256 The Marketing Book
other adopter categories. Remember the Levi’s
example earlier, in which the targeting of
opinion leaders was deliberate.
The early majority, if the early adopters
have been properly identified and reached,
would be influenced by a knock-on effect of
what was done for the early adopters. There
could be a trickle-down effect from club leaders
to club members to the more innovative in the
mass market outside of these clubs. Perhaps
now it would be appropriate to use media
advertising with a less technical message
appeal, but more of a sporting hero type, using
well-known sports personalities. Sponsorship
of an event, sport or club could also be
advantageous at this stage. The use of hospital-
ity boxes at events where these trainers are
worn via sponsorship agreements might also be
worthwhile considering.
As for the late majority, the approach
would need to change significantly – probably
concentrating on media advertising with a very
different style, suggesting that the shoes are no
longer new and suggesting that there are plenty
of ordinary people wearing them (even the
simulated opinion leaders in the advertising
might be of the unknown ‘person next door’
type). For this late majority it can be noted that
all that was appropriate for earlier adopters
now becomes right for this segment, with a
consequent danger of turning off the earlier
adopting segments.
The laggards are perhaps so difficult to
reach and even more difficult to influence that,
even if they are targeted, the approach might
detract so much from the intended image that
the laggards might be worth ignoring.
This demonstrates another of the more
traditional approaches to segmentation and
extends this into more concrete examples of
how these approaches might be converted into
practical targeting strategies. The point about
targeting opinion leaders in order to speed up
the diffusion process is one that is returned to
later, in the coverage of data-driven segmenta-
tion. But before analysing this, it is worth
mentioning a couple of other approaches: first,
benefit segmentation and then an extension –
person–situation segmentation.Benefit segmentation
Marketing is concerned with satisfying cus-
tomer needs and wants as a means to achieving
the goals of the organization. However,
although the human condition means we all
have a similar need structure, the same needs
will not be salient to every person at the same
point in time. Those with similar salient needs
and values may be grouped together to form a
market segment if their buying behaviour is
seen to be sufficiently homogeneous and, at the
same time, different from those of other groups.
Marketing then has the task of deciding which
segments to target with distinct marketing
mixes.
A useful illustration of segmentation is the
toothpaste market in terms of the benefits,
shown in Table 10.3. What is shown is that,
even in such an apparently non-differentiated
market, there are different consumer segments
that buy in different ways for a variety of
reasons and, on this basis, can be targeted with
different marketing mixes. This is a funda-
mental rationale for market segmentation.
As will be explored later, the new data-
driven approach can often relegate and ignore
these fundamental affective benefit reasons for
buying, in favour of the tracking of actual
purchase behaviour over time and the projec-
tion of this for more relevant and effective
targeting. This raises the issue of whether
segmentation and targeting might be moving
rather too much in the measurement metrics
direction at the expense of a truer under-
standing of customer behaviour.Person–situation segmentation
This approach is strongly related to benefit
segmentation because it is based on the inter-
action of consumer characteristics, product
benefits and occasions of use (Dickson, 1982).
People with specific characteristics may want to