304 Part 2 • Managing marketing communications Definitions of IMC Table 10.3 The development of IMC definitions Author Definition Shultz, Tannenbaum and Lauterborn (1993) A concept of marketing communications planning that recognises the added value of a comprehensive plan that evaluates the strategic role of a variety of communication disciplines (such as advertising, direct response, sales promotion, etc.) and combines them to provide clarity, consistency and maximum communication impact. Duncan and Moriarty (1997) A cross-functional process for creating and nourishing profitable relationships with customers and other stakeholders by strategically controlling or influencing all messages sent to these groups and encouraging purposeful dialogue with them. Keller (2001) Involves the development, implementation, and evaluation of marketing communication programmes using multiple communication options where the design and execution of any communication option reflects the nature and content of other communication options that also make up the communication programme. Kliatchko (2008) An audience-driven business process of strategically managing stakeholders, content, channels, and results of brand communication programmes. These definitions, from Shultz et al.’s (1993) original to those used today, reveal how the term has evolved. In much the same way, the very diversity of the term ‘integration’ has been highlighted by The Institute of Practitioners in Advertising (IPA). Their research into what is meant by integration, as practised by clients and agencies, reveals several different interpretations, leading them to the conclusion that the term is ambiguous in practice. For example, the IPA observe that integration can be just about channel (tools) planning, the integration of communications with brand values, the integration of data, the merging of data sources and customer understanding, the integration of offline and online media channels to achieve maximum click-throughs and sales, the facilitation of seamless working practices across internal client departments and agencies, and finding ideas that integrate into the target audience’s lives. In order to provide clarity and insight into the way integration is considered and practised, the IPA analysed over 250 cases submitted to the IPA Effectiveness Awards in the period 2000–9. They searched for a common definition of integration, but it became clear that just as the academic definitions had evolved, so had working practices developed over this period. From this review and bearing in mind that no single form of IMC can be identified, the following general definition of IMC is offered: IMC can represent both a strategic and tactical approach to the planned management of an organisation’s communications. IMC requires that organisations coordinate their various strategies, resources and messages in order that they enable meaningful engagement with audiences. The main purposes are to develop a clear positioning and encourage stakeholder relationships that are of mutual value. This definition serves to link IMC with business-level strategies and relationships. The import ance of coherence within the organisation is made explicit, whether this be through systems M10_FILL0541_06_SE_C10.indd 304 15/3/13 3:19 PM Chapter 10 • Integrated marketing communications 305 or structural change. Implicit is the underpinning notion that IMC is necessary for the development of effective relationships and that not all relationships need be collaborative and fully relational, as so often assumed to be the case in many contemporary interpretations. Scholars’ paper 10.2 Four pillars of IMC strength Kliatchko, J. (2008) Revisiting the IMC construct: a revised definition and four pillars, International Journal of Advertising, 27(1), 133–60. Kliatchko published this paper as an update to his 2005 paper on IMC. Here he reexamines and revises his definition of integrated marketing communications (IMC). His goal is to advance the theoretical foundations and definitional issues of IMC and to that end he introduces and examines his four pillars of IMC before exploring the interconnection between the pillars and levels of IMC. Interpretations of IMC The relative failure of both academics and practitioners to agree on a definition for IMC is indicative of the debate, contradiction and perhaps vagueness of the concept. It is also reflective of an emerging concept, one that has had little chance to stabilise in the context of a rapidly changing media landscape and new forms of communications. Consideration is now given to some of the different views of IMC. There are some common threads but also some points of divergence. Five interpretations are offered here, in no particular order. Harmonisation, which was an early view and still practised, is considered first. We then review planning, perspective, portfolio, and relational interpretations. See Figure 10.2. Figure 10.2 M10_FILL0541_06_SE_C10.indd 305 Five interpretations of IMC 15/3/13 3:19 PM