Are the 4 P’s still relevant in today’s world?
As I was responding to some discussions in the Marketing 2.0 group on Facebook, I started talking about the relevance of the 4 P’s in marketing, which of course is one of the cornerstones in marketing education worldwide.
But are they really relevant anymore?
Let’s look at them one by one:
- Product - I guess this one stays
- although are you sure that people are always buying your “product”? Or are they buying an experience associated with your product? Or perhaps a “personal identity” that comes with the use of your product? - Place - is amazon.com a place? Is a search engine placement a place?
- Promotion - people are not taking your corporate BS anymore…And according to the Strategy and Business article I posted in the Facebook “posted items,” 80% of all insurance policies will be bought based on information not provided by the insurance companies! So does promotion in the insurance industry still matter? Maybe - if you think that the company can participate in the creation of the user generated content that people will base their decisions on without hiring corporate “shills.”
- Price - many new business models have funny pricing schemes - as in “free”
In the late 80’s some academics (I cannot remember who they were) came up with a replacement for the 4P’s - the 4C’s. While not perfect, the 4 C’s may sound a little more modern/appropriate for the times:
- Customer instead of product
- Communication instead of promotion
- Cost instead of price
- Convenience instead of place…
Using the 4P’s as a roadmap for success for new products may not be the best roadmap to use anymore… It is a bit like using north, south, east and west as guides to find your way in deep space.
Thoughts?
[Tags: marketing 4 p's 4 c's marketing death valley marketing 2.0]
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:39 am
The 4 Ps are fundamental; you can call them different names, repackage them as you see fit, but ultimately we will always need to consider the core constructs behind these four dimensions.
I’ve read about countless “Fifth Ps” but the one I think has most relevance is: People.
People, after all, form the bonds and channels between the other four distinctions and should factor into any successful marketing plan.
ps. Francois, I’m sure I don’t need to remind you there’s no such thing as free.
October 7th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Francois - I agree with David on all accounts .. a rose by any other name and so on. The 5th P - People is a critical concept and for me is the umbrella P that synergizes all of the elements. I’ve seen models where ’social media Ps’ e.g., peer-to-peer, participation, personalization were included. My vote is not to make P soup out of this but keep it simple with one more P - People. Wonder why that People P (now that does sound bad) was not included in the original model.
October 7th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
I guess we could broaden the definition of the P’s so that they still make sense, but by themselves they no longer make sense.
In the old days “Place” was important - nowadays it is a matter of being available when people need you - so being “findable” is the key, and that is clearly not “place,” nor “promotion.”
In the old days pricing was important for an individual item (i.e., “product”). What is more important these days is the lifetime value of a customer, and in some cases that may mean giving stuff away for free to gain more revenue streams later…but “Pricing” for a “Product” can lead to very short-sighted decisions.
The point I am trying to make is that if you apply the 4 P’s to develop your marketing plan, chances are very high that your product will join the 80% of new products that fail…
October 8th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
The 4P’s can remain fundamental, but for sure we have to give to the 4P’s new meanings, more complete meanings. And the 4C’s are also useful. I think that we have to integrate the 4P’s and the 4C’s, continuing to look around us to see changes and to understand these changes.
L.T.
November 21st, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Interesting thoughts Francois — do you have a link to that piece on insurance and 80%?