the marketing communication

In their article “Why young consumers are not open to mobile marketing,” Ian Grant and Stephanie O’Donohoe have a habit of analyzing the works of other authors. Authors indicate the adoption of mobile phones has been “one of the most conspicuous social changes to happen over the last ten years”. In essence, they are analyzing the work of Pedrozo and Wilska 2004 that is ”Mobile phones and young people’s consumer identities: a comparison study between Finland and Brazil”. Proceedings of Digital Generation: Children, Youth and Media. London: Institute of Education, University of London, 26–29 July. The topic is introduced before the Ian Grant and Stephanie O’Donohoe narrow down to specific aspects of mobile marketing. They point out that mobile devices are particularly appealing to marketers due to their potential for targeting, interacting and establishing a relationship with consumers (Grant & O’Donohoe, 2007).

On the other hand, the article ”Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) and brand identity as the critical component of brand equity strategy” indicate that IMC has become widely accepted and an integral part of the brand strategy that requires extensive brand development activities within the firm. The topic is generally made about the IMC whereby Madhavaram, Badrinarayanan and McDonald review the items of previous research. Authors quote Vargo and Lusch 2004, who argued that marketing is evolving towards a dynamic and evolutionary process that is based on a service-centered view.

Establish a Niche

Ian Grant and Stephanie O’Donohoe continue the tradition of viewing young consumer as opposed to mobile marketing communications. An indicator of an increased reception of mobile marketing communication among the young customers in Italy where there was an enlarged penetration rate of 124.6 % is not convincing the authors. Authors quote Bigelow 2002 and Rohm and Sultan 2005 to drive their point that mobile phones are essential to many youth lifestyles.

Madhavaram, Badrinarayanan and McDonald are employing counterclaim technique to advance their paper. They rely on the works of other authors to set their pace. Authors point out that marketing communication helps the firm in eliciting the favorable response from customers. The paper demonstrates that the previous researcher has made a tremendous contribution in enhancing IMC, they quote de Chernatony 1999 who observed that there is a shift in the branding literature.

Occupying the Niche

Ian Grant and Stephanie O’Donohoe understand ”..that young people’s use of mobile phones and the factors driving this is a topic worthy of marketers’ attention“. Authors point out that there is a gap that should be filled with mobile marketing. The young adults are a target to the mobile marketing communication because they are in touch with their cell phone at the most of the times.

Finally, the introductory part of the paper by Madhavaram, Badrinarayanan & McDonald indicates the position of the present study and announces the principal findings of the research paper. The structure of the journal is set by authors who suggest what the paper is all about. Madhavaram, Badrinarayanan and McDonald state the definition of the terms such as brand identity strategy and offer their suggestion. It indicates that:

This section provides a brief overview of the evolution of IMC (as shown in Table 1) regarding (1) its conceptual development, (2) its strategic role in brand equity, and (3) its importance as a significant communications development (Madhavaram, Badrinarayanan & McDonald, 2005). It means that authors have given an outline of their paper.

References

Grant, I. & O’Donohoe, S. (2007). Why young consumers are not open to mobile marketing communication. International Journal of Advertising, 26:2, 223-246, DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2007.11073008

Madhavaram, S., Badrinarayanan, V., & McDonald, R. E. (2005). Integrated marketing communication (imc) and brand identity as critical components of brand equity strategy: A Conceptual Framework and Research Propositions. Journal of Advertising, 34:4, 69-80, DOI: 10.1080/00913367.2005.10639213