Insights into interpreting integrated marketing communications

Abstract

Purpose This research paper aims to examine the theoretical and practical applicability of integrated marketing communications. Design/methodology/approach Presents the findings from a two‐country qualitative study concerning the phenomenon. The research used survey methodology to assess the views of advertising agency members of the Institute of Advertising Practitioners (UK) and the Communications Agencies Association of New Zealand (CAANZ) Findings The findings show that practitioners appear to be constructing and applying IMC concepts that are situation‐specific. Nonetheless, a search for a single empirically testable theory of IMC ignores evidence that practitioners are committed to IMC concepts while at the same time resisting the development of “rigid rules”. Additionally, external factors may be forcing reconsideration of marketing communications and accountability. Research limitations/implications The research is limited to a study of ad agency perceptions in two countries. While implications of the findings for other countries are discussed, a major direction for the future is the need for research to be conducted in organisations themselves, not necessarily the agencies which service their needs. Practical implications Practical implications include variability in terms of the application of IMC principles. This leads to the idea of differential application with – as stated above – some rejection of “rigid rules” in this dynamic area. Originality/value The value of the paper lies in its use of a comparative approach using members of clearly identifiable and relevant samples in two countries in relation to IMC. The notion of differentiation in relation to IMC application, the perceived rejection of rigid rules, and the need for further research to be focused in‐company (rather than in‐agency) assist in moving this emergent paradigm forward in an academic and practitioner sense.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 78 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.