IMC At A Crossroads
IMC AT A CROSSROADS: A THEORETICAL REVIEW
AND A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR TESTING
John M. McGrath, University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown
This article examines the history, current state, and the future of Integrated Marketing
Communications (IMC). The article addresses three objectives: First, it explores IMC’s
theoretical roots in other disciplines and outlines the foundations of the concept in the existing
literature; second, it discusses the current debate over the validity of the field; and third, it
proposes an IMC conceptual framework that could make it possible to test the validity of the
concept in future research.
1
IMC At A Crossroads
2
IMC AT A CROSSROADS: A THEORETICAL REVIEW
AND A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR TESTING
INTRODUCTION
Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) has emerged as a distinct area of study, growing
from the roots of psychology, marketing and mass communications. Despite its respected lineage,
however, IMC remains an immature field that has struggled to establish its own unique body of
literature.
The origin of the IMC concept can be traced to the 1980s, when this terminology began to emerge
in the literature of the public relations field (Spotts, Lambert and Joyce 1998). The literature
suggests that the conceptual basis of IMC (some movement toward the integration of marketing
and communications) has existed for years (Hutton 1996), and perhaps even decades, dating back
to the early marketing literature (Spotts et al. 1998). A key milestone in IMC’s emergence
occurred in 1991, when a task force of academics and professionals was formed in an effort to
agree on such fundamental issues as the most appropriate terminology and definition of the IMC
concept (Spotts et al. 1998). This task force was formed under the aegis of the Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC). Interestingly, the task force actually
debated the use of at least three different terms, “integrated communications,” “total
communications,” and “IMC” (Duncan, Caywood and Newsom 1993). Although the task force did
not forge a clear consensus on which term to use, “IMC” emerged as most commonly cited option
and began to enter the mainstream of mass communications and marketing discussion in the early
1990s (Schultz 1998).
In recent years, however, a heated debate has emerged over IMC’s merits and validity. Proponents
of the concept suggest that the concept represents a revolutionary way to organize and enhance
their marketing efforts and build brand equity (Duncan 2002; Ogden 1998; Schultz 1996; Schultz
et al. 1993). Some even consider IMC to be essential for organizations to successfully execute
their marketing communications efforts (Caywood and Ewing 1991; Gorning 1994).
Critics of IMC, however, maintain that the concept is simply a management “fashion” or a “pop
management theory” that lacks a solid theoretical base (Cornelissen and Lock 2000). Others
contend that it suffers from ambiguity in terms of its definition and practice (Wolter 1993), or that
it simply “reinvents existing marketing theory using different terminology” (Spotts et al.1998, p.
210). Some critics even go so far as to proclaim the death of the IMC concept (Drobis 1998)
because it has been misunderstood by so many practitioners and academics.
Others believe that IMC is an attractive concept, but question why more practitioners have not
embraced it. For example, Pettegrew (2001) suggests that most major U.S. corporations have failed
IMC At A Crossroads
3
to fully implement key aspects of the IMC theory. This view seems to be confirmed by Cleland
(1995), who cites research suggesting that less than one-third of all firms surveyed had developed
an annual marketing communications plan.
Even some supporters of IMC share concerns over its current state. While admitting that “IMC is
not yet a theory” Schultz and Kitchen (2000, p. 17) suggest that the field is still developing. They
argue that many of weaknesses cited above by critics are indicative of a field in its early stages of
development. Gould (2000) also defends IMC as an evolutionary field, still undergoing a process
of definition and redefinition. And Duncan (2002) agrees that IMC’s ideas and practices should
continue to be critically examined and challenged as IMC continues to evolve.
This article contributes to the IMC discussion by reviewing the concept’s theoretical roots,
outlining the concept’s foundations today, and proposing a conceptual framework that could be
used to test the validity of the concept in future research.
IMC’S THEORETICAL ROOTS
At its most fundamental level, the IMC concept is an attempt to understand how and why
consumers respond to some marketing communications messages more positively than others—
and then to harness this learning to maximize the effectiveness of marketing communications
programs. Much of the basis for IMC is derived from the literature of the psychology, which, in
turn, has influenced the mass communications and marketing fields. An examination of these
literature traditions helps explain why and how consumers respond to marketing communications.
Why Consumers Respond to Marketing Communications
In order to understand how consumers react to marketing communications messages, it is
important to examine how individuals relate to their environment. Hackley and Kitchen (1998)
acknowledged this in their discussion of how the social constructionist perspective relates to IMC.
Accordingly, it is appropriate to consult the social psychology literature to understand the
motivations consumers may have to respond to marketing communications appeals.
Symbolic self-completion theory (Wicklund and Gollwitzer 1982) is helpful in this regard,
suggesting that we all have a natural desire or need to “complete” our self-concepts. We may
have acquired many of the components of our concepts organically, such as through
introspection, social learning from parents and even the media, or through social interactions
with peers. However, this theory posits that we may still experience what we perceive to be a gap
between the sum of these organic components of the self and what we perceive to be the
“complete” definition of the self. As a result, we may turn to the acquisition of material goods to
fill the gap. Marketing communications can play a powerful role in defining which specific
brands can best fill this void. In fact, marketing communication efforts can be seen as
“representative of societal norms that hold emotional power to confer or withhold social
acceptance” (Gomes, Leupold and Albracht 1998, p. 12). This perceived psychological need for
acceptance and completion becomes a major opportunity for marketers who can position their
IMC At A Crossroads
4
products as the ideal way for individuals to complete their self-concept (at least in the way the
society—or marketers—define it).
The notion of the extended self (Belk 1988) is also helpful in understanding why consumers
respond to marketing communications messages. Belk suggests that our behavior is the result of a
desire we have to “extend” our self-concept beyond our physical bodies and into the world around
us. The marketing communications implications of Belk’s theory are powerful: if a product can be
positioned as a desired, even required, extension of a person’s self-concept, then it can enjoy an
enhanced position in the marketplace. Proof of this phenomenon in practice includes the
acquisition of lifestyle accessories including luxury items such as clothing, imported luxury
automobiles, and exotic vacations. To the extent that these products can be marketed as society’s
natural expressions of the extended self, their marketers will benefit from Belk’s theory. In sum,
these examples from the social psychology literature suggest significant implications for the
creation of marketing communications messages for brands to create a differential advantage over
competitors.
How Consumers Respond to Marketing Communications
A large body of literature suggests that individuals base many decisions concerning products
upon their attitudes toward individual brands, and that these attitudes can be influenced by
marketing communications. Research into these issues owes much to the study of cognitive
psychology, dealing with the ways human beings process external stimuli, including marketing
communications messages.
The Hierarchy of Effects (HOE) model is a useful starting point in the literature because it
suggests that there is a way to understand (and influence) the ways which marketing
communications efforts could effectively change consumer attitudes—and hopefully even
consumer behavior. This promise has helped sustain the influence of the model for over a
century, starting with some early work in the late 1890s by Lewis (Barry and Howard 1990).
The HOE model suggests that consumers respond to marketing communications stimuli in a
hierarchical manner of three psychological and behavioral stages: cognitive, affective, and
conative. This original HOE model was developed to help explain how the personal selling
process worked. Over time, the original model has been adapted to help explain how consumers
respond to marketing communications messages. Two examples of these adaptations are the
AIDA Model (Strong 1925), and the Lavidge-Steiner Model (Lavidge and Steiner 1961).
McGuire’s (1968) Information Processing Model (IPM) proposed an alternative view of the
persuasion process which builds upon the HOE model by proposing a sequence of six steps
which the process of persuasion is presumed to follow: Presentation (of the stimuli), Attention,
Comprehension, Yielding, Retention, and finally Overt Behavior (Perry 1996). The IPM
influenced the development of other, related models including those developed by Engel et al.
(1993) and Thorson (1990). These models have had a major influence on the marketing
communications field, particularly through advertising agency media planning models which
IMC At A Crossroads
5
account for the need to establish frequency of exposure to consumers (that will eventually cause
consumers to yield and retain messages).
Petty and Cacioppo’s (1986) Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) also attempts to explain how
consumers process marketing communications messages. The ELM’s two routes to persuasion,
central and peripheral, have important implications for the marketing communications field. For
example, messages for certain brands which have been developed in a manner which encourages
central processing can lead to the creation of relatively strong and long-lasting attitudes about the
messages. Conversely, the ELM suggests marketing communications messages that employ
superficial or peripheral techniques (i.e., attractiveness of the message presenter, the credibility
of the message source, etc.) will not be as long lasting or as resistant to change as those
processed centrally (Petty and Cacioppo 1986).
The Heuristic-Systematic Model (Eagly and Chaiken 1993) is another approach which is similar
in many respects to the ELM, and addresses the possibility of multiple consumer motivations.
The HSM’s two routes to persuasion are summed up in its title: “heuristic” and “systematic,”
which mirror the ELM’s peripheral and central processing modes.
The four models discussed so far provide useful insights into the cognitive processes that
consumers use to react to mass communications messages. However, they do very little to
explain the link between these cognitive activities and the motivations consumers have for
considering the messages. There is a model which makes this link, the Cognitive
Structure/Cognitive Response Model (CS/CRM), and it may be the most insightful for
understanding how consumers respond to marketing communications.
The CS/CRM builds on the work of Fishbein’s attitude theory (Olson, Toy and Dover 1982) and
suggests that consumers react to marketing communications messages by creating conceptual
images of the messages in their mind (structures)—and then establishing a linkage between these
images and a set of beliefs about the images. These cognitive structures have important
relevancy for marketing communications because the model suggests that they can be powerful
predictors of attitudes, behavioral intentions toward the brand, and ultimately, even overt
behavior, such as the act of purchasing (Olson et al. 1982).
More recent work in the CS/CRM area has helped to better explain the link between consumers’
cognitive structures and the motivation for behavior (i.e., this motivation will be strong if beliefs
about the brand correlate well with the consumer’s own self concept). This linkage is provided
through the notion of the “activated self,” a critical component of the Cognitive Structure Model
of Self (Walker and Olson 1997). The activated self describes those aspects of a consumer’s selfconcept that are activated in certain situations, such as when one is particularly self-conscious
(i.e., a first date, or presenting a report at a meeting of total strangers). These activated aspects
account for only a small portion of an individual’s complete set of cognitive structures about the
core self, a network of beliefs that represent “the most stable self-knowledge with the broadest
motivational power” (Walker and Olson 1997, p. 165). Once activated, however, these aspects of
the self can be very influential in motivating behavior. This is particularly true when the
IMC At A Crossroads
6
activated structures represent aspects of the individual’s most closely held values and goals.
Importantly, consumers also develop cognitive structures about brands, either through experience
with using them, or through exposure to marketing communications messages. At the time of
activation, a consumer may make the connection between highly-important value cognitive
structures and existing cognitive structures held about a specific brand. This provides the
opportunity for marketers to position brands in such a way as to encourage the creation of such
relevant links with important consumer values.
The relevancy of the CR/CSM to IMC is that it provides a framework for examining the role of
spontaneous cognitive responses generated by exposure to a marketing communications message
upon consumer attitudes toward the message, the brand itself, and upon behavioral intentions. It
also provides a framework for examining the cognitive structures that consumers may create
about a brand, and how these structures relate to their own self values. The study of these
relationships can provide a window through which to view the deeper meanings consumers may
attach to a brand—and to its marketing communications.
THE IMC CONCEPT IN TODAY’S LITERATURE
Based largely on the theoretical roots reviewed above, a body of literature has emerged that
attempts to support the IMC concept. It suggests that IMC is based upon three theoretical
foundations.
The first foundation proposes that IMC is based on an ongoing dialogue between consumers and
marketers (Duncan 2002, 1994; Schultz 1998; Stewart 1996). This dialogue is seen as a
“relationship” between the two parties, which is subject to organic changes including growth,
dormancy, or decline. Marketers actively seek out information about their consumers, and
through the use of databases and market research tools, find ways to strengthen their brand’s
relationship with the consumer. Likewise, consumers also seek out information about brands,
and use their own resources to develop a relationship with the brand, including the reception and
processing of marketing communications messages with brand information, actively considering
how basic brand attributes and benefits fit with their own self-concept, and considering other
information such as the opinions of friends and family. Marketers could add value to their
brands if they successfully create and nurture these types of relationships. Schultz et al. (1993)
argue that IMC can help in this regard by promoting consistency in a brand’s interaction with the
consumer, resulting in a stronger, more focused relationship. This type of solid, two-way
relationship is seen as a key element of IMC, and is consistent with the social psychology
perspective suggested by the work of Wicklund and Gollwitzer, Belk, and others.
The second foundation of the IMC concept proposes that message consistency across all
elements of the marketing mix, particularly throughout all marketing communications messages,
is essential. Other terms for this message consistency are “one-voice” and “seamless”
communications (Phelps and Johnson 1996). This notion “involves maintaining a clear and
consistent image, position, message and/or theme across all marketing communications
disciplines or tools” (Phelps and Johnson 1996, p. 162). Reilly (1991) suggests such one-voice
IMC At A Crossroads
7
consistency can be established at the beginning of an IMC campaign through the adoption of a
single strategy that unifies all messages communicated to consumers about the brand. Snyder
agrees, noting that IMC is achieved when a “single positioning concept” is developed for a
brand—and then executed in all communications (Snyder 1991, p. 32). Schultz (1996) explains
that the desire for such a high degree of consistency in the IMC concept is driven by the
complexity of consumer information processing required by the multitude of competing brand
stimuli in today’s marketplace. He argues that a brand message which is relatively more
consistent in its message and execution across all marketing vehicles employed by the brand is
more likely to be processed effectively by a consumer. The importance placed upon message
consistency in simplifying message processing is consistent with some of the cognitive
psychology perspectives discussed earlier, particularly those of Walker and Olson.
The third foundation of the IMC concept proposes that all aspects of a brand’s relationship with a
consumer must be considered, not just the traditional promotion vehicles of advertising, direct
marketing, sales promotion, public relations and personal selling (Duncan 2002, 1994; Schultz
and Kitchen 2000; Schultz et al. 1993; Stewart 1996). Peltier, Mueller and Rosen (1992) reason
that the traditional marketing communications vehicles noted above are not mutually exclusive
tools and that coordinating messages across them “may jointly maximize their unique strengths,
while minimizing their weaknesses…” (Peltier et al. 1992, p. 41). DeLozier (1976) even suggests
that an exclusive focus on only these traditional promotion vehicles can be counterproductive for
an organization’s total marketing communications effort. IMC proponents suggest that the
concept can be implemented effectively only if all elements of the marketing mix are
coordinated, and that a consistent brand message must be integrated across the entire range, all
the way from the brand’s name and physical attributes to pricing, distribution, as well as the
traditional promotional tools noted above. Shimp (1990) concurs, suggesting that “the true test of
a product’s communication effectiveness is how consumers respond to the total product”
including all the use of all the vehicles noted above (Shimp 1990, p. 58). This holistic approach
to using all marketing vehicles in concert is consistent with both the social and cognitive
psychology literature discussed above, since it suggests that marketers could benefit by
coordinating all the tools at their disposal to create messages which consumers choose to process
and make their own—and which become part of their cognitive structures, waiting to be
activated by exposure to a marketing communications stimuli.
In sum, the three foundations of the IMC concept promise an opportunity for marketers to
enhance the relationship power of their brands with consumers. They propose that a strategy
employing messages that are executed consistently across all vehicles of a brand’s marketing
mix, and which foster an ongoing consumer-brand relationship dialogue, will generate enhanced
consumer appeal.
HOW DOES IMC WORK?
The IMC literature is clear on the foundations of the IMC concept. However, it begs an even
more important question: how does IMC work? Two explanations can be drawn from the
literature.
IMC At A Crossroads
8
First, the literature suggests that a marketing communications strategy employing an IMC
strategy would be more competitive in an environment where consumers are inundated with
growing volumes of competing message stimuli. In such an environment, Schultz et al. (1993)
argue that consumers, by necessity, may be capable of retaining relatively less information about
a relatively larger number of brand marketing messages. As a result, a brand employing a the
IMC strategy of message consistency would theoretically stand a better chance of seeding its
single, unified message with the consumer than brands which attempt to seed a number of
different messages.
Second, a brand employing the IMC strategy of integrating different types of vehicles may create
a stronger image trace in consumers’ memory. The implication of this stronger trace is that it
might be more easily processed than a series of brand messages which offer bits of conflicting,
or at least not highly consistent, information across different vehicles (Schultz et al. 1993). It is
then hoped that the superior processing potential of an IMC strategy would translate into more
desirable effects, including attitudes toward the message, toward the brand, and even enhanced
buying intentions.
Research to support the notion that some message creative strategies can create distinctive
memory traces is described in the literature for imagery processing. For example, Pavio and
Csapo (1973) looked at the relative impact of different stimuli on test subjects’ memory of
objects. They tested the effects of “concrete” words, “abstract” words, and pictures, and found
that consumer memory of test objects was the greatest when pictures and “concrete” words were
combined interactively, presumably because this created the most powerful imagery trace
(MacInnis and Price 1987). Lutz and Lutz (1977) also found evidence supporting the imageryenhancing effects of integrating visual and verbal stimuli. In their experiment, they manipulated
the placement of product brand name, a product attribute, and a picture in various test
advertisements. They found that memory was affected positively when the brand name, product
attribute, and picture were combined interactively in one stimulus versus when they were
presented separately in a non-interactive format. In another experiment looking at the effects of
advertising message stimuli of consumer memory, Childers and Houston (1984) found some
additional evidence of a positive relationship between advertisements integrating a picture with
other visual cues and stronger imagery resulting in higher levels of brand recall. They
hypothesized that this positive effect of integration may be due to the “chunking” of these stimuli
at the time they are encoded by the brain. This may create more powerful imagery than is
possible when each stimulus is processed by the brain individually. They concluded that the
stronger memory trace caused by chunking may lead to easier retrieval—and hence recall
(MacInnis and Price 1987).
This memory-enhancing role of the combined stimulus of different types of imagery may hold
special significance for the vehicle integration component of the IMC concept. It suggests that
messages that are conceptually consistent across different vehicles might have an enhanced
impact on consumers’ cognitive structures, creating memory traces that are reactivated and
strengthened upon exposure to subsequent exposures of different vehicles using the same
IMC At A Crossroads
9
conceptual themes. This reactivation of existing memory traces by messages that are integrated
conceptually across multiple vehicles may have a more powerful impact upon persuasion than
either the simple repetition of a message in one vehicle (i.e., on the package or in an
advertisement) or by exposure to multiple messages across different vehicles that are not
consistent conceptually.
This is one aspect of the IMC concept that offers a challenge and opportunity to make a unique
contribution to the existing literature. Specifically, the challenge is to test if an IMC strategy,
employing message consistency across a number of different vehicles, can make a unique impact
on consumer cognitive structures. If such evidence could be found, then perhaps IMC could add
some new value to the existing literature traditions it draws upon.
A PROPOSED IMC CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
To help visualize the IMC concept and provide a basis for testing its validity, a framework is
proposed which focuses on two of IMC’s key foundations described earlier, integration of
multiple vehicles, and consistency of message. The third foundation of the IMC concept,
consumer-marketer dialogue, is not considered in this typology, but could be added in future
models.
The first IMC foundation, scope of vehicle integration, can be conceptualized as a continuum of
the number of different marketing vehicles used. Duncan (2002) has identified a wide range of
vehicles that can be considered part of a brand’s IMC program. These vehicles reflect not only
the traditional one-way flow of marketing communications from the marketer of the brand to the
consumer, but also more recent two-way types of marketing communications which reflect the
dialogue nature of IMC described earlier. Duncan’s list of traditional one-way vehicles includes
advertising, public relations, sales promotion, specialty items, merchandising, packaging and
licensing. Vehicles identified by Duncan (2002) as more two-way in nature include personal
sales, direct response marketing, events and sponsorships, trade shows, e-commerce and
customer service activities.
The low end of the continuum suggests a condition with minimal level of vehicle integration
(i.e., the product would have little or no support by marketing communications vehicles such as
advertising). A condition featuring a moderate level of integration would be consistent with the
definition developed by the American Association of Advertising Agencies (Stewart 1996), in
which multiple elements of the traditional marketing communications mix would be integrated
(i.e., advertising as well as public relations, direct marketing, sales promotions and personal
selling). Finally, a condition at the high vehicle integration end of the continuum would be
consistent with the Schultz et al. (1993) insistence that “almost everything the marketer does
relates to or provides some form of communication to customers or prospects” (Schultz et al.
1993, p. 45) as well as with Duncan’s (2002) broad list of vehicles noted earlier. At this high
end of the continuum, the scope of vehicle integration would include everything from the design
of the product itself to its packaging, its distribution, its pricing, and its marketing
communications efforts.
IMC At A Crossroads
10
The second IMC foundation, degree of message consistency, could also be conceptualized as a
continuum. The existing literature is vague about a precise explication of the term message
“consistency,” with little agreement on exactly what it means for elements of an IMC portfolio to
be “consistent.” Stewart (1996) suggests that IMC requires “clarity (and) consistency” between
marketing communications stimuli, and Duncan (1994) proposes that they have a “consistent
voice and look.” Perhaps a helpful lens through which to view this concept would be the notion
of message consistency.
By looking at message consistency as a continuum, a range of conceptualizations can be
accommodated. Specifically, one extreme end of the continuum would include a condition in
which brand messages strictly adhere to the notion of a one-voice and seamless (Phelps and
Johnson 1996) campaign across different executions of a single strategy (Reilly 1991). This
condition would be represented by groups of executions across different vehicles (i.e.,
packaging, advertising, e-commerce, etc.) that are highly consistent in terms of visual imagery
(including color schemes, logos, and other design elements), as well as verbal and/or text themes
(including body copy, taglines and other devices). To the consumer, this condition would
represent the highly consistent implementation of a single message strategy. An intermediate
point along this consistency continuum would be represented by a moderate condition in which it
would appear to consumers that groups of executions across different vehicles shared a common
strategic theme (i.e., “Just Do It”), but that this strategy was implemented through the use of a
range of visual imagery and verbal and/or text themes which varied more in their execution
between vehicles than the highly consistent condition. On the other extreme of the continuum
would be a condition that represents very diverse and relatively inconsistent implementation of a
common message strategy across different vehicles. Specifically, in this low consistency
condition, visual imagery as well as verbal and/or text themes would vary widely in their
implementation on packaging, in marketing communications efforts, as well as in other aspects
of the campaign.
To visualize the interaction of these two conceptual ranges, a two-dimensional diagram is
proposed in Figure 1 below, with vehicle integration represented by the horizontal axis and level
of message consistency represented by the vertical axis. A synthesis of the definitions of IMC
offered in the literature suggests that the IMC concept would be represented by a position in the
extreme upper right hand box of the diagram.
-----------------------Figure 1 about here
-----------------------IMC’s representation would be characterized by the coordinated use of multiple vehicles to
deliver a brand’s marketing campaign coupled with a high degree of message consistency across
all of the different marketing vehicles employed in the effort, ranging from the product itself to
all forms of marketing communications executions.
IMC At A Crossroads
11
CONCLUSIONS/DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
The discussion so far has attempted to establish that the IMC concept can be grounded in the
literature traditions of psychology, as well as mass communications and marketing. However, it
should also demonstrate that IMC will remain a highly speculative field in search of its own theory
until a fundamental question is addressed in a meaningful way, preferably through empirical
research.
The IMC conceptual framework presented above could serve as a starting point from which to
study this question. For example, an experimental research design could be constructed to test
the effects of different conditions on consumers. Specifically, a test could be constructed which
would represent an IMC condition (the extreme upper right hand box) by creating stimulus
materials which employed multiple vehicles (perhaps a product package sample, a print ad for
the product, a coupon, a specialty item, a news story prompted by a brand press release, and a
web site), and which employed a high level of message consistency. This condition could be
tested against each of the other conditions depicted by the other boxes on Figure 1.
Researchers could operationalize the variable of vehicle integration by creating the types of low,
moderate, and high conditions depicted in Figure 2 below. The different levels of vehicle usage
could be then be quantified (for example, the low condition might represent the use of two
vehicles; the moderate condition might represent three to six vehicles; and the high condition
might represent the use of seven or more vehicles).
----------------------Figure 2 about here
----------------------Researchers could operationalize the variable of message consistency by creating the types of
low, moderate and high conditions depicted in Figure 3 below. The different levels of message
consistency could be quantified and compared through a pre-testing procedure employing
message consistency questionnaire scales. Such a scale could be adapted from Low (2000) who
employed it in a survey investigating the use of IMC in U.S. businesses. Low found that this
scale offered acceptable levels of internal reliability. The three items of this scale were prefaced
by the statement “describe your feelings about the materials considered together as a group...”.
Each of the three items in this scale employed seven-point bipolar semantic differential scales
anchored by the statements “disagree/agree.” The first item asked if subjects perceived that the
materials “look like they were all planned and developed by the same team of people.” The
second item asked if subjects thought “all the pieces look like they fit together in one consistent
strategy.” The third item asked if the materials “all focus on a common message.” Using such a
scale, the variable of message consistency could be quantified in a pretest (for example, the low
condition could be represented by mean scores of 0 to approximately 3.0 on a seven-point
consistency scale; the moderate condition by mean scores of approximately 3.0 to 5.0 on the
scale; and the high condition by mean scores of approximately 5.0 or higher).
IMC At A Crossroads
12
----------------------Figure 3 about here
-----------------------The critical portion of future research, as suggested above, would be to test the IMC condition
versus the others. Specifically, consumers could be exposed to the materials representing
different conditions in an experimental setting and asked to provide their assessment using
commonly accepted persuasion effectiveness measures, including attitude toward the ad (Aad ),
attitude toward the act of purchasing the product (Aact), attitude toward the advertised brand itself
(Ab), and behavioral intentions toward the advertised brand (BI).
Such an experimental research approach could begin to test the validity of at least two of the
foundations of IMC theory, vehicle integration and message consistency. It could also serve as a
catalyst for future work in the field, which would help build IMC theory and help fuel the
constructive discussion about the field.
REFERENCES
Barry, Thomas E. and Daniel J. Howard (1990), “A Review and Critique of The Hierarchy of
Effects in Advertising,” International Journal of Advertising, 9, 121-135.
Belk, Richard (1988), “Possessions and the Extended Self,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 15,
139-168.
Caywood, Clarke and Raymond Ewing (1991), “Integrated Marketing Communications: A New
Master’s Degree Concept,” Public Relations Review, 17 (3), 237-244.
IMC At A Crossroads
13
Childers, Terry. L. and Michael. J. Houston (1984), “Conditions for a Picture-Superiority Effect
on Consumer Memory,” Journal of Consumer Research, 11, 643-654.
Cleland, Kim (1995), “A Lot of Talk, Little Action on IMC,” Business Marketing, 80 (3), 1.
Cornelissen, Josep P. and Andrew R. Lock (2000), “Theoretical Concept or Management
Fashion? Examining the Significance of IMC,” Journal of Advertising Research, 40
(September-October), 7-13.
DeLozier, M. Wayne (1976), The Marketing Communications Process, New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Drobis, David R. (1998), “Integrated Marketing Communications Redefined,” Journal of
Integrated Communications, 4, retrieved from the World Wide Web May 17, 2002 at:
http://www.medill.northwestern.edu/imc/studentwork/pubs/jic/journal/1998.htm.
Duncan, Thomas R. (2002), IMC: Using Advertising and Promotion to Build Brands, New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Duncan, Thomas R. (1994), “New Sides of IMC,” in Faure, C., and L. Klien (Eds.) Marketing
Communications Strategies Today and Tomorrow: Integration, Allocation, and
Interactive Technologies, Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Duncan, Thomas R. and Stephen E. Everett (1993), “Client Perceptions of Integrated Marketing
Communications,” Journal of Advertising Research, 33, 30-39.
Duncan, Thomas R., Clarke Caywood and Doug Newsom (1993), Preparing Advertising and
Public Relations Students for the Communications Industry in the 21st Century: A Report of the
Task Force on Integrated Communications.
Eagly, Alice H. and Shelly Chaiken (1993), The Psychology of Attitudes, New York, NY: Brace
Jovanovich.
Engel, James F., Roger D. Blackwell and Paul W. Miniard (1993), Consumer Behavior, 7th
ed., London: Dryden, 391-417.
Gomes, Mary E., Stephen Leupold, and Matthew Albracht (1998), “Advertising, Community,
and Self,” ReVision, 20 (4), 26-37.
Gorning, Matthew P. (1994), “Putting Integrated Marketing Communications to Work Today,”
Public Relations Quarterly, 39 (3), 45-49.
Gould, Stephen. J. (2000), “The State of IMC Research and Applications,” Journal of
Advertising Research, 40, 22.
IMC At A Crossroads
14
Hackley, Christopher and Philip Kitchen (1998), “IMC: A Consumer Psychological
Perspective,” Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 16 (3), 229-235.
Hutton, James G. (1996), “Integrated Marketing Communications and The Evolution of
Marketing Thought,” Journal of Business Research, 37, 155-162.
Lavidge, Robert J. and Gary A Steiner (1961), “A Model for Predictive Measurements of
Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Marketing, 25, 59-62.
Low, George S. (2000), “Correlates of Integrated Marketing Communications,” Journal of
Advertising Research, 40, 27-39.
Lutz, Kathy A. and Richard J. Lutz (1977), “The Effects of Interactive Imagery and Learning:
Application to Advertising,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 493-498.
MacInnis, Deborah J. and Linda L. Price (1987), “The Role of Imagery in Information
Processing: Review and Extensions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 1-23.
McGuire, William J. (1968), “Personality and Attitude Change: An Information Process
Theory,” in Psychological Foundations of Attitudes, Greenwald, A.G., Brook, T.C., and Ostrom
T.M., eds., New York, NY: Academic Press.
Ogden, James R. (1998), Developing a Creative and Innovative Integrated Marketing
Communications Plan, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Olson , Jerry C., Daniel R. Toy and Phillip A. Dover (1982), “Do Cognitive Responses
Mediate the Effects of Advertising Content on Cognitive Structure?” Journal of Consumer
Research, 9, 245-262.
Pavio, Allan and Kalman Csapo (1973), “Picture Superiority in Free Recall: Imagery or Dual
Coding?” Cognitive Psychology, 5, 176-206.
Peltier, James W., Barbara Mueller and Richard G. Rosen (1992), “Direct Response Versus
Image Advertising,” Journal of Direct Marketing, 6 (1), 49-66.
Pettegrew, Lloyd S. (2001), “If IMC Is So Good, Why Isn’t it Being Implemented? Barriers to
IMC Adoption in Corporate America,” Journal of Integrated Communications, 7, retrieved
from the World Wide Web May 17, 2002 at: http://www.medill.northwestern.edu/imc/
studentwork/pubs/jic/journal/2001.htm.
Perry, David K. (1996), Theory and Research in Mass Communication: Contexts and
Consequences, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Petty, Richard E. and John T. Cacioppo (1986), Communication and Persuasion: Central and
Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change, New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
IMC At A Crossroads
15
Phelps, Joseph and Edward Johnson (1996), “Entering the Quagmire: Examining the ‘Meaning’
of Integrated Marketing Communications,” Journal of Marketing Communications, 2, 159-172.
Reilly, James C. (1991), “The Role of Integrated Marketing Communications in Brand
Management,” The Advertiser, 1 (Fall), 32-35.
Schultz, Don E., Stanley I. Tannenbaum and Richard F. Lauterborn, (1993), The New Marketing
Paradigm, Integrated Marketing Communications, Chicago, IL: NTC Publishing.
Schultz, Don E. (1996) “The Inevitability of Integrated Communications,” Journal of Business
Research, 37, 139-146.
Schultz, Don E. (1998), “New Century Needs New Marcom Methods,” Marketing News, 32,
(3), 12-13.
Schultz, Don E. and Phillip .J. Kitchen (1997), “Integrated Marketing Communications in U.S.
Advertising Agencies: An Exploratory Study,” Journal of Advertising Research, 37 (5), 7-18.
Schultz, Don E. and Phillip J. Kitchen (2000), “A Response to ‘Theoretical Concept or
Management Fashion?’” Journal of Advertising Research, 40, 17.
Shimp, Terrence A. (1990), Promotion Management And Marketing Communications, Chicago,
IL.: Dryden Press.
Snyder, Beth (1991), “Rethinking ‘Integrated,’” Advertising Age, 62 (46), 32.
Spotts, Harlan E., David R. Lambert and Mary L. Joyce (1998), “Marketing Déjà Vu: The
Discovery of Integrated Marketing Communications,” Journal of Marketing Education, 20, 210219.
Stewart, David W. (1996), “Market-Back Approach to the Message of Integrated
Communications Programs: A Change in Paradigm and a Focus on Determinants of Success,”
Journal of Business Research, 37, 147-153.
Strong, Edward K. (1925), The Psychology of Selling, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Thorson, Esther (1990), “Consumer Processing of Advertising,” in Current Issues and
Research in Advertising, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.
Walker, Beth A. and Jerry C. Olson (1997), “The Activated Self in Consumer Behavior: A
Cognitive Structure Perspective,” Research in Consumer Behavior, 8, 135-171.
Wicklund, Robert A. and Peter M. Gollwitzer (1982), Symbolic Self-Completion, Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
IMC At A Crossroads
Wolter, Lou (1993), “Superficiality, Ambiguity Threaten IMC’s Implementation and Future.”
Marketing News, 27, 12.
Figure 1.
A Proposed IMC Conceptual Framework
Vehicle Integration
Low
Moderate
High
IMC
Condition
High
Message
Moderate
Consistency
Low
Consistency
16
IMC At A Crossroads
Figure 2.
A Proposed Continuum of Vehicle Integration
Low
1-2 vehicles
Moderate
5-7 vehicles
High
More than 7 vehicles
17
IMC At A Crossroads
(Consistent with Stewart, 1996)
Product
Packaging
Product
Packaging
Advertising
Public Relations
Direct Marketing
Sales Promotion
Personal Selling
(Consistent with Duncan, 2002)
Product
Packaging
Advertising
Public Relations
Direct Marketing
Sales Promotion
Personal Selling
Website
Sponsorships
Specialties
Figure 3.
A Proposed Continuum of Message Consistency
Low
Moderate
High
18
Mean scores = 0 to approx. 3.0
on a seven-point consistency scale
Mean scores = 3.0 to approx. 5.0
on a seven-point consistency scale
Executions share a common
strategic theme and are highly
consistent in terms of visual
imagery (including color schemes,
logos, and other design elements),
as well as verbal and/or text themes
(including body copy, taglines and
other devices) from one vehicle to
another
Executions share a common
strategic theme, but use a range of
visual imagery and verbal and/or
text themes which vary more from
one vehicle to another
IMC At A Crossroads 19
Mean scores = 5.0 to approx. 7.0
on a seven-point consistency scale
Executions share a common
strategic theme, but visual imagery
as well as verbal and/or text themes
vary widely from one vehicle to
another