Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

  • We're Hiring!
  • Help Center

paper cover thumbnail

LITERATURE REVIEW ON ADVERTISING STRATEGY FOR INTERNATIONAL BRANDS

Profile image of IAEME Publication

2018, IAEME PUBLICATION

Global branding and advertising can help you market your product or service in many different countries around the world. Although global branding and advertising have historically required large budgets, emerging communication techniques such as social media can make global campaigns affordable for companies of all sizes. Creating a global branding and advertising program enables you to communicate consistent messages to customers in all your export markets. Consumers now receive marketing messages from a huge number of different sources, so delivering a consistent message is the most effective way to reach consumers.

RELATED TOPICS

  •   We're Hiring!
  •   Help Center
  • Find new research papers in:
  • Health Sciences
  • Earth Sciences
  • Cognitive Science
  • Mathematics
  • Computer Science
  • Academia ©2024

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List

Logo of plosone

Determinants of content marketing effectiveness: Conceptual framework and empirical findings from a managerial perspective

Clemens koob.

Department of Health and Nursing, Katholische Stiftungshochschule München, Munich, Germany

Associated Data

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Content marketing has gained momentum around the world and is steadily gaining importance in the marketing mix of organizations. Nevertheless, it has received comparatively little attention from the scientific community. In particular, there is very little knowledge about the effectiveness, optimal design and implementation of content marketing. In this study, the authors conceptualize content marketing as a set of activities that are embedded in and contingent on the specific organizational context. Based on this framework, the authors empirically investigate the context features determining content marketing effectiveness from a managerial perspective, using primary data collected from senior marketers in 263 organizations from various sectors and across different size categories, conducting multiple regression analysis. The empirical results indicate that clarity and commitment regarding content marketing strategy and a content production in line with the organization’s target groups’ content needs as well as normative journalistic quality criteria are context factors associated with higher content marketing effectiveness. The outcomes also reveal that regularly measuring content marketing performance and using the data obtained as guidance for improving content offerings positively influence content marketing effectiveness, as do structural specialization and specialization-enabling processes and systems. The insights provided in this study could offer important theoretical contributions for research on content marketing and its effectiveness and may help practitioners to optimize the design and implementation of content marketing initiatives.

Introduction

In times when consumers are becoming increasingly skeptical of traditional advertising, organizations need, more than ever, effective alternatives to traditional marketing communications. In these circumstances, content marketing (CM) has gained momentum around the world and is steadily gaining importance in the marketing mix of organizations, complementing traditional marketing instruments [e.g., 1 ]. CM investments have increased substantially. In the German-speaking area, for example, investments have risen from € 4.4b in 2010 to € 9.4b in 2019 and are forecast to grow further to € 12.5b by 2023 [ 2 ].

Content marketing refers to the creation and distribution of relevant, valuable brand-related content to current or prospective customers or other target groups (e.g. jobseekers, employees or investors) via digital platforms or print media to drive strategic business objectives [ 3 – 5 ]. Unlike traditional advertising, which typically denotes a form of communication designed to persuade or even push target groups to take some action, now or in the future [ 6 ], content marketing focuses on adding value to their lives, for instance by educating them, helping them solve problems, entertaining them or supporting them make well-informed decisions. Thus, content marketing is based on the social exchange theoretical principle that an organization’s delivery of valuable content to a target group will see it rewarding the organization in exchange with positive attitudes (e.g. brand trust) or behaviors (e.g. brand related interactions).

However, despite content marketing’s growing importance, it has received comparatively little attention from the scientific community [ 3 , 5 ]. So far, research has primarily focused on definitions and conceptualizations of content marketing [e.g. 3 , 5 , 7 , 8 ] and potential consumer- and firm-based consequences. Besides, there is a limited number of exploratory analyses and investigations about the effectiveness of content marketing that focus on specific sectors and types of media. Wang et al. [ 4 ], e.g., found CM effectiveness in the B2B domain to depend on the frequency of customers’ content consumption. Taiminen and Ranaweera [ 9 ] identified specific helpful brand actions, i.e. approaching content marketing with a problem-solving orientation, as increasing the effectiveness of B2B content marketing. With respect to consumers and branded social content, Ashley and Tuten [ 10 ] identified frequent updates, incentives for participation, as well as experiential, image and exclusivity messages to be associated with effectiveness. Chwialkowska’s study [ 11 ] revealed that customer-centric as opposed to brand-centric social content is more effective. Also, Liu and colleagues [ 12 ] provided evidence that short video clips can be effective to drive usage of other branded online content. However, apart from such rather focused studies, we have very little overall knowledge about the effectiveness of content marketing. In particular, and as Hollebeek and Macky [ 3 ] noted, still “little is known regarding its optimal design and implementation”. The question “what are the key factors for effectiveness” has long been an important theme in the marketing communications literature, but academic understanding regarding the determinants of content marketing effectiveness lags behind to date [ 3 ], generating an important knowledge gap that we address in this paper.

To investigate this gap, we conceptualize content marketing from an activity-based perspective. In line with the activity-based perspective of marketing [ 13 , 14 ], we propose to view content marketing as a set of specific activities, comprising content marketing strategizing, content production, content distribution, content promotion, performance measurement and content marketing organization. Referring to the concept of embeddedness [ 15 , 16 ], we further assume that these content marketing activities are rooted in and contingent on the specific organizational context, and that particular context features are potential determinants of content marketing effectiveness. Based on this framework, we will empirically investigate the features driving content marketing effectiveness.

Our contribution is as follows: As far as we know, the determinants of content marketing effectiveness have not yet been empirically investigated from a broader perspective. We therefore first provide a theoretical framework for analyzing content marketing effectiveness. Second, we offer empirical insights that could help marketers to potentially improve the design and implementation of their content marketing initiatives, which researchers have called for [ 3 , 5 ]. Third and in doing so, we might help to move the research on content marketing effectiveness beyond the prevailing anecdotal to an evidence-based level. Fourth, for scholars, this research could offer a platform for further studies into the drivers of content marketing effectiveness. Taken together, these advances could extend current academic and managerial discussions of how to achieve effective marketing communications.

Theoretical framework and derivation of hypotheses

Any empirical investigation of the determinants of content marketing effectiveness requires a proper conceptualization of CM effectiveness. Hence, the next section proposes such a conceptualization. After that, we propose that content marketing activities take place in an organizational context [ 15 , 16 ] affecting their effectiveness. Context refers to the specific intra-organizational circumstances, environments and constellations of forces shaping the character of the content marketing activities and their outcome [ 17 ]. We outline the potentially relevant context dimensions, being content marketing strategizing, content production, content distribution, content promotion, content marketing performance measurement, and content marketing organization, respectively.

Content marketing effectiveness

Based on a literature review ([ 3 – 5 , 8 , 18 – 23 ], see S1 Appendix for details), content marketing activities can be seen as effective if they trigger superior levels of cognitive, emotional and behavioral customer engagement at the appropriate points throughout the customer journey, strengthen customers’ brand trust and induce favorable brand attitudes, and increase customers’ perceived value of a brand, leading to more favorable responses to the brand and its communications, and thus helping the focal organization reach its strategic business objectives.

CM effectiveness and CM strategizing

Porter and McLaughlin [ 15 ] conclude that there is no universally agreed-upon set of components that comprise the relevant organizational context dimensions. However, they point to the strategizing context to be one of them, i.e. the constellations under which strategizing in the sense of ‘doing of strategy’ unfolds [ 15 ]. Strategy research supports the idea that strategic clarity is one aspect of the strategizing context that plays a key role regarding effectiveness since it gives direction and provides orientation [ 24 , 25 ]. This is also in line with goal setting theory which posits that specific and well-defined challenging goals lead to higher performance [ 26 ]. Strategy research also suggests strategy commitment, which can be defined as the extent to which managers and employees comprehend and support the goals and objectives of a strategy [ 27 , 28 ], as an essential aspect, as it is known to affect strategy supportive behavior. We assume these two factors to be pivotal for content marketing effectiveness, too. In the content marketing domain, strategizing comprises, e.g., the crafting of a content marketing mission and vision, the definition of objectives, the identification and prioritization of target groups, the specification of the unique value an organization is looking to provide through its content, the clarification of key stories to be communicated, or decisions regarding the platforms that will be used to disseminate content [e.g., 5 ]. A clearly defined content marketing strategy that is communicated and understood within the organization might positively influence CM effectiveness, because it allows to select those CM projects which promise a high strategy contribution. In case commitment to a content marketing strategy is high, all managers and employees might show vigor, get engaged and take personal responsibility for the successful realization of the content marketing initiative. Thus, we expect:

  • Hypothesis 1 : Content marketing is more effective when organizations have a stronger CM strategizing context characterized by strategic clarity and commitment .

CM effectiveness and content production

Furthermore, we suggest a strong content production context will be positively related to CM effectiveness. By this, we refer to content production environments in which high quality content can be created [ 5 ]. The necessity to create and provide quality content is widely acknowledged in the CM literature [e.g. 5 ], as it is assumed that quality content is more likely to be interacted with. However, this raises the question of what constitutes quality content. Uses-and-gratifications-theory supports the idea that people seek out media that satisfy their needs and lead to gratification [ 29 , 30 ]. From this perspective, consumers may select content for functional (e.g. learning about brands, self-education), hedonic (e.g. entertainment, diversion, relaxation) or authenticity motives (e.g. identity construction, self-assurance) [ 3 , 30 ]. In addition to that, research proposes that ‘quality content’ not only has to meet consumers’ subjective standards, but also certain objective specifications or normative principles. The criteria mentioned in the literature typically include aspects like timeliness, objectivity, accuracy, or diversity of viewpoints [ 31 – 36 ]. Hence, we believe:

  • Hypothesis 2 : A strong content production context , characterized by efforts to optimize customer-perceived content value and to adhere to normative quality criteria should be associated with higher content marketing effectiveness .

CM effectiveness and content distribution

We assume a specific content distribution context will also be positively related to CM effectiveness. The content distribution context refers to the conditions under which content is distributed and particularly includes the media platforms (e.g. customer magazines, digital magazines, blogs, podcasts, social media, chatbots etc.) used [ 3 , 5 , 8 ]. Research generally supports the idea that communications efforts using multiple media platforms are more effective than initiatives using only a single medium [e.g. 37 , 38 ]. According to Voorveld et al. [ 39 ], two psychological processes play a role in explaining these effects. First, forward encoding implies that the exposure to content in the first medium primes interest in the content in the second medium, which in turn stimulates deeper processing and easier encoding of the second content piece, resulting in multiple content retrieval cues and higher effectiveness. Second, multiple source perception refers to the effect that consumers perceive cross-media communications as more expensive, leading to the belief that the communicating brand has to be popular and successful, also resulting in more positive communications results. Furthermore, benefits from combining multiple media distribution platforms might arise from accompanying prospects and customers with the appropriate content platforms at the different points in their consideration and buying processes [ 40 ]. On the other hand, it could be argued that investment in too many media distribution properties might attenuate the power of communications, because it prevents an organization from focusing its resources on the most suitable platforms [ 38 ]. Reactance theory also suggests that communication across multiple media platforms could unfold negative consequences as customers might associate a brands omnipresence at various platforms with increasing pressure from the firm’s communications attempts which could be perceived as obtrusive [ 41 ]. Based on these considerations we believe:

  • Hypothesis 3a : Content marketing is more effective , when the content distribution context is characterized by the usage of an intermediate number of media platforms .

Content marketers continue to watch out for new opportunities to reach customers and, over time, have shifted content distribution budgets away from print media such as customer magazines to digital media such as digital magazines, blogs, social media and the like [ 2 ]. The question is whether and to what extent this shift is beneficial for improving CM effectiveness. Communications theory implies that for effective communication, the sender should match the channel that the receiver prefers [ 42 ]. Based on this recommended practice of media matching, organizations ought to be cognizant of customers’ media platform preferences as well as actual media use and adjust their channel choices accordingly. With regard to media preferences, research has repeatedly revealed a high level of consumer conservatism, indicating that established media channels, especially print media, retain favored attributes such as trust, high perceived value, intimacy or visual power, whereas digital media are, e.g., more strongly associated with speed, convenience and efficiency [ 42 , 43 ]. Considering media use, two models predict different relationships between new and established media. The displacement model assumes increases in new media use will go along with declines in the use of established media (e.g. due to functional advantages of new media or limited time budgets [ 44 , 45 ]). The complementary model hypothesizes new media usage has no or even a positive effect on established media use within a content domain, as people “interested in procuring information in a particular content area expose themselves to a multitude of media outlets to optimize the information on that particular content area” [ 46 ]. Recent studies [ 45 , 47 ] have provided evidence that adoption of new platforms is reducing the consumption of established media, but that established media will not be fully displaced. Other theoretical accounts also suggest not to neglect print media for digital media. Psychological ownership theory implies that print media, being physical goods, might have a greater capacity to garner an association with the self than digital media, leading to greater value ascribed to them [ 48 ]. Regarding text-based content, educational research points to the fact that reading on paper leads to significantly better content comprehension than reading digitally [ 49 ], possibly due to better spatial mental representation of the content and more visual and tactile cues fostering immediate overview of the content. Consequently, we expect:

  • Hypothesis 3b : Content marketing is more effective , when the content distribution context is characterized by a joint deployment of print and digital media platforms .

CM effectiveness and content promotion

Furthermore, we propose the content promotion context is key for CM effectiveness. Content promotion refers to any paid measures an organization takes to draw attention to its content or to stimulate interest in or usage of its content, typically with the help of or on third-party platforms, with the aim of optimizing content reach. Instruments include, amongst others, influencer marketing, social media and search engine advertising, or classic public relations [ 50 ]. Research has repeatedly suggested an attention economy [e.g., 51 ], denoting a world where people are awash in content, and where peoples’ available time and attention spans are limited, creating an environment in which content competes for customers’ time and attention as scarce resources. Under these circumstances, we expect that paid content promotion measures can help to accentuate content and draw attention to potentially relevant and valuable content pieces, so that these pieces can break though the “content clutter” [ 52 ].

Furthermore, the power law of practice and cognitive lock-in theory [ 43 , 53 ] state, that when people practice specific tasks, the repetition of these tasks increases efficiency, which induces familiarity, from which in turn people are inclined to get cognitively locked-in to the respective media environment. Cognitive lock-in thus denotes a condition wherein a consumer has learned how to use a specific media environment, thanks to multiple interactions with it, with the effect that more familiarity decreases his propensity to search for and switch to competing media alternatives. Research has demonstrated these effects for websites [ 53 , 54 ], as well as for print media [ 43 ]. We believe this thinking may be applicable for a broad range of media environments and applying it to the content marketing context leads us to believe that if customers are already accustomed to use specific content offerings, they see no need to switch to a new content offering. Under these conditions, paid content promotion measures might help to stimulate customers to try a focal organization’s content offer, potentially breaking up existing and initiating new cognitive lock-in processes, thereby supporting the organization’s attempt to transition customers to its own content offerings. Hence:

  • Hypothesis 4 : Content marketing is more effective when organizations have a stronger content promotion context characterized by comprehensive paid content promotion measures .

CM effectiveness and CM performance measurement

We also propose that a strong content marketing performance measurement context within an organization will be positively related to CM effectiveness. Content marketing performance measurement (CMPM) can be defined as establishing metrics related to the organization’s content marketing objectives and measuring and evaluating performance relative to these objectives, for the purpose of providing evidence for effectiveness and efficiency of content marketing activities and optimizing these activities. Previous studies have shown positive performance implications of marketing performance measurement in contexts other than content marketing [e.g. 55 – 57 ]. We believe for four reasons, that this also applies to the content marketing domain. First, the attention-based view of the firm accentuates that one of the key characteristics of measurement systems is their property to focus and direct attention of organizational members to important issues [ 58 ]. By directing minds at what needs to be done, chances increase that it will get done. Thus, we expect, that content marketing performance measurement will get an organization to attend to essential content marketing objectives and activities. We believe that the presence of CMPM activates managers and employees and causes them to achieve coordinated action and to orient their efforts to succeeding on the measured content marketing aspects. Second, previous research [ 59 ] has shown that producing measurements is not enough to get the organization into acting, but that organizations are also sensitive to what issues are internally discussed. We argue that CMPM sparks discussions about important content marketing issues, which helps to summon attention and resources for acting, ultimately improving content marketing effectiveness. Third, performance measurement usually allows to monitor the performance of marketing activities, be it relative to prior objectives, similar activities in the past, or other benchmarks, lowering uncertainty about the performance of decisions and about whether the decisions were the right ones, which in turn helps to learn and plan marketing activities producing desired outcomes [ 56 ]. We thus expect that CMPM will nurture learning, which in turn will improve content marketing decisions, and thus content marketing effectiveness. Fourth, performance measurement usually includes performance feedback, and previous studies have consistently shown that performance feedback is positively associated with work engagement [ 60 ]. Higher work engagement in turn implies that managers and employees invest more energy into their work roles, leading to superior work outcomes [ 61 ]. Thus, we expect that CMPM energizes organizational actors to act in desired ways to meet the organization’s goals. Hence:

  • Hypothesis 5 : Content marketing is more effective when organizations have a stronger content marketing performance measurement context .

CM effectiveness and content marketing organization

Finally, we expect a strong content marketing organization will be positively related to CM effectiveness. Porter and McLaughlin [ 15 ] indicate that organizational structures and processes are one of the major components contextualizing activities within an organization. Research on marketing organization also highlights the importance of organizational structures and processes for marketing performance [ 62 , 63 ]. It is widely acknowledged in the marketing literature, that organizations face dynamic and complex marketing communications environments, e.g. in terms of the development and transformation of technology and media or consumer behavior evolving at an increasingly rapid pace [ 6 ]. Under these conditions, specialization and autonomy seem to be favorable characteristics of organizational structure [ 64 ]. Specialization denotes the level to which activities in the organization are differentiated into unique elements, while autonomy refers to the level to which employees have control in executing those activities. Organizations high in specialization and autonomy have a high share of specialist employees who direct their efforts to a clearly defined set of activities, and as experts with specialized knowledge in their particular work areas, they enjoy substantial autonomy to determine the best approach to carry-out their tasks [ 65 ]. According to prior research, the combination of specialization and autonomy enables an organization to assign tasks to those employees who are best able to perform them, it enhances the organization’s knowledge base, and it promotes the development of innovative ideas and solutions [ 62 , 63 , 66 ]. However, research has also indicated that specialized organizational structures with high degrees of autonomy need the support of adequate processes and systems to function properly [ 62 ].

The application of this thinking to content marketing leads us to two considerations: First, we believe that, also in this domain, structural specialization coupled with autonomy could be beneficial. It could allow an organization to assign content marketing tasks to managers and employees that are best prepared to tackle them. Further, specialization could enhance an organization’s content marketing knowledge base, foster the development of innovative content marketing ideas and solutions and enable the organization to quickly respond to upcoming communication needs. An example for such a structure could be a dedicated content marketing unit with a high share of task- and skill-specialized content marketing experts that have control over how they organize their work and that have significant autonomy in making decisions. Second, we assume that an increase in content marketing specialization and autonomy within an organization also demands processes and information technology systems with a proper fit [ 67 ]. We believe that processes and systems are required that enable and support interaction and collaboration between content marketing specialists, between content marketing experts and further marketing functions, and also between content marketing experts and other relevant organizational entities. To sum up, we posit:

  • Hypothesis 6 : Content marketing is more effective when organizations have a stronger content marketing organization .

Fig 1 provides a summary of the proposed theoretical framework.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is pone.0249457.g001.jpg

Data collection and sample

We gathered data from organizations with over 250 employees in the German-speaking area, that is Germany, Switzerland, and Austria. Regarding industry characteristics, organizations from all sectors in line with the business registers of the three countries, comprising a broad range of industrial, services, finance and trade sectors, were eligible to take part in the investigation. We targeted medium- and large-sized organizations because they are more likely to employ complex marketing practices such as content marketing. All data were collected using an online survey with the sample drawn from an online panel provider. There is profound evidence from prior research that online panel data is capable of delivering high-quality data outcomes [ 68 ]. Porter et al. [ 68 ] recommend using online panel data particularly for studies requiring access to specific populations. Referring to this guidance, online panel data and the online panel provider Norstat were deliberately chosen for this study, because it required access to the very specific population of senior marketing or communications directors, and people in equivalent positions, responsible for the respective firms’ content marketing activities, as key informants, with the online panel provider being capable of recruiting this hard-to-reach sample. The aforementioned group of managers was identified as key informants because they are organizational members who can provide reliable data on the organizations’ content marketing activities and effectiveness. Data collection was carried out in accordance with further recommendations compiled from the literature by Porter et al. [ 68 ] regarding participant recruitment, selection and information and data quality measures. We captured participants’ managerial positions and involvement in content marketing activities in a screener survey to verify key informant appropriateness and reduce potential key informant bias, used attention checks and applied lower and upper limits of survey completion time to ensure high-quality responses, and captured IP addresses to control for potential multiple responses from the same managers.

Before carrying out the study, the University Ethics Review Board regulations indicated that a research ethics review was not required. Reasons for this decision are that the investigation does not include any manipulations or vulnerable groups, and participants were guaranteed that their data is treated anonymously. Moreover, the data has been collected consistent with the ethical guidelines of the Academy of Marketing Science and in accordance with the EU General Data Protection Regulation. All participants provided informed consent by clicking on the link to start the study, participation was completely voluntary, and only data from participants were used who fully completed the study.

In total, data collection yielded 319 responses. The sample comprised 53 managers from organizations that do not apply content marketing practices and 3 executives that failed to pass the aforementioned data quality checks. We therefore eliminated those respondents from the sample. Hence, the final sample comprised the answers from 263 organizations.

The characteristics of respondents were in line with our expectations of key informants. We were successful in getting senior-level marketing and communications executives as respondents: 131 were board members such as CMOs, 56 were marketing vice presidents or directors, 38 were corporate communications vice presidents or directors, 36 were vice presidents or directors of a dedicated content marketing unit, and the remaining 2 were senior executives in other marketing communications functions. Of the 263 organizations in our sample, 125 were from the services sector, 67 from the industrial sector, 51 from the finance sector, and 20 from the trade sector. Regarding size, 69 organizations had between 250 and 499 employees, 58 had 500 to 999 employees, 72 had between 1,000 and 4,999 employees, and 64 employed a workforce of 5,000 or more people.

For collecting data, we relied on a structured questionnaire. Whenever possible, we used measures from previous research and modified them for our study. All questions were asked in German language. The measures of the main variables are displayed in the table in S1 Table .

Dependent variable

Content marketing effectiveness (CMEFFECT) . To capture the degree of achieved content marketing effectiveness, we asked senior marketing and communications executives for their evaluations. For assessing attained customer engagement as aspect of content marketing effectiveness, we adapted three items from the consumer brand engagement scale which was developed by Hollebeek et al. [ 69 ]. These questions capture the managerial assessment of the extent to which focal content marketing activities foster positive brand-related cognitive, affective and conative activity, i.e. consumers’ brand processing, affection, and activation. To assess content marketing’s effects on brand attitudes and perceived brand value as further aspects of content marketing effectiveness, we adapted four perceptual items drawn from Sirdeshmukh et al. [ 70 ] and Sengupta and Johar [ 71 ]. These questions capture the managerial assessment of the degree to which the respective organization’s content marketing activities trigger brand trust in terms of credibility (expectancy that a promise made by the brand can be relied upon) and benevolence (confidence in the brand motives) and contribute to favorable brand evaluations. Responses to all items of content marketing effectiveness were given on 5-point agreement scales (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). An exploratory factor analysis delivered a one-factor solution; thus, we averaged all items to calculate the overall index of content marketing effectiveness. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for content marketing effectiveness was .88, exceeding the recommended minimum of .70, indicating a very good reliability [ 72 ].

Independent variables

Content marketing strategizing context (CMSTRAT) . The content marketing strategizing context was assessed using a four-item scale that measured whether the organization had a defined, comprehensible, long-term content marketing strategy and to what extent managers and employees support the strategic direction. The items for strategic clarity and strategy commitment were adapted from related scales developed by Bates et al. [ 73 ] and Noble and Mokwa [ 74 ]. Responses were given on 5-point agreement scales (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree).

Content production context (CPROD) . We assessed the content production context using a three-item scale. The items rest on previous research by Hollebeek and Macky [ 3 ], Urban and Schweiger [ 35 ] and Chen and colleagues [ 75 ] and include an organization’s efforts to optimize customer-perceived content value, to adhere to normative content quality criteria, and to plan and create content systematically. Responses were given on 5-point agreement scales (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree).

Content distribution context / intermediate number of media platforms (CDIST1) . In line with previous research by Kabadayi and colleagues [ 76 ], we used a single item to measure the number of media platforms the organizations used for content distribution purposes. We presented our respondents with the following seven media platform alternatives and asked them to mark the ones used by their organizations: customer magazines or newspapers, corporate books, company reports, owned digital media (websites, apps, newsletters, blogs), organic social media, paid social media and emerging platforms (e.g. chatbots, voice assistants). We developed this list on the basis of a review of the academic and trade literature combined with prestudy interviews of content marketing executives. Although we intended the list to be comprehensive, we asked respondents with media platforms not included in the list to add those platforms in a space that was provided. The measure of platform number was simply the number of platforms that each organization used. The range on this item was 1 to 7 platforms. Based on this item, we calculated our measure so that the usage of the intermediate number of four media platforms was assigned the maximum value 4, while lower or higher number of platforms used were assigned values in the range between 1 and 3.

Content distribution context / joint deployment of print and digital media platforms (CDIST2) . To operationalize the joint deployment of print and digital media platforms in content distribution, we asked respondents–as done in prior research [ 77 ]–how much of their content distribution budgets their organizations were allocating to print or digital media platforms, respectively, with the percentages summing up to 100 percent. We used this information to construct the joint deployment score for each organization and assigned values between zero (print or digital only) and fifty (balanced budget shares) to reflect joint platform usage.

Content promotion context (CPROM) . To measure the weight organizations attached to content promotion, respondents were requested to state the share of overall content marketing investments that their organizations allocated to content promotion measures. We adapted this approach from Fam and Yang [ 77 ] because marketing executives are usually sensitive to budget information, hence they would feel more comfortable in providing the relative weight of content promotion budgets rather than an absolute figure, leading to more accurate data. The range on this item was 0 to 100 percent.

Content marketing performance measurement context (CMPERME) . We assessed the CM performance measurement context using a three-item scale. The items rest on previous research by O’Sullivan and colleagues [ 55 ] and Mintz and Currim [ 56 ]. They capture content marketing performance measurement frequency regarding deployed print and digital content platforms as well as actual performance measurement data use in terms of the employment of data as guidance for continuously improving content offerings. Responses were given on 5-point agreement scales (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree).

Content marketing organization (CMORG) . To capture structural specialization and autonomy in the content marketing domain and specialization-enabling processes and systems, we used four questions based on prior research by Olson et al. [ 63 ], Walker and Ruekert [ 66 ], Barclay [ 78 ] and Škrinjar and Trkman [ 79 ]. These questions capture the presence of dedicated content marketing units, task- and skill-specialized, autonomous content marketing experts, and processes and information technology systems that enable collaboration of specialized staff and units. Responses were given on 5-point agreement scales (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree).

Control variables

In addition to the above variables, we considered control variables in our analyses. We followed recommendations for control variable use in the literature that suggest a focused use of controls to not unnecessarily loose available degrees of freedom and statistical power [ 80 , 81 ]. We also opted for a focused approach to avoid increase in questionnaire length, because this commonly leads to higher response burden [ 82 ], which is associated with lower response rates and more response biases. First, we included organizational size (SIZE) as a control variable. Size is established to potentially confound marketing practices [ 83 ] and organizational performance measures [ 84 ]. For example, compared to larger organizations, smaller organizations were found to be more informal with regard to marketing planning and to use fewer ways to measure performance [ 83 ]. Thus, organizational size may relate to an organization’s content marketing activities and CM effectiveness. Organizational size was measured by asking the key informants for the number of full-time employees, referring to four size categories. Three dummy variables were used, concerning organizations with 500 to 999, 1,000 to 4,999, and 5,000+ employees, respectively. Organizations with 250–499 employees served as the comparative category. Second, we also controlled for an organization’s sector affiliation (SECTOR) . A dummy-coded variable (0 = industrial sector and 1 = services sectors) was assigned to the participating organizations. The rational for selecting sector affiliation as control was that it is well established that sector characteristics, in particular differences between industry and services, play an important role for organizational behavior and outcomes [ 85 ]. Examples for sector-specific features are legal restrictions, competitive specifics, ethical concerns, or customer specifics [ 86 ]. In content marketing it could, e.g., be that creating attractive, compelling content is harder for organizations in industrial sectors.

Measure validation and analytical approach

Measure validation.

As our data met sample size recommendations [ 87 ], we assessed the validity of our measures using confirmatory factor analysis. The analysis was performed using the lavaan package in R. We estimated a measurement model with the seven reflective constructs in our study (CMSTRAT, CPROD, CDIST1, CDIST2, CPROM, CMPERME and CMORG). Regarding the inclusion of the three single-indicator latent variables (CDIST1, CDIST2, CPROM) in the analysis, we followed the recommendations in the literature [ 88 , 89 ] to fix loadings at “.95 * variance” and to calculate error variance as “sample variance of the indicator * (1 - .85)”, thus separating the single indicators from the latent variables. We used the robust Satorra-Bentler MLM estimator, since the multivariate normality assumption was not met (Mardia Statistics: skew = 41.95, p < .01 and kurtosis = 374.90, p < .01). The results indicate adequate levels of fit (CFI = 0.97, SRMR = 0.04, RMSEA = 0.05, χ 2 /df = 145.5/101), in accordance with the guidelines provided by Hu and Bentler [ 90 ].

We assessed convergent validity of the measures by examining factor loadings. The analysis indicated that all factor loadings are high (ranging from 0.58 to 0.92), in line with the guidelines of Hair et al. [ 91 ], and significant. Cronbach’s alphas of all of the measures range from 0.71 to 0.86, surpassing the acceptable level of 0.70, and composite reliabilities also surpass the acceptable level of 0.60 suggested by Fornell and Larcker [ 92 ]. Average variance extracted (AVE), reflecting the amount of variance in the indicators that is accounted for by the latent construct, is a more conservative estimate of the validity of a measurement model [ 92 ], and was also calculated for each construct. With the exception of CPROD (0.45), the AVE for each construct is greater than the 0.50 level recommended by Fornell and Larcker [ 92 ]. In sum (see table in S2 Table ), these results indicate convergent validity of the measures.

To test for discriminant validity , we calculated the difference between one model, which allowed the correlations between the constructs (with multiple indicators) to be constrained to unity (i.e. perfectly correlated), and another model, which allowed the correlations between the constructs to be free [ 93 ]. This was done for one pair of constructs at a time. For example, in testing CPROD and CMPERME, the chi-square difference test between the two models (χ 2 d (1) = 362.69, p < .001) affirmed the discriminant validity of these constructs. Similar results were obtained for the other chi-square difference tests, indicating discriminant validity.

To assess content marketing effectiveness, we drew on subjective measures . A part of the literature on performance measurement tends to conclude that subjective measures, compared with objective measures, are less appropriate for performance assessments. It has been argued that managers may tend to overrate their organization’s performance [e.g., 94 ], and that using subjective measures can be problematic when explanatory variables of performance are measured using the same informant, as this can implicate common method bias [ 95 ]. However, as done in prior research [ 96 ], we deliberately decided to rely on managers’ subjective evaluations because of the lack of generally accepted and comparable objective content marketing effectiveness indicators. Moreover, Singh et al. [ 96 ] have demonstrated that carefully collected subjective performance measures can yield reliable and valid data. To alleviate common method concerns we first used procedural remedies in line with recommendations provided by Podsakoff et al. [ 95 ]. We divided the questionnaire into various subsections, so respondents were required to pause and carefully read instructions for each set of questions, contributing to the psychological separation of predictor and criterion measures. We relied on different scale types to reduce common scale properties. In addition, we kept items specific and labeled every point on the response scales to minimize item ambiguity. We also guaranteed anonymity to diminish the tendency to respond in a socially desirable manner, and we kept the questionnaire as short as possible to maintain motivation to respond accurately. In addition to these procedural remedies, we used the regression-based marker variable technique proposed by Siemsen et al. [ 97 ] to statistically control for potential method bias. According to this approach, common method bias can be effectively reduced when estimating a regression equation by adding a marker variable that is largely uncorrelated with the substantive variables of interest and suffers from some type of method bias. Hence, we deliberately included impression management , i.e. the conscious attempt to present oneself positively, as a potentially ideal marker variable into our study, based on the expectation that this measure is theoretically unrelated and similarly vulnerable to common method variance relative to other study variables. We measured the impression management form of social desirability via the three-item scale described by Winkler et al. [ 98 ]. Items were on 5-point agreement scales (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). Analysis of our data exhibited no to small bivariate correlations (< .15) of the impression management marker ( IMM ) with the substantive variables of interest, supporting the assumed unrelatedness. Thus, we added the marker variable to our regression analysis, described in more detail below, to control for potential common method bias.

The study variables were on different response scales. Hence, we followed the recommendation from Cohen et al. [ 99 ] to put research findings into common, easily understandable metrics, and used simple linear transformations of the original scale units to convert the scores of all variables into standardized units of 0 to 100 (0, 100 for dichotomous variables), representing the percent of maximum possible (POMP) scores for each scale. This approach simplifies interpretability for example by giving immediate meaning to summary statistics such as means and measures of variability or by facilitating comparisons of scores across constructs.

We used linear multiple regression analysis for hypotheses testing in which all variables entered the regression equation on the same step. With regard to Hypothesis 3a, which predicts that content marketing is more effective when an intermediate number of media platforms is used, we categorized, as described above in the measures section, the originally continuous predictor variable so that an intermediate number of media platforms used was assigned the maximum value. Though such categorization is accompanied by loss of information, this allowed us to investigate whether CM effectiveness at an intermediate number of platforms used was different from when more or less platforms were used without resorting to a quadratic function. We proceeded analogously with regard to the analysis of Hypothesis 3b. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics 24.0.0.1 software, reporting adheres to the SAMPL guidelines [ 100 ]. Prior to the main analysis, the assumptions of regression analysis were tested. To check linearity between the dependent and the independent variables, we employed partial residual plots of independent variables [ 101 ]. The plots exhibited only minor deviations from linear relations. Hence, we concluded that there was no major problem with the linearity assumption. Regarding multicollinearity, the highest value of variance-inflation factor was 2.81, and the highest value of the condition index equaled 24.90. Since these values are below the recommended threshold of respectively 10 and 30 [ 72 ], there is no indication for collinearity concerns. A Shapiro-Wilk test of the residuals (W(263) = 0.985, p < .01) found some evidence of nonnormality and a Koenker test (K = 29.97, p < .01) indicated presence of heteroscedasticity in the residuals. We therefore used the generalized information matrix (GIM) test described by King and Roberts [ 102 ] to detect potential model misspecification. Since the value (GIM = 1.375) is below the recommended threshold of 1.5, denoting that robust standard errors are not 1.5 times larger than classic standard errors, there is no indication for misspecification. Hence, we proceeded with our model, and to account for nonnormality and heteroscedasticity, we followed the recommendation of Dudgeon [ 103 ] to use HC3 as robust standard error estimator in our regression. Multiple regression with robust standard errors was carried out using the SPSS macro by Daryanto [ 104 ]. A p-value of < .05 was considered significant.

Descriptive statistics

Table 1 lists the means, standard deviations, correlations, and Cronbach’s alphas of the study variables. In line with expectations, CMEFFECT related positively to CMSTRAT (r = .66, p < .001), to CPROD (r = .68, p < .001), to CMPERME (r = .61, p < .001), and to CMORG (r = .62, p < .001). Notably, CMEFFECT was not correlated with CDIST1, CDIST2, and CPROM.

Notes: N = 263. POMP scores for all variables.

a Dummy coded. All |r| > .11 are significant at p < .05, all |r| > .19, p < .01. Cronbach’s alphas for multi-item measures are in italics on the diagonal in the correlation matrix.

Hypothesis testing

Results of the multiple regression analysis with CMEFFECT as dependent variable are presented in Table 2 . The study variables explained a substantial proportion of variance in content marketing effectiveness (R 2 = .61, F(12, 250) = 36.71, p < .001). In Hypothesis 1, we expected that there would be a positive association between a strong content marketing strategizing context, characterized by strategic clarity and strategy commitment, and content marketing effectiveness. The regression coefficient indicates that as we hypothesized, CMSTRAT is significantly and positively associated with CMEFFECT (β = .23, t(250) = 2.94, p < .01). Therefore, the data support Hypothesis 1.

Note: N = 263.

With regard to Hypothesis 2, we predicted that a strong content production context, characterized by efforts to optimize customer-perceived content value and to adhere to normative quality criteria, should be associated with higher content marketing effectiveness. Results showed that CPROD was positively related to CMEFFECT (β = .37, t(250) = 5.05, p < .001). Thus, Hypothesis 2 cannot be rejected. Hypotheses 3a and 3b predicted that two aspects of content distribution, the usage of an intermediate number of media platforms and a joint deployment of print and digital media platforms, each affect content marketing effectiveness. However, results showed that CDIST1 (β = .01, t(250) = .29, p = .77) and CDIST2 (β = -.02, t(250) = -.50, p = .62) were not significantly related to CMEFFECT. Therefore, Hypotheses 3a and 3b are not supported by our data. Related to Hypothesis 3a, we conducted two exploratory post-hoc analyses to examine whether there might be (a) a linear relationship between the number of content distribution platforms used and content marketing effectiveness, or (b) an inverted U‐shaped relationship between the number of content distribution platforms used and content marketing effectiveness. With regard to (b), we introduced the square of the number of media platforms used as a new variable in the regression model in addition to the number of platforms used. With respect to Hypothesis 3b, we also conducted (a) a post-hoc analysis to test an alternative model that included the potential effect of focusing on print or digital media platforms on content marketing effectiveness, and (b) an analysis testing for a U‐shaped relationship between the share of content distribution budget allocated to digital media platforms and content marketing effectiveness. With regard to (b), we introduced the square of the budget share as a new variable in the regression model in addition to the budget share. However, none of these post-hoc analyses yielded significant effects. In Hypothesis 4, we predicted that there would be a positive relation between a strong content promotion context in terms of paid content promotion budgets and content marketing effectiveness. With respect to this hypothesis, CPROM was not found to have a significant impact on CMEFFECT (β = .02, t(250) = .41, p = .69). Hence, we find no support for Hypothesis 4. To further evaluate the relationship between content promotion and content marketing effectiveness, we conducted an additional exploratory post-hoc analysis. We tested an alternative model that assessed whether the number of content promotion measures is positively related to content marketing effectiveness. The number of measures was also not linked to content marketing effectiveness. Hypothesis 5 stated that content marketing is more effective when organizations have a stronger content marketing performance measurement context. Regarding this Hypothesis, the regression coefficient indicates that CMPERME is significantly and positively associated with CMEFFECT (β = .18, t(250) = 2.69, p < .01). This is the hypothesized outcome, and therefore the data support Hypothesis 5. Furthermore, a specialized content marketing organization with supporting processes and information technology systems (CMORG) was found to have a positive effect on content marketing effectiveness (CMEFFECT) (β = .14, t(250) = 1.97, p < .05), as we hypothesized in Hypothesis 6. Consequently, Hypotheses 6 cannot be rejected.

Finally, we conducted a robustness check of our results by adding the respective organization’s annual content marketing budget to the model. Including this variable into our model did not change our findings, all the variables that were significant remained significant, while the overall annual budget was not significant (β = -.04, t(245) = -0.70, p = .48).

This study examined whether and how the organizational context in which content marketing activities are embedded in determines content marketing effectiveness. We conceptualized and empirically tested a model that proposed that strong content marketing strategizing, content production, content distribution, content promotion, content marketing performance measurement, and structural and processual contexts drive content marketing effectiveness.

Summary of findings and theoretical implications

Considered together, our analysis of the data reveals that context features have a substantial impact on the effectiveness of content marketing activities. Table 3 summarizes the findings.

Notes: + = a positive hypothesized relationship. Yes = the hypothesis was supported. No = the hypothesis was not supported.

Regarding the strategizing context, we found that a well-defined content marketing strategy that is clearly communicated, thoroughly understood by managers and employees, and widely supported within the organization positively influences content marketing effectiveness. The demonstration of this link between strategic clarity and strategy commitment on the one hand and content marketing effectiveness on the other hand adds to the theoretical and empirical elaboration of the determinants of content marketing effectiveness while incorporating insights from strategy research [ 24 , 25 , 27 , 28 ] into the content marketing domain.

In addition, we found that a strong content production context, characterized by the optimization of customer-perceived content value and adherence to normative content quality criteria, has a significant, positive impact on content marketing effectiveness. Our results support the line of reasoning in the uses-and-gratifications- as well as information quality literature [ 29 – 32 ], that providing content aligned with a target group’s subjective judgement of usefulness will increase the likelihood that content is interacted with, in turn positively influencing content marketing effectiveness. While prior content marketing research focused on this argument [e.g., 3 ], we also introduce the compliance with normative content quality criteria (such as diversity of viewpoints or impartiality) as a novel content production context factor that positively influences content marketing effectiveness. From this perspective, the integration of research on journalistic quality in theories about content marketing effectiveness is essential for the progress of knowledge about content marketing effectiveness.

With regard to the content distribution context, we did not find that the usage of an intermediate number of media platforms has a positive influence on content marketing effectiveness. This finding is noteworthy since research on integrated marketing communications generally assumes that using multiple media platforms will increase the effectiveness of communications efforts but that deploying too many media properties will attenuate effectiveness [ 37 , 38 , 40 , 41 ]. One reason for our result could be that the assumption of reactance theory underlying our hypothesis, that, from a certain point, the negative consequences of using an increasing number of media platforms outweigh the positive effects [ 41 ], does not hold. This explanation would be supported by a positive linear association between the number of content distribution platforms used and content marketing effectiveness. However, our post hoc analysis did not provide any evidence for this kind of relationship. Contrary to expectations, we also did not find a positive influence of a joint deployment of print and digital media platforms on content marketing effectiveness. In addition, post hoc analyses showed no significant effects of focusing on print or digital platforms only on CM effectiveness. These findings suggest that there is no general difference in effectiveness between these two kinds of media platforms, a result similar to the conclusion by Kwon and colleagues [ 105 ]. Heterogeneity of preferences theory suggests one interpretation for this [ 41 ], positing that media platform preference is idiosyncratic and that heterogeneity in individual platform preferences influences customer response to content marketing activities. Taking the aforementioned results together, the present study advances research on content marketing effectiveness by suggesting that effectiveness may be less a question of how many or whether print or digital content distribution vehicles are used, but more of utilizing precisely those media platforms that are best aligned with the respective organization’s target groups’ preferences. Following up on this, further research on the effects of using various content distribution platforms on content marketing effectiveness is warranted.

The present study did not find a positive relationship between paid content promotion budgets and content marketing effectiveness. This is not what we expected. However, empirical evidence from the field of advertising effectiveness research suggests an interpretation of the finding that more paid media investments are not always consistent with higher performance. According to respective descriptive knowledge [ 106 ], a metric that determines the level of performance is excess share of voice, defined as a brand’s share of voice minus share of market. Arguably, then, the amount invested in paid content promotion by a brand would have to be related to the total amount invested in paid content promotion in the brand’s category, and to the brand’s market position. Also, the contribution of paid content promotion to content marketing effectiveness could be shaped by the balance between paid promotion and owned content distribution platforms (e.g., [ 107 ]). This research therefore highlights that further work is needed to untangle the conditions under which paid content promotion measures might positively influence content marketing effectiveness.

Our theoretical elaboration and empirical investigation also provided evidence that core elements of the content marketing performance measurement context–regularly measuring the performance of print and digital content platforms and actually using the data obtained as guidance for continuously improving content offerings–positively influence content marketing effectiveness. Though previous research has shown positive performance implications of performance measurement in contexts other than content marketing [e.g., 55 – 57 ], this is the first study to successfully demonstrate this relationship for the content marketing domain. Our research thus expands previous research on CM effectiveness by incorporating performance measurement as a central element of a model of content marketing effectiveness. This finding might also have implications for future research, e.g. regarding the optimal configuration of content marketing performance measurement systems.

Finally, our work extends previous research on content marketing effectiveness by including structural specialization and specialization enabling processes and information technology systems as a new factor that positively influences content marketing effectiveness. The demonstration of the link between organizational structural and processual design elements on the one hand and content marketing effectiveness on the other hand lends support to researchers, such as Lee et al. [ 62 ], who have called for a new perspective of structural marketing, recognizing the importance of using organizational design elements to achieve marketing outcomes.

Overall, the aforementioned findings are important giving the centrality of empirical insights regarding the optimal design and implementation of content marketing initiatives to current academic interest [ 3 , 5 , 8 ].

Management implications

The present study has important implications for practice as well. It clearly identifies four context factors that positively influence content marketing effectiveness. However, it is noteworthy that the strength of relationship between each of these factors and content marketing effectiveness varies. This implies, that managers could, e.g. if necessary due to budget or attention restrictions, prioritize improvements in the content marketing context factors in line with their order of importance for effectiveness as it was found in this study, being (1) content production context, (2) content marketing strategizing context, (3) content marketing performance measurement context and (4) content marketing organization. Nevertheless, efforts to drive improvement in a single context domain are less beneficial than a comprehensive effort to establish strong content marketing context conditions across the entire range of content marketing activities.

In the following sections, we present individual management recommendations, based on the order in which the various context areas in this study were found to be important.

We first advise managers to constitute a strong content production environment. To do so, we encourage content marketing executives to systematically evaluate and optimize customer-perceived content value, which means putting the audience and its needs and wants first while at the same time keeping an eye on the organization’s communications objectives without becoming self-centered. Moreover, our findings provide a powerful argument that organizations should not compromise on the journalistic quality of their content, but instead strive for creating content pieces that stand out regarding journalistic aspects such as narrative perspective, originality, diversity of viewpoints, accuracy, comprehensibility, or compliance with ethical standards.

Our findings also suggest that a strong content marketing strategizing context is associated with higher content marketing effectiveness. In this respect, managers should work towards establishing strategic clarity. To do so, crafting a compelling content marketing purpose and vision, formulating clear content marketing goals and objectives, defining content creation principles and standards, clarifying key stories and main topics, developing customer personas, investing care about what the most appropriate content formats would be for the audiences being targeted, or planning content that is matched to customers’ buying processes would be beneficial for marketers. In addition, our findings suggest that practitioners should pursue strengthening commitment to the content marketing strategy within the organization. Possible measures to enhance comprehension and backing of the content marketing strategy include regularly communicating its core pillars, rigorously and openly addressing areas of concern, explaining strategic decisions, continuously training employees, or fostering strategic conversations (e.g., [ 108 ]).

Third, we highly recommend establishing a strong content marketing performance measurement context because that would quite certainly go along with a higher level of content marketing effectiveness. Establishment of a strong content marketing performance measurement context requires content marketers to shift part of their content marketing budgets from actual content marketing initiatives to measurement and analytic efforts. Doing so would be counterproductive if it did not enhance content marketing effectiveness. Our research supports exactly such a reallocation of resources, demonstrating that it can positively affect content marketing effectiveness.

Fourth, our investigation implies that shaping the structural and processual context of content marketing activities is a central task of managers since a specialized organizational context unfolds positive effects on content marketing effectiveness. One promising way to advance structural specialization is setting up organizational platforms offering shared and specialized working environments, often referred to as brand newsrooms or content factories. Such platforms could include various desks dedicated to specific topics, media, and target groups, teams devoted to strategy, project management, and further service areas such as graphics, video, or analytics, and an editorial board ensuring integration. To unleash agility, these structures should be supported by processes and underlying information technology solutions enabling interaction and collaboration between content marketing specialists as well as integration with further marketing functions and other relevant organizational entities.

Finally, our study questions the current high level of practitioner enthusiasm for focusing on digital content distribution platforms and multichannel communications. In the light of this study’s findings, it seems to be beneficial for organizations to utilize precisely those media platforms and systems that are best aligned with the respective organization’s target groups’ preferences. Caution is also advised regarding practitioner enthusiasm for paid content promotion measures. “Pay to play” measures such as influencer marketing, social media advertising or native ads in editorial environments have been presented as indispensable means to boost content marketing reach and thus improve content marketing effectiveness. However, we do not observe any simple and direct positive effect of content promotion budgets on content marketing effectiveness. As this is one of the first investigations to examine the impact of paid content promotion in the content marketing domain and given that the use and functionality of content promotion measures evolve continuously, our findings are preliminary. Scholars and practitioners need to further explore this emerging field.

Limitations and research directions

As all empirical research, the present investigation has limitations that call for attention in interpreting its findings. First, the data was cross-sectional which prohibits unambiguously interpreting the findings as indicating causality. Still, based on the theoretical argumentation provided above, the directions of causality implied in this study are likely. Future research might try to replicate these relationships via longitudinal or experimental study designs. A second limitation is that, though the study included organizations from various sectors and across different size categories, the sample is rather homogeneous with respect to cultural factors, as all participating organizations were located in Germany, Switzerland or Austria. Hence and given the global nature of content marketing research, scholars could investigate the suggested relationships in other contexts in order to further generalize the current findings. Third, the measurement of content marketing effectiveness is a potential limitation of this investigation, since we relied on subjective ratings rather than objective data. Thus, researchers might validate our findings with objective content marketing performance data. The study builds upon the views of a single key informant in every organization. While the key informant approach is common, relying on multiple informants from each organization might provide an even more balanced view. Besides, as earlier mentioned, the lack of any evidence of effects of the content distribution and content promotion contexts on content marketing effectiveness could be due to the way we framed them in this study. Therefore, other conceptualizations are worth investigating, including considering interactions of these context factors, as each factor’s contribution to content marketing effectiveness might be contingent upon the other. Also, only a limited number of potential confounders could be taken into account in this study. We adjusted for potential effects of firm size and industry, controlled for social desirability, and conducted an additional robustness check of our results that included the respective organization’s annual content marketing budget. In future, researchers could map out the nomological network of the research field in more detail using causal graph analysis [ 81 ], and subsequently conduct studies including further control variables to rule out alternative explanations for the observed relationships. Beyond addressing limitations, this study offers a number of additional directions for prospective research. For example, given that a strong content marketing performance measurement context offers demonstrable benefits, scholars might consider whether certain findings from the general marketing performance measurement field [e.g., 55 , 109 ] also apply to the content marketing domain. Research might, e.g., explicitly take into account whether content marketing performance measurement is comprehensive or selectively focused on particular dimensions, because larger organizations could benefit from more comprehensive and smaller organizations from more focused approaches. Furthermore, future studies may explore the influence of the organizational content marketing context on content marketing effectiveness via structural characteristics other than specialization. Other major structural characteristics, such as centralization, formalization, or modularity, might also exert influence on content marketing effectiveness. Importantly, future research might investigate mediating or moderating variables, such as external environmental effects. Market turbulence, for example, may moderate the value of content marketing context factors. Such investigations could further deepen the understanding of the determinants of content marketing effectiveness.

Supporting information

S1 appendix, acknowledgments.

We gratefully acknowledge the valuable comments of Vanessa Haselhoff in the development of earlier drafts of this article.

Funding Statement

The author received no specific funding for this work.

Data Availability

Book cover

International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

HCII 2022: Design, Operation and Evaluation of Mobile Communications pp 235–245 Cite as

Social Media Advertising and Consumer Purchase: A Literature Review

  • Tianxi Gao 9  
  • Conference paper
  • First Online: 16 June 2022

2021 Accesses

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS,volume 13337)

This paper provides an overview of the literature on the use of social media advertising (SMA) and the key factors that affect the effectiveness of SMA. A total of 92 manuscripts published in top ranking journals in the last decade are reviewed. At the firm level, factors, such as brand’s social role, time to post on social media platforms, frequency of social media posts, and genre of the posts, are found to affect consumer’s purchasing decision and intention to share. At the individual consumer level, factors including demographic characteristics, general attitude toward online advertising, and privacy concerns are found to influence consumer’s buying behaviors.

  • Social media advertising
  • Social role
  • Consumer buying behaviors
  • Attitude toward advertising

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Anderl, E., Schumann, J.H., Kunz, W.: Helping firms reduce complexity in multichannel online data: a new taxonomy-based approach for customer journeys. J. Retail. 92 (2), 185–203 (2016)

Article   Google Scholar  

Appel, G., Grewal, L., Hadi, R., Stephen, A.T.: The future of social media in marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 48 (1), 79–95 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-019-00695-1

Ashley, C., Tuten, T.: Creative strategies in social media marketing: an exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychol. Mark. 32 (1), 15–27 (2014)

Bigne, E. et al.: The impact of internet user shopping patterns and demographics on consumer mobile buying behaviour. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 6 (3), 193–209 (2005)

Google Scholar  

Borah, A., Tellis, G.J.: Halo (spillover) effects in social media: do product recalls of one brand hurt or help rival brands? J. Mark. Res. 53 (2), 143–160 (2016)

Borah, A., et al.: Improvised marketing interventions in social media. J. Mark. 84 (2), 69–91 (2020)

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Bronner, F., de Hoog, R.: Social Media and consumer choice. Int. J. Mark. Res. 56 (1), 51–71 (2014)

Chen, X., Van Der Lans, R., Phan, T.Q.: Uncovering the importance of relationship characteristics in social networks: implications for seeding strategies. J. Mark. Res. 54 (2), 187–201 (2017)

Colicev, A., et al.: Improving consumer mindset metrics and shareholder value through social media: the different roles of owned and earned media. J. Mark. 82 (1), 37–56 (2018)

Dahl, D.W., Argo, J.J., Morales, A.C.: Social information in the retail environment: the importance of consumption alignment, referent identity, and self-esteem. J. Consum. Res. 38 (5), 860–871 (2012)

de Vries, L., Gensler, S., Leeflang, P.S.H.: Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: an investigation of the effects of social media marketing. J. Interact. Mark. 26 (2), 83–91 (2012)

de Vries, L., Gensler, S., Leeflang, P.S.H.: Effects of traditional advertising and social messages on brand-building metrics and customer acquisition. J. Mark. 81 (5), 1–15 (2017)

Deuze, M.: Living in media and the future of advertising. J. Advert. 45 (3), 326–333 (2016)

Errmann, A., et al.: Divergent effects of friend recommendations on disclosed social media advertising in the United States and Korea. J. Advert. 48 (5), 495–511 (2019)

Fossen, B.L., Schweidel, D.A.: Social TV, advertising, and sales: are social shows good for advertisers? Mark. Sci. 38 (2), 274–295 (2019)

Hartmann, W.R.: Demand estimation with social interactions and the implications for targeted marketing. Mark. Sci. 29 (4), 585–601 (2010)

Huang, S., et al.: Social advertising effectiveness across products: a large-scale field experiment. Mark. Sci. 39 (6), 1142–1165 (2020)

Huang, X.(I.), Li, X., Zhang, M.: “Seeing” the social roles of brands: how physical positioning influences brand evaluation. J. Consum. Psychol. 23 (4), 509–514 (2013)

Hughes, C., Swaminathan, V., Brooks, G.: Driving brand engagement through online social influencers: an empirical investigation of sponsored blogging campaigns. J. Mark. 83 (5), 78–96 (2019)

Hutter, K., Hoffmann, S.: Surprise, surprise. Ambient media as promotion tool for retailers. J. Retail. 90 (1), 93–110 (2014)

John, L.K., et al.: Does “liking” lead to loving? The impact of joining a brand’s social network on marketing outcomes. J. Mark. Res. 54 (1), 144–155 (2017)

Johnston, W.J., et al.: Behavioral implications of international social media advertising: an investigation of intervening and contingency factors. J. Int. Mark. 26 (2), 43–61 (2018)

Kanuri, V.K., Chen, Y., Sridhar, S.(H.): Scheduling content on social media: theory, evidence, and application. J. Mark. 82 (6), 89–108 (2018)

Kim, M.-Y., Moon, S., Iacobucci, D.: The influence of global brand distribution on brand popularity on social media. J. Int. Mark. 27 (4), 22–38 (2019)

Kumar, A., et al.: From social to sale: the effects of firm-generated content in social media on customer behavior. J. Mark. 80 (1), 7–25 (2016a)

Kumar, V., Choi, J.W.B., Greene, M.: Synergistic effects of social media and traditional marketing on brand sales: capturing the time-varying effects. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 45 (2), 268–288 (2016b)

Li, X., et al.: The challenge of being a challenger: social dominance orientation shapes the impact of “challenger vs. leader” comparisons. J. Consum. Psychol. 31 (1), 55–71 (2020a)

Li, X., Wang, C., Zhang, Y.: The dilemma of social commerce. Internet Res. 30 (3), 1059–1080 (2020b)

Li, Y.-M., Lee, Y.-L., Lien, N.-J.: Online social advertising via influential endorsers. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 16 (3), 119–154 (2012)

Lim, J.-S., Al-Aali, A., Heinrichs, J.H.: Impact of satisfaction with e-retailers’ touch points on purchase behavior: the moderating effect of search and experience product type. Mark. Lett. 26 (2), 225–235 (2014)

Liu, Y., Lopez, R.A.: The impact of social media conversations on consumer brand choices. Mark. Lett. 27 (1), 1–13 (2014)

Minton, E., et al.: Sustainable marketing and social media. J. Advert. 41 (4), 69–84 (2012)

Naylor, R.W., Lamberton, C.P., West, P.M.: Beyond the “like” button: the impact of mere virtual presence on brand evaluations and purchase intentions in social media settings. J. Mark. 76 (6), 105–120 (2012)

Nolan, T., Varey, R.J.: Re-cognising the interactive space. Mark. Theory 14 (4), 431–450 (2014)

Pagani, M., Malacarne, G.: Experiential engagement and active vs. passive behavior in mobile location-based social networks: The moderating role of privacy. J. Interact. Mark. 37 , 133–148 (2017)

Pancer, E., et al.: How readability shapes social media engagement. J. Consum. Psychol. 29 (2), 262–270 (2018)

Peng, J., et al.: Network overlap and content sharing on social media platforms. J. Mark. Res. 55 (4), 571–585 (2018)

Pentina, I., Guilloux, V., Micu, A.C.: Exploring social media engagement behaviors in the context of luxury brands. J. Advert. 47 (1), 55–69 (2018)

Seo, Y., et al.: Narrative transportation and paratextual features of social media in viral advertising. J. Advert. 47 (1), 83–95 (2018)

Shaw, A.: Council post: How social media can move your business forward. Forbes (2018). https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescommunicationscouncil/2018/05/11/how-social-media-can-move-your-business-forward/?sh=551618cb4cf2 . Accessed 4 Dec 2021

Snyder, J., Garcia-Garcia, M.: Advertising across platforms: conditions for multimedia campaigns: a method for determining optimal media investment and creative strategies across platforms. J. Advert. Res. 56 (4), 352–367 (2016)

“Social media.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/social%20media . Accessed 8 Feb 2022

Summers, C.A., Smith, R.W., Reczek, R.W.: An audience of one: behaviorally targeted ads as implied social labels. J. Consum. Res. 43 (1), 156–178 (2016)

Toker-Yildiz, K., et al.: Social Interactions and monetary incentives in driving consumer repeat behavior. J. Mark. Res. 54 (3), 364–380 (2017)

Trusov, M., Bodapati, A.V., Bucklin, R.E.: Determining influential users in internet Social networks. J. Mark. Res. 47 (4), 643–658 (2010)

Tucker, C.E.: Social networks, personalized advertising, and privacy controls. J. Mark. Res. 51 (5), 546–562 (2013)

Voorveld, H.A., et al.: Engagement with social media and social media advertising: the differentiating role of platform type. J. Advert. 47 (1), 38–54 (2018)

Wang, Q., et al.: What makes online content viral? The contingent effects of hubusers versus non–hub users on social media platforms. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 47 (6), 1005–1026 (2019)

Wang, Y., Sun, S.: Examining the role of beliefs and attitudes in online advertising. Int. Mark. Rev. 27 (1), 87–107 (2010)

Wu, C.W., Guaita Martínez, J.M., Martín Martín, J.M.: An analysis of social media marketing strategy and performance in the context of fashion brands: the case of Taiwan. Psychol. Mark. 37 (9), 1185–1193 (2020)

Xu, A.J., Wyer, R.S.: Puffery in advertisements: the effects of media context, communication norms, and consumer knowledge. J. Consum. Res. 37 (2), 329–343 (2010)

Zhang, X., et al.: An examination of social influence on shopper behavior using video tracking data. J. Mark. 78 (5), 24–41 (2014)

Zhang, Y., et al.: Online shopping and social media: friends or foes? J. Mark. 81 (6), 24–41 (2017)

Zubcsek, P.P., Sarvary, M.: Advertising to a social network. Quant. Mark. Econ. 9 (1), 71–107 (2011)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tianxi Gao .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

Gavriel Salvendy

University of West Florida, Pensacola, FL, USA

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Gao, T. (2022). Social Media Advertising and Consumer Purchase: A Literature Review. In: Salvendy, G., Wei, J. (eds) Design, Operation and Evaluation of Mobile Communications. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13337. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05014-5_19

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05014-5_19

Published : 16 June 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-05013-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-05014-5

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Publish with us

Policies and ethics

  • Find a journal
  • Track your research

Positioning – a literature review

PSU Research Review

ISSN : 2399-1747

Article publication date: 11 July 2020

Issue publication date: 10 September 2021

The purpose of this paper is to review state-of-the-art literature on product/brand positioning to re-examine the positioning concept and developing a more comprehensive definition from a theoretical viewpoint.

Design/methodology/approach

A systematic review of positioning was conducted. The review conformed to a rigorous set of core principles: it was systematic (organized according to a method designed to address the review questions), transparent (explicitly stated), reproducible and updatable and synthesized (summarized the evidence relating to the review question).

The literature review reveals that there is lack of coherent definition for positioning, and there is no mutual agreement among marketing scholars and practitioners about the exact meaning of the concept. Therefore, comprehensive definition of positioning encompassing the five underlying positioning perspectives (competition; empty slot/mind; consumers’ perception, differentiation and competitive advantage) is suggested.

Research limitations/implications

This paper will be useful for academicians to analyze the current nature of academic research in this area and will provide an added advantage to managers to design and implement positioning strategies for their product/brands that will allow their organizations to gain competitive advantage. This study acknowledges limitations with respect to its exclusive search criteria, which might affect its generalizability.

Social implications

Position and positioning is of relevance in society in broad terms, e.g. in sports, politics and culture. Positioning strategy is discussed and implemented in different industries (business-to-business and consumer), for all kinds of brands (including, for instance, corporate brands) and for “brands” in the very widest sense (such as places or people).

Originality/value

This is the first systematic review of positioning that provides a detailed understanding of the current state of positioning research on a single platform and also draws a comprehensive positioning conceptualization.

  • Literature review
  • Product and positioning

Saqib, N. (2021), "Positioning – a literature review", PSU Research Review , Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 141-169. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-06-2019-0016

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2020, Natasha Saqib.

Published in PSU Research Review . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

1. Introduction

Positioning has received much attention over the past decade and has emerged as a highly influential marketing management paradigm. It is generally accepted that theoretically, practically and strategically positioning has become one of the key components in modern marketing management, both from the academic point of view ( Aaker and Shansby, 1982 ; Arnott , 1992, 1994 ; Blankson and Kalafatis, 2004 ; Boatswain, 2015 ; Crawford et al. , 1983 ; Day et al. ,1990 ; Diwan and Bodla, 2011 ; Fuchs and Diamantopoulos, 2012 ; Hooley et al. , 2012 ; Kapferer, 2012 ; Kotler, 2003 ; Porter, 1996 ; Sengupta, 2005 ; Soundararaj and Rengamani, 2002 ; Urde and Koch, 2014 ; Wind, 1982 ) and from the practical or business point of view ( Oglivy, 1983 ; Ries and Trout, 1981 ; Trout and Rivkin, 1996 ). The importance of positioning is emphasized by various authors ( Aaker and Shansby, 1982 ; Arnott, 1992 ; Blankson and Kalafatis, 2004 ; Boatswain, 2015 ; Diwan and Bodla, 2011 ; Sengupta, 2005 ) who note that positioning decisions determine the direction of a firm’s overall marketing strategy and that an effective marketing mix can only be developed once a company has crafted a distinct positioning strategy. By making the wrong positioning decision, a company could develop a misguided marketing mix and thus go down an undesirable path.

Moreover, because of its inevitable effect on profitability and long-term success of the firm it has been applied to consumer products ( Boatswain, 2015 ; Crawford, 1985 ; Diwan and Bodla, 2011 ; Fuchs and Diamantopoulos, 2010 ), industrial products ( Simkin et al. , 1985 ; Iyer et al. , 2018 ; Jalkala and Keranen, 2014 ; Pandaa et al. , 2018 ), financial services ( Burton and Easingwood, 2006 ; Easingwood and Mahajan, 1989 ; Kim and Mauborgne, 2000 ; Shostack, 1987 ), retail services ( Abril et al. , 2009 ; Auken and Lonial,1991 ; Corstjens and Doyle, 1989 ; Holmes, 1974 ) and tourism services ( Botha et al. , 1999 ; Gartner, 1989 ; Javalgi et al. , 1995 ; Pike and Page, 2014 ). Thus, the wide use of the positioning concept underlines its importance, usefulness and applicability.

The literature is full of statements emphasizing the importance of positioning. Aaker and Shansby (1982) claim that product positioning is so central and critical that it should be considered at the level of a mission statement. Dovel (1990) considers positioning as the essence of a business and backbone of a business plan. While Johansson and Thorelli (1985) , Keller (2009) , Perreault and McCarthy (1996) , Wilson and Fenwick (1978) and Wind (1980) believe that product positioning is the foundation of the firms marketing strategy. More specifically, Maggard (1976) points out that positioning can make a real contribution as a conceptual vehicle through which various marketing concepts (market segmentation, product differentiation, consumer preference, target market and the like) might be synchronized more effectively. Crawford (1985) believes that positioning is meant to drive the entire marketing programme of the organization and sees positioning as an ingredient of total strategy, not just an advertising ploy, product, brand, price, promotion and distribution must all be consistent with the positioning statement. Richarme (2007) argues that marketers should adopt positioning as their fifth “P” and use it in conjunction with the other four “Ps”. To a large degree, it is a higher-order “P” that rides on the base of the other four “Ps” and at the same time serves as a bridge to corporate strategy.

Ries and Trout (1986) acknowledge positioning to be the tool of competitive warfare. It helps customers to know the real differences among competing products ( DiMingo, 1988 ) and helps in creating a distinctive image of the brand in consumers’ minds ( Wells and Prensky, 1996 ) or brand value by shaping of customers perceptions ( Park et al. , 1986 ; Devlin et al. , 1995 ). Schouten and McAlexander (1989) contend that a key benefit of a successful positioning strategy is the partial insulation it gives from the competitive pressures of other firm. Therefore, positioning is an important source of competitive advantage ( Cronshaw et al. , 1990 ; Gwin and Gwin, 2003 ; Sengupta, 2005 ).

In today’s over-communicated and product-saturated consumer world, effective positioning is critical to brand success ( Marsden, 2002 ). There is a positive relationship between the positioning related decision and the brand success that is the success of brand moves around the pivot of positioning decision ( Fuchs and Diamantopoulos, 2010 ; Pham and Muthukrishnan, 2002 ; Punj and Moon, 2002 ). This not true for only a new brand, it is also of relevance for existing brands when enlarging one’s own market potential or when differentiating a brand from its competitors by repositioning ( Trommsdorf, 2002 ). Therefore, branding and positioning are interrelated and positioning is also the cornerstone of brand management ( Blankson and Kalafatis, 2007 ; de Chernatony, 2009 ; Esch, 2010 ).

Several authors ( Brooksbank, 1994 ; Day et al. , 1990 ; Fisher, 1991 ; Mazanec, 1995 ; Porter, 1996 ; Urban and Hauser, 1993 ) are of the view that long-term success of companies and their products depend on how well they are positioned in the marketplace. Positioning has an impact on important consumer-based outcome variables such as higher consumer loyalty, higher brand equity and value ( Hartmann et al. , 2005 ; Kalra and Goodstein, 1998 ; Knox, 2004 ), less customer vulnerability ( Romaniuk, 2001 ), positively shaped preferences and beliefs about brand value, greater willingness to search for the brand ( Schiffman and Kanuk, 2007 ; Trommsdorf and Paulssen, 2005 ; DiMingo, 1988 ), perceived price sensitivity ( Kalra and Goodstein, 1998 ), brand affect ( Jewell, 2007 ) and brand salience and recall ( Alba and Chattopadhyay, 1986 ).

In addition to non-financial customer-centred indicators, literature has examined positioning effectiveness in terms of financial performance indicators. Cravens and Piercy (2009) claim that effective positioning of the firm’s products is essential in gaining and sustaining superior performance. More specifically, several authors ( Blankson et al. , 2008 ; Blankson and Crawford, 2012 ; Brooksbank, 1994 ; Clement and Werner-Grotemeyer, 1990 ; Day et al. , 1990 ; Devlin et al. , 1995 ; Ennew and Mirza, 1995 ; Fisher, 1991 ; Kalafatis et al. , 2000 ; Kalra and Goodstein, 1998 ; Lee and Liao, 2009 ; Suzuki, 2000 ) claim that positioning has an impact on the financial performance of a company. Hence, the most important decision firm will ever make about its product is how it should position its product.

This article presents an exhaustive examination of research on positioning, particularly research that addresses the problem of conceptualizing and defining positioning. The basis of the article is a literature review of positioning research published in academic journals between 1969 and 2017. These articles range across such disciplines as marketing, strategic marketing and management. The study uses network analysis and text mining to identify how research defines positioning and discusses how the definitions of positioning have been developed on different perspectives.

2. Concept of positioning

The concept of positioning can be traced back to the 1960s when positioning was popularized in consumer product marketing by pioneers such as Alpert and Gatty (1969) they identified positioning as the differentiation of brands according to consumer perceptions they studied differences in consumers perceptions of the organizations products brands when these were positioned differently using technology as the differentiating dimension over similar products in the market place. However, contemporary writers on the subject of positioning ( Hooley et al. , 1998 ; Kotler, 2003 ; Blankson and Kalafatis, 2004 ) sustain Ries and Trout were among the first to define positioning and its origins lie in their article “Positioning is a game people play in today’s me-too market place” published in the Industrial Marketing journal in 1969. In their seminal article, they defined positioning as “as a strategy for ‘staking out turf’ or ‘filling a slot’ in the mind of target customers”. They then made the concept popular by publishing a series of articles in Advertising Age in 1972. “The Positioning Era Cometh”, a three-part article series published in Advertising Age magazine. The groundbreaking series illustrated perceptual positioning related to the concept of positioning and triggered a profound paradigm shift in how people viewed advertising and marketing and how firms advertised their products. Back in 1982, Ries and Trout published their book, Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind, which placed an entirely different spin on the concept. Ries and Trout (1986) , however, consider “Positioning within the context of perceiving the product, merchandise, a service, a company, an institution, or even a person”. They noted that positioning is not what is done to the product/service, but rather what is done to the mind of the customer/consumer. According to the authors, the key issue is to position the offering in the mind of the consumer/customer such that positioning shifts the importance of marketing from the product to the battle for your mind. They further stated that the basic approach of positioning is not to create something new and different, but to manipulate what’s already up there in the mind, to retie the connections that already exist.

2.1 Issues in positioning research

Although there is a vast amount of literature on positioning, and this inquisitive verb is in great favour among marketing experts, it is one of the most convoluted concept and is still subject to incomprehension. The concept of positioning is subject to considerable differences in interpretation ( Maggard, 1976 ). It is perhaps one of the thorniest and most complex concepts in marketing ( Bhat and Reddy, 1998 ). One of the reasons for this circumstance is the issue that there is no mutual agreement among marketing scholars and practitioners about the exact meaning of the concept. It is, however, important to note that the lack of coherent definitions ( Arnott, 1992 ; Blankson and Kalafatis, 2004 ; Crosier, 1981 ; DiMingo, 1988 ; Holmes, 1973 ; Maggard, 1976 and Smith and Lusch, 1976 ) and the difficulties involved in the implementation of the positioning process by practitioners ( de Chernatony, 1994 ) has invariably given rise to comments about the lack of appreciation of the positioning concept ( Pollay, 1985 ). Such dilemma was first expressed in the writings of Aaker and Shansby (1982) who stated that: “positioning means different things to different people”. To some, it means the segmentation decision. To others it is an image question. To still others it means selecting which product features to emphasize, and it still holds true today. The foregoing is summarized by Bainsfair (1990) who states that positioning is one of those words which everybody uses but few people understand. According to Rigger (1995) , the absence of a rigorous definition is inhibiting both practitioner and academic scholars in developing appropriate means of measuring the operationalization of positioning. Blankson and Kalafatis (2004) highlighted that there has been no single universally accepted definition of the concept of positioning. Specifically, the boundaries of the concept are often not clearly defined – the question what exactly falls under the scope of positioning has not been sufficiently answered in literature and is still subject to heavy debate in the marketing community. This state of affairs has given rise to several varying terms associated with the concept, i.e. positioning, position, product positioning, market positioning, etc., but as stated by Arnott (1994) , the various terminologies are simply “several sides of the same coin” and complement each other. Further according to Smith and Lusch (1976) , product position and brand position are different in scope; product position refers to the objective attributes in relation to other products and brand position refers to subjective attributes in relation to competing brands and this perceived image of the brand does not belong to the product but is the property of consumers perceptions of a brand. However, in broader terms, the terms product positioning and brand positioning usually mean the same thing ( Kazmi, 2007 ).

Urde and Koch (2014) in their review of positioning also claim that there is surprising vagueness of the concept, the lack of the holistic view and the dominance of the market oriented approach. According to Fuchs (2008) , positioning is an important, rich and a difficult area for future research. Marketers have developed an impressive variety of highly valuable research techniques and models in positioning research. However, on the conceptual and empirical front, research on positioning is scarce and lagging behind. Chew (2005) also claims that there are little theoretical/conceptual frameworks to guide positioning research and also, the extant positioning literature is largely normative and the issues discussed tend to be subjective. Nevertheless, more research is needed to obtain a better general understanding of the positioning concept. In the following section, the present review and analysis of definitions of positioning used in articles from 1969 to 2017 are presented.

3. Research method

This study used a systematic literature review to identify articles that define or conceptualize the concept of positioning. Systematic review has its origins in the medical field and has been developed through the Cochrane Collaboration. Some of the features of this approach have been adopted in the social sciences. More recently, the approach has been closely scrutinized to determine its appropriateness in the management field and conclusions indicate that “for practitioners/managers, systematic review helps develop a reliable knowledge base by accumulating knowledge from a range of studies ( Brown and Oplatka, 2006 ).

A systematic literature review is neither a formal full-length literature review nor a meta-analysis, as it conforms to a rigorous set of core principles. It has to be systematic (organized according to a method designed to address the review questions), transparent (explicitly stated), reproducible and updatable and synthesized (summarizes the evidence relating to the review question) ( Briner and Denyer, 2012 ). In other words, it is an essential tool for an evidence-based practice ( Briner and Denyer, 2012 ) that differs from traditional narrative reviews by adopting a replicable, scientific and transparent process ( Tranfield et al. , 2003 ). In line with MacInnis’s (2011) framework for conceptual contributions in marketing, our analysis involves identifying how entities (definitions) are different by revealing the underlying key perspectives in various positioning definitions. The present study examines not only how these definitions are different but also what they have in common.

3.1 Search strategy

The review identified relevant articles, which enabled a transparent, documented research process with criteria for including and excluding articles. The systematic review involved the following steps: State research questions develop guidelines for collecting literature, decide on inclusion and exclusion criteria, develop a comprehensive search plan for finding literature, develop a codebook for classifying and describing literature, code the literature and synthesize the literature ( Tranfield et al. , 2003 ; Witell et al. , 2016 ). The present study explores the various ways in which positioning has been defined in the literature to determine whether these definitions are different and also what they have in common.

The main search strategy identified research articles that defined the concept of positioning. To capture this, inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed. The initial inclusion criteria were broad to ensure that all relevant articles were identified, were peer-reviewed empirical or conceptual articles, were published in English and had the definition of positioning. To achieve the mentioned objective, five dominant academic databases including Scopus, Emerald, EBSCOS, Wiley Online Library and Science Direct were explored to identify articles on positioning. This paper reviews literature spanning from 1969 to 2017. Articles were identified in the “article title, abstract, and keywords” section of the said databases using keywords as “positioning”; “product positioning”; and “brand positioning”. To keep the search process specific to the objectives of this study, above keywords were used with the subject limits of “Business, management and accounting”; “Social Sciences”; and “Psychology”.

3.2 Sample selection

The initial search yielded 1,557 empirical or conceptual articles, 1,502 of which were in English. Figure 1 provides an overview of the selection process

All articles were scanned for relevance, which revealed two clear trends. First, although many of the articles used the term “positioning” in the abstract, few actually defined, conceptualized, or emphasized the term. Second, many of those articles that did specifically focus on positioning did not provide a specific definition of the concept. This lack of a definition provides further merit to our claim that a clear understanding of positioning is missing in the literature. In total, 354 articles that had a clear focus on positioning were selected for further analysis.

Two authors independently read the selected 354 articles to ensure that they met the inclusion criteria and to identify those that defined or conceptualized positioning. Those authors compared and discussed the results; in cases of disagreement, a third author was consulted. The final sample included 152 articles that provided at least one of the following: a clear definition, a conceptualization or an explicit referral to a specific definition or conceptualization of positioning.

3.3 Data analysis

To analyze the sample of articles, a combination of qualitative content analysis and quantitative analysis was used, which is a method for systematically and objectively evaluating texts ( Lombard et al. , 2002 ). The analysis was conducted in three steps – classification, coding and text analysis – using qualitative text mining ( Feldman and Sanger, 2007 ). Researchers often face the question of how to summarize text and determine what words and concepts are more significant than others. To go further than merely summarize, quantitative text analysis was used so that our review would be more than just descriptive statistics and qualitatively comparing and present definitions. Textmining, also known as text data mining or knowledge discovery from textual databases, refers to the process of extracting interesting and non-trivial patterns or knowledge from text documents ( Feldman and Sanger, 2007 ; Witell et al. , 2016 ). The rationale for this process builds on social network theory, which describes linkages among social entities or nodes in a network and the implications of these linkages and can be used on text to determine which words are significant ( Xie, 2005 ; Witell et al. , 2016 ).

All selected articles were downloaded and definitions were captured in digital plain-text format. Each article was then coded according to several predetermined variables, such as context, definitions, approach and type of study (for example, empirical, conceptual) to describe the characteristics of the sample. The study analyzed the specific definition of positioning offered in each article; by “cleaning” the definitions from “positioning is defined as […]” and focusing only on the words included in the actual definition of the concept. In addition, all common words such as “and” or “of” were removed. All text were stemmed, a procedure that involves reducing all words with the same stem to a common form (Lovins, 1968; Witell et al. , 2016 ). By using this method, the five key perspectives were identified in the pool of positioning definitions.

4. Analysis and results

This section begins by describing the year-wise and journal-wise distribution of the 47 identified journal articles. The section then describes the conceptualizations of positioning proposed by previous studies.

4.1 Journal-wise distribution of articles

This classification was done to observe where positioning research is being published. Articles related to positioning were found to be published in 33 reputed peer-reviewed journals in different time periods ( Table 1 ). This number is encouraging for academicians concerned about identifying and selecting a channel for their positioning manuscripts. Among these reputed journals, the dominant outlet of positioning research have been the Journal of Marketing , Journal of Product and Innovation Management and Business Horizon.

4.2 Year-wise distribution of articles

Articles were classified based on their year of publication from 1969 to 2019 to identify the longitudinal pattern of academic research. Figure 2 shows that the emergence of publications on positioning started in 1969, followed by steady growth up until 1989. From 1990 onwards, it is clear from the figure that there is exponential growth till 2009. However, the trend line also indicates a decreasing pattern after 2010, which implies that the literature on positioning is decreasing. After 2010, only six papers were published, which is the lowest number of papers as compared to previous years. This concludes that there is a need for increasing concerns and interests on the positioning topic.

4.3 Conceptualization of positioning in the marketing discipline

Most of the authors have based their definitions on Ries and Trouts (1969) original description of positioning, i.e. they have made minor adjustments, but constructed their basic reasoning upon the words of Ries and Trout.

There are many diverse interpretations of positioning as each author has preferred his/her own definition and has viewed positioning through different perspectives. The various perspectives from which positioning are viewed by most of the authors are listed in Table 2 . It provides a description of each perspective, and denotes how many times each perspective is found in the pool of positioning definitions.

Although these core perspectives all represent fundamental elements of the concept that delineates positioning, they were not all captured by every definition. Each perspective is discussed in turn.

4.3.1 P1 – Competition.

The “Competition” (P1) perspective as already mentioned is found in 56 of the 152 (39%) definitions listed in Appendix . This perspective underlies the idea that positioning helps in creating an image for the product in relative to separate or apart from competitors. The perspective (P1) is clearly articulated in several of the definitions, and in particular, that offered by Kapferer (2004) , “Positioning means emphasizing the distinctive characteristics that make it different from its competitors and appealing to the public”. Similarly, Kotler (2003) defined “Positioning as an act of designing a company’s offering and image so that they occupy a meaningful and distinct competitive position in the target market’s minds”. Many others (including Aaker and Shansby, 1982 ; Belch and Belch, 1995 ; Kotler and Anderson, 1996 ; Lovelock et al. , 2014 ; McIntyre, 1975 ) also included this perspective in their definitions.

4.3.2 P2 – Empty slot/mind.

The perspective “Empty slot/Mind” (P2) captures the idea that the act of positioning seeks to find and fill an empty slot/window in the minds of the prospective buyers. P2 is evident in several definitions as listed in Appendix . This perspective is also dominant as it was identified in 55 of the 152 (36%) positioning definitions. The “Empty slot/Mind” perspective is rooted in Ries and Trout’s (1969) seminal work on positioning and in particular, the popularity of the phrase “filling a slot in the minds of the target customers”. P2 is clearly asserted in several definitions, for instance, in Crawford et al. (1983) “Product positioning is the act of creating and altering product perceptions in customers’ minds”. Similarly, P2 is asserted in Wright’s (1997) definition stating “Positioning involves and owning a territory in the mind of the consumer it’s not just occupying the position, but owning it”, and in Boone and Kurtz’s (2009) definition stating “Positioning is placing at a certain point or location within a market in the minds of prospective buyers”.

4.3.3 P3 – consumers’ perception.

The perspective “Consumers’ perception” (P3) captures the idea that the act of positioning seeks to purposefully establish or evoke changes in consumers’ minds regarding offering. P3 is evident in several definitions as listed in Appendix . This perspective was identified in 34 of the 152 (22 %) positioning definitions. P3 is clearly expressed in several of the definitions, and in particular, that offered by Sengupta (1990) “Positioning is the concept of perceptual space and consumers mind is regarded as a geometric perceptual space with product categories and brands occupying different points in that space”. Similarly, P3 is expressed in Arnott (1994) “Positioning is the deliberate, proactive, iterative process of defining, modifying and monitoring consumer perceptions of a marketable object”.

4.3.4 P4 – Differentiation.

The “Differentiation” (P4) perspective is evidenced in 19 of the 152 (13%) positioning definitions as listed in Appendix . This perspective captures the notion that creating meaningful differentiation in an offering represents a key aspect of the concept of positioning. P4 is clearly captured in Myers (1996) definition “Positioning refers to the problem of differentiating one’s own product/service from other competing entries in the market place”. Likewise, Zikmund and D’Amico (1989) define “Positioning as a process to identify salient product characteristics that differentiate the brand from competitive brands”. P4 is consistent with the widely accepted view that differentiating an offering is a cornerstone to the positioning of a product, and therein, the success of the brand in the marketplace ( Wind, 1982 ; Bhat and Reddy, 1998 ; Hooley et al. , 1998 ).

4.3.5 P5 – Competitive advantage.

The “Competitive advantage” perspective, is evident only in 5 of the 152 (3%) of the definitions. This perspective underlies the idea that positioning helps in gaining a competitive advantage by implementing a value creating strategy not simultaneously being implemented by any current or potential competitors. P5 is clearly articulated in several of the definitions as listed in Appendix , and in particular, that offered by Palmer (1994) “Positioning is an attempt by the organization to distinguish its offerings from those of its competitors in order to give it a competitive advantage within the market”. Hooley et al. (1998) also articulated the same in their definition, “Positioning is the act of designing the company’s offering and image so that they occupy a meaningful and distinct competitive advantage”. P6 is consistent with the widely accepted view that a well-positioned brand enhances the overall competitiveness of the brand and generates a sustainable competitive advantage for the firm Aaker and McLoughlin (2007) , Blankson et al. (2013) , Ghodeshwar (2008) , Hooley et al. (2012) , Kotler (2003) , Porter (1996) . Accepting the view that competitive advantage represents the cornerstone of the positioning concept, the researcher found it surprising that only five definitions from the pool captured this perspective.

Based on (1) the core perspectives as discussed in the foregoing Section (2) the recognized need for an universally-accepted definition of positioning (3) the inconsistencies of the core meaning of the positioning construct and the researcher’s conviction that marketing research begins with a clear underlying meaning of the phenomenon in question, following definition of positioning encompassing the five underlying positioning perspectives is suggested:

Positioning is a strategy of finding the desired consumer perception of product/brand and filling an empty slot/window in the minds of the target customers by creating and communicating an image which differentiates its unique position from competitor to gain a competitive advantage in the market.

5. Research implications

On the theoretical front, this review makes multiple contributions. First, the study presents a comprehensive systematic review of 152 identified articles in the marketing discipline to reveal how researchers have explored this concept so far and presents a route for future research. Second, this review makes a contribution to understanding what positioning is. Specifically, this research contributes by identifying the key perspectives in definitions of positioning. Gaining insights from existing conceptualizations of the construct and supporting that by the theoretical foundations, a concise definition, broad in scope and perspective, has been derived, the suggested definition will provide clearer comprehension of the concept of positioning and a base on which to advance empirical research on positioning. Third, by providing the distribution schema of customer engagement articles based on different criteria, this study is believed to serve as a valuable tool for researchers to understand the current scenario of positioning research in the marketing discipline and aid in moving the field forward. On the practical front, this study exhibits the favorable outcomes organizations can derive by having a proper definition of positioning. Developing and implementing an organization’s positioning is seen as a crucial element of an organization’s strategic orientation to markets. The more an organization knows about positioning, the better adept it will be to enact so. Therefore, understanding positioning is imperative in that regard; this review will help organizations comprehend that better. Further, understanding how various perspectives are connected with positioning will help managers to design and implement positioning strategies for their products/brands and allow organizations to gain competitive advantage.

6. Conclusion and limitations

The goal of this systematic review was to review state-of-the-art literature on product/brand positioning to re-examine the positioning concept and developing a more comprehensive definition from a theoretical viewpoint. Positioning has been defined in several nuanced ways. This fragmentation can be misleading, and a systematic review can provide a useful analysis to highlight the fragmentation and propose boundaries to better define positioning. However, a systematic review also has its own methodological limitations, including the level of precision. To tackle this limitation, we started broadly and then focused on specific databases and research terms. Although some dimensions might have been missed, we believe our conclusions obtained a reasonable level of redundancy in the databases that we used for this study. We also wanted to contribute to the literature and hope that further research on this important strategic concept will refine and clarify our results. This systematic review presented the results of an analysis and synthesis of the broader positioning literature. A review of 152 published positioning studies from the literatures identified the various perspectives from which positioning are viewed by most of the authors. The five most frequently identified perspectives were competition, empty slot/mind, consumers’ perception, differentiation and competitive advantage. Importantly, the findings of this review confirm that despite the relatively established body of literature, there is there is lack of coherent definition for positioning, and there is no mutual agreement among marketing scholars and practitioners about the exact meaning of the concept.

literature review on advertising strategy

Flow diagram of article selection process

literature review on advertising strategy

Number of positioning (definition) related articles (1969–2017)

Journal-wise distribution of articles

Core perspectives of positioning

Overview of positioning definitions

Aaker , D.A. and McLoughlin , D. ( 2007 ), Strategic Market Management , European Edition , John Wiley & Sons , West Sussex .

Aaker , D.A. and Shansby , J. ( 1982 ), “ Positioning your product ”, Business Horizons , Vol. 25 No. 3 , pp. 56 - 62 .

Abril , C. , Gavilan , D.Y. and Avello , M. ( 2009 ), “ Influence of the perception of different types of store brands on consumer typologies and satisfaction levels ”, Innovative Marketing , Vol. 5 , pp. 475 - 482 .

Adcock , D. , Bradfield , R. , Halborg , A. and Ross , C. ( 1993 ), Marketing-Principles and Practice , Pitman Publishing , London .

Alba , J.W. and Chattopadhyay , A. ( 1986 ), “ Salience effects in brand recall ”, Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 23 No. 4 , pp. 363 - 369 .

Alpert , L. and Gatty , R. ( 1969 ), “ Product positioning by behavioral life-styles ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 33 No. 2 , pp. 65 - 69 .

Antonides , G. and Van Raaij , F.W. ( 1998 ), Consumer Behaviour: A European Perspective , John Wiley and Sons , Chichester .

Apostolidis , P. , Kioulafas , K.K. , Sohoritis , Y. and Viachakis , N. ( 1989 ), “ The ABC’s of positioning ”, Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy , Vol. 15 , pp. 1063 - 1077 .

Armstrong , G. and Kotler , P. ( 2012 ), Marketing: An Introduction , 11th ed., Pearson Education , London .

Arnott , D.C. ( 1992 ), “ Bases of financial services positioning in the personal pension, life assurance and personal equity plan sectors ”, PhD thesis, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester , Manchester .

Arnott , D.C. ( 1994 ), “ Positioning: on defining the concept ”, Marketing Educators’ Group (MEG) Conference Proceedings , University of Ulster , Coleraine .

Auken , S. and Lonial , S.C. ( 1991 ), “ Multidimensional scaling and retail positioning: an appraisal ”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management , Vol. 19 No. 3 , pp. 11 - 18 .

Bainsfair , P. ( 1990 ), “ Create your own context and find a place in a public mind ”, Campaign , Vol. 16 , (November) , p. 18 .

Baker , M.J. ( 1992 ), Marketing Strategy and Management , 2nd ed., Macmillan , London .

Baker , M.J. and Hart , S.J. ( 2007 ), Product Strategy and Management , 2nd ed., Pearson Education , Harlow .

Batra , S.K. and Kazmi , S. ( 2008 ), Consumer Behaviour , 2nd ed., Excel Books , New Delhi .

Belch , G.E. and Belch , M.A. ( 1995 ), Advertising and Promotion: An Integrated Marketing Communication Perspective , Richard D. Irwin , Chicago, IL .

Berkowitz , N.E. , Kerin , A.R. and Rudelius , W. ( 1989 ), Marketing , 2nd ed., Irwin , London .

Berkowitz , E.N. , Kerin , R.A. , Hartley , S.W. and Rudelius , W. ( 1992 ), Marketing , 3rd ed., Irwin , London .

Berry , L.L. ( 1982 ), “ Retail positioning strategies for the 1980’s ”, Business Horizons , Vol. 25 No. 6 , pp. 45 - 50 .

Bhat , S. and Reddy , S.K. ( 1998 ), “ Symbolic and functional positioning of brands ”, Journal of Consumer Marketing , Vol. 15 No. 1 , pp. 32 - 43 .

Blankson , C. and Crawford , J.C. ( 2012 ), “ Impact of positioning strategies on service firm performance ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 65 , pp. 311 - 316 .

Blankson , C. and Kalafatis , S.P. ( 2004 ), “ The development and validation of a scale measuring consumer/customer-derived generic typology of positioning strategies ”, Journal of Marketing Management , Vol. 20 Nos 1/2 , pp. 5 - 43 .

Blankson , C. and Kalafatis , S.P. ( 2007 ), “ Positioning strategies of international and multicultural‐oriented service brands ”, Journal of Services Marketing , Vol. 21 No. 6 , pp. 435 - 450 .

Blankson , C. , Kalafatis , S.P. , Cheng , J.M.S. and Hadjicharalambous , C. ( 2008 ), “ Impact of positioning strategies on corporate performance ”, Journal of Advertising Research , Vol. 48 No. 1 , pp. 106 - 122 .

Blankson , C. , Cowan , K. , Crawford , J. , Kalafatis , S. , Singh , J. and Coffie , S. ( 2013 ), “ A review of the relationships and impact of market orientation and market positioning on organisational performance ”, Journal of Strategic Marketing , Vol. 21 No. 6 , pp. 499 - 512 .

Blythe , J. ( 2005 ), Marketing Strategy , McGraw-Hill Education , Berkshire .

Blythe , J. ( 2008 ), Essentials of Marketing , Pearson Education , London .

Boatswain , M.L. ( 2015 ), “ Decoy effects in brand positioning ”, Unpublished PhD thesis, Kingston University , West Yorkshire .

Boone , L.E. and Kurtz , D.L. ( 2009 ), Contemporary Business 2010 Update , John Wiley and Sons , Chichester .

Botha , C. , Crompton , J. and Kim , S. ( 1999 ), “ Developing a revised competitive position for sun/lost city, South Africa ”, Journal of Travel Research , Vol. 37 No. 4 , pp. 341 - 352 .

Bradley , M.F. and Mealey , J.A. ( 1984 ), “ Brand positioning in a consumer products market ”, Journal of Irish Business and Administrative Research , Vol. 6 No. 1 , pp. 12 - 20 .

Briner , D. and Denyer , D. ( 2012 ), “ Systematic review and evidence synthesis as a practice and scholarship tool ”, in Rousseau , D.M. (Ed.), Handbook of Evidence-Based Management: Companies, Classrooms and Research , Oxford University Press , New York, NY , pp. 112 - 129 .

Brooksbank , R. ( 1994 ), “ The anatomy of marketing positioning strategy ”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning , Vol. 12 No. 4 , pp. 10 - 15 .

Brown , J.H. and Oplatka , I. ( 2006 ), “ Universities in a competitive global marketplace: a systematic review of the literature on higher education marketing ”, International Journal of Public Sector Management , Vol. 19 No. 4 , pp. 316 - 338 .

Brown , H.E. and Sims , J.T. ( 1976 ), “ Market segmentation, product differentiation and market positioning as alternative marketing strategies ”, in Bernhardt , K.L. (Ed.), Marketing: 1776-1976 and beyond, Educators Conference Proceedings Series No. 39 , American Marketing Association , Chicago, IL , pp. 483 - 487 .

Burton , J. and Easingwood , C.J. ( 2006 ), “ A positioning typology of consumers’ perceptions of the benefits offered by successful service brands ”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services , Vol. 13 No. 5 , pp. 301 - 316 .

Buzzel , R.N. , Mathews , J. and Levitt , T. ( 1972 ), Marketing: A Contemporary Analysis , Mc Graw Hill , New York, NY .

Chandrasekar , K.S. ( 2010 ), Marketing Management Text and Cases , Tata McGraw-Hill Publication , New Delhi .

Cherunilam , F. ( 2010 ), Business Policy and Strategic Management , Himalaya punishing Houses , New Delhi .

Chew , C. ( 2005 ), “ Strategic marketing planning and positioning in voluntary nonprofit organizations: empirical findings and implications for British charitable organizations ”, Aston Business School Research Paper , Aston University , Birmingham , Vol. RP0506 No. May.

Clement , M. and Werner-Grotemeyer , H. ( 1990 ), “ The iterative positioning process: an internal approach from the pharmaceutical industry ”, Marketing and Research Today , Vol. 18 , pp. 85 - 96 .

Clow , K.E. and Baack , D. ( 2009 ), Marketing Management: A Customer-Oriented Approach , Sage Publications , London .

Corstjens , M. and Doyle , P. ( 1989 ), “ Evaluating alternative retail repositioning strategies ”, Marketing Science , Vol. 8 No. 2 , pp. 170 - 180 .

Cravens , D.W. and Piercy , N.F. ( 2009 ), Strategic Marketing , 9th ed., McGraw Hill Irwin , Boston .

Crawford , C.M. ( 1985 ), “ A new positioning topology ”, Journal of Product Innovation Management , Vol. 2 No. 4 , pp. 243 - 253 .

Crawford , C.M. , Urban , D.J. and Buzas , T.E. ( 1983 ), “ A conceptual review and taxonomy of alternatives ”, working paper No 354 , University of Michigan .

Cronshaw , M. , Cubbin , J. and Davis , E. ( 1990 ), “ The importance of product positioning: successful entry in the national newspaper market ”, Business Strategy Review , Vol. 1 No. 3 , pp. 53 - 73 .

Crosier , K. ( 1981 ), “ Ladders in the mind Occasional Reports Series, No. 2 ”, University of Strathclyde: Department of Marketing , Glasgow .

Czinkota , M.R. and Ronkainen , L.A. ( 2004 ), International Marketing , 4th ed., SouthWestern , Mason .

Dahlen , M. , Lange , F. and Smith , T. ( 2010 ), Marketing Communications: A Brand Narrative Approach , John Wiley and Sons , New York, NY .

Darling , J.R. ( 2001 ), “ Successful competitive positioning: the key for entry into the European consumer market ”, European Business Review , Vol. 13 No. 4 , pp. 209 - 221 .

Day , G.S. ( 1984a ), Strategic Market Planning , West Publishing Company , St. Paul, MN .

Day , G.S. ( 1984b ), Strategic Market Planning , West Publishing , New York, NY .

Day , G. , Weitz , B. and Wensley , R. ( 1990 ), The Interface of Marketing Strategy , JAI Press , Greenwich, CT , pp. 387 - 412 .

de Chernatony , L. ( 1994 ), “ Developing a more effective brand positioning ”, Journal of Brand Management , Vol. 1 No. 6 , pp. 373 - 379 .

de Chernatony , L. ( 2009 ), “ Brand extension effects on brand equity: a cross-national study ”, Journal of Euromarketing , Vol. 8 No. 2 , pp. 71 - 88 .

Delozier , W.M. and Woodside , A.G. ( 1978 ), Marketing Management , Merril Publishing Company , Columbus, OH .

DeSarbo , W.S. , Park , J. and Rao , V.R. ( 2011 ), “ Deriving joint space positioning maps from consumer preference ratings ”, Marketing Letters , Vol. 22 No. 1 , pp. 1 - 14 .

Devlin , J. , Ennew , C. and Mirza , M. ( 1995 ), “ Organizational positioning in retail financial services ”, Journal of Marketing Management , Vol. 11 Nos 1/3 , pp. 119 - 132 .

Dibb , S. and Simkin , L. ( 1993 ), “ The strength of branding and positioning in services ”, International Journal of Service Industry Management , Vol. 4 No. 1 , pp. 25 - 35 .

Dillon , W.R. , Domzal , T. and Madden , T.J. ( 1986 ), “ Evaluating alternative product positioning strategies ”, Journal of Advertising Research , Vol. 26 No. 4 , pp. 29 - 35 .

DiMingo , E. ( 1988 ), “ The fine art of positioning ”, Journal of Business Strategy , Vol. 9 No. 2 , pp. 34 - 39 .

Diwan , S.P. and Bodla , B. ( 2011 ), “ Development of empirically based customer-derive positioning typology in the automobile industry ”, Journal of Strategic Marketing , Vol. 19 No. 6 , pp. 531 - 550 .

Dovel , G.P. ( 1990 ), “ Stake it out; positioning success, step by step ”, Business Marketing , Vol. 5 , pp. 43 - 51 .

Droge , C. and Darmon , R.Y. ( 1987 ), “ Associative positioning strategies through comparative advertising: attribute versus overall similarity approaches ”, Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 24 No. 4 , pp. 377 - 388 .

Easingwood , C.J. and Mahajan , V. ( 1989 ), “ Positioning of financial services for competitive advantage ”, Journal of Product Innovation Management , Vol. 6 No. 3 , pp. 207 - 219 .

Engel , J.F. , Blackwell , R.D. and Miniard , P.W. ( 1993 ), Consumer Behavior , 7th ed., The Dryden Press , Orlando, FL .

Ennew , C.T. ( 1993 ), The Marketing Blueprint , Blackwell Business , Oxford .

Ennew , J.C. and Mirza , M. ( 1995 ), “ Organisational positioning in retail financial services ”.

Esch , F.R. ( 2010 ), Strategy and Technique of Brand Management , Vahlen , Munich .

Ensor , J. and Drummond , G. ( 1999 ), Strategic Marketing: Planning and Control , Butterworth Heinemann , Oxford .

Esch , F.R. ( 2005 ), “ Brand positioning as the basis of brand management ”, in Esch , F.-R. (Ed.), Modern Brand Management – Basics. Innovative Approaches, Practical Implementations , 4th ed., Business publishing house , Wiesbaden , pp. 131 - 163 .

Evans , E. ( 2003 ), “ Market segmentation ”, in Baker , M.J. (Ed.) The Marketing Book , 5th ed., Butterworth Heinemann , Oxford .

Evans , J.R. and Barman , B. ( 1988 ), Principles of Marketing , 2nd ed., Macmillan Publishing Company , New York, NY , pp. 167 - 169 .

Feldman , R. and Sanger , J. ( 2007 ), The Textmining Handbook: Advanced Approaches in Analyzing Unstructured Data , Cambridge University Press .

Ferrel , P. ( 1997 ), Marketing , 10th ed., Harvard Business School Publications , Boston, MA .

Fill , C. ( 1999 ), Marketing Communications: Contexts, Contents and Strategies , 2nd ed., Prentice Hall , Hemel Hempstead .

Fill , C. ( 2006 ), Marketing Communications – Engagement, Strategies and Practice , 4th ed., Prentice Hall , Edinburgh .

Fisher , R.J. ( 1991 ), “ Durable differentiation strategies for services ”, Journal of Services Marketing , Vol. 5 No. 1 , pp. 19 - 28 .

Font , X. ( 1997 ), “ Managing the tourist destination image ”, Journal of Vacation Marketing , Vol. 3 No. 2 , pp. 123 - 131 .

Friedmann , R. and Lessig , P.V. ( 1987 ), “ Psychological meaning of products and product positioning ”, Journal of Product Innovation Management , Vol. 4 No. 4 , pp. 265 - 273 .

Fuchs , C. ( 2008 ), “ Brand positioning through the consumers’ lens ”, Unpublished PhD thesis, Universitat Wien , Betreuerin .

Fuchs , C. and Diamantopoulos , A. ( 2010 ), “ Evaluating the effectiveness of brand-positioning strategies from a consumer perspective ”, European Journal of Marketing , Vol. 44 Nos 11/12 , pp. 173 - 1786 .

Fuchs , C. and Diamantopoulos , A. ( 2012 ), “ Customer perceived positioning effectiveness: conceptualization, operationalization, and implications for new product managers ”, Journal of Product Innovation Management , Vol. 29 No. 2 , pp. 229 - 244 .

Gartner , W. ( 1989 ), “ Tourism image: attribute measurement of state tourism products using multidimensional scaling techniques ”, Journal of Travel Research , Vol. 28 No. 2 , pp. 16 - 20 .

Ghodeshwar , B.M. ( 2008 ), “ Building brand identity in competitive markets: a conceptual model ”, Journal of Product and Brand Management , Vol. 17 No. 1 , pp. 4 - 12 .

Gwin , C.F. and Gwin , C.R. ( 2003 ), “ Product attributes model: a tool for evaluating brand positioning ”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice , Vol. 11 No. 2 , pp. 30 - 42 .

Hankinson , G. and Cowking , P. ( 1997 ), “ Branding in practice: the profile and role of brand managers in the UK ”, Journal of Marketing Management , Vol. 13 No. 4 , pp. 239 - 264 .

Hartmann , P. , Ibanez , V. and Sainz , F. ( 2005 ), “ Green branding effects on attitude: functional versus emotional positioning strategies ”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning , Vol. 23 No. 1 , pp. 9 - 29 .

Hollensen , S. ( 2010 ), Marketing Management: A Relationship Approaches , 2nd ed., Pearson Education , New York, NY .

Holmes , J.H. ( 1973 ), “ Profitable product positioning ”, MSU Business Topics , Vol. 21 , pp. 27 - 32 .

Holmes , J.H. ( 1974 ), “ Profitable positioning for retailers ”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , Vol. 2 No. 2 , pp. 332 - 339 .

Hooley , G.J. , Saunders , J.A. and Piercy , N.F. ( 1998 ), Marketing Strategy and Competitive Positioning , 2nd ed., Prentice Hall , London .

Hooley , G. , Nigel , F.P. and Nicoulaud , B. ( 2012 ), Marketing Strategy and Competitive Positioning , Prentice Hall/Financial Times , London .

Houston , F.S. and Hanieski , J.F. ( 1976 ), “ Pooled marketing and positioning ”, Journal of Advertising , Vol. 5 No. 1 , pp. 38 - 39 .

Husted , S.W. and Varble , D.L. ( 1999 ), Principles of Modern Marketing , Alyyn and Bacon Publishing , Boston .

Iyer , P. , Davarib , A. , Zolfagharianc , M. and Paswand , A. ( 2018 ), “ Market orientation, positioning strategy and brand performance ”, Industrial Marketing Management , Vol. 81 No. 1 , pp. 16 - 29 .

Jain , S.C. ( 1990 ), Marketing Planning and Strategy , 3rd ed., South Western Publishing , Cincinnati, OH .

Jalkala , A.M. and Keranen , J. ( 2014 ), “ Brand positioning strategies for industrial firms providing customer solutions ”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing , Vol. 29 No. 3 , pp. 253 - 264 .

Javalgi , R.G. , Benoy , J.W. and Gombeski , W.R. ( 1995 ), “ Positioning your service to target key buying influences: the case of referring physicians and hospitals ”, Journal of Services Marketing , Vol. 9 No. 5 , pp. 42 - 52 .

Jewell , R.D. ( 2007 ), “ Establishing effective repositioning communications in a competitive marketplace ”, Journal of Marketing Communications , Vol. 13 No. 4 , pp. 231 - 241 .

Jobber , D. ( 1995 ), Principles and Practice of Marketing , McGraw-Hill Book Company , London .

Johansson , J.K. and Thorelli , H.B. ( 1985 ), “ International product positioning ”, Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 16 No. 3 , pp. 57 - 75 .

Kalafatis , S.P. , Tsogas , M. and Blankson , C. ( 2000 ), “ Positioning strategies in business markets ”, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing , Vol. 15 No. 6 , pp. 416 - 437 .

Kalra , A. and Goodstein , R.C. ( 1998 ), “ The impact of advertising positioning strategies on consumer price sensitivity ”, Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 35 No. 2 , pp. 210 - 224 .

Kapferer , J. ( 2012 ), The New Strategic Brand Management: Advanced Insights and Strategic Thinking , 5th ed., Kogan Page , London .

Kapferer , J.-N. ( 2004 ), The New Strategic Brand Management , 3rd ed., Kogan Page , London .

Kardon , B.E. ( 1992 ), “ Consumer schizophrenia: extremism in the marketplace ”, Planning Review , Vol. 20 No. 4 , pp. 18 - 22 .

Kaul , A. and Rao , V.R. ( 1995 ), “ Research for product positioning and design decisions: an integrative review ”, International Journal of Research in Marketing , Vol. 12 No. 4 , pp. 293 - 320 .

Kazmi , A. ( 2007 ), “ Knowledge management for strategic management: nothing more, nothing less ”, Pranjana: The Journal of Management Awareness , Vol. 10 No. 1 , pp. 31 - 40 .

Keegan , W.J. ( 1995 ), Global Marketing Management , 5th ed., Prentice-Hall International , Englewood Cliffs, NJ .

Keller , K.L. ( 2003 ), Strategic Brand Management , Pearson Prentice Hall , Upper Saddle River, NJ .

Keller , K.L. ( 2009 ), “ Building strong brands in a modern marketing communications environment ”, Journal of Marketing Communications , Vol. 15 Nos 2/3 , pp. 139 - 155 .

Kerin , R. , Hartley , S. and Rudelius , W. ( 2010 ), Marketing , McGraw Hill , New York, NY .

Kim , C. and Mauborgne , R. ( 2000 ), “ Knowing a winning business idea when you see one ”, Harvard Business Review , pp. 129 - 138 .

Kinnear , T.C. , Bernhardt , K.L. and Krentler , K.A. ( 1995 ), Principles of Marketing , 4th ed., Harper Collins College Publishers , New York, NY .

Knox , S. ( 2004 ), “ Positioning and branding your organization ”, Journal of Product and Brand Management , Vol. 13 No. 2 , pp. 105 - 115 .

Kohli , C.S. and Leuthesser , L. ( 1993 ), “ Product positioning: a comparison of perceptual mapping techniques ”, Journal of Product and Brand Management , Vol. 2 No. 4 , pp. 10 - 19 .

Kotler , P. ( 2003 ), Marketing Management , 11th ed., Prentice-Hall , Englewood Cliffs, NJ .

Kotler , P. and Armstrong , G. ( 1996 ), Marketing: An Introduction , 4th ed., Prentice-Hall International , Upper Saddle River, NJ .

Kotler , P. , Keller , K.L. and Bliemel , F. ( 2005 ), Marketing Management , Pearson Stadium , Munchen .

Kotler , P. and Anderson , A.R. ( 1996 ), Strategic Marketing for Non-Profit Organizations , 5th ed., Prentice-Hall , Upper Saddle River, NJ .

Kroeber-Riel , W. and Esch , F.R. ( 2000 ), Strategy and Technology of Advertising , Kohlhammer , Stutgart, Berlin, Koln .

Lakshmi , K. , Santhana , K. , Jasim , K. , Prabhakar . and Jahira , P. ( 2017 ), “ Brand positioning of ayurvedic medicine in Indian milieu ”, International Journal of Business Excellence , Vol. 11 No. 1 , pp. 16 - 37 .

Lamb , C.W. and Cravens , D.W. ( 1990 ), “ Services marketing: reaching the customer and creating satisfaction ”, Business , pp. 13 - 19 .

Lamb , C.W. , Hair , J.F. and McDaniel , C. ( 2004 ), Principles of Marketing , South-Western Publishing , Cincinnati, OH .

Lamb , C. , McDaniel , C. , Shearer , J. , Kapoor , H. , Hair , J. , Boivin , M. and Appleby , R. ( 2010 ), Marketing Management , 10th ed., South-Western CENGAGE Learning , Mason, OH , pp. 45 - 46 .

Lautman , M.R. ( 1993 ), “ The ABCs of positioning ”, Marketing Research , Vol. 5 No. 1 , pp. 12 - 18 .

Lee , C.-W. and Liao , C.-S. ( 2009 ), “ The effects of consumer preferences and perceptions of Chinese tea beverages on brand positioning strategies ”, British Food Journal , Vol. 111 No. 1 , pp. 80 - 96 .

Lendrevie , J. , Lévy , J. and Lindon , D. ( 2003 ), Mercator: Theory and Practice of the Marketing , Dalloz , Paris .

Lilien , G.L. and Rangaswamy , A. ( 2003 ), Marketing Engineering: Computer-Assisted Marketing Analysis and Planning , Prentice Hall , Upper Saddle River, NJ .

Lodish , L.M. ( 1986 ), The Advertising and Promotion Challenge: Vaguely Right or Precisely Wrong? , Oxford University Press , New York, NY .

Lombard , M. , Snyder-Duch , J. and Bracken , C.C. ( 2004 ), “ A call for standardization in content analysis reliability ”, Human Communication Research , Vol. 30 , pp. 434 - 437 .

Loudon , D.L. and Della , A.J. B. ( 1993 ), Consumer Behavior: Concepts and Applications , 4th ed., McGraw-Hill , New York, NY .

Lovelock , C.H. ( 1984 ), Services Marketing , Prentice Hall , Englewood Cliffs, NJ .

Lovelock , E. , Patterson , P.G. and Wirtz , J. ( 2014 ), Services Marketing , 6th ed., Pearson , London .

MacInnis , D.J. ( 2011 ), “ A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 75 No. 4 , pp. 136 - 154 .

Maggard , J.P. ( 1976 ), “ Positioning revisited ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 40 No. 1 , pp. 63 - 66 .

Margulies , W.P. ( 1977 ), “ Make the most of your corporate identity ”, Harvard Business Review , pp. 66 - 74 .

Marsden , P. ( 2002 ), “ Brand positioning: meme’s the word ”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning , Vol. 20 No. 5 , pp. 307 - 312 .

Masterson , R. and Pickton , D. ( 2004 ), Marketing: An Introduction , McGraw-Hill Higher Education .

Mazanec , J.A. ( 1995 ), “ Positioning analysis with self-organizing maps: an exploratory study on luxury hotels ”, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly , Vol. 36 No. 6 , pp. 80 - 95 .

McIntyre , D.R. ( 1975 ), “ Multinational positioning strategy ”, Columbia Journal of World Business , Vol. 10 No. 3 , pp. 106 - 110 .

Muhlbacher , H. , Dreher , A. and Ritter , G.A. ( 1994 ), “ MIPS – managing industrial positioning strategies ”, Industrial Marketing Management , Vol. 23 No. 4 , pp. 287 - 297 .

Myers , J.H. ( 1996 ), Segmentation and Positioning for Strategic Marketing Decisions , American Marketing Association , Chicago, IL .

Nash , E.L. ( 1982 ), Direct Marketing. Strategy, Planning, Execution , McGraw-Hill Book Company , New York, NY .

Oglivy , D. ( 1983 ), Confessions of an Advertising Man , Ballantine Books , New York, NY .

Oliver , G. ( 1995 ), Marketing Today , 4th ed., Prentice-Hall , Hemel Hempstead .

O’Shaughnessy , J. ( 1995 ), Competitive Marketing: A Strategic Approach , 3rd ed., Routledge , London .

Palmer , A. ( 1994 ), Principles of Services Marketing , McGraw-Hill Book Company , Maidenhead .

Pandaa , S. , Paswana , K. and Mishrab , S. ( 2018 ), “ Impact of positioning strategies on franchise fee structure ”, Industrial Marketing Management , Vol. 81 No. 1 , pp. 30 - 39 .

Park , C.W. and Zaitman , G. ( 1987 ), Marketing Management , Dryden Press , Chicago IL .

Park , C.W. , Jaworski , B.J. and MacInnis , D.J. ( 1986 ), “ Strategic brand concept image management ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 50 No. 4 , pp. 135 - 145 .

Percy , L. and Elliot , R. ( 2007 ), Strategic Brand Management , Oxford University Press , New York, NY .

Perreault , D.W. , Jr and McCarthy , E.J. ( 1996 ), Essentials of Marketing: A Global Managerial Approach , 10th ed., McGraw- Hill Irwin , Boston , pp. 72 - 75 .

Pham , M.T. and Muthukrishnan , A.V. ( 2002 ), “ Search and alignment in judgment revision: implications for brand positioning ”, Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 39 No. 1 , pp. 18 - 30 .

Pike , S. and Page , S. ( 2014 ), “ Destination marketing organizations and destination marketing: a narrative analysis of the literature ”, Tourism Management , Vol. 41 , pp. 1 - 26 .

Patti , C.H. and Frazer , C.F. ( 1988 ), Advertising: A Decision Making Approach , Dryden Press , Chicago .

Pollay , R.W. ( 1985 ), “ The subsidizing sizzle: a descriptive history of print advertising, 1900-1980 ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 50 , pp. 135 - 145 .

Porter , M.E. ( 1996 ), “ What is strategy? ”, Harvard Business Review , Vol. 74 No. 6 , pp. 61 - 78 .

Punj , G. and Moon , J. ( 2002 ), “ Positioning options for achieving Brand association: a psychological categorization framework ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 55 No. 4 , pp. 275 - 283 .

Quelch , J.A. ( 1991 ), “ Product policy ”, in Dolan , R.J. (Ed.), Strategic Marketing Management , Harvard Business School Publications , Boston, MA .

Ramaswamy , V.S. and Namakumari ( 2002 ), Marketing Management , 3rd ed., Macmillan , New Delhi .

Rao , V.R. and Steckel , J.H. ( 1998 ), Analysis for Strategic Marketing , Addison- Wesley , Reading, MA .

Reidenbach , R.E. and Pitts , R.E. ( 1986 ), “ Not all CEOs are created equal as advertising spokespersons: evaluating the effective CEO spokesperson ”, Journal of Advertising , Vol. 15 No. 1 , pp. 30 - 46 .

Richarme , M. ( 2007 ), “ Positioning–marketing’s fifth ‘P ”, Decision Analyst , available at: www.Decisionanalyst.com/media/downloads/MarketingFifthP.pdf

Ries , A. and Trout , J. ( 1969 ), “ Positioning is a game people play in today’s me-too market place ”, Industrial Marketing , Vol. 54 No. 6 , pp. 51 - 55 .

Ries , A. and Trout , J. ( 1972 ), The Positioning Era Cometh”, Reprint of a Three-Part Series in Advertising Age , Crain Publications , Chicago .

Ries , A. and Trout , J. ( 1981 ), Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind , McGraw Hill , New York, NY .

Ries , A. and Trout , J. ( 1986 ), Marketing Warfare , Plume Books , New York, NY .

Riezebos , R. and van der Grinten , J. ( 2012 ), Positioning the Brand: An inside-out Approach , Routledge .

Rigger , W. ( 1995 ), “ Positioning in theory and practice, towards a research agenda ”, 24th EMAC Conference Proceedings, 1 (May), ESSEC France , pp. 991 - 1009 .

Romaniuk , J. ( 2001 ), “ Brand positioning in financial services: a longitudinal test to find the best Brand position ”, Journal of Financial Services Marketing , Vol. 6 No. 2 , pp. 111 - 121 .

Roscoe , A.D. and Lee , J.K. ( 1991 ), “ Positioning PCN ”, Cellular Business , February , pp. 42 - 46 .

Rossiter , J.R. and Bellman , S. ( 2005 ), Marketing Communications: Theory and Applications , Pearson Prentice Hall , Frenchs Forest .

Rothschild , M.L. ( 1987 ), Advertising – from Fundamentals to Strategies , Heath and Company , Lexington, MA, Toronto .

Runyon , K.E. ( 1982 ), The Practice of Marketing , Merril Publishing Company , Columbus, OH .

Sarel , D. ( 1980 ), “ Product positioning – a reassessment ”, in Lam , C. and Dunne , P. (Eds), Theoretical Developments in Marketing , American Marketing Association , Chicago .

Schiffman , G.L. and Kanuk , L.L. ( 2007 ), Consumer Behavior , Prentice Hall , Upper Saddle River, NJ .

Schouten , J.W. and McAlexander , J.H. ( 1989 ), “ Positioning services for competitive advantage: the case of duds ‘n suds source ”, Journal of Services Marketing , Vol. 3 No. 2 .

Sengupta , S. ( 1990 ), Brand Positioning: Strategies for Competitive Advantage , Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing , New Delhi .

Sengupta , S. ( 2005 ), Brand Positioning , McGraw Hill , New Delhi .

Shimp , A.T. ( 2010 ), Integrated Marketing Communication in Advertising and Promotion , 8th ed., Cengage Learning , South Western .

Shostack , G.L. ( 1987 ), “ Service positioning through structural change ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 51 No. 1 , pp. 34 - 43 .

Simkin , L.P. , Doyle , P. and Saunders , J. ( 1985 ), “ How retailers put site location techniques into operation: an assessment of major multiples’ practice ”, Retail and Distribution Management , Vol. 13 No. 3 , pp. 21 - 26 .

Smith , R.E. and Lusch , R.F. ( 1976 ), “ How advertising can position a brand ”, Journal of Advertising Research , Vol. 16 , pp. 37 - 43 .

Solomon , M. , Bamossy , G. , Askeegard , S. and Hogg , M. K. ( 2006 ), Consumer Behaviour a European Perspective , 3rd ed., Pearson Education , London .

Soundararaj , J.J. and Rengamani , J. ( 2002 ), “ The inevitability of ‘positioning’ in the present marketing scenario ”, Indian Journal of Marketing , Vol. 32 , pp. 3 - 5 .

Stanton , W.J. ( 1974 ), Fundamentals of Marketing , McGraw-Hill , Tokyo, Kogakusha .

Sujan , M. and Bettman , J.R. ( 1989 ), “ The effects of brand positioning strategies on consumers’ brand and category perceptions: some insights from schema research ”, Journal of Marketing Research , Vol. 26 , pp. 454 - 467 .

Suzuki , Y. ( 2000 ), “ The effect of airline positioning on profit ”, Transportation Journal , Vol. 39 No. 3 , pp. 44 - 54 .

Tranfield , D. , Denyer , D. and Smart , P. ( 2003 ), “ Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review ”, British Journal of Management , Vol. 14 No. 3 , pp. 207 - 222 .

Trommsdorf , V. and Paulssen , M. ( 2005 ), “ Measurement and design of Brand positioning ”, Modern Brand Management , Vol. 43 , pp. 1363 - 1379 .

Trommsdorf , V. ( 2002 ), Consumer Behavior , 4th ed., Stuttgart .

Trout , J. and Rivkin ( 1996 ), The New Positioning, the Latest on the World’s 1 Business Strategy , McGraw-Hill , New York, NY .

Tudor and Negricea ( 2012 ), “ Brand positioning − a marketing resource and an effective tool for small and medium enterprises ”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology , Vol. 8 , pp. 1 - 9 .

Tybout , A.M. and Sternthal , B. ( 2010 ), “ Developing a compelling brand positioning ”, in Management , T.M. , Tybout , A.M. and Calder , B.J. (Eds), Kellogg on Marketing , John Wiley and Sons , Hoboken, NJ , pp. 73 - 91 .

Uggla , H. ( 2006 ), Positioning: Theory, Trend and Startup , Liber AB , Malmo .

Urban , G.L. and Hauser , J.R. ( 1993 ), Design and Marketing of New Products , 2nd ed., Prentice Hall , NJ .

Urde , M. and Koch , C. ( 2014 ), “ Market and brand-oriented schools of positioning ”, Journal of Product and Brand Management , Vol. 23 No. 7 , pp. 478 - 490 .

Walker , O.C. , Boyd , H.W. and Larreche , J.C. ( 1996 ), Marketing Strategy: Planning and Implementation , Irwin , Chicago, IL .

Wells , W.D. and Prensky , D. ( 1996 ), Consumer Behavior , John Wiley , New York, NY .

Wilson , L. and Fenwick , C.I. ( 1978 ), “ A product positioning model: problems and possibilities ”, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 42 No. 2 , pp. 13 - 18 .

Wilson , R. and Giligan , C. ( 2005 ), Strategic Marketing Management: Planning, Implementation and Control , 3rd ed., Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann , Amsterdam .

Wind , Y. ( 1980 ), “ Going to market: new twist for some old tricks ”, The Wharton Magazine , Vol. 4 , pp. 34 - 39 .

Wind , Y. ( 1982 ), Product Policy, Concepts, Methods and Strategy , Addison-Wesley Publishing , Reading, MA .

Witell , L. , Snyder , H. , Gustafsson , A. , Fombelle , P. and Kristensson , P. ( 2016 ), “ Defining service innovation: a review and synthesis ”, Journal of Business Research , Vol. 69 No. 8 , pp. 2863 - 2872 .

Wright , M. ( 1997 ), “ When strength means death ”, Brand Strategy , Vol. 107 , pp. 3 - 5 .

Xie , Z. ( 2005 ), “ Centrality measures in textmining: prediction of noun phrases that appear in abstracts ”, Proceedings of the ACL student research workshop , Association for Computational Linguistics , Stroudsburg, PA , pp. 103 - 108 .

Yip , G.S. ( 1997 ), “ Patterns and determinants of global marketing ”, Journal of Marketing Management , Vol. 13 Nos 1/3 , pp. 153 - 164 .

Zikmund , W. and D’Amico , M. ( 1989 ), Marketing , 3rd ed., John Wiley , New York, NY .

Zineldin , M. ( 1996 ), “ Bank strategic positioning and some determinants of bank selection ”, International Journal of Bank Marketing , Vol. 14 No. 6 , pp. 12 - 22 .

Further reading

Crompton , J. , Fakeye , P. and Lue , C.C. ( 1992 ), “ Positioning: the example of the lower Rio Grande valley in the winter long stay destination market ”, Journal of Travel Research , Vol. 31 No. 2 , pp. 20 - 26 .

Dillman , D.A. ( 2011 ), Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method–2007 Update with New Internet, visuaL, and Mixed-Mode Guide , John Wiley and Sons , Hoboken, NJ .

Etzel , M. , Walker , B. and Stanton , W. ( 2007 ), Marketing , McGrawHill , New York, NY .

Jain , S.C. ( 2000 ), Market Planning and Strategy , 6th ed., South-Western College Publishing , Cincinnati .

Palmer , A. ( 2004 ), Introduction to Marketing: theory and Practice , Oxford University Press , Oxford .

Winer , R.S. ( 2007 ), Marketing Management , Prentice Hall , Upper Saddle River, NJ .

Witell , L. , Gustafsson , A. and Johnson , M.D. ( 2014 ), “ The effect of customer information during new product development on profits from goods and services ”, European Journal of Marketing , Vol. 48 Nos 9/10 , pp. 1709 - 1730 .

Corresponding author

Related articles, we’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

Syracuse University Libraries

IST 613: Library Planning, Marketing, and Assessment

  • Writing the Literature Review

Search Strategy Tools

Starting points in identifying sources, your google scholar, other sources to consult, interlibrary loan.

  • Literature Review Tools
  • Library and Information Science Guide This link opens in a new window
  • Contacts at SU Libraries
  • SU Libraries Events-Spring 2024
  • Search Strategy Development

The Constructing a Search worksheet is a useful tool for mapping concepts and potential searches prior to starting your search in a database:

Constructing a Search Worksheet    (PDF)

Constructing a Search Worksheet  (Word)

Search Options Summary

These databases are good starting points for your course project and iSchool research in general. They may contain a mix of journal articles, conference proceedings, and other content. 

Google Scholar will link to our full text online articles even off-campus if you set up your Syracuse University affiliation in Google Scholar Settings.  Follow the steps below.

NOTE:  Setting up Google Scholar to link to our library holdings   must be done when you are off-campus .

  • Go to  Google Scholar  (scholar.google.com)

More options icon in google scholar

  • Click on Library Links in the left column.
  • Type Syracuse University in the Library Links search box.
  • Select Syracuse University, Syracuse University Libraries – Gale Full Text, and Open WorldCat.
  • Click Save.
  • Full text links will be found in the right column of a search results page.  When no full-text link is given try clicking on the title and sometimes the full-text will be available.
  • Summon searches across SU Libraries holdings, including books (print and electronic) and other sources.
  • Journal Locator browse and search SU Libraries journals by title or subject.

For resources not in Syracuse University Libraries' collection, a request could be submitted via SU Libraries' Interlibrary Loan (ILL) Request Form . SU Libraries will request the item on your behalf. Articles and book chapters are typically sent to your SU email within 1-2 business days.

  • << Previous: Writing the Literature Review
  • Next: Literature Review Tools >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 13, 2024 3:37 PM
  • URL: https://researchguides.library.syr.edu/613
  • Print This Page
  • Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

CNN’s New Morning Strategy: More News, Less Banter

The change is the first major programming shift under CNN’s new leader, Mark Thompson.

A portrait of Mark Thompson, wearing a bright red tie and a gray suit, standing near a large window.

By Michael M. Grynbaum and Benjamin Mullin

CNN spent years trying to compete in the cutthroat realm of chatty morning TV, cycling through formats in the hopes of catching up to breakfast-time staples like “Morning Joe” and “Good Morning America.”

That experiment never quite caught on with viewers — and now it is coming to an end.

In his first significant programming move since joining the network in the fall , Mark Thompson, CNN’s chairman, announced on Monday that the channel would exit the morning chat-show format by the end of the month. Instead, its morning lineup will focus on straight news coverage, the kind of bread-and-butter reporting that Mr. Thompson, a former head of the BBC and The New York Times, has championed.

The co-anchors of “CNN This Morning,” Poppy Harlow and Phil Mattingly, are in discussions about new roles at the network.

“I’m very aware that today’s announcement means a great deal of uncertainty for many valued colleagues,” Mr. Thompson wrote in a memo to employees, adding that “change and uncertainty are inevitable in an industry undergoing a revolution.”

Ratings for “CNN This Morning” have lagged far behind its competitors, according to data from Nielsen. The show has drawn roughly 322,000 viewers on average this year, well behind “Fox and Friends” (1.07 million) and “Morning Joe” (988,000).

Ahead of Monday’s announcement, CNN executives had acknowledged internally that the lackluster viewership and relatively high expenses necessitated a change, according to a person familiar with the discussions who would speak only on the condition of anonymity to avoid straining relationships. Mr. Thompson had pondered what to do about those problems for months, culminating this weekend when he informed Mr. Mattingly and Ms. Harlow of his decision.

In the memo, Mr. Thompson noted that CNN had “decided to reshape how we approach mornings on domestic cable.” Among other changes, Jim Acosta, an anchor and former White House correspondent who had been hosting a weekend show, will return to weekdays with a 10 a.m. program.

CNN dived into the chummy, banter-filled morning show space in 2013 at the behest of its then-new president, Jeff Zucker, a “Today” alumnus. Mr. Zucker hired Chris Cuomo from ABC to co-host a show called “ New Day, ” with a glossy set and Manhattan-based production crew.

Mr. Zucker’s successor, Chris Licht, a co-creator of “Morning Joe,” tried his own spin on the format, renaming the show “CNN This Morning” in 2022. The setup was troubled from the start: A co-host, Don Lemon, had to apologize after making insensitive comments about women and aging, and he was eventually forced out of the network.

Monday’s move effectively eliminates one of the final vestiges of Mr. Licht’s time at the network; he was ousted in June . After his departure, CNN’s interim leaders — a group of four executives known internally as the Quad — put their own stamp on the network’s lineup, adding Mr. Mattingly as a permanent host.

Under the changes announced on Monday, the Manhattan-based morning crew will be disbanded, with oversight of early weekday programming shifted to Atlanta.

The move comes as CNN is looking for ways to save on costs as it tries a high-stakes transition to a digital-first future amid the industrywide decline of cable television. Warner Bros. Discovery, CNN’s parent company, is dealing with a significant debt load and has slashed costs at CNN since taking over the network in 2022.

Michael M. Grynbaum writes about the intersection of media, politics and culture. He has been a media correspondent at The Times since 2016. More about Michael M. Grynbaum

Benjamin Mullin reports on the major companies behind news and entertainment. Contact Ben securely on Signal at +1 530-961-3223 or email at [email protected]. More about Benjamin Mullin

IMAGES

  1. (PDF) Marketing Literature Review

    literature review on advertising strategy

  2. How to Write a Literature Review in 5 Simple Steps

    literature review on advertising strategy

  3. Advertising Strategy

    literature review on advertising strategy

  4. Get a Great Literature Review on Advertising Effectiveness

    literature review on advertising strategy

  5. Literature Review On Direct Marketing

    literature review on advertising strategy

  6. Celebrity Advertising: Literature Review and Propositions World Review

    literature review on advertising strategy

VIDEO

  1. How to Write a Literature Review

  2. Literature review in Educational Research

  3. Methods L04

  4. Mistake to Avoid in LITERATURE REVIEW INTRODUCTION

  5. What is Literature Review?

  6. Writing Literature review on history 2024

COMMENTS

  1. A Comprehensive Literature Review on Marketing Strategies ...

    Rashini Hansika Uva Wellassa University, Faculty of Management Date Written: December 20, 2022 Abstract Marketing is the process of promoting and selling products and services, including market research and advertising. Today, marketing is an essential part of any organization's growth strategy.

  2. The effectiveness of advertising: a literature review

    The effectiveness of advertising: a literature review Authors: Elisabetta Corvi Università degli Studi di Brescia Michelle Bonera Università degli Studi di Brescia Abstract The aim of the paper...

  3. (Pdf) Literature Review on Advertising Strategy for International

    LITERATURE REVIEW ON ADVERTISING STRATEGY FOR INTERNATIONAL BRANDS IAEME Publication 2018, IAEME PUBLICATION Global branding and advertising can help you market your product or service in many different countries around the world.

  4. Research in marketing strategy

    Recent reports regarding the top challenges facing marketers (Table 1) reveal numerous questions within the domain of marketing strategy including: (1) how to create organizational structures that better enable development of marketing strategies that help navigate and adapt to changing customer and firm needs; (2) how to choose the optimal set ...

  5. Full article: Social media advertisements and their influence on

    2. Literature review. Advertisements' perception is critical to their success. Prior research has attempted to ascertain the antecedents of consumers' perceptions of online advertising, and it has been discovered that an increase in consumer perception is connected with an increase in online advertising (Nasir et al., Citation 2021). This ...

  6. The past, present, and future of marketing strategy

    We believe that, over the next 10 to 20 years, future marketing strategy research will build on the extant literature by deepening our understanding of why and when marketing matters (Section 4.1), improving methodology with the availability on new data and better models (Section 4.2), and shifting its focus to keep pace with emerging issues (Section 4.3).

  7. Effective Brand Strategy Implementation: Review of Literature and

    Bonoma, Thomas V. (1984), "Making your marketing strategy work," Harvard Business Review, 62 (2), 69-76. Google Scholar (1985), The marketing edge: Making strategies work. New York. Google Scholar

  8. Determinants of content marketing effectiveness: Conceptual framework

    Based on a literature review ([3 ... A clearly defined content marketing strategy that is communicated and understood within the organization might positively influence CM effectiveness, because it allows to select those CM projects which promise a high strategy contribution. In case commitment to a content marketing strategy is high, all ...

  9. A systematic literature review: digital marketing and its impact on

    A systematic literature review has been conducted on digital marketing, and its implementation in SMEs. The impact of digital marketing on SMEs performance is observed over the past 12 years through the resources which are undertaken for the study, namely, Science Direct, Scopus, Springer, IEEE Explorer, ACM Digital Library, Engineering Village ...

  10. The sales-marketing interface: A systematic literature review and

    Introduction In the traditional perspective on marketing and sales, both departments serve customers by performing complementary activities ( Malshe & Biemans, 2014aMatthyssens & Johnston, 2006 ).

  11. (PDF) A Literature Review on Digital Marketing Strategies and Its

    Based on the literature review, the researchers identified the following themes: digitalization and digital marketing, digital and traditional modes of marketing, social media as a digital...

  12. Consumer Marketing Strategy and E-Commerce in the Last Decade: A

    Thus, a literature review on consumer marketing strategy for e-commerce in the last decade is opportune. This paper aims to identify research trends in the field through a Systematic...

  13. A Scoping Review of the Effect of Content Marketing on Online Consumer

    Contrary to the scholarly belief about the paucity of research about content marketing in the extant literature, this scoping review established that many studies about content marketing exist. However, fewer studies are available with evidence on the effect of content marketing on online consumer behavior which has become an important lens to ...

  14. Consumer Marketing Strategy and E-Commerce in the Last Decade: A ...

    Thus, a literature review on consumer marketing strategy for e-commerce in the last decade is opportune. This paper aims to identify research trends in the field through a Systematic Bibliometric Literature Review (LRSB) of research on marketing strategy for e-commerce. The review includes 66 articles published in the Scopus® database ...

  15. Market innovation: A literature review and new research directions

    Against this backdrop, the purpose of this article is to provide a review of the literature and reveal the underlying structure of the field of market innovation, identify distinct research streams, and uncover major shifts in perspectives. ... His research lies at the intersection of marketing strategy, innovation, and entrepreneurship, with a ...

  16. Social Media Advertising and Consumer Purchase: A Literature Review

    Social Media Advertising and Consumer Purchase: A Literature Review Tianxi Gao Conference paper First Online: 16 June 2022 2015 Accesses Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS,volume 13337) Abstract

  17. Positioning

    Positioning is developing a marketing strategy aimed at influencing how a particular market segment perceives a good or service in comparison to competition: 122. Fill (2006) Positioning is a natural conclusion to the sequence of activities that constitute a core part of the marketing strategy: 123. Uggla (2006)

  18. PDF Exploring the Value and Process of Marketing Strategy: Review of Literature

    7-18 By conducting etailed literature review we will explore the concept of marketing strategy discussing its value, consequently creating foundation for a conceptual model and empirical study. 2. The Concept of Marketing Strategy

  19. PDF Research in marketing strategy

    Recent reports regarding the top challenges facing marketers (Table 1) reveal numerous questions within the domain of marketing strategy including: (i) how to create organizational structures that better enable development of marketing strategies that help navigate and adapt to changing customer and firm needs; (ii) how to choose the optimal set...

  20. A Comprehensive Literature Review on Marketing Strategies ...

    tharanga, Nadee, A Comprehensive Literature Review on Marketing Strategies Adopting by Various Industries in the Global within the Pandemic Period (December 20, 2022). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4315683 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4315683 Download This Paper Open PDF in Browser 0 References 0 Citations

  21. Marketing and School Choice: A Systematic Literature Review

    Abstract School-choice programs may increase schools' incentives for marketing rather than improving their educational offering. This article systematically reviews the literature on the marketing activities of primary and secondary schools worldwide.

  22. (PDF) Strategic Marketing. A literature review on ...

    Strategic Marketing. A literature review on definitions, concepts and boundaries. October 2012; ... marketing strategies, some aspects are related to evaluating the importance of the .

  23. PDF A Review of Literature on Social Media Marketing Strategies

    A REVIEW OF LITERATURE ON SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING STRATEGIES MREDU GOYAL RESEARCH SCHOLAR, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN ABSTRACT: The new "internet sensation" social media marketing has considerably influenced the world of marketing.

  24. Identifying Sources for the Literature Review

    Business Source Elite Business and economics journals and magazine articles, many with full text, including content from the Harvard Business Review. Education Source Index and abstracts to articles, books, and papers in many areas of education; includes some full text and retrospective indexing back to the 1930s.

  25. CNN's New Morning Strategy: More News, Less Banter

    CNN dived into the chummy, banter-filled morning show space in 2013 at the behest of its then-new president, Jeff Zucker, a "Today" alumnus. Mr. Zucker hired Chris Cuomo from ABC to co-host a ...

  26. Navigating Revenue Success In 2024: Six Strategies For Leaders

    Here are six strategies leaders can use to navigate the evolving landscape and enable their revenue teams for success in the year ahead. 1. Prepare your team for change. Rising interest rates and ...

  27. Online superstore Temu doubles down on Super Bowl with TV ad and $15

    A year after making its advertising debut at the Super Bowl, Chinese-backed online shopping platform Temu is redoubling efforts in its most important market with a second ad on America's biggest ...