414 The Marketing Book
appealing for many. The attraction of using
several different agencies is the possibility of
selecting the best people in each field.
Moreover, there is a general lack of experi-
enced people within the field of marketing
communications, who exhibit expertise in the
variety of fields which make up the total
communications process. The need for individ-
uals with a ‘broad perspective’ and an under-
standing of the contribution which each of the
marketing communications disciplines can pro-
vide is underlined by a study by Cleland (1995).
The study by Kitchen and Schultz (1999)
identified a number of barriers, real or per-
ceived, to achieving IMC:
Requires staff to be more generalist.
Integrated agencies do not have talent across
all marcom areas.
IMC means staff have to develop new skills.
IMC gives a few individuals too much control.
Client staff lack expertise to undertake IMC
programmes.
Client centralization difficulties.
Client organizational structures constrain IMC.
Lannon (1994) asserts that most company com-
munications policies are rooted in an outmoded
past, when competition was less intense and
the retailer wasn’t anything like the powerful
force it is today:
The discontinuities of the 1980s and into the
1990s have fractured and fragmented not only
the conventional media scene, but also the
corporate structures and cultures of a more
stable past.
Differing agendas of clients and agencies have
eroded productive and trusting relationships
between clients and their agencies.
Perhaps the most significant barrier to integra-
tion is the approach to communications budg-
eting. In most cases, budgets are substantially
determined on an ‘historic’ basis – considering
what has been spent in the past – rather than
against an evaluation of specific objectives.
Often, individual departments are required to
argue for budget tenure, or an increase if the
situation demands it. In the majority of cases,
budgets are considered on a line-by-line basis,
rather than holistically.
Despite this, some market sectors are more
advanced than others in the adoption of an
integrated approach. Two, in particular, stand
out as having made significant progress in the
integration of their campaigns – the financial
sector and retailers. In both cases, there has been
a more widespread recognition of the benefits of
integration. Campaigns by many of the com-
mercial banks, together with high street retailers
such as Safeway, underpin the advantages of
integration. Certainly, most companies agree
that the process of integration will increase
apace, as much because of the need to deal with
substantial communications budgets in a more
positive manner as from the drive towards
global considerations, where the desire for a
common communications policy and the obvi-
ous financial benefits are of major importance.The consumer and integrated marketing communications
At the heart of the debate is the undeniable
need to ensure the clear and effective commu-
nication of brand messages to consumers and
others. The process demands a change of focus
from share and volume to a detailed under-
standing of the extent to which the manu-
facturer can satisfy the needs and wants of
consumers. The essential focus has to be on
customers, relationships, retention levels and
satisfaction.
Several authors have suggested that IMC,
as well as benefiting the manufacturers of
products and services, also works for the
consumer. David Iddiols (2000) suggests that
IMC works on three levels for the consumer:1 It provides short cuts to understanding what a
brand stands for.