Marketing communication: principles and practice

I N T E G R A T E D M A R K E T I N G C O M M U N I C A T I O N
254

---

THE BENEFITS OF IMC
We can connect the concepts of internal marketing, integrated marketing
communication, and relationship marketing, so as not to imagine them as
separate or alternative managerial strategies for customer relationship
management (see Figure 13.2). As Levitt put it in 1962, management 
of communication with stakeholders should aim to create one compelling,
self-reinforcing, simple and persuasive story – a total communication 
system with a coherent output. However, we should beware – Levitt’s frame
of reference was almost certainly Schramm’s sender–receiver model of
communication. Of course, we need to reinterpret the sentiment of his
thinking – communication is meaning-making interaction, so the story is, in
a sense, negotiated.
If we do this, what might be the benefits to provider and consumer/buyer?
For the provider, integration of marketing communication activities can
avoid confusion and disaffection in the minds of consumers and buyers,
offering a comfortable identity to customers and staff. Agencies who support
the marketing communication process can take a more holistic and thus
strategic stance to their client’s business, concentrating on strategic develop-
ment rather than separate agendas. 
Unintegrated communicative actions can appear disjointed to stakeholders,
resulting in confusion, frustration, and anxiety.
OBSTACLES TO ADOPTION OF IMC
Of course, it would be naïve to expect that IMC is universally understood,
accepted, and adopted, or even that where adoption has been attempted,
there is no resistance to the changes in processes, infrastructure, priorities,
and attitudes required. We briefly highlight some obstacles that will be faced
by the marketing communication manager. Again, we should not imagine
that these obstacles are not interrelated and mutually influencing.
Attitude
We often experience real resistance to change, especially when the idea for
innovation does not ‘belong’ to those people who are asked to participate
and cooperate. There is a further political obstacle, ‘tribal warfare’, in that
specialist groups may resist the change if they believe that it will weaken
their struggle for ascendancy of power in the corporation (‘turf wars’).