|
|||
| Member: Company name: Groupe-conseil Vectis, inc. Resource person: François La Roche Actions: |
|||
|
August 16, 2007 - Advice and Strategy > Communications & Marketing
How many Ps in the marketing mix?Does a 6-P marketing mix tell you anything? "Hey, I thought there were only 4 Ps!", you says. Well, what about 7 Ps, or even 9! Or this: the 4 Ps are dead, viva the 4 Cs! The science --or the art as you see it-- of marketing management seems to evolve. But in this case, do we really have anything new to bite into? A Classic Marketing Mix McCarthy, Kotler et al. taught us some five decades ago that the "marketing mix" was composed of 4 Ps. Who never heard about these when on a school bench or at a training seminar? As there is always one to question commonly accepted knowledge, we are seeing a plethora of new models about ways to think, plan and make decisions on marketing issues. The masters are challenged! Some of them are worth looking into. Others, well... Enough letters? Models are often presented with an acronym to help remember them. The 4 Ps are like that. Many now propose to add Ps to the equation. Here's a quick review. Boom and Bitner add 3 Ps to the original 4: Weingand add these two to McCarthy & Kotler's mix : The list of other "P" variables goes on with suggestions such as: Caution! If a number of detractors of the original model are serious and do add valid points to think about, others propose complex, twisted --almost burlesque-- models, like Woolf who proposed a 10-P model: From Ps to Cs 50 years laters, there are academia who believe that the original 4-P model needs an upgrade. Lauterborn, amongst others, suggest that the approach is all wrong and that marketing decision makers should view their work from the market point of view first (instead of taking on an operational point of view). He came up with the 4 Cs of marketing. Interesting approach that has the value of forcing decision makers to consider everything from the client's perspective. It does propose a different approach yet I beleive that both models are complementary. Nothing really new All --most of-- these proposals are sound and valid. They force us to question our ways of making decisions. They cue our minds to stop for a minute and be vigilant about deciding just out of (old) habits. Putting our usual ways of doing things on the exam table is always a good thing, especially if it does help us become better afterwards. Although the essence of marketing has not changed over the years... Using some of the new ways expressed above to plan and make marketing decisions within a thorough and disciplined planning effort will cover all the necessary variables and angles that a modern business context is bringing on. My mantra: |
|
|