Marketing Strategy – 4Ps – 7Ps – 4Cs

The Marketing Mix 4P’s and 7P’s Explained

The advent of significant service sectors and digital marketing and communications, have changed both marketing strategy and dynamics of business in reaching consumers.

From the Marketing Mix (2018):

‘Before we go into all the elements of the marketing mix, and to avoid confusion between the 4p’s, 7p’s and even the 4c’s – you should pay attention at the image below to understand what makes up the entire marketing mix.

4Ps 7Ps and 4Cs in marketing strategy and digital world.

4Ps or 7Ps in Marketing? (Image copyright MarketingMix 2018)

The image above is a simplistic diagram of the elements that are included in a marketing mix.

It is a basic concept, but here’s the cold hard truth…

If you don’t understand it in detail or at all, then there is a fairly certain chance that you are missing out on the key ingredients that will ensure scalable success from the ground up.

It has been said many, MANY times in business that if you don’t know your target market well enough and figured out what they exactly want, you’ll commit entrepreneurial suicide and the business will inevitably fail.

On the other hand, you can be sure to attract mountains of profits when you have a deep understanding of these concepts. Understand this fully and you will know exactly how to maximize profits on your own sustainable business or help become a valuable asset within your company and gain endless promotions.

Sadly, for many existing marketers and aspiring marketers, this concept is glossed over as “everyone seems to know what it is” and is disregarded as basic knowledge. But do you really know what it is? Let’s find out.

Now, what is a marketing mix, exactly?

 

  • Marketing Mix 4P’s Product, Price, Place and Promotion.

  • Marketing Mix 7P’s People, Process and Physical Evidence.

  • Marketing Mix 4C’s Customer Value, Cost, Convenience and Communication.’

 

Of the above key changes have occurred in how ‘people’ ‘communicate’ in a digital environment carrying word of mouth WOM quickly and broadly to attain value from trusted sources, in other words out of the control of conventional marketing.

 

Reference:

Marketing Mix 2018, The marketing mix 4P’s and 7P’s explained, viewed 17 July 2018, < http://www.marketingmix.co.uk >

 

 

 

Advertisements

EU GDPR – Digital Marketing – European Commission – General Data Protection Regulation

What impact will the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) have upon advertising, media, marketing and social media channels in both the EU and outside?

How important is involvement of IT/web teams, customers, legal, financial, communications and marketing?

EU EC GDPR 2018 description for business and marketing

European Commission GDPR General Data Protection Regulation (image copyright European Commission)

The European Commission GDPR

According to the European Commission:

Fundamental rights

The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights stipulates that EU citizens have the right to protection of their personal data.

Legislation

The new data protection package adopted in May 2016 aims at making Europe fit for the digital age. More than 90% of Europeans say they want the same data protection rights across the EU and regardless of where their data is processed. (European Commission, 2018)

Scope of the GDPR

From the technology consultancy Trunomi (2018):

‘The EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) replaces the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC and was designed to harmonize data privacy laws across Europe, to protect and empower all EU citizens data privacy and to reshape the way organizations across the region approach data privacy. The key articles of the GDPR, as well as information on its business impact, can be found throughout this site.

An overview of the main changes under GDPR and how they differ from the previous directive

  • IncreasedTerritorial Scope (extra-territorial applicability)
  • Penalties
  • Consent
  • Data Subject Rights
  • Breach Notification
  • Right to Access
  • Right to be Forgotten
  • Data Portability
  • Privacy by Design
  • Data Protection Officers’

 

Australian context for the GDPR

From the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC 2018):

Key messages

The European Union General Data Protection Regulation (the GDPR) contains new data protection requirements that will apply from 25 May 2018.

Australian businesses of any size may need to comply if they have an establishment in the EU, if they offer goods and services in the EU, or if they monitor the behaviour of individuals in the EU.

The GDPR and the Australian Privacy Act 1988 share many common requirements, including to:

  • implement a privacy by design approach to compliance
  • be able to demonstrate compliance with privacy principles and obligations
  • adopt transparent information handling practices.

There are also some notable differences, including certain rights of individuals (such as the ‘right to be forgotten’) which do not have an equivalent right under the Privacy Act.

Australian businesses should determine whether they need to comply with the GDPR and if so, take steps now to ensure their personal data handling practices comply with the GDPR before commencement.

Issues of non-compliance

However, Hern in The Guardian (2018) when observing large personal data using companies states:

Privacy policies from companies including Facebook, Google and Amazon don’t fully meet the requirements of GDPR, according to the pan-European consumer group BEUC.

An analysis of policies from 14 of the largest internet companies shows they use unclear language, claim “potentially problematic” rights, and provide insufficient information for users to judge what they are agreeing to.

“A little over a month after the GDPR became applicable, many privacy policies may not meet the standard of the law,” said Monique Goyens, BEUC’s director general. “This is very concerning. It is key that enforcement authorities take a close look at this.”

Impact on Email marketing

Email marketing software company MailChimp (2017):

The scope of the GDPR is very broad. The GDPR will affect (1) all organizations established in the EU, and (2) all organizations involved in processing personal data of EU citizens. The latter is the GDPR’s introduction of the principle of “extraterritoriality”; meaning, the GDPR will apply to any organization processing personal data of EU citizens—regardless of where it is established, and regardless of where its processing activities take place. This means the GDPR could apply to any organization anywhere in the world, and all organizations should perform an analysis to determine whether or not they are processing the personal data of EU citizens. The GDPR also applies across all industries and sectors…… relevant to MailChimp…

 

…..Expansion of scope; definitions of personal and sensitive data; individual rights: EU citizens will have several important new rights under the GDPR, including the right to be forgotten, the right to object, the right to rectification, the right of access, and the right of portability and stricter processing requirements’

 

However, the most significant issue are the stricter consent requirements:

Stricter consent requirements

Consent is one of the fundamental aspects of the GDPR, and organizations must ensure that consent is obtained in accordance with the GDPR’s strict new requirements. You will need to obtain consent from your subscribers and contacts for every usage of their personal data, unless you can rely on a separate legal basis, such as those found in number 5 below. The surest route to compliance is to obtain explicit consent. Keep in mind that:

1 Consent must be specific to distinct purposes.
2 Silence, pre-ticked boxes or inactivity does not constitute consent; data subjects must
explicitly opt-in to the storage, use and management of their personal data.
3 Separate consent must be obtained for different processing activities, which means
you must be clear about how the data will be used when you obtain consent. (MailChimp 2017).

Consent would appear to be both central to compliance and rights of privacy yet problematic for much existing practice in ‘marketing’.

Best Practice Marketing

Meanwhile in Australia Hanson (2018) argues in ‘Mumbrella’ that it’s best practice for both business and customers:

For Australian businesses that want to better serve their customers, the GDPR signals the end of activities that marketers should have abandoned long ago. This means that it’s no longer good enough to buy a mailing list, nor is it appropriate to send cold-call emails or, heaven forbid, actually send spam.

Under the new rules, customers have to explicitly opt-in to getting your communications. In the old days, it was fine to pre-tick boxes on a web form allowing you to send a customer marketing emails. Now you can’t do that. Instead, customers have to give consent to you communicating with them, and that consent needs to be clear, in plain English, as well as informed, specific, unambiguous and revocable.

How to implement GDPR?

What does this mean for marketing in a digital environment or system? According to the Digital Marketing Institute (2018):

Step 1. Get your privacy policy page up to scratch

Step 2. Audit your current databases for opt-in consent

Step 3. Re-opt-in campaigns for current databases

Step 4. Create a process for opt-in consent

Step 5. Get the sales team on board

Step 6. Review third-parties who have access to your databases

Step 7. Have a streamlined process for information requests

Step 8. Prepare for a security breach.

 

In the short term the direct impact is neither selling nor buying of client email lists, but clear or voluntary consent or opting-in, through organic collection of prospective and existing clients’ details, how?

Using digital marketing techniques for organic inbound SEO search engine optimisation traffic as not just strategy but a living system to attract prospective clients over time. This will ensure compliance and allow prospective clients to opt-in voluntarily for newsletters, follow up etc. with the peace of mind their data will be private and not be shared.

However, organic inbound SEO requires cooperation and input across departments to share inter disciplinary expertise whether strategic management, IT, legal, finance, logistics, marketing, communications and importantly, customers or clients.

 

Reference List:

Digital Marketing Institute, 2018, ‘Trends & Insights: The Definitive GDPR Checklist for Marketers’, 5 April, viewed 7 July 2018, < https://digitalmarketinginstitute.com/en-au/blog/05-04-2018-the-definitive-gdpr-checklist-for-marketers >

European Commission, 2018, ‘Data protection in the EU’, viewed 7 July 2018, < https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/data-protection-eu_en >

Hanson, G 2018, GDPR is a great thing for Aussie marketers, Blog, 13 June, viewed 7 July 2018, < https://mumbrella.com.au/gdpr-is-a-great-thing-for-aussie-marketers-522988 >

Hern, A 2018, ‘Privacy policies of tech giants ‘still not GDPR-compliant’’, The Guardian, 5 July, viewed 7 July 2018, < https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/05/privacy-policies-facebook-amazon-google-not-gdpr-compliant >

MailChimp, 2017, Getting ready for the GDPR, MailChimp Blog, 9 Oct 2017, viewed 7 July 2018, < https://blog.mailchimp.com/getting-ready-for-the-gdpr/ >

OAIC Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, 2018, ‘Privacy business resource 21: Australian businesses and the EU General Data Protection Regulation’  <  https://www.oaic.gov.au/agencies-and-organisations/business-resources/privacy-business-resource-21-australian-businesses-and-the-eu-general-data-protection-regulation > 7 July 2018.

Trunomi, 2018, ‘EU GDPR key changes’, viewed 7 July 2018, < https://www.eugdpr.org/key-changes.html >

Copying and Plagiarism at University

Featured

Copying and plagiarism have always been apparent for various reasons and manifested in many ways.  Reasons can include rote learning via pedagogy versus andragogy, not coping or under time pressure which can lead to short cuts that can be easily identified by software such as Turnitin.

From Henrietta Cook in The Sydney Morning Herald:

How unis can beat the cheats by finding ‘fingerprints’ in their essays.

The tell tale signs of a cheat could be lurking in a comma or a seemingly innocuous double space after a full stop.

As universities grapple with a rise in contract cheating – which involves students outsourcing their assessments – technology is clamping down on the unethical practice by monitoring students’ unique writing styles.

The software, which has been created by US-based company Turnitin and will be launched later this year, is being developed and tested at Australian institutions including Deakin University, the University of New South Wales, the University of Wollongong and the University of Queensland.

Forensic linguists – the experts who scrutinise ransom notes and suspicious wills – helped identify 70 different factors that feed into a person’s unique writing style.

These include the use of commas, parentheses and dashes, how they list examples and whether they double space after a full stop…

…. Universities Australia chief executive Catriona Jackson said universities were continually coming up with new ways to detect cheating.

“There’s a clear message to all students in this: if you try to cheat, it’s very likely that you’ll get caught. So just don’t do it.”’

 

Advice for students (and institutions) would be learn how to write academically (should be compulsory in all university foundation and/or bachelor degree programs), plan well with time management to include good research of references or sources, use required referencing system (correctly) included in process of note taking, paraphrasing and synthesis, have draft for checking by lecturers, tutors or learning advisors, for feedback.

Further, institutions could provide a generic TurnitIn point for students to check essay or report drafts and be rewarded for process, as well as grade outcomes.

For more articles and blogs about teaching, learning and assessment click through.

Focus Group Feedback – Qualitative Data Analysis – Grounded Theory & Coding

Featured

Focus Group Feedback – Qualitative Data Analysis – Grounded Theory & Coding

 

Potential respondents must have the ethics of research explained before any interview or feedback, not only verbally at start of an interview or related interaction, but inclusion on a briefing document explaining study and research, storage of data, along with ethics.

Focus Group Interviews

 

Focus interviews, individual or via a group, based on psychoanalysis, can be very adaptable, allow expression of body language, in addition to concept checking or informal communication which would be precluded by the written form.  However, there are disadvantages, interviews can be very time consuming to conduct, transcribe, code and analyse when using open questions to elicit perceptions, attitudes and experience of the research area, plus they can be subjective or prone to bias.  On the other hand, they are useful to explore same perceptions etc., then importantly, used to inform a valid survey or data collection instrument or further research (Bell, 2005).

 

Types of interview include structured e.g. answering survey face to face, semi-structured and unstructured, the latter allows good quality data to be offered.  The unstructured interview can offer an opportunity for an industry person to explain and elaborate on issues that have emerged organically, that would have otherwise remained unknown and ignored (Ibid.).

 

Focus Group Interview Feedback Respondents

 

The ‘Focus Respondents’ for this research study included two former international students now professionals with digital literacy, two international education marketing (and admissions) managers for large multinational education providers and two more senior ‘Focus Respondents’ who manage within international education, but without formal marketing background.

 

‘Focus Respondents’ were asked open questions based upon the literature and round the information search process with any critical issues, key words, processes or phenomenon to be expressed, not in long narrative for full transcription, but abbreviated for notes and action coding.

 

It was explained to focus respondents, to give them structure or context, that the general focus was decision making behaviour process, represented by a five-stage model:

 

Purchase Decision Making Model

 

Five Stage Purchase Decision Behaviour Model or Process (simplified)

  • Recognition of Need
  • Information Search
  • Evaluation of Alternatives
  • Purchase Decision
  • Post Purchase Behaviour

(Kotler & Keller, 2012).

 

From same focus interviews regarding information search or discovery process, the research elicited factors or latent variables, then quantified by survey to analyse for significance of these factors in ‘optimal marketing and communications’.  These factors and construct can then be used to develop an information seeking construct and a useful template for industry.

Next step is to deliver survey to a hopefully significant sample population to then ground any marketing strategy development.

 

Reference List:

 

Bell, J. (2005) Doing Your Research Project. (4th Ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

 

Kotler, P. & Keller, K. (2012) Marketing Management. (14th Ed.) Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education – Prentice Hall.

NOM Net Overseas Migration – Immigration – Population Growth

Population, Immigration and Net Overseas Migration NOM

Interesting article on immigration and NOM net overseas migration by former Australian Department of Immigration Deputy Secretary Abul Rizvi endeavouring to insert some understanding and clarity round the ‘immigration’ debate when most misunderstand, misinterpret or misrepresent immigration and population data.

 

 

This is manifested in media, political and public narratives that focus upon the NOM and the false notion that it is both unusually high and can be micromanaged; underpinned by lack of detail or ‘solution’ to lowering the NOM (without assessment of broader societal impacts).

 

NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Putting the numbers back into the immigration debate

ABUL RIZVI 20 FEBRUARY 2018

Drastically reducing net migration would be neither easy nor wise, says a former senior official.

How governments manage migration is a big deal. A perception of too many arrivals drove the Brexit result in Britain, helped define the Trump presidency, and fuelled the rising populist vote in Europe. Japan’s ageing population is driving its government to increase immigration — but ever so cautiously, recognising the likely backlash from its largely homogeneous population. And the same demographic forces have driven China to try to attract back part of its huge diaspora.

Yet, despite our long immigration tradition, Australia’s immigration debate is tortured and surprisingly poorly informed. Until very recently, this was not helped by the Turnbull government’s eerie silence on immigration levels and population policy. Immigration minister Peter Dutton’s tentative foray late last week should therefore be welcomed.

Given the complexities, immigration ministers have an obligation to be accurate with the data and honest about the range of issues to be considered in significantly reducing the intake. Dutton was neither.

 

Issues and Critique of Net Overseas Migration Statistics and Data

 

The NOM is a measure of movements, not designed as an ‘immigration’ target but merely measures numbers of people (irrespective of nationality, visa status and includes Australians) who enter Australia with the intention of remaining longer than 12/16+ months (ABS, 2017).

Rizvi cites several variables or inputs that would be required to control or lower the NOM.  This would include restricting rights of Australians marrying foreigners, restricting numbers of international students, preclude second year visas for working holiday makers doing agricultural work, close the refugee program, limit New Zealanders and seek out overstayers.

Other issues or features neither understood nor highlighted:

  1. Few nations use the same NOM as a measure to estimate resident population apart from Australia, UK and NZ then e.g. in the EU Schengen Zone it’s impossible due to free movement and that most nations appear to estimate from e.g. residency registration or census data (UN, 2015).
  2. Rizvi also fails to mention the cumulative statistical impact of an ageing population of citizens and permanent residents (includes significant numbers of British subjects) who were already in country 2006 when line was drawn in the sand on population; many have neither departed nor returned to Australia long term and have two impacts upon the data (and census). First is longevity due to better health hence staying in the data longer (though invisible) being attributed to ‘immigration’.  However, this will change when the baby boomer demographic starts departing this earth in the medium long term in about five years onwards i.e. deaths will outnumber births for long term thus impacting the estimated resident population significantly.  This is also set against already declining fertility rates and global population ex. Sub Saharan Africa, expected to peak by mid-century as explained by development, medical and statistics expert Professor Hans Rosling (Gapminder, 2013).
  3. A significant financial reason for encouraging temporary residents with no likelihood of permanent residency outcomes, whether students, backpackers etc., is as net financial contributors paying taxes without future access to state services. In other words, they support or subsidise increasing numbers of retirees needing pensions, health care etc. dependent upon healthy state budgets (with decreasing dependency ratio of workforce tax payer numbers to retirees).
  4. Further, statistical analysis has found that not only is the NOM very confusing, it may over estimate Australia’s population significantly, through double counting those not in country but not outside for more than 12/16+ months:

Except on migration. On this single metric, it’s as if the entire world converges into a deafeningly silent consensus. Population! At last a hard number. Something tangible, physical, consistent. The cacophony of economic debate subsides as everyone gather’s around to pay homage at the altar of the purest, simplest driver of demand, production, and everything else. The one undisputed back-stop to debate…Trying to find a simple and defensible explanation of a complex issue isn’t easy. But for migration, I think there is one. I’ll describe it here in prose, and in a later post gather some of the graphs and data that support it. There has been a level shift. But it hasn’t been in ‘migration’, as everyone actually intends and understands the word. The shift that we should be talking about has been in mobility.’ (Quixotic Quant, 2017a).

 

The alternative story is that sometime in the mid-2000s the Australian Bureau of Statistics changed the definition of an official statistic called “Net Overseas Migration”. The arbitrary definition they had at the time was malfunctioning, and the next arbitrary one they changed to has been malfunctioning even worse. A blithely ignorant press didn’t even notice the change, let alone query the disfunction that inspired it, so the entire country has been putting their faith soaring population figure that has the integrity of custard. The harder alternative figure shows that our migration rate is actually flat’ (Quixotic Quant, 2017b).

 

  1. By using ‘Migration’ in NOM to describe the definition may simply be a linguistic coincidence, however, it is highly suggestive of a direct correlation with permanent immigration and long-term population growth, which does not exist (except by some indirect correlation set amongst other factors).
  2. The local and global NGOs, think tanks, institutes, commentators, ‘ecologists’, media and politicians who constantly highlight supposed negative aspects of immigration and ‘sustainable’ population growth have been influenced or manipulated by the US white nativist movement, with the latter being influential amongst Republican Party and Trump (SPLC, 2001) in turn influenced by Darwin’s cousin Galton’s ‘science of eugenics and racial hygiene’ (Das, 2015).
  3. Post WWII prior to the formation of the UN Population Council the Rockefeller Foundation (Standard Oil/Exxon Mobil) co-opted the American Eugenics Society (AES) which had become discredited by the Nazis and their ‘research’ at The Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany, to then form the UN Population Council (Kurbegovic, 2005 & Novielli, 2017).
  4. Also, to emerge with support of same and similar oligarchs’ (fossil fuels and auto) foundations were Zero Population Growth (ZPG) (Bentley Historical Library – University of Michigan, 2018), Zero Economic Growth (ZEG) (Daly, 1980) and the Club of Rome ‘limits to growth’, etc. constructs (Green Agenda, 2018) to popularise negative perceptions of population growth and immigration as ‘liberal and environmental’ concerns (Stern, 2005).
  5. Demographically it is now coming to a head for many whether middle Europe or the ‘Anglosphere’ with the refrain, ‘brown people, Moslems etc. are going to outnumber white people or WASPs leading to demographic suicide….’.

 

Reference List:

 

ABS – Australian Bureau of Statistics (2017) 3412.0 – Migration, Australia, 2015-16 Available at: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/exnote/3412.0 (Accessed on: 25 February 2018).

Bentley Historical Library – University of Michigan (2018) John Tanton Papers: 1960-2007. Available at: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/b/bhlead/umich-bhl-861056?byte=53770321;focusrgn=bioghist;subview=standard;view=reslist (Accessed on: 27 February 2018).

Daly, H. (1980) Why the Industrial World Needs Zero Economic Growth (Recording). Available at: https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/34007423?selectedversion=NBD22971101 (Accessed on 27 February 2018).

Das, S. (2015) Francis Galton and the History of Eugenics at UCL.  Available at: https://blogs.ucl.ac.uk/museums/2015/10/22/francis-galton-and-the-history-of-eugenics-at-ucl/

Gapminder (2013) Don’t Panic – The Facts About Population. Available at: https://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about-population/ (Accessed on: 25 February 2018).

Green Agenda (2018) The First Global Revolution. Available at: http://www.green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html (Accessed on: 27 February 2018).

Kurbegovic, C. (2013). Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics (KWI-A). Available at: http://eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/connections/5233cdc25c2ec500000 Accessed on 25 February 2018).

Novielli, C. (2017) The Population Council has a shocking 65-year history, and it’s nothing to celebrate. Available at: https://www.liveaction.org/news/population-council-founded-eugenicists-promoting-abortion-turns-65/ (Accessed on: 25 February 2018).

Quixotic Quant (2017a) The state of debate: A bird’s-eye on migration. Available at: https://www.quixoticquant.com/post/the-state-of-debate-a-bird-s-eye-on-migration/  (Accessed on: 27 January 2018).

Quixotic Quant (2017b) The Missing Million: Is Australia’s migration rate actually high? Available at: https://www.quixoticquant.com/post/the-missing-million/ (Accessed on: 27 January 2018).

SPLC Southern Poverty Law Center (2010) Anti-Immigration Groups. Available at: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2001/anti-immigration-groups (Accessed on 25 February 2018).

Stern, M. (2005) Eugenic Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in Modern America. California: University of California Press.

UN – United Nations – Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division (2015) International Migration Flows to and From Selected Countries: The 2015 Revision. Available at: http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/data/empirical2/docs/migflows2015documentation.pdf (Accessed on: 25 February 2018).