See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/305079910

Integrating Marketing Communications: New Findings, New Lessons and New

Ideas

Article in Journal of Marketing · July 2016

DOI: 10.1509/jm.15.0419

CITATIONS READS

451 60,801

2 authors, including:

Rajeev Batra
University of Michigan
80 PUBLICATIONS 18,210 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Rajeev Batra on 08 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Rajeev Batra & Kevin Lane Keller

Integrating Marketing
Communications: New Findings, New
Lessons, and New Ideas
With the challenges presented by new media, shifting media patterns, and divided consumer attention, the optimal integration
of marketing communications takes on increasing importance. Drawing on a review of relevant academic research and
guided by managerial priorities, the authors offer insights and advice as to how traditional and new media such as search,
display, mobile, TV, and social media interact to affect consumer decision making. With an enhanced understanding of the
consumer decision journey and how consumers process communications, the authors outline a comprehensive framework
featuring two models designed to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of integrated marketing communication programs:
a “bottom-up” communications matching model and a “top-down” communications optimization model. The authors conclude
by suggesting important future research priorities.

Keywords: marketing communications, marketing integration, integrated marketing communications, traditional

media, digital media

n designing integrated marketing communication (IMC) especially important; brand messaging is even less under

I programs, marketers face many challenges as a result of the

fact that consumers, brands, and the media are funda-
mentally changing in profound ways. With the explosion of
the marketer’s control.
These new ways of communicating, however, also facilitate
greater personalization of message content, timing, and location,
new media, consumers are dramatically shifting both their enabling marketers to utilize more media types to accomplish
media usage patterns and how they utilize different media specific communication objectives. Previously, marketers had
sources to get the information they seek, which thus influences only a small quiver of communication modalities at their dis-
when, where, and how they choose brands.1 Perhaps more posal to try to accomplish multiple brand communication ob-
than ever, their attention is divided, often due to multi- jectives. They could, for instance, use broadcast television ads
tasking, and they are seemingly in a perpetual state of partial to reach a large target audience and make them aware of the
attention. brand and its offerings; use radio and outdoor ads to build
The consumer “path to purchase” is also fundamentally and maintain brand salience; use print ads in newspapers and
different today—often shorter in length, less hierarchical, and magazines to provide details about the brand’s features and
more complex (Court et al. 2009). Consumers do not necessarily competitive superiority; generate public relations (PR) for third-
passively receive brand information strictly through legacy mass party credibility; use newspaper coupons and co-op ads to offer
media such as print or TV and store it in memory for later use. limited promotional price discounts and communicate points
Rather, they now actively seek it when needed, through search of purchase; and use frequently mailed newsletters and catalogs
engines, mobile browsers, blogs, and brand websites. Much more
to build long-term relationships and loyalty.
consumer-to-firm, consumer-to-consumer, and consumer-about-
Today, in contrast, marketers are blessed with a much richer
firm communication exists. Because of increased social influences
array of communications possibilities. In addition to those tra-
on purchase, word of mouth (WOM) and advocacy have become
ditional means, a brand can reach (and send reminders to) a large
number of consumers through mass or targeted Facebook
1Throughout this article, we use the term “brand” in a broad sense; ads, banner or display ads on thousands of websites, or paid
it refers not only to commercially marketed products and services and organic search ads. It can use its own website, third-
but also to organizations, nonprofit causes, and any other offering party websites, and bloggers to provide persuasive con-
that consumers may seek information about so that they can make a tent to create brand preference; offer short-term promotions
choice among alternative options. through tweets and targeted e-coupons; and create online
brand communities through its own and social media–type
Rajeev Batra is S.S. Kresge Professor of Marketing, Ross School of Business, web properties. Second-by-second media-usage data allow
University of Michigan (e-mail: [email protected]). Kevin Lane Keller is for micro and dynamic segmentation and targeting; media
E.B. Osborn Professor of Marketing, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth
College (e-mail: [email protected]). The authors thank the JM
and message changes can be made much more quickly.
review team for helpful feedback and suggestions. By using the distinctive strengths of the greater number of
media choices available today, a marketer can potentially

© 2016, American Marketing Association Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue

ISSN: 0022-2429 (print) Vol. 80 (November 2016), 122–145
1547-7185 (electronic) 122 DOI: 10.1509/jm.15.0419
sequence them in more powerful ways to move consumers that are strongest in their ability to meet each of those different
more quickly along their decision journey or funnel than was specific needs. The planning and sequencing of multiple com-
ever possible before. Although these paths to purchase may munications must also account for the costs involved to create
be faster and less linear today, there is still a beginning and an the most effective and efficient IMC program possible (Briggs,
end to them, with identifiable stages in between. To influence Krishnan, and Borin 2005; Madhavaran, Badrinarayanan, and
prospective and existing consumers over this complex path, McDonald 2005, Naik, Raman, and Winer 2005).
multiple communication attempts are usually required to in- Our article is organized as follows. We first review aca-
form, persuade, or propel action or advocacy, pushing con- demic research on IMC related to the main effects as well as the
sumers on to the next stage in the process. interaction effects that can be created by different communi-
Crucially, none of these individual communication attempts cation options. Although this research is extremely insightful,
is likely to accomplish the complete “sales” or “loyalty” job it does not provide enough overall guidance to address the
by itself. One message often needs to “set up” or “build on” challenge of crafting a well-integrated marketing communi-
another, such as prior trade advertising opening the door to cations plan today. Toward that goal, we suggest that mar-
subsequent personal selling, as the famous McGraw-Hill “man keters employ a set of two research-inspired (but empirically
in the chair” trade ad (created in 1958) vividly showed. In other untested) communication models as part of a comprehensive
words, what each communication attempt needs to do well IMC framework. We develop these models (with supporting
depends on the messages that came before and the ones that will submodels) in depth subsequently. Next, we briefly introduce
come after. Marketers thus must be concerned not just with the basic functioning of model:
what each message can accomplish in isolation (its “main effect”) 1. A “bottom-up” communications matching model, which
but also with what it needs to accomplish in the context of this identifies the communication options that have the greatest
entire sequence or stream of messages (its “interactive effects”). ability to satisfy consumers’ brand-related information needs
Recent academic research has confirmed the existence of at different stages of the consumer decision journey.
interactions and cross-effects across new and old media options 2. A “top-down” communications optimization model that helps
such as search, display, mobile, TV, social media, offline marketers evaluate the overall design or makeup of a mar-
WOM, and so on (e.g., Joo et al. 2013; Mayzlin and Shin 2011). keting communication program with relevant criteria to judge
However, although research has empirically established the how well it is integrated to both drive shorter-term sales and
build longer-term brand equity.
existence of media interactions and cross-effects, it has not yet
clearly explicated the relative strengths and weaknesses of Drawing on these learnings and models, we conclude by
different media in influencing different communication out- considering the broad themes and managerial implications
comes. Nor does the existing research really help marketers that emerge from our analysis as well as develop key future
decide the best sequence in which to use old and new media so research priorities.
that they can deploy these media in a coherent and integrated
manner.
Successful integration of different marketing communica- Prior Academic Research on IMC
tions is critically important to drive short-term sales and long- Academic Approaches to IMC
term brand building (Luo and Donthu 2006; Osinga et al. 2011;
Reid, Luxton, and Mavondo 2005). Not surprisingly, when the Different disciplines have different views or approaches
Marketing Science Institute (MSI) recently surveyed its 70+ toward IMC that have evolved through the years (see, e.g.,
corporate members as to their most critical marketing ques- Madhavaran, Badrinarayanan, and McDonald 2005; Naik
tions, a set of questions emerged related to IMC, providing 2007). These different viewpoints are reflected in how IMC
useful insight into managerial priorities in the area. These has been defined. Appendix A presents some notable defi-
priorities included the development of better models and nitions used by relevant organizations. There are some com-
frameworks to understand and integrate the full range of mon elements in these definitions, however, that reflect our
consumer touch points for a brand to both generate short-term approach to IMC. As we explain in greater detail next, we
purchases and build long-term loyalty and brand value. These take a consumer-centric approach and focus on how marketers
touch points included marketer-controlled and consumer- can optimally combine all available communication options.
driven media, offline and online media (particularly mobile), In academia, researchers have put more emphasis on cer-
and sales force efforts. The MSI priorities also called for ex- tain areas depending in part on their disciplinary background.
plication of the organizational processes (including training) Communication and journalism academics have tended to place
required to achieve marketing integration within and across more emphasis on internal factors, such as organizational pro-
marketing and sales. cesses that promote or inhibit optimal coordination and
The MSI priorities make clear that the always-existing sequencing of message content (Schultz and Kitchen 1997). In
challenge of creating IMC is even more difficult today and thus contrast, marketing academics have tended to place more
requires new tools and theories. Therefore, after reviewing the emphasis on factors external to the firm, such as the optimal
existing literature, we argue that this integration challenge can design of marketing communication programs based on their
be met more easily through the use of a conceptual framework effects on consumers. Two streams of research are notable within
that analytically considers consumers’ most pressing brand- marketing academia:
related information needs at different points in their decision 1. More micro approaches that use consumer psychology and
journeys and then matches the particular media and messages consumer information-processing principles to study multimedia

Integrating Marketing Communications / 123

campaigns (e.g., Edell and Keller 1989, 1999) and the strengths article on the complementary main effects as well as the many
and weaknesses of different media (new vs. old) in achieving cross-effects and interactions that can exist in today’s digital
different communications goals (e.g., Chang and Thorson 2004; media environment—in which search, tweets, Facebook
Dijkstra, Buijtels, and Van Raaij 2005; Pfeiffer and Zinnbauer
2010).
feeds, and so on meet consumers’ communication needs as
they move along their decision journey or path to purchase, a
2. More macro approaches that use econometric techniques to
assess multimedia effects at the brand level (e.g., Naik, process we describe next.
Raman, and Winer 2005). A topic of enduring importance in
this line of research is the allocation of resources across media
(Naik and Raman 2003; Raman and Naik 2004). Consumer Decision Journey or Path to Purchase
Our approach continues in the tradition of marketing In working to understand how different messages and media
academics and their concern with the optimal design of can be optimally combined and sequenced, it is first neces-
communication programs based largely on external, consumer- sary to develop a model of the different stages or steps consu-
driven factors (Pilotta et al. 2004; Voorveld, Neijens, and Smit mers might go through in their evolving relationships with a
2011). Although the notions of IMC are applicable to all the particular brand—before, during, and after purchase. The stages
touch points through which a marketer communicates with the in such a model can help suggest different communication
targeted consumer—including the implicit communication that objectives and metrics depending on what stage the consumer is
takes place through product features and design, employee in and, thus, which combination of media and messages might
service, and retail environments—we do not cover such non- be most appropriate there.
media-related consumer touch points for brands in this article. Building on classic early models from social and cog-
As we detail next, several considerations come into play nitive psychology (McGuire 1978), many marketers have
in developing a well-integrated marketing communications found it useful to portray the different stages involved in
program for a brand. Three of the most important consid- consumer decision making in terms of the well-known
erations are consistency, complementarity, and cross-effects “purchase funnel.” A simple version of the funnel is the
among media and communication options, as the following classic “hierarchy-of-effects” models (Wijaya 2012; e.g.,
example for the Volvo automotive brand shows. AIDA [Awareness, Interest, Desire, and Action]). In today’s
rich communication environments, these more traditional
Consistency. To facilitate learning and induce action, the funnels, however, no longer adequately capture the different
exact same persuasive message can benefit from being re- stages involved in consumer decision making and the more
inforced in different ways across different communications. For complex, nonlinear paths to purchase that consumers might
example, Volvo’s key “safety superiority” message is com- follow when choosing among multiple options.
municated consistently through print and TV ads, PR, and Recently, researchers from McKinsey & Company (Court
corporate communications; on the company’s website and et al. 2009) have suggested a “consumer decision journey
through other digital means; and through sponsorships with the circle,” in which consumers begin by considering a prelimi-
American Trucking Associations to promote various key safety nary set of brands to form an initial consideration set, modify
outreach programs for the trucking industry. this consideration set (often adding more brands) as they gather
and evaluate more brand information, select a brand (at the
Complementarity. At the same time, different communi-
moment of purchase), and then utilize their postpurchase ex-
cation options have varied strengths and weaknesses, which can
periences to shape their next decision. Consistent with that
meet different brand-related information needs for consumers
reasoning, “attribution modeling” of actual consumer paths to
and, thus, complement each other. Volvo sponsors golf, cul-
purchase has shown that consumers often go through com-
tural events, and an ocean race to help improve the brand’s
plex, long, and interacting steps before conversion and pur-
visibility and contemporary status, raising initial salience and
chase, with organic and paid search, retargeted display and
consideration. Their various sales promotions and financing
banner ads, price comparisons and e-mails, and visits to
programs then push safety-concerned consumers to take action.
marketer websites and physical stores all playing a part in
Each communication option addresses a different brand
getting consumers from their initial starting points to the point
objective, all of which are needed to successfully persuade
of conversion (Anderl et al. 2014; Smith, Gopalakrishna, and
consumers and build brand equity and drive sales.
Chatterjee 2006).
Cross-effects. Communication effects from consumer Although consumers today interact with many more media
exposure to one communication option can be enhanced types, and do so in more nonlinear and circular ways, it seems
when consumers have had prior exposure to a different reasonable that consumers still go through a sequence of steps
communication option. For Volvo, the good feelings and or stages as they engage with a particular brand. For instance,
awareness engendered by one of its sports or arts spon- consumers can go through a series of stages such as those
sorships may later increase consumer predisposition to con- in Appendix B: they (1) feel a need or want for the overall
sider the brand or color any impressions that a consumer forms category of which the brand is a part; (2) recall the brands they
in evaluating a Volvo vehicle. associate with meeting that category-level need; (3) further
All three considerations are important. However, given evaluate a smaller subset of those brands not only with respect
the substantial prior research reporting the benefits from to performance quality but also about their trustworthiness; (4)
message consistency, that area would not seem to be a priority develop a preference and make a tentative choice; (5) decide
for further investigation. We therefore focus more in this how much they are willing to pay for the preferred brand; (6)

124 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

take the action step of trial or purchase; (7) form an assessment or implicitly or explicitly choose to reject the brand. Figure 1
of postconsumption satisfaction with the brand, which deter- displays the dynamics involved in a consumer decision jour-
mines repurchase intentions and loyalty; and hopefully, over ney with multiple stages and the potential to move forward or
time, (8) increase their usage amount or purchase frequency; (9) backward across stages or drop out of the decision process
engage in postpurchase interactions with the brand; and (10) altogether.
become a loyal and willing advocate for it. Each of these steps puts the consumer in a particular
Because each of these steps is probabilistic, a successful information-processing state of mind, which makes any one
consumer decision journey for a brand can be derailed by media type more or less appropriate for deployment by the
failure at any stage (e.g., ignorance of the existence of the brand to satisfy that consumer’s information needs and ensure
brand, a negative product experience at trial). Across brands movement to the next stage. Subsequently, we elaborate on
and for any one brand, consumers may backtrack, skip steps, these likely “states of mind” and their IMC implications. First,

FIGURE 1
A Dynamic, Expanded Consumer Decision Journey

Needs/Wants

Is Aware/Knows

Considers/Examines

Searches/Learns

Likes/Trusts

Sees Value/Is Willing to Pay

Rejection

Commits/Plans

Consumes

Is Satisfied

Is Loyal/Repeat Buyer

Is Engaged/Interacts

Actively Advocates

Integrating Marketing Communications / 125

we review some of the relevant research on main (direct) as well and Krishnamurthy 2014). Research has also explored newer
as interactive (indirect) effects across different media. topics such as “open sourcing” or “crowdsourcing” and the use
of consumers as a creative team (Lawrence, Fournier, and Brunel
Main Effects of Different Media: Research Findings 2013; Thompson and Malaviya 2013; see also Marketing Sci-
Much academic research has shown the effectiveness of dif- ence’s 2012 Special Issue on the Emergence and Impact of
ferent communication options and media, as well as the value User-Generated Content).
of a multimedia campaign (Koslow and Tellis 2011; Sethuraman, By identifying various factors that moderate advertising
Tellis, and Briesch 2011; Wind and Sharp 2009). For exam- effectiveness, this prior research also offers relevant insights
ple, Danaher and Dagger (2013) provide evidence of the into how older and newer media interact with each other.
effectiveness of multimedia advertising for a chain of depart- Advertising effects certainly vary by medium. For example,
ment stores. Specifically, they found that among traditional consumers process broadcast (TV and radio) advertising
media options, catalogs most strongly influenced sales and differently from print (newspapers and magazines) adver-
profit, followed by TV and direct mail. For digital media tising. Because of its pervasiveness and expressive nature,
options, only e-mail and sponsored Google search had an TV advertising is highly effective at creating awareness,
influence on purchase outcomes. In their setting, magazines, interest, and consideration—the front end of the funnel or
online display advertising, and social media had no significant consumer decision journey. In contrast, print advertising
association with purchase incidence or outcomes. allows for detailed exposition and is well-suited for mid-
Collectively, prior research has revealed some of the in- funnel information provision (see, e.g., classic comparisons
herent strengths and weaknesses of different communication of the “information content” of different media by Stern and
options and how they can be most effective (Belch and Belch Resnick [1991] and Abernathy [1992]).
2015; O’Guinn et al. 2015). Much research has examined the
short- and long-term effects of traditional advertising media Newer online media. A company chooses which forms
(Assmus, Farley, and Lehmann 1984; Hu, Lodish, and Krieger of online communications will be most cost effective in
2007; Lodish, Abraham, Kalmenson, et al. 1995, Lodish, achieving sales and brand equity objectives (Katona, Zubcsek,
Abraham, Livensberger, et al. 1995; Stewart and Furse 1986; and Sarvary 2011; Risselada, Verhoef, and Bijmolt 2014). The
Vakratsas and Ambler 1999) or has compared those effects wide variety of available online communication options means
with those of promotion (Jedidi, Mela, and Gupta 1999; Mela, companies can offer tailored information or send messages that
Gupta, and Lehmann 1997). To illustrate some of the issues engage consumers by reflecting their special interests and
involved, it is useful to briefly contrast some of what we have behavior. We next highlight six key online communication
learned from academic research on advertising in traditional options that are receiving increased research attention and some
media (e.g., print, TV) with what we have learned from aca- illustrative research findings that have emerged for each.
demic research on newer online media (for some empirical • Search ads (Berman and Katona 2013; Jerath, Ma, and Park
comparisons between the two, see Draganska, Hartmann, and 2014; Rutz and Bucklin 2011; Rutz, Bucklin, and Sonnier
Stanglein [2014] and Trusov, Bucklin, and Pauwels [2009]). 2012). Because consumers who search for less popular
keywords expend more effort in their search for information
Traditional media. Even in today’s media environment, and are closer to a purchase, they can be more easily targeted
the power of traditional advertising media endures (Nunes through sponsored search advertising. Higher positions of
and Merrihue 2007). Advertising research continues to address paid search ads can increase both the click-through rates and,
especially, the conversion rates.
many interesting, important topics—showing, for example, (1)
• Display ads (Danaher, Lee, and Kerbache 2010; Hoban and
how informative advertising can create brand awareness and Bucklin 2015; Manchanda et al. 2006). Display advertising
increase knowledge of new products or new features of existing can positively affect visitation to a firm’s website for users in
products (Amaldoss and He 2010; Barroso and Llobet 2012), most stages of the purchase funnel but may not do so for those
(2) the role of ad creative in persuasion (Reinartz and Saffert who previously visited the site without creating an account. In
2013), (3) the effects of comparative advertising (Thompson one application, expected visits increased by almost 10%
and Hamilton 2006) or competitive advertising (Danaher, when display ad impressions were partially reallocated from
Bonfrer, and Dhar 2008), (4) estimates of response functions nonvisitors and visitors to authenticated users.
(Freimer and Horsky 2012; Tellis, Chandy, and Thaivanich • Websites (Danaher, Mullarkey, and Essegaier 2006; Hauser
et al. 2009; Steenkamp and Geyskens 2006). Websites can be
2000; Vakratsas et al. 2004), and (5) the effects of ad rep- better liked and can increase sales if their characteristics (e.g.,
etition (Malaviya 2007). more-detailed data) match customers’ cognitive styles (e.g.,
Concrete guidelines have emerged from this work (Hanssens more analytic). Differences in consumers’ age, gender, and
2015). For example, a review of academic research has found geographical location can also affect successful website
that advertising elasticities were estimated to be higher for characteristics.
new (.3) than for established products (.1) (Allenby and Hanssens • E-mail (Aufreiter, Boudet, and Weng 2014; Li and Kannan
2005; see also Sethuraman, Tellis, and Briesch 2011; Van 2014). The rate at which e-mails prompt purchases has been
Heerde et al. 2013). Research has also found that what a message estimated to be at least three times that of social media, and
the average order value has been estimated to be 17% higher.
says (e.g., the emotional vs. attribute content of ad copy or of E-mail effectiveness has been shown to improve with per-
online WOM) is typically more important than the number sonalized emails—though, even then, repeated e-mails can
of times a message is communicated (e.g., the volume of ad backfire—as well as with customized landing pages when
exposures or online WOM conversation) (Gopinath, Thomas, someone clicks.

126 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

• Social media (Kumar et al. 2016; Naylor, Lamberton, and West • Social media may not be as effective as more traditional
2012; Schweidel and Moe 2014). Three key characteristics of forms of communications in attracting new users and driving
firm-generated content—valence, receptivity, and customer brand penetration.
susceptibility—have been shown to positively affect customer • Research by DDB and others has suggested that brands and
spending, cross-buying, and profitability, though the effect of products vary widely in how social they are online. Con-
receptivity was shown to be the largest. Approaches to mon- sumers are most likely to engage with media, charities, and
itoring social media that ignore the multiple social media fashion and least likely to engage with consumer goods
venues that exist for the brand and either focus on a single (Schulze, Schöler, and Skiera 2014).
venue or ignore differences across venues have been shown to • Although consumers may use social media to get useful
produce misleading brand sentiment metrics. information or deals and promotions or to enjoy interesting or
• Mobile (Bell 2014; Fang, Luo, and Keith 2014; Hwang, entertaining brand-created content, a much smaller percentage
McInerney, and Shin 2015). When and where consumers use a of consumer want to use social media to engage in two-way
mobile phone to shop has been shown to have important “conversations” with brands.
implications for how they shop (e.g., proximity to physical
stores for a brand, physical presence of other brand users). Nevertheless, consumers can be influenced by the online
Mobile consumers have been shown to be more likely to go opinions and recommendations of others. The informal social
directly to a retailer’s site or app than to use a search engine; networks that arise among consumers complement the product
moreover, they deliberate less and make purchases more by networks set up by the company (Goldenberg, Oestreicher-
impulse than by product features. Research has found mobile Singer, and Reichman 2012). Online “influentials” who are
ads and coupons to be more effective when customized (to
reflect, e.g., a person’s tastes, geographic location, time of day).
one of a few people (or maybe even the only person) to
influence certain consumers are particularly important and
Marketers can trace the effects of online marketing com- valuable to companies (Katona 2014; Trusov, Bodapati, and
munications in various ways (Bonfrer and Drèze 2009), such as Bucklin 2010). Although online communications may be
by noting how many unique visitors click on a page or ad, how more influential than mass communication for many con-
long they spend with it, what they do on it, and where they sumers, mass media might be the major means of stim-
go afterward. Although some traditional media also allow for ulating it (Bruce, Foutz, and Kolsarici 2012; Gopinath,
placement (e.g., newspaper sections, special interest mag- Thomas, and Krishnamurthy 2014).
azines), online media offers even more targeted placement,
through the placement of ads on sites related to a company’s Interaction and Cross-Effects Across Different
offerings and the ability to place ads on the basis of search Media: Research Findings
engine keywords, to reach people who have started the buying
process. Marketers can also emphasize certain types of newer Understanding the direct or main effects provides valuable
media to signal that the firm has a particular competence or insight into possible components of an IMC program. To be
personality, making the choice of medium itself the message able to decide on exactly which communications to employ,
(McLuhan 2001; e.g., a firm such as Delta Airlines may use however, it is also necessary to understand the interaction
Twitter for customer service in part to signal its utmost re- effects that may arise. However, very few academic articles
sponsiveness to immediately solving customer problems). have taken a macro, “big picture” perspective to examine such
interactions. Before presenting our two models to help with
Mixing and matching online media. As with all forms of this goal, we first review some relevant academic research on
communication, each online option has pros and cons, suggesting media interactions.
the need to mix and match. For example, given that Internet users Several different academic works have provided useful
may spend only 5% of their time online searching for infor- insight into the nature of cross-media effects, typically
mation, display ads still hold great promise compared with search focusing on just a few communication options at a time. As a
ads. These display ads, however, need to be more attention- general rule, this research has contrasted cross-media syn-
getting and influential, better targeted, and more closely tracked ergies with corresponding within-media effects to find the
to fully realize that potential (Braun and Moe 2013; Lambrecht incremental value of coordinating communication strategies
and Tucker 2013; Schumann et al. 2014; Urban et al. 2014). across media in some fashion. Next, we next highlight some
Social media has received much academic and practi- representative cross-media research in three different areas.
tioner attention (Lamberton and Stephen 2016). Three main Traditional media synergies. Some of the earliest re-
social media platforms enable consumers to become engaged search on IMC showed how traditional advertising and
with a brand at perhaps a deeper and broader level than ever promotions—such as TV, radio, and print advertising; price
before (Van Den Bulte and Wuyts 2007): (1) online com- promotions; and others—interacted with each other to lead to
munities and forums, (2) blogs (individual blogs and blog more favorable consumer response.
networks such as PopSugar and TechCrunch), and (3) social
networks (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, YouTube). • Several researchers empirically demonstrate how coordi-
Although marketers can encourage willing consumers to nated TV–radio and TV–print campaigns can improve recall
and lead to more favorable attitudes (Edell and Keller 1989,
engage productively with their brands on social media (Lee 1999; Jagpal 1981; Naik and Raman 2003).
and Bell 2013; Naylor, Lamberton, and West 2012), research • Lemon and Nowlis (2002) show that synergies between
has shown that social media should rarely be the sole source displays and price promotions, as well as between feature
of marketing communications for a brand for the following advertising and price promotions, were greater for low-tier
reasons: brands than high-tier brands.

Integrating Marketing Communications / 127

Sales force and personal selling interactions. Much research direct, referrals) but increased purchase probabilities (con-
has shown that personal selling efforts and the sales force are more versions) only through paid search and direct visits (but not
productive when preceded by or combined with other forms of through referrals).
marketing communications. • Stephen and Galak (2012), in studying the microlending
website Kiva, found that traditional earned media activity (e.g.,
• Smith, Gopalakrishna, and Smith (2004) show that follow-up press mentions in newspaper articles and on television pro-
sales efforts generate higher sales productivity when firms grams) flowed from social media (e.g., posts made by con-
have already exposed customers to its product at a trade sumers on online communities, social networking websites, or
show. Trade show exposure reduced sales force expenses by blogs), but not the other way around. The per-event sales
approximately 50% to generate a given level of sales (p. 70). impact of traditional-media earned mentions was greater than
• Gopalakrishna and Chatterjee (1992) find an interactive that for social-media-earned mentions—presumably because
effect of advertising and personal selling on sales of a mature of the former’s greater reach—but because the frequency of the
industrial product of low complexity. This interaction was latter was much higher, social-media-earned mentions ended
more than half the size of the main effect of advertising itself up having greater overall impact on sales.
(p. 192). • Kumar et al. (2016) found that firm-generated content in
• Gatignon and Hanssens (1987) show how personal selling social media worked synergistically with both television
effectiveness in Navy recruiting increased with local adver- advertising and e-mail marketing.
tising support (Mantrala 2002). • Gopinath, Thomas, and Krishnamurthy (2014) reported that
• Narayanan, Desiraju, and Chintagunta (2004) report that emotion-oriented advertising drove online WOM recom-
direct-to-consumer advertising and detailing interacted to mendations and thus sales.
affect brand shares in a pharmaceutical category.
• Naik and Raman (2003) demonstrate positive interactions
between advertising and several different marketing activities: Development of a Conceptual
Advertising effectiveness increases with improved product Framework
quality (Kuehn 1962), greater retail availability (Parsons 1974), As the previous section’s review shows, prior academic re-
increased salesperson contact (Swinyard and Ray 1977), and a
larger sales force (Gatignon and Hanssens 1987). search has persuasively documented that significant cross-
effects do occur across media. At the same time, this prior
Online and offline synergies. Marketers are increasingly research has several limitations.
attempting to coordinate all their online and offline com- First, it has not illuminated the full range of outcomes that
munications activities. Recent research has provided much may arise from consumer exposure to communications along
evidence as to how online and offline communications can different stages of the consumer decision journey, as we show
interact by tapping into different stages of the consumer in Appendix B and Figure 1. Many different dependent var-
decision journey (Chang and Thorson 2004; Havlena, iables have been identified and examined collectively across
Cardarelli, and De Montigny 2007). studies, but in any one study, the focus has typically been on
• For a major German car company, Naik and Peters (2009) only one or a few outcomes. Because marketers are potentially
found synergies within the offline media types (TV, mag- interested in many of the outcomes shown in Appendix B and
azines, radio and newspapers) for offline dealer visits, while Figure 1, this narrow focus of current research is clearly an
for online website visits, they found both these within-media important limitation.
synergies and cross-media synergies with online media types Second, current research has tended to study only message
(banner and search ads). Direct mail only contributed to the effects that occur at the same point of time, rather than to also
online visits, without any synergies.
incorporate lagged and downstream effects. Thus, it has not
• Wiesel, Pauwels, and Arts (2011) found multiple online–offline
synergies in a model that examined multiple funnel outcomes really provided a fully dynamic, longitudinal view of when and
and also utilized time delays (lags) and feedback relations. They how cross-effects occur across different media and the tem-
found the maximum profit impact for Google AdWords was poral sequences (downstream effects) involved. Consumers
17 times higher than that for faxes, which were the highest- view messages in sequence, and research should therefore
impact offline medium studied. The sales elasticity for Google study the effects of multiple messages viewed in sequence,
AdWords was a sizable 4.35. Notably, in their study, 73% of the with the ordering (sequence) potentially making a difference.
effect of Google AdWords took place through offline orders. Some prior research has already demonstrated that media
• Dinner, Van Heerde, and Neslin (2014) found that, for a high- effects can vary depending on the sequence or order in which
end clothing and apparel retailer, paid search and online display
advertising had the greatest impact on both online and offline they are seen. For example, Kim, Yoon, and Lee (2010) ex-
sales, and both were more effective than traditional advertising perimentally show that the interactive effects of advertising
primarily because of strong cross-effects on the offline channel. with positive or negative publicity vary depending on which is
Clearance promotions had even higher effects on online sales. seen first (see also Edell and Keller 1989, 1999; Stammerjohan
They also found that traditional advertising decreased paid et al. 2005; Voorveld, Neijens, and Smit 2012).
search click-through rates, thus reducing the net cross-effect of A third drawback of prior research is that it generally pools
traditional advertising. all consumers together during analysis, implicitly assuming that
• Drawing on customers’ path of visits and purchases at a travel they have the same response elasticities to every communi-
and hospitality firm’s website, Li and Kannan (2014) found
significant carryover and spillover effects across online channel cation or media option. Because consumer needs vary by their
options. If customers visited the website through e-mail and stage in the decision journey, their brand-related information
display channels (firm-initiated channels), it increased visits to needs and response elasticities also likely vary with their stage
the website through customer-initiated channels (e.g., search, in the consumer decision journey; therefore, the stage of their

128 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

decision journey should be used as a moderator variable to used at different stages of the consumer journey, in the next
allow for heterogeneity in effects. For example, the high ef- section we propose two different communication models as part
fectiveness of search advertising found in prior research of such an improved conceptual framework. These models
(e.g., Wiesel, Pauwels, and Arts 2011) may be because it address two specific questions:
perfectly fits the needs of those consumers in that particular 1. What are the effects or outcomes created by different types of
stage of the decision journey. As Dinner, Van Heerde, and communication options or platforms? Which of these com-
Neslin (2014, p. 542) note: “The strong effects for search munication options best help achieve the communication
advertising are probably due to the medium’s ‘value pro- objectives associated with each stage in the consumer deci-
position,’ in that search advertising targets customers who sion journey?
are already in the process of buying. As a result, paid search 2. How do you ensure that those communication options are
well-integrated to collectively maximize the communication
expenditures translate more readily into purchases” (emphasis
effects created?
added).
In one of the few studies that has attempted to address Combining these models provides useful guidance and
these shortcomings, Smith, Gopalakrishna, and Chatterjee advice to answer academic and managerial questions as well
(2006) developed a three-stage model of the communications as to suggest propositions for further research. Before we
of a manufacturer of replacement windows that captured the develop our models, however, it is helpful to first group the
effects of their expenditures and the exposure sequence for different media possibilities. One broad distinction many mar-
communications for nine different media on multiple out- keters and academic researchers have made (e.g., Stephen
comes (e.g., lead generation, appointment conversions, sales and Galak 2012) is between communications that appear
conversions). Their analysis incorporated main and inter- in paid media (traditional outlets such as TV, print, and
active effects, individual-media time lags, and delayed decay direct mail), owned media (company-controlled options
effects. They found that follow-up sales efforts were more such as websites, blogs, mobile apps, and social media),
effective if consumers had already been exposed to media and earned media (virtual or real-world WOM, press
communications, with media type and timing of exposure coverage, etc.).
making a difference; they state that “the indirect effects of For our purposes, we focus more on paid and owned
increased radio spending on the level of response to news- media, given that those are the areas over which marketers
paper ads and exhibition are substantial” (p. 570). Another have the most control, though we also incorporate earned
study that utilizes multiple outcome metrics and examines media (e.g., WOM advocacy) in our analyses. The most
time-delayed effects and feedback relationships is Wiesel, important examples of these different media types appear as
Pauwels, and Arts (2011). column headings in Table 1 and are described more com-
Such incorporation of many more outcomes as dependent pletely in the next section.
variables, lagged and downstream sequence effects, and effect
heterogeneity (varying with consumer stage in the decision
journey) is required not just in future empirical research but Understanding Consumer
also in the development of more relevant conceptual frame- Processing of Communications
works. To guide managerial decision making and academic To develop a fully integrated marketing communication pro-
research for IMC, an updated comprehensive, dynamic frame- gram, it is first necessary to understand how communications
work is needed that captures the full range of outcomes of interest “work” over a consumer’s decision journey—specifically, the
as well as the various temporal sequences involved. With a goal resources and mindsets a consumer brings to the reception and
of providing insight into which combinations of media are best processing of different messages, as well as the outcomes these

TABLE 1
Research Propositions Concerning Likely Communication Outcomes from Different Communication Options
Communication Options
Communication Outcomes TV Promos Events PR Social Media Website Search Display Mobile Direct Selling

Create awareness and +++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ +++ +++ +++ ++ +

salience
Convey detailed information + + + + ++ +++ + + ++ +++ +++
Create brand imagery +++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ + + ++ + +
and personality
Build trust + + + +++ +++ + + + ++ + +++
Elicit emotions +++ ++ +++ +++ +++ ++ + + ++ + +
Inspire action + +++ + + + ++ +++ ++ +++ +++ +++
Instill loyalty ++ + + + ++ ++ + + ++ ++ ++
Connect people + + ++ + +++ +++ + + +++ + +
Notes: +++ = greatest influence; ++ = medium influence; + = least influence.

Integrating Marketing Communications / 129

messages can lead to in terms of consumer knowledge, atti- received (which we discuss separately in a following
tudes, and action tendencies. Figure 2 organizes the key fac- subsection).
tors that interact to determine these outcomes into consumer The motivation, or desire, to process incoming infor-
characteristics, (message reception) context, and content of the mation varies with the extent to which the consumer views
communication itself. Figure 2 also makes clear that the out- it as potentially helping with the brand choice task at hand.
comes of interest are many (Keller 2003), ranging from creating This increases with the level of perceived risk (Cox 1967;
awareness, to conveying information or emotion and building Loewenstein et al. 2001; Mitchell 1999) and the degree to
trust, to taking action and even engaging in brand advocacy. which the category-level need is salient or pressing—such as
The extent to which each of these outcomes occurs will depend the geo-location of the consumer (affecting the processing of
on the interactive effect of the consumer characteristics, pro- mobile messages) or the degree to which the consumer is in
cessing context, and message content factors, some which we the search process (affecting the processing of retargeted
highlight in the following subsections. online advertising). Situational factors may also matter in
their potential to affect consumers’ emotional state/mood and
willingness or desire to seek information.
Consumer Characteristics The consumer ability to process information depends,
Much research has shown how consumer motivation, ability, among other factors, on the amount of prior familiarity and
and opportunity to process a communication determine the knowledge with the brand and category. Thus, consumers at
intensity and direction of that processing and the resulting the earliest stages of category search might not be able to
outcomes that occur (Batra and Ray 1986; MacInnis and process in-depth attribute-level brand comparison informa-
Jaworski 1989; MacInnis, Moorman, and Jaworski 1991; Petty, tion (Alba and Hutchinson 1987), though they should still be
Cacioppo, and Schumann 1983). If motivation, ability, or able to understand which brands are more versus less relevant
opportunity are lacking for any reason, consumer processing for their brand choice decisions (Court et al. 2009).
of a communication will be impaired or may not even occur. Interactions across motivation, ability, and opportunity
While motivation and ability to process information are factors can have important implications for IMC planning.
consumer-level factors, the opportunity to do so is determined For example, mobile brand messages may tap into high-
in large part by the nature of the medium itself, as well as the motivation processing situations but be low in processing
processing conditions (context) under which the message is opportunity; alternatively, social media messaging from

FIGURE 2
Factors That Affect Consumer Communication Processing

Motivation Ability Opportunity

Propensity to create
awareness and
salience
Consumer
Propensity to
convey detailed
information
Time
Propensity to create
imagery and
personality
Situation Outcomes Propensity to
build trust

Propensity to
elicit emotions
Place
Propensity to
inspire action
Propensity to
Communication
instill
loyalty

Propensity to
Brand and connect people
Modality Source Executional
product
characteristics credibility characteristics
information
characteristics

130 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

trusted peers might be very high in credibility but low in its Communication Outcomes
ability to convey detailed information.
As stated previously and reflected in Appendix B, the consumer
processing that results from exposure to a communication—
Characteristics of the Processing Context or contingent on the characteristics of the communication, con-
Situation sumer, and context involved (see Figure 2)—can create several
different possible communication outcomes. Depending on
As mentioned previously, the consumer’s opportunity to process
the stage of the consumer’s processing journey, these multiple
information is affected by several aspects of the time and place of
possible outcomes vary in importance to a particular brand
message exposure, such as whether the consumer is under time
marketer. These communication outcomes or goals include
pressure or in a physical setting where (s)he can process the
the following:
communications in depth. Different media options vary in how
strong they are along these processing factors. Thus, certain • Create awareness and salience. The foundation of all brand
media, such as mobile or billboards, seem more suitable for and marketing efforts is creating awareness and ensuring that
messages that remind or trigger action rather than for messages the brand is sufficiently salient and thought of in the right way
at the right times and right places. Salience occurs when the
that aim to persuade through detailed information. Other media, brand is associated with a wide variety of cues—categories,
such as online video or TV, naturally lend themselves to situations, need states, and so on—such that the brand is
messages that inject more emotion and imagery into brand recalled easily and often (Keller 2001a). In some cases (e.g.,
perceptions. with really new products), awareness of both an unmet need
Table 1 shows some of these plausible relationships. In and the brand to satisfy that need may be required.
doing so, it draws on prior research by Stern and Resnick • Convey detailed information. After creating that basic aware-
(1991) and others who compared the “information content” ness, marketers must convince consumers of the advantages of
across multiple media (e.g., TV ads typically having less choosing the actual products or services identified with the
brand. Persuading consumers about brand performance requires
product information than print ads). While textbooks on
that they appreciate the benefits of the products or services and
marketing communications provide useful descriptions understand why the brand is able to better deliver those benefits
of practitioner beliefs about the qualitative strengths and in terms of supporting product attributes, features, or charac-
weaknesses of alternative media classes on various com- teristics that function as “proof points.” In today’s crowded,
munication goals (e.g., O’Guinn et al. 2015), most of these limited-attention-span communication environment, effectively
relationships have, to our knowledge, not yet been sub- conveying such detailed information to consumers is more and
jected to formal empirical investigation by academic more challenging.
researchers. • Create imagery and personality. Most successful brands have a
duality—what they offer in terms of tangible and intangible
benefits. All kinds of user and usage imagery may be created in
Communication Content Characteristics terms of the type of person who uses the brand, when and where
the brand could be used, and so on. Brand personality reflects the
Research has also examined how various characteristics of human-like traits consumers attribute to a brand (e.g., sincer-
the communication itself (e.g., its modality, its executional ity, competence, excitement; Aaker 1997) and influences how
and message information, its source credibility) influence the consumers view themselves (Park and John 2010) and the brand
resulting outcomes from exposure (Stern and Resnick 1991). relationships/bonds that consumers form (Batra, Ahuvia, and
Creative strategies such as music, celebrities, special effects, Bagozzi 2012; Fournier 1997; Swaminathan, Stilley, Ahluwalia
2009).
sex appeals, and fear appeals are all examples of attention-
getting devices to increase consumer motivation to process a
• Build trust. Even when the consumer receives and processes
the information in the message, (s)he might not use it in
communication and build awareness and salience, though they judgment and decision making if it is not sufficiently credible
may direct processing away from the brand or its message in and trustworthy or “diagnostic” (Lynch, Marmorstein, and
the process, hurting preference formation (McGuire 1978). Weigold 1988). There is a vast stream of literature on “source
While much of the prior research using traditional media effects” (Janis and Hovland 1959; Ohanian 1990), which has
should also apply to the newer media, marketers need to highlighted the important role of source credibility, expertise,
think about communication content idiosyncrasies in today’s likability, and similarity in facilitating the acceptance of
messages. Consumers are increasingly knowledgeable and
digital environment, such as different processing implica-
skeptical about marketer influence attempts (Campbell and
tions and outcomes for different types of Facebook posts, Kirmani 2008; Friestad and Wright 1994), and there is an
tweets, and so on (e.g., De Vries, Gensler, and Leeflang 2012; increasing desire for product and message “authenticity”
Lee, Hosanagar, and Nair 2015; Stephen, Sciandra, and (Brown, Kozinets, and Sherry 2003). The increasing usage
Inman 2015). of social media communications from friends and peers is
The nature of the medium can itself affect opportunity to indicative of the greater importance of messages that come
process: the smaller screen size of a mobile message can limit from similar and trusted, rather than distant and motivated,
sources.
processing depth, while detailed information can be provided
on a website that permits extensive brand-related processing • Elicit emotions. The importance of emotional, social, and sym-
bolic benefits and purchase motivations for branded products has
by consumers, assuming that they are attracted to the website been known for decades (Batra and Ahtola 1990; Belk 1988;
to begin with. Yet this detailed information may lack cred- Holbrook and Hirschman 1982; Levy 1959). Brands can increase
ibility and may not motivate consumers unless it is attributed their total perceived value by adding such benefits to the usual
to a trustworthy message source (McGuire 1978). functional/utilitarian ones. Brand messages can increase these

Integrating Marketing Communications / 131

perceived “added value” benefits, for example, through mech- mass-mediated communications (e.g., through TV com-
anisms such as the transfer of cultural meaning (Batra and Homer mercials) (Smith and Swinyard 1983).
2004; McCracken 1989; Torelli et al. 2012). A broad array of This kind of analysis is facilitated by our communications
benefits also helps elicit different types of emotions that affect
consumer decision making (Edell and Burke 1987; Holbrook and
matching model, a “bottom-up” approach to choosing com-
Batra 1987; Olney, Holbrook, and Batra 1991; Richins 1997; munications according to their effectiveness in achieving the
Westbrook and Oliver 1991). right communication effects at different stages of the con-
• Inspire action. Brand message information that is received, sumer decision journey. After reviewing that model, we then
processed, and accepted may shape brand preference and present our communications optimization model, which takes
choice but still not lead to action and behavior because of the more of a “top-down” view of the communications program
inherent disconnect that can occur between cognition, affect, as a whole to consider how efficiently it has been assembled
and behavior (Bagozzi and Dholakia 1999; Johnson, Chang, and how well it has been integrated overall.
and Lord 2006). Therefore, particular kinds of messaging are
often required when the goal is the inducement of action and
behavior from consumers who are already favorably pre-
disposed to the brand.
• Instill loyalty. After actual consumption, consumers form an
Communications Matching Model
assessment of how satisfied they are, in which their expectations The communications matching model matches the expected
are compared with their interpreted consumption experience, main and interactive effects of different media options with
with the latter itself being potentially influenced by market- the communications objectives for a brand, sequencing the
ing communications (Bloemer and Kasper 1995; Chaudhuri former to best match the dominant need at different stages
and Holbrook 2001; Hoch and Ha 1986; Oliver 2014). Shaping
satisfaction is part of a larger objective of reinforcing loyalty
along the consumer decision journey. The communication
and avoiding customer defections (Brakus, Schmitt, and matching model thus considers the needs/gaps in consumer
Zarantonello 2009; Johnson, Hermann, and Huber 2006; knowledge and behaviors in terms of where different targeted
Park et al. 2010). consumer segments are versus where they need to be, relative
• Connect people. High consumption satisfaction should lead to the brand’s needs, and then suggests the most appropriate
to brand repurchase behavior and loyalty, but this may not, media combinations that should best meet these needs/gaps
by itself, create brand advocacy. Such brand advocacy and at each stage along the journey.
WOM are especially important for service brands, for which When combined with prior research on media strengths,
the consumer cannot otherwise obtain tangible and credible
evidence of product quality and trustworthiness (Berry
our description of consumer processing factors (Figure 2)
2000). For WOM and advocacy to occur, the consumer might suggests the kinds of processing effects or outcomes that
need to engage and interact frequently with the brand and would likely be created by different types of communica-
develop a sense of “brand love” (Batra, Ahuvia, and Bagozzi tions (see Table 1). To develop the communications matching
2012), arising in part from the brand becoming meaningful model, it is also necessary to identify the communication
in a symbolic and emotional (not just functional) manner. outcomes marketers actually desire at different stages of the
Furthermore, the brand might need to send consumers the consumer decision journey. Table 2 offers such a character-
types of brand messages that would motivate them to pass
these messages along to others (Berger 2014; Brown and ization on the basis of the likely communication needs and
Reingen 1987; Chevalier and Mayzlin 2004; Godes and objectives along the consumer path to purchase.
Mayzlin 2004). By knowing both (1) the kinds of outcomes that different
communications create and (2) the kinds of outcomes that
marketers want at different stages of the consumer decision
Rationale for the Communications Models journey, it is possible to derive the kinds of communications
In developing an IMC program, the implication of the pre- that would be most helpful to marketers as consumers move
vious discussion is that marketers should be “media neutral” through their decision journey. Applying the logic and
and evaluate all communication options on the basis of analysis from Tables 1 and 2 thus suggests the communi-
effectiveness (How many desired effects does a communi- cations that might be needed at different stages, as we sum-
cation create?) and efficiency (At what cost are those out- marize in Table 3 (see also Young 2010).
comes created?). In other words, marketers ultimately only Many of the linkages shown in these tables have not been
care about achieving their communication goals and moving empirically established by academic research; they should
consumers along in their decision journey—any means of therefore be viewed as research propositions in need of
communications that would facilitate those goals should be empirical testing. In particular, within the category of “new
considered. media,” additional research is required to confirm that (1)
For example, whether a consumer has a strong, favorable, search advertising and display ads are the vehicles best suited
and unique brand association of Subaru with “outdoors,” to raising brand awareness and salience; (2) own websites are
“active,” or “rugged” because of a TV ad that shows the car best for communicating brand benefits and features; (3) social
driving over rough terrain or because Subaru sponsors ski, media is best for creating preference and, later, loyalty; and
kayak, and mountain bike events, the impact in terms of (4) mobile is best for pushing persuaded consumers to action.
Subaru’s brand equity should be similar unless the associ- Although these strengths seem intuitively plausible, and
ations created are materially different in some ways. Research some are suggested in the research reviewed in the previous
has shown that “direct experience” communications (e.g., section (e.g., Naylor, Lamberton, and West 2012), these are
event-created ones) can create stronger associations than can important model assumptions that clearly require testing,

132 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

TABLE 2
Research Propositions Concerning Possible Communication Needs and Objectives at Different Stages of the
Consumer Decision Journey
Communication Needs and Objectives
Decision
Journey Stage Awareness Information Imagery Trust Emotion Action Loyalty Connect

Needs +++ +++ + ++ ++ + + +

Is aware +++ +++ + + + + + +
Considers +++ +++ +++ ++ + + + +
Learns +++ +++ +++ +++ + + + +
Likes ++ +++ +++ +++ +++ + + +
Will pay ++ +++ +++ +++ +++ + + +
Commits ++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ + +
Consumes + ++ +++ +++ ++ +++ + +
Is satisfied + ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ +++ +
Is loyal + + + ++ ++ +++ +++ ++
Engages + + + ++ ++ +++ +++ +++
Advocates + + + ++ ++ +++ +++ +++
Notes: +++ = greatest influence; ++ = medium influence; + = least influence.

especially because the nature of the message and creative can keywords, or third-party website and blog native content
also shape the nature of these relationships. promoting generic category demand. Appropriate messag-
To illustrate how such a model can operate, we next ing could make the category-level need conscious by
examine several of the possible steps along the consumer showing how it could solve a problem or increase quality
decision journey (see Appendix B). We discuss some of the of life. Such messaging should then generate within the
likely needs/gaps in consumer knowledge and behaviors at consumer the logical desire to figure out which brands best
each stage (combining a few) and propose media combina- satisfy the now-recognized need. For example, the obstacle-
tions that might therefore be most useful as part of an IMC course brand “Tough Mudder” targeted Facebook ads to
plan for that stage. consumers who were already into extreme sports, making
them aware that this kind of product could meet their need
Stage 1: The Consumer Recognizes That (S)he Has for extreme sports.
an Unmet Need or Want and Begins to Think About
What Kinds of Products or Services Might Satisfy It Stage 2: The Consumer Then Begins to Consider
One communications implication is that larger-share brands Which Specific Possible Brands Might Best Satisfy
ought to consider the enhancement of overall category That Need or Want
demand as a possible communications objective. Appro- At this stage, the consumer is probably high on motivation
priate media to utilize might be location-targeted mobile and desire, but not on cognitive ability. Thus, the consumer
apps and ads, paid search ads triggered by proximate search will not be in a position to conduct extensive research but will

TABLE 3
Research Propositions Concerning the Relative Strengths of Different Communication Options Across the
Consumer Decision Journey
Communication Options
Decision
Journey Stage TV Promos Events PR Social Media Website Search Display Mobile Direct Selling

Needs 111 1 1 11 11 1 111 111 11 111 111

Is aware 111 11 111 11 11 111 111 111 1 111 111
Examines 11 11 1 1 11 111 111 111 11 111 111
Learns 11 11 1 1 11 111 111 11 111 111 111
Likes 111 11 111 11 111 111 1 1 111 11 11
Will pay 1 11 1 11 1 11 1 1 11 111 111
Commits 1 111 1 1 1 11 1 1 111 111 111
Consumes 1 111 1 1 11 1 1 1 11 1 1
Is satisfied 11 11 1 11 11 11 1 1 11 1 1
Is loyal 11 111 111 1 111 11 1 1 111 111 111
Engages 1 111 111 111 111 111 1 1 111 111 1
Advocates 1 1 111 11 111 111 1 1 111 1 1
Notes = +++ = greatest influence; ++ = medium influence; + = least influence.

Integrating Marketing Communications / 133

simply be identifying the best few brands for further Stage 5: The Consumer Then Decides Which Pieces
investigation.2 of Information Are Both Credible and Diagnostic
During this initial brand consideration process, the mar- and, Thus, Relevant to Choice
keter’s key communication tasks would logically be to in-
In cases in which brands make specific performance claims,
crease the accessibility and salience of the brand’s existence
the information-searching consumer may be looking for
and its key reason for consideration. The marketer must thus
credible evidence to substantiate the brand’s claims (i.e.,
ensure that the brand is highly visible through organic search
“reasons to believe”). These could be in the form of objective,
and paid search ads, retargeted display and banner ads, targeted
third-party testing or endorsements and testimonials from
Facebook posts and paid ads, (re)tweets, location-targeted
current and past customers (as in published reviews), friends
mobile apps and ads, high share of voice in targeted tradi-
(via Facebook posts, e-mails, or personal conversations), or
tional advertising media, targeted events and sponsorships,
perceived experts or celebrities (via ads, blog posts, tweets,
high presence in high-traffic third-party websites (e.g., via
or in-store conversations with salespeople). Integrated mar-
“native content”), high and positive user-generated-content
keting communication plans also need to be in place to solicit
presence (e.g., in blogs and reviews), the creation and
credible and positive reviews and ratings, endorsements, and
awareness-building of “thought leadership”–owned web-
testimonials in the brand’s owned media as well as earned
sites, and so on. An example is a campaign by Papa John’s
and shared media (Chevalier and Mayzlin 2006; Trusov,
Pizza, in which the company sent tweets with coupons to
Bodapati, and Bucklin 2010).
Twitter users who were tweeting about pizza (“conquest-
Communications from a brand at this journey stage
ing”), thus making the brand more salient among consumers
should also engender a feeling of overall trust and confidence
demonstrating a high level of category need.
in the brand and the organization and employees behind it.
More credible information helps reduce purchase anxiety and
Stages 3 and 4: The Consumer Will Next Try to build trust and confidence in the provider for service brands
Actively Learn More About the Various Brand in particular (Berry 2000). Credibility can be signaled through
Options That Seem Capable of Satisfying the the heightened prominence of the brand in the media, positive
Category-Level Need or Want and public reviews and ratings, publicized awards, linkages
The consumer’s ability to process information will probably with other trusted and high-quality brands and organizations,
increase over this stage of the decision journey, so that the and so on.
(s)he is likely to seek out more detailed and granular
information and rely less on heuristics and peripheral cues Stage 6: The Consumer Next Has to Decide How
such as endorsers or source/execution likability (Alba and Much the Preferred Brand Is Worth to Decide on
Hutchinson 1987). Such information search could include the Extent of His or Her Willingness to Pay the
visits to brand or third-party websites (e.g., Consumer Asked-For Price
Reports, the automotive website Edmunds.com), search Any brand communications for consumers at this stage needs
engine queries (used to drive consumers to the brand’s to communicate that the price being charged by the brand is
owned informative website), online and offline inquiries to “fair,” competitively reasonable, and indeed perhaps less than
friends and acquaintances, visits to dealer and retailer outlets to the actual “value” being delivered by the brand to its purchaser,
inspect options and talk to salespeople, and so on. Marketers relative to competing brands. Conventional media campaigns
could also use persuasive content in informative long- could do this (e.g., Jim Beam Black “8 Years Changes Every-
length TV ads or YouTube videos, informative online and thing” campaign).
offline WOM and viral content, and placement of key brand It is also likely that at this willingness-to-pay assessment
information on blogs and third-party websites. stage, the perceived value of the brand is influenced by its
For example, Lysol got mothers on Facebook to pass on perceived emotional benefits and social appeal. Associating
information to their networks about how they could take care the brand with desired feelings and values through “meaning
of cleaning tasks by using the Lysol brand instead of harsh transfer” and creating desired social image value and social
chemicals; Dollar Shave Club has used detailed YouTube currency are thus important objectives for a brand at this
videos, and various law firms employ “thought leader” blogs. stage. Media that are stronger in their ability to “transfer in”
During this information search process (which may be quick targeted brand associations, cultural meaning, and emotions
and iterative), other brands may be added to the initial con- could include long-form TV ads, associated high-prestige
sideration set (Court et al. 2009), leading to a fresh cycle of events, celebrity (re)tweets, YouTube brand videos (e.g., those
information gathering. that were used by Dove), Facebook pages or posts (e.g.,
Procter & Gamble’s Cover Girl pages with Ellen DeGeneres),
2Depending on the nature of the consumer’s consideration and and blogs (e.g., Iams).
decision processes for that purchase, such higher awareness may or
may not be very important in driving eventual brand choice. So, Stage 7: Even if a Favorable Willingness-to-Pay
whereas brands in some categories (e.g., restaurants) may need to Judgment Is Rendered, Consumers Still Have to
expend maximum resources to lead in “top-of-mind awareness,” Follow Through and Make the Purchase
brands in other categories (e.g., automobiles) might be adequately
served by ensuring that they are always one of the three or four that Brand communications at this stage need to explicitly impel
are spontaneously considered for further evaluation. action, letting ready-to-buy consumers know where the product

134 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

can be purchased conveniently, at an acceptable price, and with Through such media tactics, a brand not only can reach
confidence. A preference, or the intention to choose a brand, many more potential consumers but also can do so in
does not automatically and immediately lead to a trial or pur- credible, low-key ways that are less likely to evoke hostility
chase action. Delay is possible, sometimes because the purchase and skepticism.
step is considered inconvenient or untrustworthy or because it is Consumers are more likely to take advantage of these
not available at the best price; such delay can reduce the extent WOM opportunities if they genuinely love the brand—that is,
to which brand purchases actually take place. Messages about believe that the brand reflects their deeply held life values and
retail or e-shopping locations, bolstered by reassurances about helps them communicate “who they are” and “who they want
guarantees/warranties and return policies, can be combined with to be,” among many other things. Brand communications are
“actual prices paid” data that show that the price the consumer therefore needed that touch consumers in deeply meaningful
pays will indeed be “a good deal.” “Limited-time” promotions ways and make the brand symbolic of the targeted consumers’
and deals could be offered to close the sale. life values, identities, and aspirations (Batra, Ahuvia, and
These messages might need to be delivered through paid Bagozzi 2012). Creating such communications requires the
media, owned media (e.g., brand websites, Facebook pages, utilization of emotional, cultural, and symbolic cues—delivered
Twitter feeds, location-triggered mobile apps), and/or earned through “authentic” messages and “close-to-consumer” media
media (e.g., third-party sites offering shopping advice, cou- (e.g., Four Seasons tweeted about wine tastings to some of its
pons, price comparison smartphone apps), as well as through top customers).
the message modalities of distribution (trade) partners, possibly To facilitate brand love, marketers also need to create
utilizing co-op advertising and linked-to-retailer websites. Ex- easy and attractive ways for consumers to engage and interact
amples of campaigns incentivizing quick action include the use with the brand in multiple and frequent ways, through Twitter
of Groupon and videos on YouTube and on brand websites that hashtag events, Facebook pages, online and offline brand
reduce barriers to action, using client case studies and brand communities, the presence of helpful and inspiring native
specifics. content on websites and blogs, and voting-type contests (e.g.,
Electronic Arts asked fans to pick a player for the cover of a
Stages 9 and 10: A Consumer Then Has to Weigh game; American Express had members vote on charitable
Whether (S)he Wants to Repurchase the Brand projects it should support).
over Time
Because repeat purchases (increasing the lifetime value of the Summary
customer) only occur if the consumer feels highly satisfied Utilizing the previous analysis and other research inputs,
with the product or service and his or her initial decision to Table 3 offers an illustration of how different types of media
purchase it, the brand’s ongoing communications need to vary in their effectiveness at different stages of the consumer
convince the buyer that the brand is, in fact, performing well decision journey. A brand thus needs to form an overall or
when compared with “reasonable” expectations. To increase segment-level assessment of where its target consumers are
this real and perceived customer satisfaction, companies can on this decision journey. It needs to quickly and automati-
also use many of the newer media for internal employee cally aggregate data from various sources to decide how its
communications that improve the quality of their customer media dollars should be allocated at that moment, what kinds
interactions, such as internal YouTube channels (e.g., Best of messages and tonality should be used, and at which
Buy’s “Blue Shirt Nation”). locations and times these messages should be sent.
Appropriate media at this stage for “purchase reinforce- After these decisions have been made and a communi-
ment” messaging might be postpurchase direct mail, e-mail, and cation plan has been tentatively developed, the communi-
outbound telemarketing; targeted traditional media ads and even cation optimization model provides a top-down evaluation of
retargeted banner and display ads; social media reinforcement; the proposed communication program in terms of how effi-
Facebook pages and Twitter direct communications for cus- ciently it maximizes main and interaction effects. It helps fine-
tomer service support (e.g., as with Zappos, Delta, and UPS); tune the communication program to ensure optimal integration
and online sentiment and review tracking. Brands can also by helping marketers answer the question: “How do I know if I
increase the frequency and amount of consumption, as well as have a fully integrated marketing communications program?”
cross-selling and up-selling, through targeted discount offers to
existing customers from their loyalty program communications.
Communications Optimization
Stages 11 and 12: Some Consumers May Then Model
Choose to Engage in Positive WOM for the Brand Although several criteria may be relevant to assess integra-
or Even Become Brand “Advocates” and tion, the following seven criteria (“the 7Cs”) have been found
“Missionaries” for It to be particularly helpful in terms of capturing the key
Here, brands need to make it easy to get their consumers considerations raised by much prior IMC research (e.g.,
to recommend the brand to others, through Facebook likes, Keller 2001b, 2013). The first two criteria are especially
(re)tweets, viral branded content, Instagram comments, and relevant to the financial efficiency of the communication
so on (e.g., Duane Reade got its loyal followers to retweet its plan. Some of these criteria have been addressed in previous
women’s hosiery stories using the hashtag #DRLegwear). sections and, thus, are not elaborated in great detail.

Integrating Marketing Communications / 135

Coverage executed across multiple media in a visually consistent manner
can induce stronger attitudes toward the brand than the same
Coverage is the proportion of the target audience reached by
executions with less visual consistency.
each communication option employed, as well as the amount
of overlap among those options. In other words, to what extent
Complementarity
do different communication options reach the designated tar-
get market and the same versus different consumers who make As noted in previous sections, communication options are
up that market? more effective when used in tandem, ideally in the most
appropriate sequence. Complementarity is the extent to
Cost which different associations and linkages are emphasized
Marketers must evaluate marketing communications on all across communication options. For effective competitive
these criteria against their cost to arrive at the most effective positioning, brands typically need to establish multiple
and most efficient communications program. To increase the brand associations. Different marketing communication
cost efficiency of an IMC program, marketers can conduct options may be better suited to establishing a particular
A/B split (multivariate design) field experiments, using track- brand association (e.g., sponsorship of a cause may improve
ing metrics on business metrics that feed into return-on- perceptions of a brand’s trust and credibility, but TV and
investment assessments. For instance, do those customers print advertising may be needed to communicate its per-
who are fans on a firm’s Facebook page or followers of its formance advantages).
Twitter account have a sufficiently higher purchase fre-
quency? Do they spend more, with fewer discounts? Ideally, Cross-Effects
such tests would use a randomized test versus control design Communications used in tandem are more powerful when
to obviate issues of causality (e.g., Facebook page/Twitter they interact and create synergistic cross-effects with other
followers could otherwise be consumers who already feel communications through proper sequencing. Our review has
high brand affinity). illustrated many such effects within and between online and
There are several brands that already conduct such tests. offline media. For example, promotions and online solic-
U.K. retailer Marks & Spencer found that its YouTube itations can be more effective when combined with adver-
channel video watchers (vs. nonwatchers) had a 25% higher tising (Neslin 2002).The awareness and attitudes created by
basket size, had higher conversion rates, had fewer returns, advertising campaigns can increase the success of more direct
and spent twice as much time on the company website, which sales pitches. Advertising can convey the positioning of a
they visited twice as often. Volvo compared the percentage of brand and benefit from online display advertising or search
times that it was in people’s consideration set of prospects in engine marketing that sends a stronger call to action (Pfeiffer
areas where it ran (vs. did not run) a Facebook campaign, with and Zinnbauer 2010).
controlled equality in the other-media campaigns in both
areas. Conformability
The coverage and cost criteria thus reflect the efficiency of In any IMC program, consumers will encounter communi-
the media plan to cost effectively reach the right consumers cations in different orders or sequences, or perhaps not at all.
(Lin, Venkataraman, and Jap 2013). The next five criteria home Any particular message may be new to some consumers, but
in on the success that the IMC program has in actually influ- not to others, and, for any one consumer, it may be preceded
encing those consumers along their decision journey to drive or followed by a completely different set or sequence of
sales in the short run and build brand equity in the long run. communications from the brand. Conformability refers to
Contribution communication versatility and the extent to which a particular
marketing communication “works” for many target con-
Contribution reflects direct “main effects” and the inherent ability sumers in many times and places. In other words, how well
of a marketing communication to create the desired response does the communication conform to the different charac-
and communication effects from consumers in the absence of teristics and communication needs of different consumers?
exposure to any other communication option. How much does The ability to work at two levels—effectively communicating
a communication—by itself—affect consumer processing and to consumers who have or have not seen a communication
build awareness, enhance image, elicit responses, induce sales, or and will or will not see other communications—is critically
affect any other stage along the consumer journey? important. A highly conformable or versatile communication
achieves its communication goals regardless of the com-
Commonality munications path consumers have been on or will be on. Note
Commonality is the extent to which common associations are that one of the benefits of new media and programmatic
reinforced across communication options; that is, the extent advertising efforts is that there may be a more accurate record
to which different communication options share the same of prior communication exposures for consumers and, thus,
meaning. Information processing research has found that a greater ability to adapt a communication accordingly.
repeated message is more effective when it is presented in two A fully integrated communications program should perform
different modes rather than in one (Unnava and Burnkrant well on each of these seven integration criteria (coverage, cost,
1991; Young and Bellezza 1982). McGrath (2005) empirically contribution, commonality, complementarity, cross-effects, and
shows how communication programs with a common theme conformability). Several points about the specific criteria are

136 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

worth noting. First, there are not necessarily inherent dif- tremendous potential through their greater versatility and pre-
ferences across communication types for contribution and cision, but they also create greater integration challenges.
complementarity because, in theory, any communication, if To capitalize on these new media opportunities, marketers
properly designed, can play a critical and unique role in need new tools and ways of thinking that can provide structure
achieving certain communication objectives. Communication to an increasingly complex communications environment. To
types vary, however, in their breadth and depth of audience better understand how to develop and deliver fully integrated
coverage and in terms of commonality and conformability communication programs in today’s changing marketing world,
according to the number of modalities they employ: the more we reviewed academic research and substantive findings to
modalities available with a communication type, the greater date. Appendix C displays five main themes that emerged from
its potential commonality and conformability. In other words, this review.
the more a communication employs multiple modalities (e.g., With these main themes in mind, we propose two com-
audio, video, images), the more opportunities there are to munication models as part of a broad conceptual framework to
match that communication with another communication and address key IMC questions of interest to both academics and
to appeal to different audiences. marketing managers and researchers. Figure 3 shows how the
two conceptual models combine to assist in the development
Summary and delivery of IMC programs.
• Building on an understanding of the consumer, contextual,
Conclusions and content factors that shape communication outcomes, the
Integrated marketing communications are the coordinated, communications matching model considers the specific
objectives and desired outcomes at different stages of the
consistent means by which firms attempt to inform, incent,
consumer decision journey and the characteristics of dif-
persuade, and remind consumers—directly or indirectly— ferent media types to recommend the best-aligned media
about the products and brands they sell. Technological and messaging options.
advances and other factors have transformed the marketing • The communication optimization model evaluates all pro-
communications environment and present new challenges and posed communication options for effectiveness and effi-
opportunities to marketers. Digital media, in particular, offer ciency to ensure that maximal collective effects result.

FIGURE 3
IMC Conceptual Framework

Top-Down Communications
Optimization Model

Online and Direct and

Major Sales Events and PR and Social Media Mobile Database Personal
Communication Advertising Promotion Experiences Publicity Marketing Marketing Marketing Selling
Platforms

Propensity
Communication Propensity Propensity to
to create Propensity Propensity Propensity Propensity Propensity
Outcomes and to convey create brand
awareness to build to elicit to inspire to instill to connect
detailed imagery and
Objectives and trust emotions action loyalty people
information personality
salience

Stages of
Consumer Needs/ Knows Considers Searches/ Likes/ WTP Commits Consumes Satisfied Loyal Engages Advocates
Decision Wants Learns Trusts
Journey

Bottom-Up Communications
Matching Model

Integrating Marketing Communications / 137

By considering communication matching and integration substantive questions in Appendix D. As we discuss in more
in detail, the two communications models offer a compre- detail next, we organize these questions into three main areas
hensive top-to-bottom view of marketing communications, concerning (1) our conceptual framework, (2) how to model
helping address some of MSI’s research priorities in this IMC communication effects, and (3) other key priorities.
domain. By virtue of its broad nature and media neutrality,
Our conceptual framework. Certainly one important fu-
the framework we offer can help guide managerial thinking
ture research area is to validate the usefulness and logic of
and academic research in several specific areas, such as in
the general approach suggested by the proposed communi-
understanding online versus offline, marketer-controlled
cations framework. Given that there are several issues in
versus consumer-driven, and digital versus nondigital
operationalizing the two communication models, it is crucially
differences.
important to further develop and refine each model and
empirically test the resulting formulations.
Managerial Implications In particular, the depicted linkages in Tables 1, 2, and 3,
There are several important managerial guidelines that follow which support the foundation of the communications
from this research that can help marketers better integrate matching model, are all research propositions that require
their marketing communications. careful further investigation and testing. As part of the val-
idation of Table 1, several specific links should be explored.
1. There must be as complete an understanding as possible of the
consumer paths to purchase and decision funnels for the For example, are brand websites necessarily poor in build-
specific product categories and consumer segments of most ing trust and eliciting emotions, or can such outcomes be
interest to the brand being managed. There is no single path to obtained with careful use of certain types of endorsers/
purchase shared by all consumers. However, there can be a sources and audio/video material? If so, which specific types?
general sense of the kinds of decision journeys taken by To test the propositions in Table 2, research should explore all
different sets of consumers and their likely attitudes and possible communication needs for consumers at different
behaviors at different stages along the way. In formulat-
ing these paths to purchase, it is important to adopt a model stages of the decision journey, as well as all possible out-
that reflects and can account for the more complex and non- comes created by communications with consumers, to ensure
linear decision journeys that characterize many of today’s that a comprehensive inventory of all meaningful commu-
consumers. nication effects exists.
2. For every communication option under consideration or Many of the posited linkages in Table 3 also call for
currently being used, it is critical that marketers assess: additional research. What, for example, are the types of
a. What is the direct (“main” or independent) effect of the communications content and formats that increase a con-
communication on consumers? In what ways does it sumer’s willingness to pay or lead a consumer to purchase
change consumer knowledge or behaviors? What does it action? For both Tables 1 and 3, researchers may find it easier
make consumers think, feel, and do? Does it reinforce the
to focus their study on individual columns to assess the full
messages conveyed by other communications in any way?
range of processing effects and communication outcomes
b. What does the communication uniquely contribute that
complements other communications? What is the unique role associated with particular communication platforms.
played by the communication that makes it indispensable? In terms of the communications optimization model, the
c. In what ways, if at all, does the communication interact with seven IMC criteria should be investigated in greater depth.
other communications and enhance their effects? How does Are they sufficiently exhaustive and mutually exclusive? What
the communication improve the ability of other communi- kinds of specific checklists and quantifiable metrics can be
cations to influence consumer knowledge and behaviors? applied to help both the design of IMC programs a priori and
Consequently, what is the best role for that communication the assessment of their effects after the fact?
in the necessary sequence of multiple messages?
3. More broadly, marketers must routinely conduct a commu- How to model communication effects. In motivating the
nications audit of any proposed communications program to logic behind our conceptual framework, we noted the need
evaluate how well it is integrated and the extent to which the in researching IMC to (1) incorporate multiple dependent
whole exceeds the sum of its parts. The seven criteria from variables, (2) move beyond contemporaneous effects into
the communication integration model—coverage, cost, con- lagged and sequencing effects, and (3) measure effects con-
tribution, commonality, complementarity, cross-effects, and
conformability—can provide a useful foundation to assist ditional on the stage of the consumer decision journey. We
in such a critique. Marketers must also conduct in-depth elaborate on these three suggestions next.
communication reviews for ongoing or already executed First, there clearly is a need for more research using a
communications programs. Such a review should attempt broader set of dependent variables more closely linked to
to empirically assess both the direct and indirect con- expanded funnel metrics (as in Appendix B and Table 2).
tributions to brand equity and sales of each marketing Ideally, this research should be conducted in field settings
communication. Applying the proper measurement models
(as was done by, e.g., Ataman et al. 2010; Naik and Peters 2009;
is critical here.
Smith, Gopalakrishna and Chatterjee 2006; Smith, Gopalakrishna
and Smith 2004; Wiesel et al. 2011). Such research would be
Future Research Directions more likely to provide insights that tie more closely with how
Given what we have learned about the state of IMCs, what managers use them to make decisions.
pending issues still require additional academic research? We Second, there is a definite need for the development of
summarize some of the remaining key methodological and dynamic models that recognize the longitudinal, time-delayed

138 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

effects of marketing communications (i.e., capture sequential alignment of sales and marketing, were identified as part
effects instead of just simultaneous effects, as was done by, of the MSI research priority setting. In this area, progress
e.g., Smith, Gopalakrishna, and Chatterjee 2006; see also may be made by collaborating with academics from com-
Assael 2011 and Raman et al. 2012). As part of this re- munication and journalism schools, which, as we have noted,
search thrust, there is a need to study optimal sequence issues have generally placed greater emphasis on organizational
(differential carryover and decay rates, lags and delays, etc.). issues with IMC. Blending their thinking with some of the
Although these inquiries may often involve analytical models aforementioned marketing tools and insights may spark new
and empirical research of large databases, there is also a need ideas as to how to strategically and tactically develop well-
for individual-level analyses to explore changes in knowl- integrated communication programs within organizations.
edge and behavior in more detail. Finally, the MSI research priorities pose several ques-
Finally, there is a need to recognize that consumers’ tions that our article does not address, which require more
brand-related needs vary as they move through various stages thorough examination to identify what we know and do not
in their decision journey. Consequently, their response know from academic research. These include improved integra-
elasticities should also be expected to vary by stage. To tion of marketing and sales and more holistic development of
accurately reflect this heterogeneity in consumer response, messages and creative across communication options. One
the stage of the consumer decision journey should therefore clearly emerging area of tremendous importance is mobile
be used as a moderator variable in analyses. Incorporating marketing. Given its recent emergence due to the explosion of
these three changes in future IMC research modeling and smartphones, academics are just now beginning to develop
analyses should produce richer, more valid insights into how concerted research on the topic (e.g., Andrews et al. 2016;
exactly consumers are affected by different communication Fang, Luo, and Keith 2014; Gupta 2013). Like any new com-
options, either singularly or in combination. munication medium, although some general communication
principles will certainly apply, there will undoubtedly be a
Other key priorities. Our review also identified several number of uniquely original considerations that firms will have
specific areas that we also believe deserve significant research to factor in (Bell 2014; Ericson, Herring, and Ungerman 2014;
attention in this domain. First, there seems to be a paucity of Ghose 2015; Hwang, McInerney, and Shin 2015).
scholarly research on the changing nature of how consumers
seek, acquire, and integrate brand-relevant information in
today’s dramatically new media environment. Court et al. Appendix A: Some Definitions
(2009) claim that the purchase funnel model no longer applies of IMC3
and that their model of the consumer decision journey “loop”
should replace it. Academic research is needed to test this American Academy of Advertising Agencies
very consequential assertion. We find it quite surprising that
“Integrated Marketing Communications recognizes the value
behaviorally oriented academic research has not attempted to
of a comprehensive plan that evaluates the strategic roles of
study how consumers gather and integrate their brand-related
a variety of communication disciplines—advertising, public
information in ways that are potentially very different from
relations, personal selling, and sales promotion—and com-
how they did so more than 30 years ago, when behavioral
bines them to provide clarity, consistency, and maximum
research last pursued this question (e.g., Punj and Staelin
communication impact.”
1983). Some more recent research has suggested propositions
but does has not conducted empirical tests (e.g., Peterson and
American Marketing Association
Merino 2003).
Second, individual-level IMC research must recognize “A planning process designed to assure that all brand contacts
that communications coordinated in some fashion may pro- received by a customer or prospect for a product, service, or
duce differences in the levels of awareness, beliefs, and atti- organization are relevant to that person and consistent over
tudes, as well as qualitative differences in the actual knowledge time.”
created, compared with uncoordinated messaging. Thus, a
well-designed and executed IMC program may form new Journal of Integrated Marketing Communications
associations about the scope and meaning of the brand, as “IMC is a strategic marketing process specifically designed
well as the nature of its communications program as a whole. to ensure that all messaging and communications strategies
Behaviorally oriented researchers also need to conduct are unified across all channels and are centered around
individual-level “mediators and moderators” analyses to the customer. The IMC process emphasizes identifying and
explore the full range of possible changes in consumer thoughts, assessing customer prospects, tailoring messaging to cus-
feelings, and actions about the brand resulting from IMC tomers and prospects that are both serviceable and profit-
programs versus single-medium or uncoordinated media pro- able, and evaluating the success of these efforts to minimize
grams. A deeper understanding of all these different possible waste and transform marketing from an expense into a
consumer behavior changes would help both agencies develop profit-center.”
better IMC programs and marketers better track their effects.
A third priority area concerns organizational issues and 3Summarized at https://thedma.org/membership/member-groups-
the internal processes that will improve communication communities/integrated-marketing-community/integrated-marketing-
integration. Several related topics, such as training and definitions/.

Integrating Marketing Communications / 139

Appendix B: Potential Stages in depending on the sequence in which the different commu-
nications are processed.
an Expanded Consumer 4. By recognizing the direct and indirect changes in knowledge
Decision Journey and behavior engendered by different communications,
marketers can choose those communication options that are
1. Feels a need or want for it (at a category level) most likely to collectively achieve brand objectives.
2. Knows about it (sufficient brand awareness in terms of recall 5. Digital communication options, in particular, offer robust
and recognition) effects that influence consumers directly as well as indirectly
3. Actively considers it (examines attributes and benefits) by how they interact with many other digital or nondigital
4. Searches for more information, learns more about it, and communication options.
begins to critically evaluate it (builds brand knowledge)
5. Likes it and has trust/confidence in it (has functional and
nonfunctional brand associations that are strong, favorable, Appendix D: Future Research
and unique)
6. Is willing to pay (more) for it (high perceived brand value
Imperatives in IMC and
based on functional, emotional, social, and symbolic Recommendations to Marketers
benefits) 1. To better validate the communications matching model,
7. Chooses to try it soon and knows where, when, and how to gain a deeper understanding of both the full range of possible
get it (high desire to act) outcomes created by different types of communications as
8. Consumes it (timing, frequency, and amount of consumption) well as the specific communication needs for consumers at
9. Is satisfied with it (has positive thoughts, feelings, and different stages of the decision journey.
experiences) 2. To improve the insights and recommendations from the
10. Is loyal repeat buyer of it (both attitudinal and behavioral communications optimization model, at the macro level,
loyalty) consider the scope and relevance of the seven IMC criteria
11. Is engaged and interacts with it (participates in both online and, at the micro level, develop more specific and quantifiable
and offline brand-related activities) considerations for each of the seven criteria.
12. Is an active advocate for it (both offline and online with 3. To better reflect the full range of outcomes that may arise
social media) from consumer exposure to communications along different
stages of their decision journeys, employ multiple dependent
variables.
4. To capture the dynamic nature of marketing communication
Appendix C: Five Major Themes effects, incorporate differential carryover and decay rates,
Reflected in Prior IMC and lags and delays, and the effects of sequencing in theoretical
models and empirical tests.
Related Research 5. To better reflect the complexity of consumer paths to pur-
1. The current consumer decision journey is significantly dif- chase, use the message recipient’s current stage in the
ferent from what it was in the past, in that it requires much decision journey as a moderator variable in assessing the
more carefully designed and implemented IMC programs heterogeneous effectiveness of different marketing media
to ensure maximal results, with the deployment of stage- effects (main and interaction effects).
appropriate media and messages in optimal sequence. 6. To provide stronger grounding to the proposed conceptual
2. Different communication options have different strengths and framework, gain a richer, deeper understanding of the con-
weaknesses and generate different types of effects on con- sumer decision journey and how consumers choose to seek,
sumer knowledge and behavior along consumers’ decision acquire, and integrate brand-relevant information in today’s
journeys. New media options greatly increase the marketer’s new communications environment.
ability to target specific outcomes with greater precision. 7. To improve the impact of the proposed conceptual frame-
3. Much interaction and synergy exists across communications. work, examine the optimal organizational structures and
Different types of information in different communications processes in employing the proposed models and con-
interact and combine to change consumer knowledge and cepts to craft a well-integrated marketing communica-
behavior in meaningful ways. These interactions often vary tions plan.

REFERENCES
Aaker, Jennifer (1997), “Dimensions of Brand Personality,” Journal Amaldoss, Wilfred and Chuan He (2010), “Product Variety, In-
of Marketing Research, 34 (August), 347–57. formative Advertising, and Price Competition,” Journal of
Abernathy, Avery M. (1992), “The Information Content of News- Marketing Research, 47 (February), 146–56.
paper Advertising,” Journal of Current Issues and Research in Anderl, Eva, Ingo Becker, Florian von Wangenheim, Jan Schumann
Advertising, 14 (2), 63–68. (2014), “Mapping the Customer Journey: A Graph-Based Frame-
Alba, Joseph W. and J. Wesley Hutchinson (1987), “Dimensions work for Online Attribution Modeling,” working paper, [DOI:
of Consumer Expertise,” Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (4), 10.2139/ssrn.2343077].
411–54. Andrews, Michelle, Xueming Luo, Zheng Fang, and Anindya
Allenby, Greg and Dominique Hanssens (2005), “Advertising Ghose (2016), “Mobile Ad Effectiveness: Hyper-Contextual
Response,” Special Report No. 05-200, Marketing Science Targeting with Crowdedness,” Marketing Science, 35 (2),
Institute. 218–33.

140 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

Assael, Henry (2011), “From Silos to Synergy: A Fifty-Year Review Brown, Jacqueline Johnson and Peter H. Reingen (1987), “Social
of Cross-Media Research Shows Synergy Has Yet to Achieve its Ties and Word-of-Mouth Referral Behavior,” Journal of Con-
Full Potential,” Journal of Advertising Research, 51 (1), 42–48. sumer Research, 14 (3), 350–62.
Assmus, Gert, John U. Farley, and Donald R. Lehmann (1984), Brown, Stephen, Robert V. Kozinets, and John F. Sherry Jr. (2003),
“How Advertising Affects Sales: Meta-analysis of Econometric “Teaching Old Brands New Tricks: Retro Branding and the Re-
Results,” Journal of Marketing Research, 21 (February), 65–74. vival of Brand Meaning,” Journal of Marketing, 67 (July), 19–33.
Ataman, M. Berk, Harald J. Van Heerde, and Carl F. Mela (2010), Bruce, Norris I., Natasha Zhang Foutz, and Ceren Kolsarici (2012),
“The Long-Term Effect of Marketing Strategy on Brand Sales,” “Dynamic Effectiveness of Advertising and Word of Mouth in
Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (October), 866–82. Sequential Distribution of New Products,” Journal of Marketing
Aufreiter, Nora, Julien Boudet, and Vivian Weng (2014), “Why Research, 49 (August), 469–86.
Marketers Keep Sending You E-Mails,” McKinsey Quarterly, Campbell, Margaret C. and Amna Kirmani (2008), “I Know What
(January), [available at http://www.mckinsey.com/business- You’re Doing and Why You’re Doing it: The Use of the Per-
functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/why-marketers- suasion Knowledge Model in Consumer Research,” in Hand-
should-keep-sending-you-emails]. book of Consumer Psychology, C. Haugtvedt, P. Herr, and F.
Bagozzi, Richard P. and Utpal Dholakia (1999), “Goal Setting and Kardes, eds. New York: Psychology Press, 549–74.
Goal Striving in Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Marketing, Chang, Yuhmiin and Esther Thorson (2004), “Television and Web
63 (Special Issue), 19–32. Advertising Synergies,” Journal of Advertising, 33 (2), 75–84.
Barroso, Alicia and Gerard Llobet (2012), “Advertising and Con- Chaudhuri, Arjun and Morris B. Holbrook (2001), “The Chain of
sumer Awareness of New, Differentiated Products,” Journal of Effects From Brand Trust and Brand Affect to Brand Per-
Marketing Research, 49 (December), 773–92. formance: The Role of Brand Loyalty,” Journal of Marketing,
Batra, Rajeev and Olli T. Ahtola (1990), “Measuring the Hedonic 65 (April), 81–93.
and Utilitarian Sources of Consumer Attitudes,” Marketing Chevalier, Judith A. and Dina Mayzlin (2006), “The Effect of Word
Letters, 2 (2), 159–70. of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews,” Journal of Marketing
———, Aaron Ahuvia, and Richard P. Bagozzi (2012), “Brand Research, 43 (August), 345–54.
Love,” Journal of Marketing, 76 (March), 1–16. Court, David, David Elzinga, Susan Mulder, and Ole Jorgen
——— and Pamela M. Homer (2004), “The Situational Impact of Vetvik (2009), “The Consumer Decision Journey,” McKinsey
Brand Image Beliefs,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14 (3), Quarterly, (June), [available at http://www.mckinsey.com/business-
318–30. functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/the-consumer-decision-
——— and Michael L. Ray (1986), “Situational Effects of Ad- journey].
vertising Repetition: The Moderating Influence of Motivation, Cox, Daniel F. (1967), Risk-Taking and Information-Handling in
Ability, and Opportunity to Respond,” Journal of Consumer Consumer Behavior. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Research, 12 (4), 432–45. Danaher, Peter J., André Bonfrer, and Sanjay Dhar (2008), “The
Belch, George E. and Michael A. Belch (2015), Advertising and Effect of Competitive Advertising,” Journal of Marketing
Promotions: An Integrated Marketing Communications Per- Research, 45 (April), 211–25.
spective, 10th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. ——— and Tracey S. Dagger (2013), “Comparing the Relative
Belk, Russell W. (1988), “Possessions and the Extended Self,” Effectiveness of Advertising Channels: A Case Study of a Mul-
Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (September), 139–68. timedia Blitz Campaign,” Journal of Marketing Research,
Bell, David (2014), Location Is (Still) Everything: The Surprising 50 (August), 517–34.
Influence of the Real World on How We Search, Shop, and Sell in ———, Janghyuk Lee, and Laoucine Kerbache (2010), “Optimal
the Virtual One. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Internet Media Selection,” Marketing Science, 29 (2), 336–47.
Berger, Jonah (2014), “Word-of-Mouth and Interpersonal Com- ———, Guy W. Mullarkey, and Skander Essegaier (2006), “Factors
munication: A Review and Directions for Future Research,” Affecting Web Site Visit Duration: A Cross-Domain Analysis,”
Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24 (4), 586–607. Journal of Marketing Research, 43 (May), 182–94.
Berman, Ron and Zsolt Katona (2013), “The Role of Search Engine De Vries, Lisette, Sonja Gensler, and Peter S.H. Leeflang (2012),
Optimization in Search Marketing,” Marketing Science, 32 (4), “Popularity of Brand Posts on Brand Fan Pages: An Investigation
644–51. of the Effects of Social Media Marketing,” Journal of Interactive
Berry, Leonard L. (2000), “Cultivating Service Brand Equity,” Marketing, 26 (2), 83–91.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28 (1), 128–37. Dijkstra, Majorie, Heidi E.J.J.M. Buijtels, and W. Fred van Raaij
Bloemer, José M.M. and Hans D.P. Kasper (1995), “The Complex (2005), “Separate and Joint Effects of Medium Type on Con-
Relationship Between Consumer Satisfaction and Brand Loy- sumer Responses: A Comparison of Television, Print, and the
alty,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 16 (2), 311–29. Internet,” Journal of Business Research, 58 (March), 377–86.
Bonfrer, André and Xavier Drèze (2009), “Real-Time Evaluation Dinner, Isaac M., Harald J. Van Heerde, and Scott A. Neslin (2014),
of Email Campaign Performance,” Marketing Science, 28 (2), “Driving Online and Offline Sales: The Cross-Channel Effects
251–63. of Traditional, Online Display, and Paid Search Advertising,”
Brakus, J. Joško, Bernd H. Schmitt, and Lia Zarantonello (2009), Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (October), 527–45.
“Brand Experience: What Is It? How Is It Measured? Does It Draganska, Michaela, Wesley R. Hartmann, and Gena Stanglein (2014),
Affect Loyalty?” Journal of Marketing, 73 (May), 52–68. “Internet Versus Television Advertising: A Brand-Building Com-
Braun, Michael and Wendy Moe (2013), “Online Display Adver- parison,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (October), 578–90.
tising: Modeling the Effects of Multiple Creatives and Individual Edell, Julie A. and Marian Chapman Burke (1987), “The Power of
Impression Histories,” Marketing Science, 32 (5), 753–67. Feelings in Understanding Advertising Effects,” Journal of Con-
Briggs, Rex, R. Krishnan, and Norm Borin (2005), “Integrated sumer Research, 14 (3), 421–33.
Multichannel Communication Strategies: Evaluating the Return ——— and Kevin Lane Keller (1989), “The Information Processing
on Marketing Objectives: The Case of the 2004 Ford F-150 of Coordinated Media Campaigns,” Journal of Marketing Re-
Launch,” Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19 (3), 81–90. search, 26 (May), 149–63.

Integrating Marketing Communications / 141

——— and ——— (1999), “Analyzing Media Interactions: The Hu, Ye, Leonard M. Lodish, and Abba M. Krieger (2007), “An
Effects of Coordinated Print-TV Advertising Campaigns,” Re- Analysis of Real World TV Advertising Tests: A 15 Year
port No. 99–120, Marketing Science Institute. Update,” Journal of Advertising Research, 47 (3), 341–53.
Ericson, Liz, Louise Herring, and Kelly Ungerman (2014), “Busting Hwang, Heeyoung, Paul McInerney, and Jun Shin (2015), “Learning
Mobile Shopping Myths,” McKinsey Quarterly, (December), from South Korea’s Mobile-Retailing Boom, McKinsey Quar-
[available at http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/retail/our-insights/ terly, (May), [available at http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/
busting-mobile-shopping-myths]. retail/our-insights/learning-from-south-koreas-mobile-retailing-
Fang, Zheng, Xueming Luo, and Megan E. Keith (2014), “How boom].
Effective is Location-Targeted Mobile Advertising,” MIT Sloan Jagpal, Harsharanjeet S. (1981), “Measuring Joint Advertising Ef-
Management Review, (October), 14–15. fects in Multiproduct Firms,” Journal of Advertising Research,
Fournier, Susan (1997), “Consumers and Their Brands: Developing 21 (1), 65–69.
Relationship Theory in Consumer Research,” Journal of Con- Janis, Irving L. and Carl I. Hovland (1959), “An Overview of
sumer Research, 24 (3), 343–73. Persuasibility Research,” in Personality and Persuasibility, C.I.
Freimer, Marshall and Dan Horsky (2012), “Periodic Advertising Pulsing Hovland and I.L. Janis, eds. New Haven, CT: Yale University
in a Competitive Market,” Marketing Science, 31 (4), 637–48. Press, 1–28.
Friestad, Marian and Peter Wright (1994), “The Persuasion Knowledge Jedidi, Kamel, Carl F. Mela, and Sunil Gupta (1999), “Managing
Model: How People Cope with Persuasion Attempts,” Journal of Advertising and Promotion for Long-Run Profitability,” Mar-
Consumer Research, 21 (1), 1–31. keting Science, 18 (1), 1–22.
Gatignon, Hubert and Dominique M. Hanssens (1987), “Modeling Jerath, Kinshuk, Liye Ma, and Young-Hoon Park (2014), “Con-
Marketing Interactions with Application to Sales Force Effec- sumer Click Behavior at a Search Engine: The Role of Key-
tiveness,” Journal of Marketing Research, 24 (August), 247–57. word Popularity,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (August),
Ghose, Anindya (2015), “Cynicism About Mobile Advertising Is 480–86.
Greatly Misplaced,” The Conversation, (August 19), [available at Johnson, Michael D., Andreas Herrmann, and Frank Huber (2006),
http://theconversation.com/cynicism-about-mobile-advertising-is- “The Evolution of Loyalty Intentions,” Journal of Marketing,
greatly-misplaced-45673]. 70 (April), 122–32.
Godes, David and Dina Mayzlin (2004), “Using Online Con- Johnson, Russell E., Chu-Hsiang Chang, and Robert G. Lord (2006),
versations to Study Word-of-Mouth Communication,” Mar- “Moving From Cognition to Behavior: What the Research Says,”
keting Science, 23 (4), 545–60. Psychological Bulletin, 132 (3), 381–415.
Goldenberg, Jacob, Gal Oestreicher-Singer, and Shachar Reichman Joo, Mingyu, Kenneth C. Wilbur, Bo Cowgill, and Yi Zhu (2013),
(2012), “The Quest for Content: How User-Generated Links Can “Television Advertising and Online Search,” Management
Facilitate Online Exploration,” Journal of Marketing Research, Science, 60 (1), 56–73.
49 (August), 452–68. Katona, Zsolt (2014), “Competing for Influencers in a Social
Gopalakrishna, Srinath and Rubikar Chatterjee (1992), “A Com- Network,” working paper, Haas School of Business, University
munications Response Model for a Mature Industrial Product: of California, Berkeley.
Applications and Implications,” Journal of Marketing Research, ———, Peter Pal Zubcsek, and Miklos Sarvary (2011), “Network
29 (May), 189–200. Effects and Personal Influences: The Diffusion of an Online
Gopinath, Shyam, Jacquelyn S. Thomas, and Lakshman Krishna- Social Network,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (June),
murthi (2014), “Investigating the Relationship Between the 425–43.
Content of Online Word of Mouth, Advertising, and Brand Keller, Kevin Lane (2001a), “Building Customer-Based Brand
Performance,” Marketing Science, 33 (2), 241–58. Equity: A Blueprint for Creating Strong Brands,” Marketing
Gupta, Sunil (2013), “For Mobile Devices, Think Apps, Not Ads,” Management, (July/August), 15–19.
Harvard Business Review, 91 (March), 70–75. ——— (2001b), “Mastering the Marketing Communications Mix:
Hanssens, Dominique M., ed. (2015), Empirical Generalizations Micro and Macro Perspectives on Integrated Marketing Com-
About Marketing Impact. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science munication Programs,” Journal of Marketing Management,
Institute. 17 (7/8), 819–48.
Hauser, John R., Glen L. Urban, Guilherme Liberali, and Michael Braun ——— (2003), “Brand Synthesis: The Multi-Dimensionality of
(2009), “Website Morphing,” Marketing Science, 28 (2), 202–23. Brand Knowledge,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (4),
Havlena, William, Robert Cardarelli, and Michelle De Montigny 595–600.
(2007), “Quantifying the Isolated and Synergistic Effects of ——— (2013), Strategic Brand Management, 4th ed. Upper Saddle
Exposure Frequency for TV, Print, and Internet Advertising,” River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall.
Journal of Advertising Research, 47 (3), 215–21. Kim, Jooyoung, Hye Jin Yoon, and Sun Young Lee (2010),
Hoban, Paul R. and Randolph E. Bucklin (2015), “Effects of Internet “Integrating Advertising and Publicity,” Journal of Advertising,
Display Advertising in the Purchase Funnel: Model-Based 39 (1), 97–114.
Insights from a Randomized Field Experiment,” Journal of Mar- Koslow, Scott and Gerard J. Tellis (2011), “What Scanner Panel
keting Research, 52 (June), 375–93. Data Tell Us About Advertising: A Detective Story with a Dark
Hoch, Stephen J. and Young-Won Ha (1986), “Consumer Learning: Twist,” Journal of Advertising Research, 51 (March), 87–100.
Advertising and the Ambiguity of Product Experience,” Journal Kuehn, Alfred (1962), “Consumer Brand Choice as a Learning
of Consumer Research, 13 (2), 221–33. Process,” Journal of Advertising Research, 2 (4), 10–17.
Holbrook, Morris B. and Rajeev Batra (1987), “Assessing the Role Kumar, Ashish, Ram Bezawada, Rishika, Ramkumar Janakiraman,
of Emotions as Mediators of Consumer Responses to Adver- and P.K. Kannan (2016), “From Social to Sale: The Effects of
tising,” Journal of Consumer Research, 14 (3), 404–20. Firm-Generated Content in Social Media on Customer Behav-
——— and Elizabeth C. Hirschman (1982), “The Experiential ior,” Journal of Marketing, 80 (January), 7–25.
Aspects of Consumption: Consumer Fantasies, Feelings, and Lamberton, Cait and Andrew T. Stephen (2016), “A Thematic
Fun,” Journal of Consumer Research, 9 (2), 132–40. Exploration of Digital, Social Media, and Mobile Marketing:

142 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

Research Evolution from 2000 to 2015 and an Agenda for Future Manchanda, Puneet, Jean-Pierre Dubé, Khim Yong Goh, and
Inquiry,” Journal of Marketing, 80 (November), 146–72. Pradeep K. Chintagunta (2006), “The Effects of Banner Adver-
Lambrecht, Anja and Catherine Tucker (2013), “When Does tising on Internet Purchasing,” Journal of Marketing Research,
Retargeting Work? Information Specificity in Online Adver- 43 (February), 98–108.
tising,” Journal of Marketing Research, 50 (October), 561–76. Mantrala, Murali K. (2002), “Allocating Marketing Resources,”
Lawrence, Benjamin, Susan Fournier, and Frederic Brunel (2013), Chapter 16, Handbook of Marketing, B.A. Weitz and R. Wensley,
“When Companies Don’t Make the Ad: A Multi-Method In- eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 409–35.
quiry into the Differential Effectiveness of Consumer-Generated Marketing Science (2012), “Special Issue on the Emergence and
Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 42 (4), 292–307. Impact of User-Generated Content,” 31 (3), 369–547.
Lee, Dokyun, Kartik Hosanagar, and Harikesh S. Nair (2015), Mayzlin, Dina and Jiwoong Shin (2011), “Uninformative Adver-
“Advertising Content and Consumer Engagement on Social tising as an Invitation to Search,” Marketing Science, 30 (4),
Media: Evidence from Facebook,” working paper, Tepper 666–85.
School of Business, Carnegie-Mellon University. McCracken, Grant (1989), “Who Is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural
Lee, Jae Young and David R. Bell (2013), “Neighborhood Social Foundations of the Endorsement Process,” Journal of Consumer
Capital and Social Learning for Experience Attributes of Products,” Research, 16 (3), 310–21.
Marketing Science, 32 (6), 960–76. McGrath, John M. (2005), “A Pilot Study Testing Aspects of the
Lemon, Katherine N. and Stephen M. Nowlis (2002), “Developing Integrated Marketing Communications Concept,” Journal of
Synergies Between Promotions and Brands in Different Price– Marketing Communications, 11 (3), 191–214.
Quality Tiers,” Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (May), 171–85. McGuire, William J. (1978), “An Information Processing Model of
Levy, Sydney J. (1959), “Symbols for Sale,” Harvard Business Advertising Effectiveness,” in Behavioral and Management
Review, 37 (July/August), 117–24. Science in Marketing, H.L. Davis and A.J. Silk, eds. New York:
Li, Hongshuang (Alice) and P.K. Kannan (2014), “Attributing Ronald Press, 156–80.
Conversions in a Multichannel Online Marketing Environment: McLuhan, Marshall (2001), “The Medium Is the Message,” in
An Empirical Model and a Field Experiment,” Journal of Mar- Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks, M.G. Durham and D.M.
keting Research, 51 (February), 40–56. Kellner, eds. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 129–38.
Lin, Chen, Sriram Venkataraman, and Sandy Jap (2013), “Media Mela, Carl F., Sunil Gupta, and Donald R. Lehmann (1997), “The
Multiplexing Behavior: Implications,” Marketing Science, 32 (2),
Long-Term Impact of Promotion and Advertising on Consumer
310–24.
Brand Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 34 (May), 248–61.
Lodish, Leonard M., Magid M. Abraham, Stuart Kalmenson, Jeanne
Mitchell, Vincent-Wayne (1999), “Consumer Perceived Risk: Con-
Livelsberger, Beth Lubetkin, Bruce Richardson, et al. (1995),
ceptualisations and Models,” European Journal of Marketing,
“How TV Advertising Works: A Meta-Analysis of 389 Real
33 (1/2), 163–95.
World Split Cable TV Advertising Experiments,” Journal of
Naik, Prasad A. (2007), “Integrated Marketing Communications:
Marketing Research, 32 (May), 125–39.
Provenance, Practice and Principles,” in Handbook of Adver-
———, ———, Jeanne Livelsberger, Beth Lubetkin, Bruce
tising, G.J. Tellis and T. Ambler, eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Richardson, and Mary Ellen Stevens (1995), “A Summary of
Publications, 35–53.
Fifty-Five In-Market Experimental Estimates of the Long-Term
——— and Kay Peters (2009), “A Hierarchical Marketing Com-
Effect of TV Advertising,” Marketing Science, 14 (3, part 2),
G133–40. munications Model of Online and Offline Media Synergies,”
Loewenstein, George F., Elke U. Weber, Christopher K. Hsee, and Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23 (4), 288–99.
Ned Welch (2001), “Risk as Feelings,” Psychological Bulletin, ——— and Kalyan Raman (2003), “Understanding the Impact of
127 (2), 267–86. Synergy in Multimedia Communications,”Journal of Marketing
Luo, Xueming and Naveen Donthu (2006), “Marketing’s Credi- Research, 40 (November), 375–88.
bility: A Longitudinal Investigation of Marketing Communication ———, ———, and Russ Winer (2005), “Planning Marketing-Mix
Productivity and Shareholder Value,” Journal of Marketing, Strategies in the Presence of Interactions,” Marketing Science,
70 (October), 70–91. 24 (1), 25–34.
Lynch, John G., Jr., Howard Marmorstein, and Michael F. Weigold Narayanan, Sridhar, Ramarao Desiraju, and Pradeep K. Chintagunta
(1988), “Choices from Sets Including Remembered Brands: Use (2004), “Return on Investment Implications for Pharmaceutical
of Recalled Attributes and Prior Overall Evaluations,” Journal of Promotional Expenditures: The Role of Marketing-Mix Inter-
Consumer Research, 15 (2), 169–84. actions,” Journal of Marketing, 68 (October), 90–105.
MacInnis, Deborah and Bernard J. Jaworski (1989), “Information Naylor, Rebecca Walker, Cait Poynor Lamberton, and Patricia M.
Processing from Advertisements: Toward an Integrative Frame- West (2012), “Beyond the “Like” Button: The Impact of Mere
work,” Journal of Marketing, 53 (October), 1–23. Virtual Presence on Brand Evaluations and Purchase Intentions
———, Christine Moorman, and Bernard J. Jaworski (1991), in Social Media Settings,” Journal of Marketing, 76 (November),
“Enhancing and Measuring Consumers’ Motivation, Oppor- 105–20.
tunity, and Ability to Process Brand Information from Ads,” Neslin, Scott (2002), Sales Promotion: MSI Relevant Knowledge
Journal of Marketing, 55 (October), 32–53. Series. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
Madhavaram, Sreedhar, Vishag Badrinarayanan, and Robert E. Nunes, Paul F. and Jeffrey Merrihue (2007), “The Continuing Power
McDonald (2005), “Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) of Mass Advertising,” MIT Sloan Management Review, (Win-
and Brand Identity as Critical Components of Brand Equity Strat- ter), 63–69.
egy,” Journal of Advertising, 34 (4), 69–80. O’Guinn, Thomas, Chris Allen, Richard J. Seminik, and Angeline
Malaviya, Prashant (2007), “The Moderating Influence of Adver- Close (2015), Advertising and Integrated Brand Promotion, 7th
tising Context on Ad Repetition Effects: The Role of Amount ed. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
and Type of Elaboration,” Journal of Consumer Research, Ohanian, Roobina (1990), “Construction and Validation of a
34 (1), 32–40. Scale to Measure Celebrity Endorsers’ Perceived Expertise,

Integrating Marketing Communications / 143

Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness,” Journal of Advertising, ———, ———, and Garrett P. Sonnier (2012), “A Latent In-
19 (3), 39–52. strumental Variables Approach to Modeling Keyword Con-
Oliver, Richard L. (2014), Satisfaction: A Behavioral Perspective on version in Paid Search Advertising,” Journal of Marketing
the Consumer. New York: Routledge. Research, 49 (June), 306–19.
Olney, Thomas J., Morris B. Holbrook, and Rajeev Batra (1991), Schultz, Don E. and Philip J. Kitchen (1997), “Integrated Mar-
“Consumer Responses to Advertising: The Effects of Ad keting Communications in U.S. Advertising Agencies: An Ex-
Content, Emotions, and Attitude Toward the Ad on Viewing ploratory Study,” Journal of Advertising Research, 37 (5), 7–18.
Time,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (4), 440–53. Schulze, Christian, Lisa Schöler, and Bernd Skiera (2014), “Not All
Osinga, Ernst C., Peter S.H. Leeflang, Shuba Srinivasan, and Fun and Games: Viral Marketing for Utilitarian Products,”
Jaap E. Wieringa (2011), “Why Do Firms Invest in Consumer Journal of Marketing, 78 (January), 1–19.
Advertising with Limited Sales Response? A Shareholder Schumann, Jan H., Florian von Wangenheim, and Nicole Groene
Perspective,” Journal of Marketing, 75 (January), 109–24. (2014), “Targeted Online Advertising: Using Reciprocity Appeals
Park, C. Whan, Deborah J. MacInnis, Joseph Priester, Andreas B. to Increase Acceptance Among Users of Free Web Services,”
Eisingerich, and Dawn Iacobucci (2010), “Brand Attachment Journal of Marketing, 78 (January), 59–75.
and Brand Attitude Strength: Conceptual and Empirical Dif- Schweidel, David A. and Wendy W. Moe (2014), “Listening In on
ferentiation of Two Critical Brand Equity Drivers,” Journal of Social Media: A Joint Model of Sentiment and Venue Format
Marketing, 74 (November), 1–17. Choice,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (August), 387–402.
Park, Ji Kyung and Deborah Roedder John (2010), “Got to Get You Sethuraman, Raj, Gerard J. Tellis, and Richard A. Briesch (2011),
into My Life: Do Brand Personalities Rub Off on Consumers?” “How Well Does Advertising Work? Generalizations from
Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (4), 655–69. Meta-Analysis of Brand Advertising Elasticities,” Journal of
Parsons, Leonard J. (1974), “An Econometric Analysis of Adver- Marketing Research, 48 (June), 457–71.
tising, Retail Availability, and Sales of a New Brand,” Man- Smith, Robert E. and William R. Swinyard (1983), “Attitude-
agement Science, 20 (6), 938–47. Behavior Consistency: The Impact of Product Trial Versus
Peterson, Robert A. and Maria C. Merino (2003), “Consumer In- Advertising,” Journal of Marketing Research, 20 (August),
formation Search Behavior and the Internet,” Psychology and 257–67.
Marketing, 20 (2), 99–121. Smith, Timothy M., Srinath Gopalakrishna, and Rubikar Chatterjee
Petty, Richard E., John T. Cacioppo, and David Schumann (1983), (2006), “A Three-Stage Model of Integrated Marketing Com-
“Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: munications at the Marketing–Sales Interface,” Journal of Mar-
The Moderating Role of Involvement,” Journal of Consumer keting Research, 43 (November), 546–79.
Research, 10 (2), 135–46. ———, ———, and Paul M. Smith (2004), “The Complementary
Pfeiffer, Markus and Markus Zinnbauer (2010), “Can Old Media Effect of Trade Shows on Personal Selling,” International
Enhance New Media?” Journal of Advertising Research, 50 (1), Journal of Research in Marketing, 21 (1), 61–76.
42–49. Stammerjohan, Claire, Charles M. Wood, Yuhmiin Chang, and
Pilotta, Joseph J., Donald E. Schultz, Gary Drenik, and Philip Rist Esther Thorson (2005), “An Empirical Investigation of the
(2004), “Simultaneous Media Usage: A Critical Consumer Interaction Between Publicity, Advertising, and Previous Brand
Orientation to Media Planning,” Journal of Consumer Behav- Attitudes and Knowledge,” Journal of Advertising, 34 (4),
iour, 3 (3), 285–92. 55–67.
Punj, Girish N. and Richard Staelin (1983), “A Model of Consumer Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E.M. and Inge Geyskens (2006), “How
Information Search Behavior for New Automobiles,” Journal of Country Characteristics Affect the Perceived Value of Web
Consumer Research, 9 (4), 366–80. Sites,” Journal of Marketing, 70 (July), 136–50.
Raman, Kalyan, Murali K. Mantrala, Shrihari Sridhar, and Yihui Stephen, Andrew T. and Jeff Galak (2012), “The Effects of Tra-
Elina Tang (2012), “Optimal Resource Allocation with Time- ditional and Social Earned Media on Sales: A Study of a
Varying Marketing Effectiveness, Margins and Costs,” Journal Microlending Marketplace,” Journal of Marketing Research,
of Interactive Marketing, 26 (10), 43–52. 49 (October), 624–39.
——— and Prasaid A. Naik (2004), “Long-Term Profit Impact ———, Michael R. Sciandra, and J. Jeffrey Inman (2015), “Is It
of Integrated Marketing Communications Program,” Review of What You Say or How You Say It That Matters? The Effects of
Marketing Science, 2 (1), 1–23. Branded Content on Consumer Engagement with Brands on
Reid, Mike, Sandra Luxton, and Felix Mavondo (2005), “The Facebook,” working paper, Saı̈d Business School, University of
Relationship Between Integrated Marketing Communication, Oxford.
Market Orientation, and Brand Orientation,” Journal of Ad- Stern, Bruce L. and Alan J. Resnick (1991), “Information Content in
vertising, 34 (4), 11–23. Television Advertising: A Replication and Extension,” Journal
Reinartz, Werner and Peter Saffert (2013), “Creativity in Adver- of Advertising Research, 31 (3), 36–48.
tising: When It Works and When It Doesn’t,” Harvard Business Stewart, David A. and David H. Furse (1986), Effective Television
Review, (June), 107–12. Advertising: A Study of 1000 Commercials. Lexington, MA:
Richins, Marsha L. (1997), “Measuring Emotions in the Con- Lexington Books.
sumption Experience,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (2), Swaminathan, Vanitha, Karen Stilley, and Rohini Ahluwalia (2009),
127–46. “When Brand Personality Matters: The Moderating Role of
Risselada, Hans, Peter C. Verhoef, and Tammo H.A. Bijmolt (2014), Attachment Styles,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (6),
“Dynamic Effects of Social Influence and Direct Marketing on 985–1002.
the Adoption of High-Technology Products,” Journal of Mar- Swinyard, William R. and Michael R. Ray (1977), “Advertising-
keting, 78 (March), 52–68. Selling Interactions: An Attribution Theory Experiment,”
Rutz, Oliver J. and Randolph E. Bucklin (2011), “From Generic to Journal of Marketing Research, 14 (November), 509–16.
Branded: A Model of Spillover in Paid Search Advertising,” Tellis, Rajesh K. Chandy, and Pattana Thaivanich (2000), “Which
Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (February), 87–102. Ad Works, When, Where, and How Often? Modeling the Effects

144 / Journal of Marketing: AMA/MSI Special Issue, November 2016

of Direct Television Advertising,” Journal of Marketing Re- Van Den Bulte, Christophe and Stefan Wuyts (2007), Social Net-
search, 37 (February), 32–46. works and Marketing. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science
Thompson, Debora V. and Rebecca W. Hamilton (2006), “The Institute Relevant Knowledge Series.
Effects of Information Processing Mode on Consumers’ Re- Van Heerde, Harald J., Maarten J. Gijsenberg, Marnik G. Dekimpe,
sponses to Comparative Advertising,” Journal of Consumer and Jan-Benedict E.M. Steenkamp (2013), “Price and Adver-
Research, 32 (March), 530–40. tising Effectiveness over the Business Cycle,” Journal of
——— and Prashant Malaviya (2013), “Consumer-Generated Marketing Research, 50 (April), 177–93.
Ads: Does Awareness of Advertising Co-Creation Help or Voorveld, Hilde A.M., Peter C. Neijens, and Edith G. Smit (2011),
Hurt Persuasion?” Journal of Marketing, 77 (May), 33–47. “Opening the Black Box: Understanding Cross-Media Effects,”
Torelli, Carlos J., Aysegül Özsomer, Sergio W. Carvalho, Hean Tat Journal of Marketing Communications, 17 (2), 69–85.
Keh, and Natalia Maehle (2012), “Brand Concepts as Repre- ———, ———, and ——— (2012), “The Interacting Role of
sentations of Human Values: Do Cultural Congruity and Media Sequence and Product Involvement in Cross-Media
Compatibility Between Values Matter?” Journal of Marketing, Campaigns,” Journal of Marketing Communications, 18 (3),
76 (July), 92–108. 203–16.
Trusov, Michael, Anand V. Bodapati, and Randolph E. Bucklin Westbrook, Robert A. and Richard L. Oliver (1991), “The
(2010), “Determining Influential Users in Internet Social Net- Dimensionality of Consumption Emotion Patterns and Con-
works,” Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (August), 643–58. sumer Satisfaction,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (1),
———, Randolph E. Bucklin, and Koen Pauwels (2009), “Effects 84–91.
of Word-of-Mouth Versus Traditional Marketing: Findings from Wiesel, Thorsten, Koen Pauwels, and Joep Arts (2011), “Market-
an Internet Social Networking Site,” Journal of Marketing, ing’s Profit Impact: Quantifying Online and Off-line Funnel
73 (September), 90–102. Progression,” Marketing Science, 30 (4), 604–11.
Unnava, H. Rao and Robert E. Burnkrant (1991), “Effects of Re- Wijaya, Bambang Sukma (2012), “The Development of Hierarchy
peating Varied Ad Executions on Brand Name Memory,” of Effects Model in Advertising,” International Research
Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (November), 406–16. Journal of Business Studies, 5 (1), 73–85.
Urban, Glen, Guilherme (Gui) Liberali, Erin Macdonald, Robert Wind, Yoram and Byron Sharp (2009), “Advertising Empirical
Bordley, and John Hauser (2014), “Morphing Banner Adver- Generalizations: Implications for Research and Action,” Journal
tising,” Marketing Science, 33 (1), 27–46. of Advertising Research, 49 (2), 246–52.
Vakratsas, Demetrios and Tim Ambler (1999), “How Advertising Young, Antony (2010), Brand Media Strategy: Integrated Com-
Works: What Do We Really Know?” Journal of Marketing, munications Planning in the Digital Era. New York: Palgrave
63 (January), 26–43. MacMillan.
———, Fred M. Feinberg, Frank M. Bass, and Gurumurthy Kalyanaram Young, Daniel R. and Francis S. Bellezza (1982), “Encoding
(2004), “The Shape of Advertising Response Functions Revisited: A Variability, Memory Organization and the Repetition Effect,”
Model of Dynamic Probabilistic Thresholds,” Marketing Science, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and
23 (1), 109–19. Cognition, 8 (6), 545–59.

Integrating Marketing Communications / 145

View publication stats