A Common Ground in Guerilla Marketing – State of Research and Further Research Opportunities

Junior Management Science 1 (2016) 1-300 Junior Management Science journal homepage: www.jums.academy A Common Ground in Guerilla Marketing – State of Research and Further Research Opportunities Lennart Wendland Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg Abstract Guerilla Marketing is a cloudy concept. While practitioners and scientists increasingly use it in their practice, its definition remains not straightforward. This thesis builds a common ground in Guerilla Marketing through clearing up the field. Guerilla Marketing is defined and an overall model is presented that integrates previous efforts. This model has some advantages. Most strikingly, it introduces two highly relevant mediators which include recipient’s behavior into the model. Keywords: Guerilla Marketing, Marketing science, Conceptual framework, Philosophy of science 1. Introduction that are said to be aligned with the Guerilla Marketing concept but only little input has been delivered on how to de- “Guerilla Marketing is a body of unconventional ways of fine, classify or categorize those approaches. A final scien- pursuing conventional goals” is how Levinson(2008) broadly tific model to explain the entire concept is still missing and describes a concept which he himself devised and who so far mostly single actions or effects have been described. claimed to be the “father of Guerilla Marketing” (Schulte, The definition of Levinson(2008) as a basis is just as explicit 2007, p. 16). This ambiguous definition was obviously only as it is misleading yet it still today is of a tremendous rele- one of Levinson’s innumerable contributions since the early vance for a critical discussion on the topic. Asking whether 1980s, yet it reflects that the concept itself leaves plenty of or not Guerilla Marketing really is as innovative as it is said room for interpretation. Over the past thirty years practi- to be or if it simply can be perceived as a trend that managed tioners and scholars have used the term for a wide range to survive evolution as a subculture to marketing in general of activities, instruments, concepts, tools, strategies and needs further questioning. Due to its relevance it has been methods, only agreeing on one simple thing: Guerilla Mar- carried on over the decades and still causes confusion nowa- keting always aims at achieving maximum effects at low days. expenses (Baltes and Leibing, 2008). Within these parameters it seems that everything else around the concept is left 1.1. Heritage up to the individual who subjectively defines it for whatever reason desired. A diffuse understanding, lacking clear-cut Ernesto Che Guevara Lynch de la Serna, the leader of the definitions and practitioners who constantly (re-)invent “un- Cuban revolution, delineated the Guerilla tactics as a method conventional” marketing concepts under the umbrella of to campaign war through surprising ambush attacks allowing Guerilla Marketing are the result of this confusion. Guerilla a practically inferior army to succeed over the outnumbering Marketing and whatever action one derives from it has be- opponent (Guevara, 1982). The inferior Guerilla warriors come the random synonym for almost any marketing or avoided the open battle and rather made use of surprise ef- advertising activity that does not fit the classical frame. Fur- fects and acts of sabotage versus the military and even their thermore, this misapprehension carries on from practice to own government (Schulte and Pradel, 2006). The term itself scholarship as “literature still lacks a scientific contribution linguistically derived from the Spanish word “guerra” simply which directly focuses on the guerilla concept” (Hutter and meaning “war” (Nufer and Bender, 2008). The adjustment Hoffmann, 2011a, p. 2). “Guerilla” therefore can be translated to “lit-tle war” (Putte- To recap, a mass of activities and concepts can be found nat, 2007). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5282/jums/v1i1pp34-59 L. Wendland / Junior Management Science 1 (2016) 34-59 35 Transferring these tactics to marketing, practitioners have titioners in everyday life (Mughari, 2011). Yet, great descrip- quickly adapted and created the term “Guerilla Marketing” tive and normative confusion about what scholars and prac- during the mid-1960s (Baltes and Leibing, 2008). During titioners really refer to when labelling an instrument or cam- that time a change from a seller- to a buyer-market took place paign “unconventional” can be witnessed. With many deficits and companies felt the need of creative ideas, ingenuity and already identified, the extensive relevance for the topic will flexibility in their effort to persuade the consumers of their be presented in the adjacent chapter. products and brands (Schulte and Pradel, 2006). In its early days mostly small and middle scale enterprises (SME’s), with 1.2. Relevance strongly limited budgets, used these revolutionary strategies The necessity for critically reviewing and the relevance of trying to get the attention of the consumer and moreover this topic in general from a practical perspective can be found doing whatever it takes to weaken competition (Puttenat, in the exemplary study of the GfK(2009) . Matching data 2007). Over the years, as external factors changed, the range from the years 2005 and 2009 the association’s study com- of companies trying to benefit from Guerilla Marketing ac- pared the use of conventional and (professed) Guerilla Mar- tions strongly increased independently from the original rea- keting methods and instruments through interviewing 233 sons. The effectiveness of traditional forms of advertisements marketing associates and managers (GfK, 2009). As a result constantly decreased (Smith et al., 2007). New pressures on the study showed that the use of television advertising had companies and consumers developed as customers started to decreased by 1.5% and radio advertising by 5.3% whereas show lower brand loyalty and greater eagerness to switch contrarily the use of Ambient Marketing had increased by between competing brands (Roy and Chattopadhyay, 2010). 5.4% and Viral marketing by even 12.8% (GfK, 2009). Word-of-mouth (WoM) gained in relevance as mistrust in Apart from a practical perspective describing increased company’s messages made classical channels defective and interest in the operational field, the ”shortage , up to now, of companies incapable of distributing and diffusing their con- scientifically substantiated knowledge on the subject matter of tent into society (Keller and Berry, 2003). Most recent inci- guerilla marketing, its instruments and its categorization may dents like the financial crisis of 2008/09 are good examples be interpreted from two different points of view: guerilla mar- of influential factors facilitating the demand for cheap alter- keting cannot be classified or guerilla marketing is difficult to natives as marketing budgets are quickly and easily reduced classify” (Nufer, 2013, p. 5). in rough times. Factors like those also led the larger players While searching for relevant literature one quickly real- in the business to rethink their strategies focusing on more izes how little developed scientific research is so far and that cost-effective methods to differentiate (Porter, 1985). research is lost in a theoretical ambiguity. The existing defi- While in its early days the concept was mostly appeal- nitions deliver a basic understanding but just now started to ing to SME’s competing against the big players in fiercely present all-embracing projections and a lacking terminolog- competitive markets, Kotler et al.(2007, p. 12) states that ical delimitation results in an imbroglio in literature (Zerr, “Guerilla warfare is normally practiced by smaller compa- 2003). The lack of unified and especially overreaching def- nies against larger companies” deserves critique; even the initions does not allow scholars to speak the same language Goliaths of the industries nowadays take advantage of this and therefore gain a deeper insight into the concept. Still def- method which has the potential to reach a great amount initions are facilitated by strategical orientations and scholars of customers, cheaply and cost-efficiently, while seeking an interpreting the concept from their own specialized perspec- undisturbed dialogue with the consumer maximizing the im- tive (Tropp, 2011). Various practitioners have distributed ar- pression left behind (Kotler et al., 2007; Bigat, 2012). For ticles bearing only specialized scientific results, upholding ex- those big companies, entering new territory obviously comes amples of executed actions. In fact many studies are mainly along with a certain risk, yet despite the budgetary pressure, driven by practitioners and scholars trying to explain or jus- the changing environment and while having to target mar- tify single advertising actions or examples instead of develop- ket segments as heterogeneous towards others as possible, it ing scientific models as a basis for exploration (Yüksekbilgili, might be worth taking such risk (Ansoff, 1965). Since the 2014). They are primarily interested in whether or not the 1980s Jay Conrad Levinson, strongly promoted the Guerilla single effect they desired is really achieved. An interplay of Marketing evolution through his various contributions and effects as a basis to derive and test models has not been suf- pushed the concept to its final breakthrough. Ever since mar- ficiently delivered. Furthermore parameters and metrics to keters and scholars have used this term referring to any kind actually measure effectiveness and delineate

Load more