DÜNYANIN ÖBÜR UCUNDA IMC

Yeniden merhaba,

Biraz teknik ve akademik kaçacak biliyorum fakat, yine de sizlerle bu çalışmayı paylaşmak istedim. Sıkılmayacağınızı umarım :)

Australian Advertising and PR Agency Perspectives on Integrated Marketing Communications

Prof. Dr. Philip Kitchen

The Business School, University of Hull, Hull UK

Assist. Prof. Dr. Serdar Sever

Anadolu university, Faculty of Communication Sciences

Advertising and PR Department

Eskisehir, Turkey

Introduction

Integrated marketing communications has been around for quite some time. Nevertheless, debates and discussions on the concept are ongoing in practitioners as well as academic circles. This study will investigate how executives within Australian advertising and PR agencies perceive integrated marketing communications. The Australian market and marketers shows similar characteristics with US and the UK marketing communications sectors. Thus, expectations are that executives in the Australian Marketing communication sector should have digested and be practicing the integrated marketing communications no less than in those other markets. In order to assess how Advertising and PR practitioners perceive integrated marketing communications, a survey instrument was developed and 150 questionnaires were distributed via direct mail. Out of these 150 questionnaires, 100 were sent to advertising agencies, and 50 were sent to PR agencies.

The research findings indicate that advertising agency executives tend to view the concept as similar to process used to ‘unify promotional messages’. On the other hand, PR agencies perceive integrated marketing communications as ‘a strategic business process’. The findings thus point to a major variance between the two groups. That is while advertising agencies view IMC as a tactical tool, for PR agencies IMC is a strategic pathway. This finding does have a comparative value. In a study which was done six years ago, ‘one voice’ emerged as a peculiar finding. Findings of this research over half a decade later indicate that perceptions of IMC have not been changed much amongst advertising and PR circles. Obviously, reasons behind this findings should be analysed and can be a subject of another study. There may be several reason of this relatively static position. One possible reason would be of that IMC is in fact different based upon where it is viewed. However, a break through can be accomplished if Australian advertising and PR agencies would invest more in human resources, training and above of all if they choose to have greater interaction with their counterparts in the UK and US.

Literature Review

Integrated marketing communications as concept and as a field of praxis has been around little more than a decade. However, neither scholars nor practitioners have reached an agreement on definition, measurement or on implementation of the concept. According to Kitchen and Schultz (1999), there was a little progress towards understanding IMC beyond a ‘one voice, one look’ perception. Another debate however has been on who should lead the integration process (Kliatchko 2005). Perhaps if there is one cohort that has been widely affected by these discussions it is the advertising and public relations agency sectors. It is a fact that, on a tactical level clients expect integration of a kind in their marketing communications efforts primarily from their agencies. The question remains, to what extent do advertising and public relations agencies, understand, differ, and or are willing to implement IMC on their clients’ behalf?

Since early 1990’s, scholars have been doing extensive research on IMC and its perception by advertising and public relations agencies throughout the world. Kitchen and Schultz (1999) stated that such research is valuable in order for establishing a basis for more ‘robust’ development of IMC. Besides, a longitudinal research effort over a certain period of time would help scholars overcome to criticism (Cornellisen and Lock 2000) that IMC is a ‘management fad’, and helps theory development (Swain 2004).

Today it is clear that IMC is not fuzz or a fad. On the contrary, it is evolving to a paradigm. Nevertheless, one can conclude that its development stage may vary by country or by marketing culture where communication or IMC takes place (Kitchen et al. 2004).

Kim et al. (2004) investigated perception of IMC as a concept in South Korea. Researchers further indicated that they also aimed to determine degree of diffusion of IMC in other non English speaking country. Kim et al’s (2004) research had three objectives: (1) To explore the perception and implementation of the IMC concept amongst South Korean advertising agencies. (2) To compare and contrast the perception and implementation of IMC between the advertising agencies. (3) To compare and contrast the results of the South Korean study with the previous research results that had been obtained in English-speaking countries. The researchers indicated that IMC had arrived in South Korea and moreover had been widely accepted as a ‘new form of marketing communications strategy’ (Kim et al. 2004). Further evidence suggested that both advertising agencies and clients were implementing IMC. Lastly, their research results revealed that IMC development and implementation were prefaced and underpinned by important changes in the marketing landscape just as had happened in English-speaking countries.

Kallmeyer and Abratt (2001) conducted similar research on perceptions of IMC amongst South African advertising agencies. Researchers found similarities between the findings from their studies from and America (Schultz and Kitchen 1997), and New Zealand (Eagle et al. 1999) . Other scholars indicated that differences in findings were minor rather than substantive between these three studies (Kallmeyer and Abratt 2000).

Kitchen et al. (2004) in their study on perceptions of IMC derived from UK advertising and public relations executives revealed that agency practitioners knew, understood, and practiced IMC on behalf of clients. Further findings from their research indicated that consumers’ needs has become a major driving force in IMC development and implementation. The research also pointed out that a major weakness of IMC concerned evaluation and measurement and that this weakness was incapable of easy resolution. But, and if not resolved, this issue could become a major barrier forestalling subsequent developments.

Research Methodology

The research was designed to investigate and define how advertising and PR agencies’ managers and executives in Australia view IMC. To assess perceptions of IMC among advertising and public relations agencies in Australia, an exploratory approach was applied. A survey method was utilised to collect data from selected agency executives located in Australia, including Tasmania.

10 advertising and 10 PR agencies were chosen for a pilot study. The pilot study revealed that the questionnaire structure was valid and no major problems were detected. Some minor amendments were incorporated where needed.

Following the test run, the questionnaire form direct mailed to senior named executives in 100 advertising and 50 public relations agencies. The list of advertising agencies were selected from B&T Directory 2005/2006 edition, and public relation agencies were composed of B&T Directory 2005/2006 edition and from the membership list of the Institute of Public Relations of Australia (IPRA). B&T is the most comprehensive guide of media and marketing communications sectors within Australia. B&T directory is revised and published annually by Australia’s highest circulating advertising, marketing and media magazine.

Each questionnaire form was individually addressed to a senior manager within the selected organization. Advertising and PR agencies were indiscriminately selected regardless of local or foreign origin. A Convenience sampling method was adopted on the basis of senior managers named in the B&T Directory and IPRA members’ list.

The initial survey instrument consisted of 28 questions. Each questionnaire was accompanied by a cover letter stating the purpose of the study and the researchers name and contact details. A postage paid return envelope was also included in each mailing kit. By the cut-off date 47 questionnaires had been returned from advertising agencies and 25 questionnaires from PR agencies.

Due to errors, only 45 of the advertising agency and 22 of the PR agency return questionnaires were usable for analysis. The effective response rates were assessed as 43% for advertising and 44% for PR agencies. In data analysis, the SPSS statistical computer analysis package was used to analyse research findings.

Results

Table1. Position of respondents

	Frequency	Percent
Staff Manager Executive Other Total	2 17 40 6 65	3.1 26.2 61.5 9.2 100

Overall, distribution of respondents at advertising and PR agencies indicates majority of respondents were executives, followed by managers with various titles and duties in agency structures. Because it is irrelevant with the research aim, gender demographics were not included in tabulations. The overwhelming number of respondents were advertising and public relations agencies executives. This findings we believe indicate two points: (1) IMC merely has become a key point both for advertising and public relations agencies, thus higher management levels are highly involved with the concept and perhaps its applications, (2) researchers were successful in disseminating questionnaires and in gaining a relatively high response rate.

Perception of IMC

Unlike in early days of the concept, researchers concluded that the term has been long in circulation in marketing circles. Because this project is a part of a longitudinal project, researchers did not include a definition as to what IMC entails. Thus, as Kitchen and Li (2005), and Sever (2000) did in their research; there was no need to provide an IMC definition to advertising and PR executives who participated in the research. Rather, respondents were asked to rate the importance of statements in questionnaire. It is assumed that their response to given statements would reflect respondents’ perception of IMC.

IMC may be in different stages of development in each country. For this reason, at question a generic statements about IMC were given and respondents asked to respond to each statement on how they perceive IMC. This was seen to be the best approach to determine at which stage IMC is at in a specific country. Responses towards given statements were tabulated in Table 2. Data analysis indicates that advertising agency executives mainly perceive IMC as a process of ‘delivering unified messages to consumers.’ The advertising agency executives’ response to ‘delivering unified messages to consumers’ acquired a 4.6 mean score. T-test analysis indicates the only significant difference between advertising and PR agency respondents emerges in perceiving IMC as a ‘way of delivering unified messages to consumers.’ Advertising agencies tend to see IMC more like a process to unify messages. PR professionals did not agree with this statement.

One of the discussions in Kitchen and Schultz’s (1999) ‘Multi-Country Comparison of the Drive for IMC’ study was that Australia and India were two countries where utilization of the IMC was not fully developed as was the case in the USA or UK. In ‘IMC-A UK Ad Agency Perspective’ (1998) study, respondents from Australia ranked ‘increased importance of one voice’ as fourth among thirteen other statements. Seven years later, this finding actually corresponds with this study and reveals that advertising agency still apparently values the same attributes in IMC. Thus, the subject in terms of implementation, has not gone far in this time. However this finding does support that of Ewing, De Bussy and Ramaseshan’s (1998) on the ‘one-voice’ element in IMC being seen as the main pillar in agency adopting the concept in Australia.

Respondents from PR agencies valued IMC more as a ‘strategic business process’ achieved 3.70 mean score. Results indicate that advertising agency executives perceive IMC as a ‘tactical process’ whereas PR agency executives tend to see the concept from a ‘strategic’ view point. This findings seem to contradict that of Kitchen and Li (2005), and Schultz and Kitchen (2006).

Table 2. Respondents' perception of IMC

	Mean Ad Agency	Mean PR Agency	SD Ad Agency	SD PR Agency	t	Df	p
Definition of IMC based on coordination Definition of IMC based on a way of organize the business Definition of IMC based on developing and directing brand strategy Definition of IMC based on delivering unified messages to consumer Definition of IMC based on terminology Definition of IMC based on perceiving the concept as strategic management	4.20 2.33 3.05 4.46 2.97 4.03	3.86 3.30 3.40 3.20 3.55 3.70	1.81 1.80 1.26 1.55 1.56 1.25	2.03 2.43 1.27 1.24 1.50 1.56	0.668 -1.572 0.750 3.150 -1.355 0.873	60 57 57 57 57 58	.506 .126 .319 .003** .181 .386

*p<.05; **p<.01

As researchers indicated in their earlier study, “Australia is behind the US in the implementation of IMC.” (Ewing, de Busy and Ramaseshan 1998). This finding indicates that perception of IMC has not been changed a lot among marketing communications circles in Australia since the introduction of IMC in early 1990’s. Such a view overlaps with Schultz and Kitchen’s (1999) finding in “A multi-country comparison of the Drive for IMC” study. In this study researchers found that Australia, despite its free market economy was coming behind the US and the UK. Similar findings were indicated for India as well. Nevertheless India as a emerging economy might need more time before it settles its marketing communications sector. Despite being a western country with fairly developed market economy, reasons behind why Australian advertising and PR agencies are still at development stage of IMC must be a subject for a future research study.

Imc Measurement Issues

Effectiveness or measurement of IMC is one of the most debated points in the literature. Since the early days of IMC, scholars have constantly focussed upon problems with measurement or evaluation. There seems no single right way to measure the success of an IMC process. In this research, we included orthodox ways of IMC measurement in the questionnaire. Instead of giving respondents choices of pre-determined measurement tolls, they were asked to write down their own most preferred method of IMC measurement, if any. Then, responses were grouped under 14 sub categories. These categories and number of answers to each category was tabulated in Table 3. Note that findings reflect one response per agency. Some of the respondents did not not indicate any measurement method, thus are not included in findings. Thus, out of 45 advertising agencies and 22 PR agencies, 33 advertising agency respondents and 20 PR agency respondents indicated that they have some form of IMC measurement in place.

Table 3. Preferred IMC measurement method by agency type

	Advertising Agencies	PR Agencies
Sales Awareness Market share Cost per acquisition Web click Response rate Share of voice Profitability Membership Attendance at events Tracking studies Coverage Media audits Measuring outcomes against pre-determined objectives Total	11 2 2 2 3 8 - - - - 3 - - 2 33	3 1 - - - 3 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 4 20

N= 47

‘Sales’ was by far the most preferred method of measurement for advertising agencies. As for PR agencies, ‘measuring outcomes against pre-determined objectives’ was found to be the most preferred measurement method. These findings indicate a correlation with Kitchen and Schultz (1999) study of ‘A Multi-Country Comparison of the drive for IMC’. In this research, scholars found that Australian agencies just ‘don’t have the tools to measure the impact of IMC’. This finding could have been focussed upon two options. One would be Australian advertising agencies just did not measure the outcome of IMC at all. Alternatively, the second option would be that leave this to their clients, and for clients the first tool of measurement that may naturally come to their mind is volume of sales. We took the second path and concluded that sales’ in the absence of any other method would play a dominating role, thus comes as a number one measurement tool for agencies. Using this axiom as a starting point, our research findings indicated that Australian advertising agencies still perceived ‘sales’ as the most appropriate measurement tool for what they perceived to be integrated campaigns.

In terms of percentages, 33,3 % of Australian advertising agency executives agree that IMC effectiveness is always measured. This figure comes down to just 15 % for PR agency executives. The difference between ad and PR agency respondents become clearer when it comes to how the effectiveness is measured. For respondents from ad agencies ‘sales’ (33.3%) by far the most preferred tool for measuring IMC effectiveness. For PR agency respondents, indicated that ‘measuring outcomes against pre-determined objectives’ (20 %) is the most common way to measure IMC effectiveness, followed by ‘response rate’.

Limitations

This study is just one part of a longitudinal research project, and the questionnaire form has still to undergo further development and be refined over time. The researchers aware that this research is not immune to majority of those limitations confronted by previous research. On the other hand, as this research project progresses in various cultures within and outside of Australia, and as the research instrument and methodology are improve, that hopefully a clearer picture of IMC implementation will emerge.

In Kitchen and Li (2005) study, questionnaire form was distributed via BAF (Beijing Advertising Federation) due to time constraints and accessibility issues. However, in this study survey forms were mailed to respondents directly. Thus, the research process remained under researchers’ control.

Questionnaires were sent to all advertising and PR executives regardless of geographical locations. This approach was taken to increase validity of research findings. However, respondents view on IMC was taken from an aggregate perspective and naturally limited to advertising and PR agencies. The actual implementation decision of IMC belongs to client yet, this research did not cover client side.

Standardized questionnaire and implementation of convenience sampling method emerges as a barrier to generalize research findings to other advertising and PR agencies in Australia.

Implications for further research

It is clear that further research is needed to investigate client perception of IMC in Australia. Perhaps a better approach would be to tackle just how perception of integration occurs in consumer’s minds. However, it may seem that while the IMC concept is gradually evolving to a paradigm state in the other countries it seems to be deeply entrenched at an early stage of its development in Australia. The issue of measurement or evaluation at campaign is the biggest barrier satnding in the way of subsequent development. Perhaps new models are to be developed in the light of findings as to how IMC is perceived and works in various cultures. New research projects should attempt to assess validity of models, which are yet to come. In any case, measurement of IMC should given a first preference in future research project as many critiques to the concept are intensifying around this issue.

References

Cornellisen, J. P. and Lock, A. 2000. Theorethical concept or management fashion: examining the

significance of imc. Journal of Advertising Research (September/October): 7-15.

Eagle, L. and Kitchen, P. 2000. Imc, brand communications, and corporate cultures: client/advertising agency

co-ordination and cohesion. European Journal of Marketing 34 (5/6): 667-686.

Eagle, L., K. Hyde, F. W. Padisetti, and P. Kitchen. 1999. Perceptions of integrated marketing communications

among marketers and advertising agency executives in New Zealand. International Journal of Advertising 18 (1):89-119.

Ewing, M., T., N. deBussy, and B. Ramaseshan. 1998. The meaning of integrated marketing communications

and its impact on promotional effectiveness: evidence from Australia. Paper presented at 8th

International Advertising Association world education conference, October 1-4, in Zagreb, Croatia.

Kallmeyer, J. and Abratt, R. 2001. Perceptions of imc and organisational change among agencies in South

Africa. International Journal of Advertising 20: 361-380.

Kim, I., D. Han and D. E. Schultz 2004. Understanding the diffusion of integrated marketing communications.

Journal of Advertising Research (March):31-45.

Kitchen, P., D. E. Schultz, I. Kim, D. Han, T. Li 2004. Will agencies ever get (or understand) imc. European

Journal of Marketing 38 (11/12): 1417-1436.

Kitchen, P. And T. Li 2005. Perceptions of integrated marketing communications: a Chinese ad and PR agency

perspective. International Journal of Advertising 24 (1): 51-78.

Kliatchko, J. 2005. Towards a new definition of integrated marketing communicatios (imc). International

journal of Advertising 24 (1): 7-34.

Kitchen, P. And D. E. Schultz 1999. A multi-country comparison of the drive for imc. Journal of Advertising

Research (january/February): 21-38.

Kitchen, P. And D. E. Schultz 1998. Imc- a UK ad’ agency perspective. Journal of Marketing Management 14:

465-485.

Sever, N. S. 2000. Perception of imc among advertisers and agency practitioners in Turkey. Paper presented at

9th International Advertising Association world education conference, October 12-15, in Miami, USA.

Swain, W. N. 2004. Perceptions of imc after a decade of development: whos’ at the Wheel, and how can we

measure success. Journal of Advertising Research (March): 46-65.

YENİDEN IMC

YENİDEN BÜTÜNLEŞİK İLETİŞİM

Merhaba

Bu bir deneme yazısıdır ve bu yazıda teorik bir tartışmanın kapılarının aralanması amaçlanmaktadır. Daha doğrusu uzunca süredir gölgede kalan bir kavramın, bir iletişim biçiminin yeni gelişmelerin ışığında tekrar gündeme taşınmasına çalışılacaktır. Bütünleşik iletişim ya da yaygın adıyla bütünleşik pazarlama iletişiminden söz ediyoruz. Bu yazıda bütünleşik pazarlama iletişimi geleneksel doğrusal formatının dışında, tüketici merkezli olarak tartışılacaktır.

MEA CULPA

Bir süredir hepimiz toplumsal değişimin tüketici-birey olgusunu da değişime zorladığını ve giderek bunu başardığını hissediyor olmalıyız. Bu yargı bilimsel bir saptama olmaktan çok, pazarlama iletişimi alanında çalışan ve daha da önemlisi kendisi de bir tüketici olan yazarın gözlemlerini yansıtmaktadır. Bütünleşik pazarlama iletişiminin isim babası Prof. Dr. Don E. Schultz’la yaptığımız model geliştirme çalışmasına başlarken, bir başlangıç noktası aramaktaydık. Aslında yeni bir tanıma hatta yeni bir sistematiğe gereksinim duyduğumuzu her ikimiz de biliyor ancak bunun adını koymakta güçlük çekiyorduk. Tam bu dönemde yayınlanan Schultz’un “Consumers Control the Integration, Not Marketers” başlıklı yazısı, farkında olmadan değişimin neden ve hangi noktadan başlayarak gerekli olduğunun altını çiziyordu (Schultz, 2006).

Schultz bu yazısında başta kendisi olmak üzere pek çok meslektaşının içine düştüğü temel yanılgıyı şöyle anlatıyordu: “1980’lerin sonlarına doğru sahip olduğum bütünleşik pazarlama iletişimini kavrayış biçimimiz tamamen yanlıştı… Yaptığım hata şuydu: Bütünleşikliğin müşteri ya da –reklam veya halkla ilişkiler-ajansının yaptıklarıyla gerçekleştirilebileceğini sanıyordum. Daha açık söylemek gerekirse, pazarlama iletişimi mesajlarının bu ikili tarafından iletilme şekliyle bunların pazarda ortaya çıkan sonuçlarının ölçülmesini bütünleşik pazarlama iletişimi olarak tanımlamıştım. Aslında bütünleşme dediğimiz şey, tüketicinin zihninde oluşur ya da oluşmaz.”

YUNAN TRAGEDYASINDAN EPİK TİYATROYA POST-MODERN PAZARLAMA

Antik Yunan tragedyasında “katharsis” adı verilen bir olgu vardır. Katharsis, izleyicinin önce sahnelenen oyuna ısınması, sonra oyundaki kimi karakter ve olayları kendi dünyasıyla özdeşleştirmesi, zirve noktasında ise oyun ve oyuncularla bütünleşmesi; onlarla ağlayıp onlarla gülmesi ve oyunun sonunda ise duygusal olarak boşamış ve tatmin olmuş bir biçimde tiyatrodan ayrılması süreciydi.

Pazarlama iletişiminde katharsis dışarıdan gelen uyaranlar (stimulus) yoluyla hedef tüketici kitlesini istendik bir davranışa yöneltmek olarak tanımlanabilir. Bu süreçte reklam veren kaynaklı pazarlama iletişiminde kullanılan çekicilik öğeleri uyaran, reklam iletişim araçları sahne, düzenlenen iletişim örgüsü örneğin reklam filminin konusu ya da özel olay düzenlemesi olay kurgusu, oyuncular-gerçek ya da sanal-karakterler, tüketicinin satın alma davranışı ve olası tatmini ise verilen mesaj örgüsüyle izleyicin bütünleşmesi süreçleriyle eşleştirilebilir.

Antik yunan tragedyası klasik tiyatro biçimi olarak yerinde duruyor. Ancak bir de Bertold Brecht’in Epik Tiyatro’su var. Bu biçimde içinde bulunulan duruma yabancılaşma var. Repliklerin değişmesi, doğaçlama repliklerin kullanılması, verilmek istenilen mesajı yansıtmayan sahne ve dekorlar var. Dahası zaman zaman oyuna hazırlıksız olarak davet edilen ve katılan izleyiciler var.

Fuat Fırat bu durumu oldukça iyi açıklıyor: “Modern dönemlerde Pazar bir tiyatroya benziyordu. Sahnede bir grup insan, kurgulanmış bir oyunu oynuyordu ve salondaki seyirci ya bu oyunu beğenip alkışlıyor ya da beğenmeyip yuhalıyordu. (Yani büyük firmalar sahnedeki oyunculardı ve biz tüketiciler de salondaki seyirciler) Ancak post-modernizm ile bu tiyatro da şekil değiştirmeye başladı. Tek bir düzenin tüm insanların ihtiyacını karşılayamayacağı gibi, tek bir tiyatro da yeterli olamazdı. Post-modernizm bu tiyatroların sayısını artırmayı, bununla da kalmayıp tiyatrolardaki sahneleri kaldırmayı veya seyirciyi de sahneye çıkarmayı istiyor. Bu sayede, bir çok farklı düzenden oluşmuş ve bu farklı düzenlerin kendi içinde bütünleşik olduğu bir düzen oluşturmaya çalışıyor.” (Özata ve Öztaşkın, 2005). İki teatral biçim arasındaki farkı pazarlama ortamında tarif eden oldukça “Epik” ancak durumu çok net aktaran bir saptama değil mi?

GELENEKSEL ÖĞRETİLERİMİZİ TARTIŞMANIN ZAMANI GELMEDİ Mİ?

Belki de pazarlama iletişimi çabalarını yanlış bir temele oturtuyoruz. Belki de geleneksel pazarlama iletişimi alışkanlıklarımızı ve öğretilerimizi sorgulamanın zamanı gelmiştir. Etkiler Hiyerarşisi (Hierarchy of Effects), Bilişsel Öğrenme Kuramı (Cognitive Learning Theory), Detaylandırma Olasılığı Modeli (Elaboration Likelihood Model) gibi geleneksel anlamda reklamcılığın üzerine oturtulduğu dönem bitiyor.

Shannon-Weaver temel iletişim modelinde yer aldığı gibi, iletilerin bizden (kaynaktan), tüketiciye (alıcıya) gönderilip istenilen yönde davranış değişikliğine yol açtığı dönemler geride kaldı. Post-Modern pazarlamanın tarif etmek istediği yeni bir evren bu. Kabul etmek gerekir ki 21. yüzyıl yeni bir demokrasi tarifi yarattı. Bu demokrasi internet ortamında gezinen, kopuk kopuk ya da bütünsel anlamda –olumlu veya olumsuz- deneyimlerin, gözlemlerin paylaşıldığı ve en önemlisi de reklam verenin sözün değil, sıradan insanların sözlerine güvenilen bir demokrasi bu. Bir tüketici demokrasisi.

Klasik anlamda modern dünyanın karmaşası içinde yalnızlaşan ve o ölçüde çaresizleşen tüketici tipi, bilginin özgürce paylaşıldığı sanal topluluklarda yerini bulan ve kendisini ifade edebilen güçlü bireylere dönüşüyor (Odabaşı, 2005). Kendisini tam anlamda hiçbir şeye bağlı saymayan, medya ve marka bağımlılığı olmayan bir tüketici kuşağı yetişiyor.

Pek çok işi aynı anda yapabilen bu yeni tüketici tipi, sığ ancak geniş bir bilgi ağına sahip. Yeni tüketici tipi geleneksel “edilgen” izleyici koltuğundan kalkmayı ve dahası bunu davetsiz yapmayı seviyor. Kesinlikle “sufle” almayı sevmiyor, doğaçlama replikler kullanıyor. Kısacası oyunu yaratmak, olmazsa kendi kostüm, dekor ve replikleriyle oyuna istediği zaman katılmak istiyor.

Öyleyse bizim de bu yeni tüketici kuşağının istediği tarzda bir iletişim paradigmasına sahip olmamız gerekiyor. Bu yeni iletişim modeli bir başka yazının konusu olmakla birlikte, şu kadarı söylenebilir ki bu yeni yapı eklektik, akışkan, modüler ve isteğe bağlı olarak devreye giren ancak yine de bütünleşik bir model olmalı. Belki de “pürüzsüz iletişim”, “kişiye özgü iletiler” gibi tanıdık kavramlar şimdi yeni bir anlam kazanıyor. Daha da doğrusu yeni yeni anlam kazanıyorlar. Buna “kişisel-bütünleşik iletişim modeli” mi desek, ne dersiniz?

KAYNAKÇA

Odabaşı, Yavuz, “Sanal Tüketici Toplulukları”, Pazarlama ve İletişim Kültürü Dergisi, cilt. 4, sayı 13, temmuz-Ağustos-eylül 2005, ss. 48- 58.

Özata, Zeynep, “Pazarlama Dünyası Blogosfer’i Keşfetti: Büyük Bir Değişimin İlk Adımları”, Pazarlama ve İletişim Kültürü Dergisi, cilt. 4, sayı 13, Temmuz-Ağustos-Eylül 2005, ss. 35-47.

Schultz, E., Don, “Consumer Control Integration, Not Marketers”, marketing News, March 2006, p. 7.