The 4 e's of marketing

Case study: Evaluating the 4Ps of marketing

INTRODUCTION

The marketing function is a pivotal concept for brand managers all over the world. As part of

this function, companies need to understand and determine value propositions and deliver it

to consumers (Armstrong and Kotler, 2018). Product, Price, Promotion and Placement are

key factors in helping companies achieve their marketing goals. The main aim of this paper is

to critically analyse arguments raised by Chai Lee Goi in his review of the marketing mix.

External research is intensively used to support and substantiate points of agreement and

disagreement. Recommendations have also been suggested at the end to highlight a different

and more relevant interpretation of the key elements of the marketing mix.

CLARITY AND CONVENIENCE

The first point of agreement, is that the present marketing mix is clear and precise in its

depiction of the pivotal factors that companies need to focus on. Goi (2009), asserts that the

4Ps are concise and easy to understand, making it conveniently applicable for brand

managers in their marketing operations. Also, the present marketing mix assists organizations

in the allocation of scare organizational resources, by making things simple and clear for

management (Goi, 2009). In addition, the mix is a very good starting point for students to

understand the essentials of marketing and was highly relevant in the past where resources

were mainly physical (Goi, 2009). This essentially beefs up our understanding of the

formative years of organizations and economies and helps us understand some of the business

decisions made in history.

FEASIBILITY

The second point of agreement is that the mix is feasible and flexible, allowing it to be easily

applied in various industries and organizations. Goi (2009), advocates the mix as a tool that

can be utilized by every sector and market segment. Chen (2017), further strengthens the

reliability of the mix, by stating that regardless of the number of new factors proposed by

new research, the 4Ps have always been an essential and irreplaceable part, making its value

and importance unchallenged. Even in the modern world where mobile and social marketing

have gained prominence, the 4Ps, have played a significant and unquestionable role in

anit
Sticky Note
First 4 paras meet the requirements of S4B(B): Communication is superior demonstrating excellence in knowledge of context, theory and application, critical analysis and synthesis - This is HD SLO1 : Explains essential concepts of holistic marketing within organisation, demonstrating all levels of applications of concepts This is a HIGH DISTINCTION
bolstering customer’s contentment and satisfaction (Chen, 2017). Thus, it is imperative that

the 4P’s are not overlooked as these factors act as the cornerstone for our understanding of

the marketing function and the many new factors that are coming into the picture.

IRRELEVANCE OF THE 4PS

In contrast to the arguments raised above, Goi attempts to strike a balance by highlighting

some negative aspects to the marketing mix. Goi (2009) highlights that the 4Ps is a possibly

outdated theory that might not be accurate and relevant in today’s world. However, in his

conclusion, he asserts that the 4Ps will always be an integral framework that will essentially

be used in the education of modern day marketing due to its simplicity. I disagree with this

stand as I feel that the 4Ps framework is not relevant in today’s world and should not be the

main driver in marketing education. Based on my research, there are three main reasons for

this.

Figure 1

Reasons against the use of the 4Ps

PROLIFERATION OF SMES

In today’s business world, SMEs are a common sight and it has become relatively easy for

budding entrepreneurs to set up businesses. Resnick, Cheng, Simpson and Lourenco (2015),

argue that the current marketing mix is more suited to a large company’s operations rather

than a small-scaled business. Larger companies have more resources and financial muscle,

allowing them to have a stronger marketing expertise. SME’s need to deploy a marketing

approach that is more customer centric, given their relatively small operation scale (Resnick

et al 2015). Additionally, SMEs need to have a strong knowledge of their consumer base and

need to establish appropriate communication means to tap into the value provided by this

base (Resnick et al 2015).

PRODUCTION ORIENTED ECONOMY

Goi (2009) also asserts that the marketing mix was relevant in the past where manufacturing

and production sectors were the main drivers of economic and organizational growth. With

the rapid growth of service-oriented economies, it is important to question the efficacy of the

mix in the modern-day context. Lauterborn (1990) as reflected in (Goi, 2009), further

elaborates on this point by claiming that the 4Ps act as a one-way conduit that is essentially

prejudiced towards the organization’s main activities and the nature of the industry.

LACK OF CUSTOMER FOCUS

Goi (2009), highlights several times in his article that the marketing mix fails to consider the

customer’s perspective. Chen (2018), argues that the mix overlooks the concept of

Relationship Marketing that emphasizes on long-term networking with customers. This is a

pivotal component given the growth of social media and internet connectivity. Zooming in to

specific industries allows us to properly evaluate the relevance of the 4Ps. For instance, in the

mobile shopping industry, consumer trust is an essential component that helps spur

consumption and user satisfaction. Without trust, transactions will be hampered and

companies will not be able propel their sales. On the other hand, in the hospital industry,

private hospitals need to have a robust understanding of customer needs, allowing them to

deliver high value services that are tailored to their consumer base. This leads to patient

loyalty, continuous growth and a significant advantage over competing hospitals (Hosseini,

Etesaminia and Jafari, 2016). Thus, the perception of the customer and their interest in the

market is major point that is overlooked by the 4Ps.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Thus, factoring the points mentioned above, it is vital for any modern-day marketing

framework to factor in the needs and wants of the consumer. Muneer (2018), argues that

organizations today have very little people who are responsible for the understanding and

recognizing of customer needs and wants. Many students are taught that marketing is a force

orchestrated by the company and customers are outsiders who affected by this force (Goi,

2009). This contradicts modern-day marketing theories such as Relationship Marketing,

which is a concept that is centered on the relationship between consumer and marketer (Chen,

2018). Based on my research, I propose two alternative frameworks, that are more dynamic

and robust than the 4P’s. Most importantly, the proposed ideas, factor in the needs of

consumers who play an unquestionable role in the growth and success of an organization’s

marketing campaign.

SOLUTION 1 - INTEGRATION OF MARKETING, PROMOTION AND COMMUNICATION

anit
Sticky Note
The last three sections (paras 5-7) address very comprehensively the requirements of SLO3: Demonstrates comprehensive and rigorous understanding and creative application of strategic planning and marketing decision process
Figure 2

Muneer’s integrated marketing approach

This framework integrates the marketing, promotion and communication elements in a

company (Muneer, 2018). Under the marketing section, the company focuses on the

attributes of the product and how it specifically caters to consumer interests. Secondly, the

promotion aspect involves targeting market segments and proactively campaigning the

product against competitors. The communication element is the vital component as it factors

in the needs of consumers and how the information released by the company is streamlined

with the interests and demands of consumers.

SOLUTION 2 - 4E’S APPROACH

Figure 3

A reconsideration of the Marketing Mix

The second model being proposed is the 4E’s approach. This approach involves replacing the

4Ps with 4Es as it is more accurate, effective and flexible in guiding marketing managers.

Festa, Cuomo, Metallo and Festa (2015), strongly advocate this approach and this model has

already been proven a success in the wine industry. In this model, Expertise is used instead of

product to enhance and widen the understanding and development of consumer goods.

Evaluation is used instead of price to undermine the value of money and to promote the

consideration of other factors in the judgement of a product. Also, Education depicts a

stronger interpretation and contextualization of the product. Lastly, Experience is used

instead of place to comprehensively encompass the full customer experience.

These 2 models provide a more detailed and logical explanation of the forces involved in the

marketing mix and are more useful for brand managers across various industries. Personally,

I would prefer and advocate the second approach as it had been statistically tested in the wine

industry and has helped wine companies boost their sales. This gives it a slight leverage over

Muneer’s model and is possibly a safer bet for brand managers.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it is an undeniable fact that the 4Ps have played a vital role in shaping our

understanding of the forces of marketing. However, it is pivotal to understand that the world

today is rapidly changing and companies are on a playing field that is drastically different

from the past. It is imperative that new models are explored and tested to provide future

generations with a more pragmatic and realistic take on the elements of marketing and how

they help an organization achieve its objectives.

anit
Sticky Note
This section comprehensively meets the requirements of S2(D) - Demonstrates comprehensive and rigorous understanding and creative application of strategic planning and marketing decision process - Again this section is HD
REFERENCES

1) Armstrong, G., & Kotler, M. (2018). Principles of marketing. Kotler. Harlow United

Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.

2) Chen, H. (2018). What drives consumers’ mobile shopping? 4Ps or shopping

preferences?Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 30(4), 797-815.

doi:10.1108/APJML-08-2017-0167

3) Festa, G., Festa, A., Cuomo, M. T., & Metallo, G. (2016). The (r)evolution of wine

marketing mix: From the 4Ps to the 4Es. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1550-1555.

doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.015

4) Goi, C. L. (2009). A Review of Marketing Mix: 4Ps or More? International Journal of

Marketing Studies,1(1). doi:10.5539/ijms.v1n1p2

5) Hosseini, S. M., Etesaminia, S., & Jafari, M. (2016). identifying eleven factors of service

marketing mix (4ps) effective on tendency of patients toward private hospital. Materia

Socio-Medica, 28(5), 366-369. doi:10.5455/msm.2016.28.366-369

6) Muneer, M. (2018). The 4Ps hinder marketing integration. Business World,