Buyer Behaviour – Summative Assignment
100% Individual coursework
Choose an advert or advertising campaign you have seen. It can be taken from any media and can be something you thought was really effective or not. Remember this is all about how you perceive things and you need to justify every point you make!
You will need to consider:
WHO? Who is the advert targeted at? Paint a picture of the consumer using your knowledge of segmentation variables.
WHAT? What brand or services are being offered? What are the features and benefits?
WHEN? For what occasion is the product/service being advertised for? Is seasonality involved?
WHERE? Where is the advert positioned? Is this important?
WHY? Is the advertiser informing/selling?
Perception – Colours used/text/models used/celebrity endorsers. Are these used correctly in your opinion?
Buyer Process – What stage of the buyer process is your advert aimed at?
Involvement Levels/Risk Perception? Are they high, medium or low? What types of risk are displayed?
Marketing Mix elements:
- Product – what are the features and benefits? How effectively does the advert communicate the brand to you?
- Pricing – do the adverts contain information about pricing? Why / why not?
- Place – what distribution strategies are being used in your industry? How much information (if any) is given about this in the advert? Does the advert tell you anything about distribution?
- Promotion – What are the promotional objectives and how effectively are they achieved in your opinion? What does the choice of media tell you about the promotion strategy of the company?
Critique and recommendations– you should conclude with a critique of the approach the advertiser has taken and make some recommendations. Do not simply describe what the advertiser has done or summarise what you have already said in your report. A critique is a critical review in which you give an evaluation, stating what you think is good and what you think could be improved. If you think the advert is good, what is it that is good about it? If you think the advert is bad, why is it bad and how could it be improved?
The report included in this document looks at two adverts from two different companies company focusing on their similarities and differences. The report also investigates the motive behind the adverts and the expected results. The adverts under consideration are of Nike and Adidas company brands. Nike is a multinational company that deals with designing, developing and manufacturing of footwear and apparels as well as equipment and related accessories. The company also market and sell the same products and services. Nike is well known for revealing new adverts often with each carrying a new theme. Adidas is a multinational company headquartered in Germany with other subsidiary head offices in the major countries of the world such as in the US. The adverts under study here are the “Men vs. Women Challenge” and the “Impossible is Nothing” which were aired in 2009 and 2004 respectively. The first advert first appeared on the 72andSunny news where both male and female athletes joined the challenge. The second advert appeared on ESPN STAR Sports, Ten Sports 180 Amsterdam, TBWA San Francisco, and Adidas website before spreading on social media and YouTube. This analysis will look at consumer process, target market, market segmentation, perception as well as market mix and the motivation behind the adverts. The two adverts come from two similar companies that deal with almost homogenous products but rather apply different marketing strategies.
|“IMPOSSIBLE IS JUST A BIG WORD THROWN AROUND
BY SMALL MEN WHO FIND IT EASIER TO LIVE IN THE
WORLD THEY ‘VE BEEN GIVEN THAN TO EXPLORE THE
POWER THEY HAVE TO CHANGE IT. IMPOSSIBLE IS
NOT A FACT. ITS’S AN OPINION. IMPOSSIBLE IS NOT A
DECLARATION. IT’S A DARE. IMPOSSIBLE IS POTENTIAL.
IMPOSSIBLE IS TEMPORARY…..
…..IMPOSSIBLE IS NOTHING”.
Table of Contents
The 2009 ‘’ Men vs. Women’’ was a campaign aimed at ‘’tapping into the competitive spirit of the young athletes’’ (Pener, 2010, p. 41). The campaign commenced in March and complete in April 2009. Athletes joined by signing up via the Nike website after which they were able to purchase personalized Nike products. The products included shoes, clothes and a SOFTWARE TH with the capability to track the distance covered during races. Once an athlete had acquired the software, one was allowed access to Nike’s” largest running club”. This club provided the runners with the opportunity to receive individualized training as well as feedback on one’s progress. The club also enabled the runners to interact with other athletes. MacRury (2009, p.184) explains that despite the ending of the challenge campaign, the Nike network is still rampant with active participants.
Adidas CEO Herbert Hainer realized that the US market was often a playing ground for the local firms such as Nike, New Balance and Reebok (Culiberg & Bajde, 2013). Although Adidas was also noticeable as a company producing athletic footwear, problems started arising in 2003 when the sales for the initial quarter declined by 16 % (Vukowich 2002, p.71). The decline contributed negatively to the overall revenues of the company. The management attributed the decline in sales volume to neglect in strategy. Another reason that compounded this fall was the time long distance the company had maintained with the basketball, the most popular sport in the US. The company’s product failed to recognize the size of the crowd that the sport pulled. Moreover, Adidas lost its sponsorship deal to the 2008 Olympic Games to its rival Nike.
These events implied that Adidas had to formulate a strategy to gain some competitive advantage in the US market. The “Impossible is Nothing” campaign was launched in 2004 with the company investing $50 million (Vukowich 2002, p.78). This strategy was the largest marketing campaign done by the company. Television channels, print media, and internet sources covered the campaign. The campaign’s objective was to spread the company’s “forever sport” philosophy to an individual level. The intention was to encourage everybody to overcome problems that seemed impossible. Strategies such as print and outdoor adverts delivered the “Impossible is Nothing” idea into the hands of the people.
The selected labels for the axis represent the level of competition in the market and the value of products presented to the buyers by the sellers (Hiebing & Cooper, 2003). Nike is better positioned in the local market compared to Adidas in the competition. The two companies offer products of better quality as seen from the diagram. Customers can change their buying behavior after realizing availability of products in the market. This adjustment depends on the level of income, individual tastes, and preferences, past experiences as well as the value of the products available (Taormina & Gao, 2013, p.160).
The two adverts present no offer to the consumer rather they serve to attract their attention. Nike draws the attention of both male and female athletes while Adidas focus on attracting the attention of basketball players. A contrasting view from the two adverts arises from the content. The Nike advert draws attention by utilizing people and a message. The advert is described as trying to raise some tension between males and females by using a challenge to unite the two. On the other hand, the Adidas advert is drawing attention by using a long message that is intended to raise some conviction from the viewers. The perception on prompts is much apparent in the use of images due to their clarity. Nike has its word well written and in caps for easier viewing (Hiebing & Cooper 2003). The Adidas advert is also clear, and the use of caps emphasizes this effect. The two adverts target sportsperson with Nike focusing on athletes while Adidas focus on basketball players.
Also, the two ads create a sense of affection for the intended audience. Nike arouses feelings by presenting men and women a fair playing ground to challenge each other (Gold et al., 2011, p. 147). On its part, Adidas arouse emotions by challenging its audience to seek to achieve everything. The two ads provide the audience with an opportunity to try their emotions by doing something new. The manner in which the two adverts are presented is captivating to the public hence avoids the probability of boring them.
The type of product available, its value and price influences consumer’s behavior of buying significantly (Gold et al., 2011, p. 148). The process of consumer buying is explained by the use of Means-End Model. The model has five steps as explained as follows.
|Evaluation of Alternatives|
|Post Purchase Analysis/Evaluation|
This stage involves perceiving a situation from the perspective of the customer to ascertain a problem and possible solution. This problem can be caused by consumers’ internal response or by functional and social need as well as the need for change. Consumers use Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to classify their needs (Vukowich, 2002, p. 81). The hierarchy has five stages as follows.
- Physiological needs
- Safety needs
- Need for love and belonging
- Need for self-esteem
- Need for self-actualization.
The Adidas campaign may stimulate consumers to try their products and experience the ‘’Impossible is Nothing” effect.
The consumer seeks information after identifying the problem to identify probable solutions to the current problem (Hiebing et al., 2003, p.57). Information available to the consumer can either be internal or external. Internal information refers to what the consumer already knows. External information refers to what the user obtains from other sources and especially from the adverts. For instance, while the consumer is in need of the best and latest athlete shoes, Nike and Adidas provide the consumer with external information on the different types of such products they offer. The two adverts are geared towards this motive.
This step occurs after the customer has gathered information and analyzes the different options available. This evaluation is done by considering objective features of a product as well as subjective ones. Nike and Adidas adverts offer the consumer an opportunity to evaluate the products on offer. Both use enticing language that is convincing but the decision lies with the consumer.
Gold et.al (2011, p. 162) explain that once the consumer has the necessary information, the actual purchase takes place. Purchase is dependent on the available information, perception, quality of buying experience, promotions awarded as well as the return of goods policy. The consumer might purchase the Nike athletic shoe due to its integrated technology as it is perceived more advanced. On the other hand, Adidas might be considered as the consumer aims at conquering challenges in life.
After the purchase is complete, the consumers compare the goods or services and determine if they have met their needs for buying the product. For instance, if the consumer purchases Nike shoes and they fail to satisfy his or her needs, then Nike shoes will be ditched for Adidas. Failure of the two goods to meet the customer needs will induce the consumer to go back to step one again and repeat the whole process.
Adidas initiated a campaign to focus on a new market that the company had ignored for a long time. The target market provided the firm with a segment that did not exist previously. The segmentation is further enhanced with a message to draw more attention from the target audience. On the other hand, Nike’s strategy did not have a precise segmentation. The advert targeted athletes with an aim of bringing them together in a challenge, but that required participants to purchase the company’s products to be granted access.
Adidas advert is based on the message on the advert (Culiberg & Bajde 2013, p. 450). The logo represents the company’s traditions, but the writing represents a new strategy to act as an inspiration. The message makes a strong conviction of trying something new.
Nike’s advert is focused on both the people and the message. The masculine athletes look comfortable as a result of using the running boots combined with the software. The athletes also seem to be enjoying their activity which makes the advert appear more appealing.
Neither of the commodities has prices on them. This method can be considered a competition strategy where competitors are interested in their rival’s prices. The two companies deal with products that display style and design and hence their pricing involve skimming pricing. Also, competitive pricing is applied owing to the high competition between the firms.
Culiberg and Bajde (2013, p. 457) explain that in the theory of product mix, place refers to the exact place where the selling takes place. Nike sells its products through wholesalers locally and internationally, Direct-to-Consumer sales which involve retail outlets and e-commerce as well sales to global brand divisions. On the other hand, Adidas utilizes retail outlets, multi-brand showrooms and online via its website.
Nike promoted its innovative shoes through a challenge. The shoes had software that further emphasized on the level of technological application by the company. This approach further created more confidence on the side of customers by proving they have the capacity to apply technology to advance their products. In another perspective, the company employed the comparative technique. It is visible from the advert that there are two middle-aged athletes with a female leading the male partner. This portrayal raises the issue of whether women are better than men are in athletics. Attempts by either of the gender to prove itself provided Nike Company with the opportunity to make sales.
On the other hand, Adidas focused on a lengthy message instead of an image (Gold et.al 2011, p. 153). The advert comprised of only the logo and the message. The company wanted to promote itself as the primary source of motivation for sports as well as the best brand in athletic footwear. The company worked with 180 and TBWA advertising agencies and reached out to 22 sports idols where they urged them to share their victorious stories and the road to the sensation. The idea was to let people know that irrespective of the barriers one faces, everything is possible (Funk 2016, p. 591). The message also encouraged one to try challenging scenarios though they did not promise any financial gains. Funk (2016, p. 598) explains that it is by understanding challenges that make the experience of success great. Adidas used TV commercials and their websites as the mains avenues to promote its product.
Gold et al. (2011, p. 147) clarify that the Nike advert targeted all the athletes and especially those who value innovations. On the other hand, Adidas targeted the youth between 12-34 years who were involved in sports at the time.
The Adidas advert risked the loss of $50 million in advertising. This risk could have translated to huge losses in case of advert failure. Nike advert risked the wrath of gender politics that it may have caused. This inference is because gender issues have become very sensitive in the current society.
The Nike advert is appealing to athletes but appears to stir war between males and females to the public. The advert also raises a lot of questions on whether it is undermining the ability of men. The “join the challenge” needs to find some balance in the way they represent males and females in their adverts.
Although Adidas advert is appealing, it needs to moderate on its emphasis to avoid creating doubt. The logo also needs to be made bigger and more visible since it is the trademark of the company.
Barigozzi, F., Garella, P. G., & Peitz, M. (2002). With a little help from my enemy: comparative advertising. Bologna: Università degli Studie, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche.
Culiberg, B., & Bajde, D. (2013). Consumer recycling: An ethical decision-making process. Journal Of Consumer Behaviour J. Consumer Behav., 12(6), 449–459. http://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1446
Funk, D. (2016). Sport consumer behavior: marketing strategies. London: Routledge.
Gold, G., Ramey, C., & Butcher, L. (2011). Nike Ad Analysis. Retrieved April 18, 2016, from http://www.reed.edu/anthro/adprojects/2011/gould_ramey_butcher/
Hiebing, R. G., & Cooper, S. W. (2003). The successful marketing plan: a disciplined and comprehensive approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Jones, S. (2024). The Six Stages of the Consumer Buying Process and How to Market to Them. Retrieved April 18, 2016, from http://www.business2community.com/consumer-marketing/six-stages-consumer-buying-process-market-0811565#0qdlagoveypo
MacRury, I. (2009). Advertising. London: Routledge.
Pener, L. (2010). Information Search and Decision Making. Retrieved April 18, 2016, from http://www.consumerpsychologist.com/cb_decision_making.html
Taormina, R. J., & Gao, J. H. (2013). Maslow and the Motivation Hierarchy: Measuring Satisfaction of the Needs. The American Journal Of Psychology, 126(2), 155–177. http://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.126.2.0155
Vukowich, W. T. (2002). Consumer protection in the 21st century: a global perspective. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers.