Planning Marketing-Mix Strategies in the Presence of Interaction Effects
Companies spend millions of dollars on advertising to boost a brand's image and simultaneously spend millions of dollars on promotion that many believe calls attention to price and erodes brand equity. We believe this paradoxical situation exists because both advertising and promotion are necessary to compete effectively in dynamic markets. Consequently, brand managers need to account for interactions between marketing activities and interactions among competing brands. By recognizing interaction effects between activities, managers can consider interactivity trade-offs in planning the marketing-mix strategies. On the other hand, by recognizing interactions with competitors, managers can incorporate strategic foresight in their planning, which requires them to look forward and reason backward in making optimal decisions. Looking forward means that each brand manager anticipates how other competing brands are likely to make future decisions, and then by reasoning backward deduces one's own optimal decisions in response to the best decisions to be made by all other brands. The joint consideration of interaction effects and strategic foresight in planning marketing-mix strategies is a challenging and unsolved marketing problem, which motivates this paper. This paper investigates the problem of planning marketing mix in dynamic competitive markets. We extend the Lanchester model by incorporating interaction effects, constructing the marketing-mix algorithm that yields marketing-mix plans with strategic foresight, and developing the continuous-discrete estimation method to calibrate dynamic models of oligopoly using market data. Both the marketing-mix algorithm and the estimation method are general, so they can be applied to any other alternative model specifications for dynamic oligopoly markets. Thus, this dual methodology augments the decision-making toolkit of managers, empowering them to tackle realistic marketing problems in dynamic oligopoly markets. We illustrate the application of this dual methodology by studying the dynamic Lanchester competition across five brands in the detergents market, where each brand uses advertising and promotion to influence its own market share and the shares of competing brands. Empirically, we find that advertising and promotion not only affect the brand shares (own and competitors') but also exert interaction effects, i.e., each activity amplifies or attenuates the effectiveness of the other activity. Normatively, we find that large brands underadvertise and overspend on promotion, while small brands underadvertise and underpromote. Finally, comparative statics reveal managerial insights into how a specific brand should respond optimally to the changes in a competing brand's situation; more generally, we find evidence that competitive responsiveness is asymmetric.
Volume (Year): 24 (2005)
Issue (Month): 1 (June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA|
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Kamel Jedidi & Carl F. Mela & Sunil Gupta, 1999. "Managing Advertising and Promotion for Long-Run Profitability," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 1-22.
- Kenneth R. Deal, 1979. "Optimizing Advertising Expenditures in a Dynamic Duopoly," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 682-692, August.
- Harald J. van Heerde & Peter S. H. Leeflang & Dick R. Wittink, 2004. "Decomposing the Sales Promotion Bump with Store Data," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 317-334, December.
- anonymous, 1983. "The budget and macro-economic policy," Reserve Bank of New Zealand Bulletin, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, vol. 46, september.
- Gerald L. Thompson & Jinn-Tsair Teng, 1984. "Optimal Pricing and Advertising Policies for New Product Oligopoly Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 148-168.
- Sridhar Moorthy, 2005. "A General Theory of Pass-Through in Channels with Category Management and Retail Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 110-122, August.
- Jorge M. Silva-Risso & Randolph E. Bucklin & Donald G. Morrison, 1999. "A Decision Support System for Planning Manufacturers' Sales Promotion Calendars," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 274-300.
- anonymous, 1983. "International economic situation and outlook," Reserve Bank of New Zealand Bulletin, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, vol. 46, january/f.
- Fruchter, Gila E. & Kalish, Shlomo, 1998. "Dynamic promotional budgeting and media allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 15-27, November.
- anonymous, 1983. "Developments in the international economy," Reserve Bank of New Zealand Bulletin, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, vol. 46, july.
- David Besanko & Jean-Pierre Dubé & Sachin Gupta, 2005. "Own-Brand and Cross-Brand Retail Pass-Through," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 123-137, July.
- -, 1983. "Notas sobre la economía brasileña en 1982," Oficina de la CEPAL en Brasilia (Estudios e Investigaciones) 28369, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
- anonymous, 1983. "New Zealand economic chronology 1982," Reserve Bank of New Zealand Bulletin, Reserve Bank of New Zealand, vol. 46, january/f.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:24:y:2005:i:1:p:25-34. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.