all messages sent to these groups and
encouraging data-driven, purposeful di
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。