Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Using the 7Ps as a generic marketing mix: an exploratory survey of UK and European marketing
academics
Mohammed Rafiq Pervaiz K. Ahmed
Article information:
To cite this document:
Mohammed Rafiq Pervaiz K. Ahmed, (1995),"Using the 7Ps as a generic marketing mix", Marketing Intelligence & Planning,
Vol. 13 Iss 9 pp. 4 - 15
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02634509510097793
Downloaded on: 22 November 2016, At: 07:14 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 44 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 64790 times since 2006*
Downloaded by Universiti Teknologi MARA At 07:14 22 November 2016 (PT)
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:434496 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
The 7Ps framework has clear advantages over the 4Ps framework
Introduction
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
promotions;
packaging;
display;
servicing;
physical handling; and
fact finding and analysis.
Price
Place
Promotion
Level
Discounts and
allowances
Payment terms
Distribution
channels
Distribution
coverage
Outlet locations
Sales territories
Inventory levels
and locations
Advertising
Personal selling
Sales promotion
Publicity
Participants
Transport
carriers
Location
Accessibility
Distribution
channels
Distribution
coverage
Advertising
Personal selling
Sales promotion
Publicity
Personnel
Physical
environment
Facilitating
goods
Tangible clues
Process of
service
delivery
Personnel:
Environment:
Training
Furnishings
Discretion
Colour
Commitment
Layout
Incentives
Noise level
Appearence
Facilitating
Interpersonal
goods
behaviour
Tangible clues
Attitudes
Other customers:
Behaviour
Degree of
involvement,
Customer/
customer
contact
Policies
Procedures
Mechanization
Employee
discretion
Customer
involvement
Customer
direction
Flow of
activities
Also that:
However, supporters of the 4Ps argue that there is no
need to amend or extend the 4Ps, as the extensions
suggested by Booms and Bitner can be incorporated into
the existing framework. The argument is that consumers
Intermediaries
Services
Producer
Product
Price
Promotion
Place
Participants
Process
Physical evidence
Product
Price
Promotion
Place
Participants
Process
Physical evidence
Place
Participants
Process
Physical evidence
Customer
Key
Normal route
Less frequent route
Methodology
The target respondents of this survey were the delegates
of the UKs Marketing Education Group (MEG)
Conference held in Salford in 1992 and the European
Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference held in
Aarhaus, Denmark in May 1992. The two conferences
were selected because they are probably the two largest
annual marketing conferences in Europe. Also the two
conferences provided the opportunity to compare the
views of the participants of one conference with a
national reputation (MEG) with those of the participants
of a conference with an international reputation (EMAC).
It was believed that the participants of the two
conferences had different profiles and that this may be a
factor in the opinions held by the respondents.
To maximize the response rate a modified-mail-survey
approach was used. For the UK respondents: the
questionnaires were handed out at the MEG Conference
in July 1992 and in mid-September a follow up letter and
questionnaire were sent. A total of 46 usable questionnaires were received giving a response rate of 24 per cent
for UK marketing academics.
A postal questionnaire was also sent out to all non-UK
academic participants of the EMAC Conference in
Aarhus in Denmark in 1992. To prevent overlap between
respondents, the delegate-lists were carefully compared
before sending out the mailed questionnaires and UK
participants of the EMAC Conference were systematically
Results
Dissatisfaction with the 4Ps
A large majority of the respondents (78 per cent of EMAC
delegates and 84 per cent of the MEG delegates) felt that
the 4Ps concept was deficient in some respects as a
pedagogic tool. (The difference in the proportions of MEG
and EMAC delegates dissatisfaction is not statistically
significant.) In fact, 75 per cent of the EMAC respondents
had used modified versions of the 4Ps concept at some
time or other. Of these, 82 per cent (or 62 per cent of the
total sample) said that this was a regular occurrence.
Similarly, 84 per cent of MEG respondents had used a
modified version of the 4Ps and of these 84 per cent had
found this to be a regular occurrence. Examination of the
data showed that the level of dissatisfaction expressed
did not appear to be influenced by length of experience in
teaching marketing or the status (i.e. the seniority) of the
respondents; i.e. full professors were just as likely to be
dissatisfied with the 4Ps as junior marketing academics.
The respondents were further probed as to how adequate
they felt the 4Ps were for various types of marketing
situations, as it was felt that the dissatisfaction probably
varied across subjects. This was largely borne out (see
Tables II and III).
10
Table II. A comparison of the dissatisfaction of UK and European academics with the 4Ps framework for various types of
marketing course
Degree of satisfaction/dissatisfaction
Totally
adequate
%
Adequate
%
Just about
adequate
%
Problematic
%
Unusable
%
Number of
respondents
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
34
27
5
18
0
11
2
8
0
9
2
7
2
5
2
6
48
44
52
29
27
28
19
21
18
20
27
13
13
9
11
9
7
15
21
31
27
33
26
27
24
27
23
27
18
28
16
25
7
9
21
18
42
22
45
37
47
35
43
46
51
44
64
51
2
4
2
4
5
6
7
8
11
9
5
7
16
13
7
9
46
54
44
55
41
54
42
52
45
55
44
55
45
54
45
55
UK
European
7
11
26
23
20
27
41
33
7
6
100%
100%
Type of marketing
Introductory
Consumer
Retail
International
Strategic
Industrial
Not-for-profit
Services
Average
Table III. Overall dissatisfaction with the 4Ps framework for various types of marketing courses among the entire sample
Degree of satisfaction/dissatisfaction
Type of marketing
Introductory
Consumer
Retail
International
Strategic
Industrial
Not-for-profit
Services
Percentage of all
responses
Totally
adequate
%
Adequate
%
Just about
adequate
%
Problematic
%
Unusable
%
31
12
6
5
5
5
4
4
47
39
27
20
19
19
11
10
11
26
31
27
26
25
23
21
8
19
31
40
40
44
48
57
3
3
5
7
10
6
14
8
100
99
95
94
100
99
99
100
24
24
36
100
Number of
responses
11
Table IV. A comparison of UK and European academics relevance rankings of mix elements for various marketing situations
Type of marketing
Consumer
Retail
International
Strategic
Industrial
Not-for-profit
Services
Average for
all variables
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
UK
European
Product
Place
Promotion
Mix variable
Price
Participants
Process
Physical evidence
4.5
4.2
4.2
4.0
4.4*
3.9
3.9
3.8
4.6
4.4
3.8
3.5
4.0
3.6
4.5
4.2
4.4
4.4
4.4
4.0
3.7
3.4
3.8*
3.3
3.4
3.2
3.8
3.8
4.8*
4.4
4.5
4.3
4.2
3.9
3.7
3.4
3.7
3.4
4.0
3.6
4.1
3.8
4.4
4.2
4.4
4.2
4.2
3.8
3.8
3.6
4.2
3.9
3.1
2.9
3.9
3.9
3.7
3.5
4.1
3.7
3.8
4.0
3.7
3.8
4.1
4.3
4.1
4.0
4.5
4.3
3.3
3.1
3.7*
3.2
3.5
3.7
3.7
3.8
3.9
4.1
3.9
3.6
4.3
4.0
3.7
3.4
4.1
3.5
3.0
3.0
3.3
2.7
3.1
3.1
3.4*
2.8
4.1*
3.1
3.9
3.7
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.6
3.1
Notes:
*Statistically significant at 95 per cent level
Respondents were asked to rate the 7Ps according to the critera : 1 = no relevance; 2 = little relevance; 3 = some relevance; 4 = quite
relevant; 5 = highly relevant
Introductory marketing is excluded from this table because, the respondents were asked about the relevance of mix variables for
various marketing situations rather than courses
12
Table V. Relevance rankings of mix elements for various marketing situations for the entire sample
Type of marketing
Product
Place
Consumer
Retail
International
Strategic
Industrial
Not-for-profit
Services
4.33
4.06
4.15
3.84
4.47
3.60
3.78
4.33
4.39
4.16
3.53
3.50
3.31
3.80
4.04*
3.88*
Mix variable
Promotion
Price
Participants
Process
Physical evidence
4.55
4.39
4.03
3.56
3.56
3.75
3.94
4.33
4.32
3.97
3.73
4.08
2.99
3.88
3.59
3.86
3.87
3.74
4.21
4.04
4.40
3.15
3.42
3.58
3.71
4.02
3.70
4.13
3.51
3.77
2.96
2.99
3.08
3.09
3.60
3.98*
3.90*
3.99*
3.71*
3.35**
Notes:
*No statistically significant difference between these variables. However they are significantly different from the other variables.
**Significantly different from all the other variables at 95 per cent confidence level.
Respondents were asked to rate the 7Ps according to the criteria : 1 = no relevance; 2 = little relevance; 3 = some relevance; 4 = quite
relevant; 5 = highly relevant
Degree of usefulness
Very useful extension
Useful extension
Neither superior nor inferior
Of little use
Of no use
Total (per cent)
Number of respondents
UK
%
Respondents
European
%
All
%
17.4
47.8
17.4
17.4
0.0
100
46
1.9
50.0
26.9
11.5
10.7
100
52
9.2
49.0
22.4
14.3
5.1
100
98
13
Conclusions
The results presented here suggest that there is a high
degree of dissatisfaction with the 4Ps framework among
European academics. The 4Ps framework is thought to be
most relevant for introductory marketing and consumer
marketing. The result also suggests that the 7Ps framework
has already achieved a high degree of acceptance as a
generic marketing mix among our sample of respondents.
However, although there is general support for the 7Ps mix,
there is not uniform support for the three new variables.
The participants/people variable is the most widely
accepted element of the new variables and the process
Table VII. Strengths and weakness of the 4Ps and 7Ps mixes as perceived by the respondents
7Ps
4Ps
Strengths
More comprehensive
More detailed
More refined
Broader perspective
Includes participants/
people and process
It is a model
Standardizarion
Signals marketing theory
Weaknesses
More complicated
Extra elements can be incorporated in 4Ps
Controllability of the three new elements
Note: The responses are listed in order of frequency that the respondents mentioned them
14
15
Mohammed Rafiq is a Lecturer in Retailing and Marketing at Loughborough University Business School, Loughborough,
UK. Pervaiz K. Ahmed is a Lecturer in Strategic Management at the Department of Economics and Management,
University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland.
22. Rashad Yazdanifard, Arash Najmaei, Zahra SadeghinejadCrafting Excellent I-Brands by Rendering an Intensive Internet
Marketing Mix 527-535. [CrossRef]
23. Laetitia RadderNelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa Yi WangNelson Mandela Metropolitan
University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa. 2006. Dimensions of guest house service. International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management 18:7, 554-562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
24. Tony KentThe Marketing School, London College of Communication, University of the Arts London, London, UK Reva
Berman BrownBusiness School, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK. 2006. Erotic retailing in the UK (19632003).
Journal of Management History 12:2, 199-211. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
25. Jonathan GroucuttThe Marketing Mix and Relationship Marketing 155-166. [CrossRef]
26. Jonathan GroucuttProcesses 313-326. [CrossRef]
27. Michael R. Hyman. 2004. Revising the structural framework for marketing management. Journal of Business Research 57:9,
923-932. [CrossRef]
28. Rob Law, William Lau. 2004. A Study of the Perceptions of Hong Kong Hotel Managers on the Potential Disintermediation
of Travel Agencies. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 17:2-3, 117-131. [CrossRef]
29. Linus Osuagwu. 2003. Internet Appreciation in Nigerian Business Organizations. Journal of Internet Commerce 2:1, 29-47.
[CrossRef]
30. Alistair R. AndersonAlistair R. Anderson is a Lectuer in the Department of Management Studies, Unviersity of Aberdeen,
Aberdeen, Scotland, UK.Andrew McAuleyAndrew McAuley is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Marketing, Faculty
of Management, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland, UK.. 1999. Marketing landscapes: the social context. Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal 2:3, 176-188. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
31. A F Wazir Ahmad, Mohammad Fateh Ali Khan PanniGreen Marketing Strategy 92-124. [CrossRef]
32. A. F. Wazir Ahmad, Mohammad Fateh Ali Khan PanniGreen Marketing Strategy: 67-99. [CrossRef]
33. Kijpokin KasemsapThe Roles of Corporate Marketing Strategies and Brand Management in the Global Retail Industry
310-339. [CrossRef]
34. Leonidas G. Anthopoulos, Pantelis Ipsilantis, Vassiliki KazantziThe Project Management Perspective for a Digital City
793-811. [CrossRef]