How to Use Imagination and Reason in Marketing

The Little Book of Marketing Thought
Introduction
Everyone knows the 4 P’s of the Marketing Mix (Product, Place, Price and Promotion) and most are aware of the 7 P’s too (the same 4 with People, Processes and Physical added)—and almost all will agree that this extended mix covers virtually all the bases of marketing (Professional Academy, 2016). Yet Schewe and Hiam (1998) identify another critical tool that marketers can use that is not identified in the traditional marketing mix or in the extended marketing mix: this tool is called Imagination. Imagination is such a “vital tool” that Schewe and Hiam (1998) describe it as the one tool “that gives the marketer the power to use the other tools effectively” (p. 32). In other words, if Imagination is lacking, the tools to market effectively will be useless: they will dangle in one’s tool belt or be wielded by individuals who do not know how to use them appropriately. Imagination allows one to think outside the box—to see new approaches to getting the point across, which is ultimately the whole point of marketing. You’re job is to get your product to the consumer. If you’re not thinking outside the box, you’re stuck inside the box—and in the box, the consumer already has everything he needs. To get the consumer to see that he also needs your product, you have to climb out of the confines—i.e., the current order of things, in which other producers have a market and have consumers—and show consumers what they are missing by not consuming your product. It takes Imagination to make yourself that visible, just like it takes Imagination to be able to see a house in your mind (how it should look, function, be put together) before any groundwork is laid at all. Imagination sets everything in motion. Of course, the tools and skills have to be there—and that is where the marketing mix comes into play. But Imagination is required to get the engine running. This paper will show how Imagination plays a crucial role in bringing the core concepts of marketing together for an effective strategy.
Imagination
As is noted in Murray’s (2006) Marketing Gurus, Trout and Rivkin (2006) say the marketer must “differentiate or die” (p. 2). Differentiation is dependent upon the ability to be different, to think differently, to see differently, to envision that which others are not envisioning, and to identify a path towards achieving that vision. In short, differentiation—and survival, in a world of “killer competition” as Trout and Rivkin (2006, p. 2) put it—depends on Imagination. Because the “tyranny of choice” has virtually arrested every consumer and overwhelmed him with an unending stream of possibilities, the list of options is a major obstacle for anyone trying to put a product into the marketplace. Chances are that product is already available and is already doing everything it can to obtain the consumer’s attention. It is like having a room full of school children clamoring for the teacher’s attention all at the same time. Which student is the teacher most likely to notice? The one doing something different from what all the others are doing. That student may be sitting still, calmly and politely waiting for the teacher’s next move. Or that student may be opening the window and climbing out. Either way, that student will be noticed because he is doing what no one else is—he is differentiating himself—and it takes Imagination to do that.
Consider how Bill Watterson’s Calvin in the comic strip Calvin & Hobbes used to use his imagination to make himself into a crime fighter, a space explorer, a pilot, a scientist, a time traveler, a dinosaur, and so on. Calvin had Imagination in spades. He stood out from all the other school children. Indeed, he stood out from all the other comic strips of his time: none matched Calvin in terms of sheer brilliance of Imagination. Calvin’s only problem was harnessing that Imagination and applying it towards something productive. The marketer should be like Calvin in terms of Imagination, but he should be like Hobbes in terms of application. Hobbes was Calvin’s counter-part: the cerebral, thoughtful, philosophical, practical, and rational second half of the dynamic duo. Hobbes stayed grounded where Calvin rose in the air after his dream. Left alone, neither was of much use to anyone. Together, they dominated their era and made lifelong fans of their following. Together they differentiated themselves from their peers.
Reason
The marketer should be the same: use Imagination to get going, but keep it going towards the right goal by applying rational measures to it. This is the essence of what Trout and Rivkin (2006) assert when they state that one should not overdo it with differentiation. Being different just to be different won’t win anyone any fans. Being different for a reason—with a real point in mind—is what will. The teacher will reward the student who is sitting still and behaving while everyone else is acting rowdy if the teacher perceives that the student is acting with composure because he wants to help the teacher restore order or get on with the lesson or set a good example for others. If the teacher perceives that the student is only sitting still to be different—and that as soon as the others calm down, he will then jump up and start yelling for no reason—that student will not win any love for the teacher. Likewise, if the teacher perceives that the student exiting via the window is exiting with a firm purpose in mind, the teacher is far more likely to have respect for that student’s boldness than he would if it turned out that the student was only exiting via the window because this was just different from exiting through the door. The aim of the differentiation is crucial. There has to be a reason. Consumers are, at the end of the day, rational beings. They will stop and consider their options at some point. They will look at what’s available—and they will take an interest in a producer that is providing something different so long as there is a good reason or purpose for the differentiation.
One example that can easily be applied is the launching of the start-up Honest Company by Jessica Alba. Alba got the idea for the company when her own personal experience with name brand diapers showed her that a need existed for a better product. She wanted something natural, organic and effective. From that start point, she created an enormous company that produces not just diapers but wipes, sprays, creams, carrying cases, shampoos, soaps and more. The Imagination started clicking, and Reason joined in to keep the vision moving towards a productive end result. Alba’s start-up is now valued around $1 billion (Primack, 2017) and is still attracting investors even after a hit-piece from the Wall Street Journal attempted to undermine the company’s capture of market share from other long-time baby product producers (Ng, 2016). Alba was doing something different—for a reason. She identified the demand for organic diapers and wipes—and thought of a creative way to get the product moving. She identified herself as a Mom—like other Moms—who want the best natural products for their kids. She used her celebrity to get in front of people, but once she was in front of them, she showed them that she was not like other celebs: no, she was like them, the consumers, the stay-at-home Moms who seek organic products that are safe so that their children are not exposed to ineffective or harmful chemicals. Alba’s approach paid off. It set her company apart from the others and allowed it to have a meteoric rise—primarily because there was nothing like it in the diaper industry—but also because Honest Company’s diapers were actually very good: they were thicker than other leading brands, absorbed more, and had the added benefit of being biodegradable (unlike other diapers that do not degrade in landfills). In other words, Alba had delivered by linking Imagination with good reason and purpose: creativity (the vision) with the goods (a product that was earth-friendly and mother-approved).
Ries and Trout (2009) point out in The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing that “if you can’t be first in a category, set up a new category you can be first in” (p. 17), which plays perfectly into the concept of using Imagination to differentiate yourself from what others are doing. However, as any successful start-up will show, there has to be a reason for it—a purpose to support the new category that you establish. The example of the importance of categorization given by Ries and Trout (2009) is one from history: every schoolboy remembers that Amelia Earhart was the first woman to fly solo over the Atlantic. Yet, she is not the first person to fly solo over the same ocean. She is not even the second. She is the third. Who are the other two? Few schoolchildren could tell you because they have not succeeded at being categorized in the same way as Earhart. Earhart’s story has successfully been categorized in a way that sets her apart from the others (even though she did nothing different from her male counterparts) and makes her story a memorable one. Thus, if you are marketing a product that is really offering the consumer the same old thing, one trick is to market it as something new because, categorically speaking, it is different.
Taking the example of Alba’s Honest Company once more, one can see that the product was still just a diaper—no different from any other product in the baby aisle. And yet it was different, categorically so, because it was environmentally friendly and celebrity-mom approved. No other diaper brand could boast of such a categorization. Thus, since Alba was not first to the diaper product category itself, she defined a new category—a developed category—a refined category, into which she could place her unique diaper product. Imagination and reason merged and produced a successful product that could be distinctly categorized in a way that would appeal to consumers and be a memorable option for the future.
Perception
Ries and Trout (2009) also note that “marketing is not a battle of products, it’s a battle of perception” (p. 23)—and this can be seen in the Honest Company story as well. When the Wall Street Journal piece hit the stands accusing the company of fraudulently selling a product to consumers that was not as chemically-friendly as the company purported, a battle of perception was being waged. The Journal was attacking the Company’s credibility and saying that Honest was not really that honest when it went into what went into its products. It looked at the laundry soaps being used and noted that a specific chemical that Honest said it avoided was actually being put in by the outsourced producers. Honest could claim that it wasn’t putting the chemical into the product, but clearly someone somewhere was. The Company was sued. Yet, in spite of the Journal’s claims, the Honest Company did not go under. On the contrary, it managed to retain its image of being honest, organic, safe and good for the environment in the mind of consumers: it was attacked by the media, but defended itself well enough so that in the minds of consumers, their perception of the company was not twisted or turned. The Company is still winning the battle of perception—even if some of its products are really not that much different from competitors in terms of ingredients used. Honest has still been able to convince consumers that it is fighting the good fight. The perception that customers have of the company did not much diminish. As Cialdini (2006) notes, the psychology of persuasion is a mighty tool that marketers can use to keep up their influence in the marketplace—especially when they are under attack from the voice box media used by competitors when waging the battle of perception.
Commitment
Cialdini (2006) states that “a variety of factors affect the ability of a commitment to constrain our future behavior” (p. 42) and this is evident for consumers who do not waver when they are confronted with information that challenges the trust they have placed in a product or in a producer. One challenge might not do the job of changing the consumer’s mind about a product. Two challenges might give the consumer pause. Three challenges might begin to make the consumers suspicious. Four challenges will likely kill whatever confidence the consumer had in the brand. The Honest Company example serves the purpose again. The Wall Street Journal investigation was the first attack. So far there has not been a second. Consumers could brush off the investigation as a hit-piece or as an accident (if they chose to believe the article’s claims) that the Company was unaware of. The trust that consumers had in the company—and, more importantly, their commitment to the company—was greater than the challenge brought forward by the Journal.
Getting consumers to develop this level of commitment to your product will require that both you and your consumers are essentially on the same team. This means that you have both identified a clear goal that is important to each of you and so long as you’re both working towards achieving that goal, there will be commitment. You the producer will be committed to the goal, and the consumer will be committed to you the producer. For instance, if you are producing a product that is supposed to help people to stop smoking—like an e-cigarette—you will appeal to a market base that shares the goal of quitting smoking. Even if your product is attacked by lawmakers for whatever reason (typically an indirect attack from the competition—eg., in this case the tobacco industry), consumers will not be turned away because they have committed to quitting smoking and see you and your product as being on their team; thus, they will be committed to you and your product.
It is like a marriage: so long as the two partners are committed to the same goal—making the relationship last and working through all obstacles and difficulties that might come along—the commitment will last till death. So too does it work for the producer and the consumer. The concept of corporate social responsibility is somewhat based on this idea and indicates how a producer will take to heart issues that are important to the community, support them through initiatives, and/or implement policies within the organization itself that will promote the ideals of the community—such as promoting environmentally-friendly ideas through the use of green energy in its office building, or promoting gender equality by voluntarily closing the wage gap between men and women within its departments. By appealing to issues that the consumer cares about, the business fosters a relationship with the consumer that leads to commitment. Thus, if a challenge to the company’s integrity, credibility or product comes along, the committed consumer will not be turned away. If the challenges keep coming, however, it may indicate that there is a serious problem. Just like in a marriage, if one partner in the relationship is constantly coming under attack from third parties who accuse the person of infidelity, divorce or separation might end up being the result. This is why it is important for producers to be committed themselves to the policies and ideals that they promote in public and that have led them to develop a good relationship with their core consumers in the first place.
How to deal with the attacks, however, is something that marketers will inevitably have to face. It is a struggle to survive out there, as Trout and Rivkin (2006) have shown. Differentiation might help get you set up and get your consumers committed to you, but maintaining that relationship will depend on trust and the producer’s ability to fend off challenges to its character. The best way to do that, of course, is to ensure that you give your competitors no excuses to construct a challenge. If they have nothing to go on, then they cannot accuse you of any infraction. If they make something up, it should be relatively easy to show how they are lying—and that will in turn destroy their credibility. Thus, the best way to keep from losing consumers through repeated challenges is to give competitors now ground to stand on: if you say your product is safe for the environment, make sure it truly is. Your marketing must be truthful, in other words.
If there are chinks in your armor, however, Imagination and Reason may not be enough to guide you in your use of the tools you have available. You may have to adopt a third characteristic: Humility. Humility can be that saving grace that allows a firm to admit mistakes, take the hits, and give the opportunity for a second chance. Humility allows a company to show that it is, after all, only human and that it can do better. No company (like no person) is perfect, so there will be mistakes made along the way. A producer can grow and show that it is making strides to improve, but only if it embraces a spirit of Humility and is actually dedicated to doing better in order to please its consumers. Humility can help clear the mists and disperse the fog that can sometimes gather in a company as a result of negative influences. One example of a company that could have benefitted from more Humility is Enron: it let itself get so pumped up on its own fabrications that it lost a sense of who and what it really was. When the façade that it had constructed was brought down, the company’s ego deflated, its leaders were left standing in the cold. Humility can act as an umbrella to protect your business from the rain and as a warm cloak to protect your business from the cold when the cracks begin to appear. Humility has to be there so that you can see for real what the situation is, and what steps need to be taken to fix problems. If you are not looking through Humble eyes, you’re not living in reality. Humility is the lens needed to make continual self-evaluations and see what is lagging and what needs improving. If you are marketing yourself as a financial products genius but are really only focused on cooking the books, no amount of marketing using the 4 or 7 p’s will save you in the end. Your entire business model will be predicated on a lie. Humility is what lets you be truthful and honest: it is what lets you to use your Imagination and your Reason to Differentiate yourself from others—with a purpose—and to enable your consumers to be Committed to you and your product.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the marketing mix is full of tools to help a marketer achieve great things—but in order to use those tools, a marketer must possess Imagination, which gives vision and purpose to the producer and his product. Imagination has to be guided by Reason, which makes it clear that there is a good rationale for doing what you’re doing in the first place. Being different just to be different will not be of any use to anyone. It also requires your ability to manage perception, and that in turn is what helps to generate Commitment. Consumers who will be committed to you will be those who sense that you are delivering a product that is good because it touches upon something important to them.

References
Cialdini, R. (2006). Influence: The psychology of perception. NY: Harper Business.
Murray, C. (2006). The Marketing Gurus. NY: Penguin.
Ng, S. (2016). Laundry detergent from Jessica Alba’s Honest Co. contains ingredient it
pledged to avoid. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/laundry-detergent-from-jessica-albas-honest-co-contains-ingredient-it-pledged-to-avoid-1457647350
Primack, D. (2017). Jessica Alba’s Honest Co. slashes its valuation. Retrieved from
https://www.axios.com/jessica-albas-honest-co-slashes-valuation-2493350812.html
Professional Academy. (2016). Marketing theories—the marketing mix—from 4 p’s to
7 p’s. Retrieved from https://www.professionalacademy.com/blogs-and-advice/marketing-theories---the-marketing-mix---from-4-p-s-to-7-p-s
Ries, A., Trout, J. (2009). The 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing. NY: Harper Business.
Schewe, C., Hiam, A. (1998). The portable MBA in marketing. NY: John Wiley &
Sons.
Trout, J., Rivkin, S. (2006). Differentiate or die. In The marketing Gurus (ed. Murray).
NY: Penguin.