The purpose of this paper is to analyze, on one hand, factors which influence consumers to start interacting with companies, and on the other hand, factors which influence consumers to develop / maintain relationships with companies.
Methodology: In order to analyze mentioned factors, a telephone survey (CAT’) was conducted on the representative sample of Croatian citizens (n=411) Findings: Using Dalmatians analysis I have come up with factors which Influence consumers’ willingness to participate In Interactive marketing communication and hose which influence consumers’ willingness to develop personalized relationships with companies.
Implications: These findings have implications on what should companies nourish if they want to have interactive personalized relationships developed with their consumers. Key words: Interactivity, Marketing, Communications, Relationships, Personalization Introduction Interactive marketing communication and relationship personalization present some of the most recent developments in the field of marketing communication and marketing in general (Villas, AAA).
Technology developments (both software and reward) have enabled cost effective interactive communication and thus cost effective management of personalized relationships with each consumer individually. Thus, if adequately implemented interactive communication enabling relationship personalization could result In substantial savings for companies and In significant satisfaction Increase for consumers. Due to these facts, this paper analyzes factors that influence consumers’ willingness companies.
In order to analyze these factors, the concepts of interactive marketing communications and relationship personalization need to be defined. Conceptualizations of Interactive Marketing Communication Interactive marketing communication is one of the most intensively developing fields in marketing, and does not represent a short-term hit but rather a long-term strategy which includes a change of business philosophy where consumers are becoming partners (Rodriguez Pearled and Barbwire, 2005).
Ideation and Grayson have in 1995 envisaged that non-interactive marketing communication will start to evolve into interactive communication with consumers which, supported by digital monitoring and management of interactions, will enable maintenance of dialogue and legislation with each consumer individually with lower costs (Digestion and Grayson, 1995). Definitions of interactive marketing communication are numerous.
Computer Science dictionary (Panic, 2005) defines it as a communication where sources exchange roles of transmitter and receiver. One of the most relevant basic definitions was given by Digestion and Blather who define it as a possibility for people and businesses to communicate directly regardless of space and time constraints (Blather and Digestion, 1998).
This aspect is also analyzed by Hooey who stresses the possibility of erect communication without time-space constraints as the main characteristic and advantage of interactive marketing communication (Hooey, 1998). From a sociological point of view, interactive marketing communication represents a culmination of information society which surpasses machines and atomization as a development stimulus (Patterson, 1998).
Some authors stress the insurability as an important aspect of interactive marketing communication where there is a feedback enabling the quantification of results of every single communications effort (Marriott and Schnitzel, 1998). In addition, it is defined as a marketing system which uses one or more media in order to achieve measurable responses or transactions on any given location, where insurability of responses represents the main difference in comparison to traditional communication.
Some authors analyze the interactive marketing communication from the aspect of implementation, and point out that it enables small and medium size companies to equivalently compete with the big companies which have incomparable budgets for communication purposes (did Talon 1994) because it enables communication on arrow segmented markets as well as mass markets (Young, 1993), and is adequate both for domestic and foreign markets. Interactive marketing communication can also be viewed from the aspect of of impact of each individual party on format and content in real time (Lie and Shrub, 2005).
This aspect is also stressed by other authors (Lockable, 2005) pointing that interactivity is basically the possibility to control and influence information, where information is not presented linearly but rather, their flow depends on activities of both consumer and company. Soon and Lockable (Lockable, 2005) suggest that interactivity is a concept dependent on processes where each individual takes an active role in socio-communication process and thus influences the interactivity of communication.
Interactivity can also be defined as a degree of influence from included participants on each other, communication media, message and the synchronization of these, with three main dimensions: active control, two-way communication and synchronization (Lie and Shrub, 2005). Attention should be given to such definitions due to the fact that interactivity enables certain pleasures like nonviolence, diversity, relationship, intellectual challenges with a very important aspect of control of communication and relationships.
Literature also includes definitions which closely analyze personalization of relationships and interactive marketing communication, and imply that interactive marketing communication is a system in which personalized information based on personal information on consumers and their preferences are instantaneously present (Olson and Hiding, 2002; Rarely, 2000; Habit and Drifts, 2000). IBM stresses that interactive marketing has become a critical factor of personalization of experiences, and thus of business success (Anderson, 2000).
The simplest and most comprehensive definition of interactive marketing communication as a base for interactive marketing and relationship personalization defines it as any method which enables prospect or consumer to give instantaneous feedback through the same or different medium of the original message through: orders, requests for additional information, purchases, etc. Including most simple form (I. E. 0800 numbers), through more complex forms (I. E. Audio and video text) to most complex ones (I. E. Interactive TV and virtual reality) (Ryan, 2001).
After thorough analysis of mentioned definitions, it is possible to point out most important concepts related to interactive marketing communication: ; Interactive marketing communication includes at least two parties who have a capability of communication and information control ; Interactive marketing communication includes two-way communication, that is a dialogue ; Interactive marketing communication includes personalization of communication, that is adaptation of communication form and content to each consumer individually ; marketing communication implies a possibility of momentary feedback from all included parties through the same medium or different ones ;Interactive marketing communication abolishes time-space constraints ; Interactive marketing communication enables precise insurability of results ; Interactive marketing communication can be initiated through non-interactive media Relationship personalization represents development and maintenance of long-term profitable relationships between companies and consumers based on mutual understanding and cognition along with the concept of added value. In such relations company personalizes every aspect of relationship with a consumer including marketing communication, product, price and place. Thus, personalized marketing provides experiences for a known consumer (Stone and Jacobs, 2001). In further text, connected terms to personalization will be presented. Customization results in the development of products and services customized to consumers’ needs and wants. As such, it represents an important part of relationship personalization.
Collaborative customization is a result of the development of interactivity resulting in added value through interactive relationship between consumers and companies (Gilmore and Pain, 1997). Besides this type of customization, companies develop so called mass customization where they produce variable and adaptive products and services at cost of mass production (Wind and Runaways, 2001). As such it represents a transitional type toward full customization at comparable costs which is enabled by new technologies (Baker et al. , 1998). Due to such development mass production, and even mass customization, lose their main comparative advantage – cost reduction with customization becoming an optimum solution.
So, consumers do not have to make compromises, while at the name time companies do not have to invest their liquid assets for the production with questionable results. Database marketing, unlike relationship personalization, is focused on the company with no, or very limited, personalization of offering. Relationship marketing, unlike database marketing, is based on long-term relationships which are result of needs satisfaction and not of contact frequency and short-term transactional orientation which are stressed in database marketing (Baker et al. , 1998). Thus, database marketing uses basic information on consumers to customize the communication, UT disregards the customization of other aspects of marketing.
Other interrelated concepts to relationship personalization include precision marketing which, through technological platforms and data analysis methods enables specialized and personalized approach to every consumer (Cabin and Breach, 2004). It is also possible to define it as technology enabled process of acquisition and management of information on consumers, and analysis of data in order to obtain strategic information which could be used to develop more efficient and profitable interactions with consumers (Cabin and Breach, 2004). Precision racketing, unlike relationship personalization, aims to develop precise and customized relationship, but it ignores the development of long-term relationships and long-term profit requirements. Present most closely related concepts to relationship personalization. With the technological advances, some authors have renamed relationship marketing into technologically marketing in order to stress the importance of technology in marketing (Zincked, 2000). All the mentioned concepts are related to relationship personalization, but relationship personalization also includes and important concept of knowledge exchange which results in added value for all parties involved. Knowledge exchange concept requires trust and acquaintance between consumers and companies. True relationship personalization requires managerial as well as emotional competencies from companies (Pones and O’Brien Kelly, 2000).
Personalization includes all mentioned concepts, but also incorporates some additional factors: ; Knowledge exchange Stressing the intangible aspects which add value Increased consumers’ expectations caused by interaction and personalization ; Cost factor Reduction of choice complexity due to personalization Thus, relationship personalization can be defined as a marketing conception which assumes relationship development between consumers and companies, based on mutual understanding, developed and continuous knowledge exchange through interactive communication with a goal of achieving added value for all parties involved. Research Methodology The research was done on two separate samples: web survey on the convenient sample of Internet users, and ; telephone survey (CAT’) on representative sample of Croatian citizens. Sample structure: Table 1 : Sample structure – telephone survey
According to Hair (Hair K. , et. Al. 2003), since chance predictive accuracy is 50%, predictive accuracy should be higher than 62,5 to be accepted as valid – which in this case is. But, since certain factors: Concern for information sharing, Personal relationship with employees, Mutual understanding, analysis was done excluding those factors. Table 7: Wills’ Lambda 1 ,812 21,764 9 ,010 Table 8: Structure Matrix Reputation ,821 Adequate compensation ,608 Loyalty ,582 Attitude toward company ,547 Laws – well defined ,539 Trust ,534 Personal contact ,496 Privacy concerns ,429 Prior experiences ,425 AVERAGE ,553 Table 9: Functions at Group Centuries
O – strictly do not want interactive communication -,821 1 – strictly do want interactive communication ,277 Table 10: Classification Results(a) 1 – strictly do want interactive communication 35 48 83 Ungrouped cases 156 144 300 % O – strictly do not want interactive communication 92,857147,142857100 1 – strictly do want interactive communication 42,1686757,83133100 Ungrouped cases 52 48 100 (a) 66,7% of original grouped cases correctly classified. This function explains 66,7% of cases which is still above recommended values. Thus, it could be concluded that all of the above factors significantly influence consumers’ illnesses to start interactive communication with companies. However, reputation, adequate compensation and loyalty generate above average (0,553) influence and thus present a grounds for developing consumers’ willingness for interactive communication with companies.
