This report is a case analysis of an advertisement failure involving one of Burger King’s advertisements that appeared on New York Times and its Twitter page, stating that, “women belong in the kitchen” (WERSM, 2021, p. 1). From the standpoint of the consumer, the Tweet reinforced traditional conceptions of women as homemakers, which has been used to limit their involvement in the workplace and other spheres of life (Colella and King, 2018). However, this was not the intention of Burger King because it aimed to celebrate International Women’s Day albeit with a satirical twist to the above-mentioned advertisement statement (WERSM, 2021). This case is an example of an established company failing to understand the ever-changing, unique, social, and political dynamics of the market it serves.
In this document, the reasons for the advertisement failure will be mentioned and evaluated using the 7P model. The document is categorized into two distinct sections with the first one being the introductory part, which presents a background to the study and a brief overview of the case study. The second section is the literature review and it contains an analysis of the scholarly evidence relating to the “promotion” aspect of the 7P model.
The 7P model adds microscopic elements of analysis to a company’s marketing strategy by introducing physical evidence, processes, and people to the traditional 4P analytical matrix (Pratika and Oberoi, 2018). In the context of this review, scholarly evidence on the “promotion” aspect of the model will be discussed.
Promotion
Companies use promotion strategies to communicate the inherent value of their products or services to their customers (Pratika and Oberoi, 2018). Those that fail in this respect tend to make mistakes of omission or commission when implementing their strategies, relative to the norms, preferences, or attitudes of the target market (Leela, 2020). Failing to understand these nuances in consumer perception and behavior is a common cause of failed promotion campaigns (Keller, Deleersnyder, and Gedenk, 2019). Nonetheless, techniques chosen by a company to promote its products depends on a multiplicity of factors. According to Basil, Diaz-Meneses, and Basil (2019), promotion campaigns can be divided into two main groups – digital and traditional methods.
Today’s marketing environment is characterized by digital promotion techniques because of their effectiveness and practicality in information exchange (Langan, Cowley, and Nguyen, 2019). Firms that use a combination of digital and traditional techniques to promote their products or services should be wary of the potency of negative information spread on these platforms (Pratika and Oberoi, 2018). Notably, the spread of negative information can happen quickly across various social media platforms because information can be “retweeted” or “shared” thousands, or millions, of times to fuel outrage or support (WERSM, 2021; Langan, Cowley and Nguyen, 2019; Patsiaouras, Veneti and Green, 2018)). In this regard, digital promotion is a powerful platform for spreading both positive and negative messages.
Digital promotion platforms also demonstrate the power of social norms and culture in analyzing responses to promotion strategies. Indeed, given that these plans are intended to communicate the inherent value of a company’s products or services to its customers, the value of an advertisement strategy can be overshadowed by the lack of proper context or meaning of publication (Sethna and Blythe, 2019). In this regard, failing to account for the social context of advertising may make it difficult for companies to influence the market.
The failure of established companies to understand the ever-changing culture of their consumers draws attention to a series of failed advertisement campaigns involving companies trying to be innovative without accounting for the cultural context of their messages (Patsiaouras, Veneti and Green, 2018). Hoyer et al. (2017) have delved deeper into this phenomenon and suggest that generational differences have made it prudent for companies to evaluate the impact of their marketing campaigns on target markets, relative to prevailing cultural and social norms. Overall, a company’s promotion strategy is contingent on the achievement of three main objectives, which include encouraging the spread of positive information, increasing demand for products, and differentiating them from competitors (Langan, Cowley and Nguyen, 2019; Patsiaouras, Veneti and Green, 2018). Therefore, there is a need to review promotion strategies in line with present business and social variables.
Reference List
Basil, D. Z., Diaz-Meneses, G. and Basil, M. D. (eds.). (2019) Social marketing in action: cases from around the world. New York, NY: Springer.
Colella, A. and King, E. (2018) The Oxford handbook of workplace discrimination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hoyer, W. D. et al. (2017) Consumer behaviour: Asia-Pacific edition. Sydney: Cengage.
Keller, W. I. Y., Deleersnyder, B. and Gedenk, K. (2019) ‘Price promotions and popular events’, Journal of Marketing, 83(1), pp. 73–88.
Langan, R., Cowley, S. and Nguyen, C. (2019) ‘The state of digital marketing in academia: an examination of marketing curriculum’s response to digital disruption’, Journal of Marketing Education, 41(1), pp. 32–46.
Leela, K. (2020) Entrepreneurship and small business enterprises: an integrated concept. New York, NY: Shashwat Publication.
Patsiaouras, G., Veneti, A. and Green, W. (2018) ‘Marketing, art and voices of dissent: promotional methods of protest art by the 2014 Hong Kong’s Umbrella Movement’, Marketing Theory, 18(1), pp. 75–100.
Pratika, M. and Oberoi, D. S. (eds.). (2018) Application of gaming in new media marketing. New York, NY: IGI Global.
Sethna, Z., and Blythe, J. (2019) Consumer behavior. London: SAGE.
WERSM. (2021) Burger King gets it all wrong for International Women’s Day.