Marketing Segmentation and Political Marketing

Declan P Bannon
Paisley Business School,
University of Paisley,
Paisley, PA1 2BE
0141-8483377
declan.bannon@paisley.ac.uk
Abstract

Marketing segmentation and targeting techniques are widely used in the political
arena. However the appropriateness, limitations and efficiency of marketing
segmentation have received little critical appraisal from the academic literature.
The objectives of this paper are firstly to explain the potential benefits and limitations
of the marketing segmentation process in the light of nearly 70 years of academic
literature. Secondly, to review the methods in which segments can be constructed.
Thirdly, to introduce a generic tool for targeting and to consider the process in the
context of political marketing.

Despite the consistency of academic approaches to marketing segmentation and

acceptance (at least in theory) by organisations of the value of marketing
segmentation, too many organisations are not segmenting their markets effectively.
Organisations are not basing their strategies on research based marketing
segmentation and there is a need to adopt a more professional and considered
approach (Wind, 2000).

It is argued that marketing segmentation could be viewed as anti-marketing in that it

is not treating the customer as a unique individual but as a standardised unit within a
segment. There is a tendency to assume that segmentation is ipso facto a good activity
and the potential benefits derived are rarely challenged. Such blind obedience to the
marketing segmentation process is naïve, misleading and could potentially be an
expensive mistake (Cui & Choudray, 2002).

A generic framework for evaluating and prioritising segments has been developed and
is described in detail along with criteria for application.

Key Words: Political Marketing, Marketing Segmentation, Targeting, Positioning.

Introduction

The objectives of this paper are firstly to explain the potential benefits and limitations
of the marketing segmentation process in the light of nearly 70 years of academic
literature. Secondly, to review the ways in which segments can be constructed.
Thirdly, to introduce tools for targeting and positioning and to consider the process in
the context of political marketing.

Marketing is both a philosophy and a function. As a philosophy, marketing pursues

knowledge, understanding of exchanges and the process of enhancing value. There is
no general theory of Marketing (Gronroos, 1994). There are 12 different schools of
marketing and 21 schools of post-modern marketing thought (Sheth, 1988; Brown

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

1998). As a function within organisations, marketing's scope and boundaries should
encompass 4 specific areas:

1. The understanding of customer and potential customer values

2. The creation of products and services that customers value
3. To communication with specific segments the values they wish to exchange
4. Ensure delivery of value to the organisation and customers

As a management function, marketing is a process of decision making that entails 5

areas of focus:
• Segmentation market
• Target marketing
• Positioning
• Market planning (Doyle, 2000)
• Implementation

Frederick first introduced the concept of segmentation in 1934 (Goller et al, 2002).
Over the last 70 years it has attracted considerable interest from both academics and
practitioners as the importance and benefits became apparent for consumer, b2b,
services, not for profit, social and societal marketing. Goller et al, (2002) classifies
the academic research of segmentation into 4 main areas:

1. the development of segmentation bases and models (Hummel, 1960; Haley, 1968;
Wind and Cardozo, 1974; Bonoma and Spapiro, 1983; Moriarty and Reibstein,
1986; File and Prince, 1996);
2. research methodologies (Webster, 1978; Silk and Kalwani, 1982; Flodhammar,
1988; Mitchell,1994);
3. the development and application of statistical analysis tools (Frank and Green,
1968; Green and Carmone, 1977; Rao and Winter, 1977; Acito and Jain, 1980;
Klastorin, 1983; Green and Krieger, 1991; Fish et al, 1995; Balakrishnan et al,
1996);
4. segmentation implementation (Beik and Busby, 1973; Mahajan and Jain, 1978; De
Kluyer and Whitlark, 1986; Piercy and Morgan, 1995).

Goller et al, (2002) contend that the above research areas have mainly been developed
in isolation of each other that has lead to a fragmented understanding of the process as
a whole. What at first appears to be a relatively straight forward process of
segmenting, targeting and positioning (STP), in reality becomes a highly complex
field of study.

In the early 1930's Joan Robinson and Edwin Chamberlain formulated the theory of
imperfect competition. This was driven by the dissatisfaction with classic economic
theory of the interaction of supply and demand. These theories provided the
necessary stepping stone to the concept of marketing segmentation. It was the
recognition of heterogeneity in the demand for goods and services that led to the
disaggregation of the traditional single demand schedule and the acceptance of a
fragmented demand schedule where sub-markets or segments exist. The distinction
between product differentiation and market segmentation is an important distinction
to note. Wendell Smith in 1956 noted that product differentiation is supply led i.e.
emanates from a production orientation whilst market segmentation is fundamentally

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

of a marketing orientation driven by an understanding and knowledge of the customer.
Each individual customer, from a consumer buying behaviour perspective, is unique.
Each consumer construct's their own unique social reality and consumer requirements.
However from a practical and resource perspective, rarely can organisations
customise to the nth degree. Marketing segmentation can be viewed as a compromise
and meaningful position between two extremes that are generally unpractical
positions (Baker, 2000:262). This not to say, as Figure 1 seems to imply, that
disaggregation and aggregation will produce the same market segments.

Perfectly Homogeneous Market Segments Completely

Market Heterogeneous
Markets

A1 A2 A1 A1 A1 A2
B1 C1 A2 A2 B1 C1
A1 B2 B1 B1 A1 B2
Disaggregates Aggregates
C1 B1 B2 C1 B1
A2 C2 C1 C1 A2 C2
C2
Economists Marketers Behaviourists

Figure 1 Disaggregation versus Marketing Segmentation

Source: Adapted from Enis (1977)

The precise definition of a market is elusive, because all product-market boundaries

are arbitrary (Day et al, 1979; Baker, 2000:261). Historically a market was a place to
sell and buy goods. However the term has come to be used as a generic term for a
large geographic area, the relationship between the demand and supply of a specific
product or the activities surrounding the process of selling. For the purpose of this
paper the term market is used to reflect the interactions between an organisation, it's
existing and potential customers and it's competitors.

All markets are heterogeneous (Smith, 1956; Wind, 2000). The population is not
similar in terms of their desired outcomes, motives and behaviour. However
organisations may appear to offer one product or service to the whole population.

The concept of marketing segmentation is not new. Marketing segmentation has been
viewed since the 1960's as a critical process in successfully marketing. The marketing
segmentation research literature is plentiful and relatively in agreement as to the
processes involved. A segment is viewed as valid if it is measurable, accessible,
substantial, stable and unique (Baker, 2000). Approaches to segmentation research
have not changed significantly, despite a glut of academic papers on the segmentation
of heterogeneous markets (Wind, 2000).

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

Despite the consistency of academic approaches to marketing segmentation and
acceptance (at least in theory) by organisations of the value of marketing
segmentation, too many organisations are not segmenting their markets effectively.
Organisations are not basing their strategies on research based marketing
segmentation and there is a need to adopt a more professional and considered
approach (Wind, 2000).

Benefits and Limitations of Marketing Segmentation

The benefits of marketing segmentation are sometimes assumed or understated,

however, the process supports the development of competitive advantage in 10 ways:

1. provides a basis and rationale for the selection of target markets

2. encourages the development of products and services that match the success
criteria of a segment. These products and services must be are viewed as
providing more added value than competitors offerings
3. allows the tailoring of communications and channels of distribution to customer
needs. Hopefully, providing higher customer satisfaction leading to loyalty and
repurchase
4. helps marketers identify opportunities and threats
5. encourages competitor analysis
6. efficient allocation of resources to segments were the returns will be differentially
higher i.e. the get more bangs for your bucks; Pareto's 80-20 law
7. focuses an organisations attention on chosen segments, allowing a greater
understanding of these markets and customers
8. a more in depth understanding of selected segments should lead to the
development of different plans for each (or a small number) of the market
segments
9. market segments were the organisation is unlikely to be competitive can be
identified and thus avoid wasting resources targeting them. This also provides an
opportunity to analyse the attributes of competitors products and services
10. marketing segmentation can provide a basis for smaller or new organisations to
establish themselves in a market with minimal outlay of resources in a shorter
period of time i.e. niche marketing or concentrated target marketing

These benefits will appeal to organisations as an efficient method of delivering

products and services.

The marketing segmentation process is not without its critics. There are several
obvious and practical issues with the process:

1. suitability of the marketplace to apply the marketing segmentation process. Over

emphasis on segmentation techniques can neglect the market itself and the
competitive position of an organisation within it (Bliss, 1980). Disaggregation
(product differentiation) versus aggregation (marketing segmentation)
2. cost benefit analysis
3. the practicality and feasibility of marketing segmentation for SME's or NFP
organisations
4. acceptability to target some segments and ignore others e.g. provision of public
services that should be available to all

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

5. legal and ethical issues e.g. data protection act; the targeting of children; the
targeting of patients by pharmaceutical companies
6. validity and reliability of criteria for segmentation
7. depth of segmentation i.e. at what stage do you decide to cease segmenting.
Resnik et al (1979) argue that too much segmentation looses some of the benefits
and cost advantages of market segmentation. They argue that some organisations
need to have larger segments and they refer to this as counter-segmentation
8. research methods utilised; availability and collectability of relevant timely data;
appropriate interpretation of data
9. stability of segments produced
10. ability and flexibility of organisations to tailor products and services to any
identified segment
11. expertise within organisations to professionally conduct a marketing segmentation
process. Alternatively, the lack of in depth industry knowledge of an external
consultant to conduct a meaningful marketing segmentation. Sometimes an
intuitive segmentation may be sufficient
12. evaluation of targeting activities can be difficult

It could be argued that marketing segmentation is anti-marketing in that it is not

treating the customer as a unique individual but a standardised unit within a segment.
There is a tendency to assume that segmentation is ipso facto a good activity and the
supposed benefits are rarely challenged. Such blind obedience to the marketing
segmentation process is naïve, misleading and could potentially be an expensive
mistake (Cui & Choudray, 2002).

Marketing segmentation is only a viable activity if a product market already exists. In

the case of new innovations, one can only speculate as to whom the early adopters
might be. In this case product differentiation drives the targeting effort. The ability to
customise product offerings either through computer aided design or computer aided
manufacture has called into question the need for marketing segmentation. Ford
Europe has the potential to create 2 million different models by allowing customers to
order to their own specification. Overall, there seems to be more benefits than
disadvantages to marketing segmentation since it can be implemented to a varying
degree of refinement and sophistication (Baker, 2000:263).

In certain circumstances it is inappropriate to attempt to segment the market:

1. the market is too small

2. the vast majority of the market are users or potential users
3. a major brand is established and mass marketing is the preferred forms of
communication and distribution to support brand development i.e. undifferentiated
targeting
4. the product needs to appeal to the market as a whole for reasons of growth
5. customers exchange in sufficient numbers as to sustain the organisation e.g. the
NHS and patients. However it could be argued that screening programmes are a
medical version of market segmentation. Identifying the need, treating the patient
and generating new business
6. the costs of the segmentation process outweigh the potential benefits

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

THE MARKETING SEGMENTATION PROCESS

A market is not a mass of potential customers all with the same values, desires,
aspirations and ability to be a customer for any given organisation. However,
customers’ attitudes can be grouped into sub-groups or segments of the whole market.
Market segmentation can thus be viewed as the sub-dividing of a market into groups
with similar attributes. A market segment will be valid if a company decides it is
capable of delivering the specific requirements that match the success criteria for
marketing to that segment and that the segment is sufficiently large to be attractive.

The major stages of the process are:

Marketing Segmentation
• identify bases for segmenting the market
• develop profiles of resulting segments

Market Targeting
• develop measures of segment attractiveness
• select the market segments

Market Positioning
• develop positioning for each target segment
• develop marketing plans for each segment

Implementation
• development of marketing plans to implement marketing segmentation
• evaluate the benefits derived from the activities and refine the process

TYPES OF SEGMENTATION

The segmentation of a market requires criteria or variables that can meaningfully

differentiate elements in the population. There are two approaches for segmenting
markets, a priori and clustering.

a priori segmentation design utilises management knowledge of a market to select

criteria or variables that can be used to sub-divide a population. These variables can
be product based or customer characteristics. Marketers usually do this instinctively
Some examples: older people are more likely to vote, so the criteria chosen may be
age; former mining towns predominately vote Labour, so the criteria is geographic
distribution; previous Tory voters are more likely to vote Tory, so the criteria is prior
behaviour. In other words the criteria is deduced prior to segmentation using
knowledge of cause and effect.

There are 7 stages to a priori segmentation:

1. selection of the a priori basis of segmentation
2. selection of a set of segment descriptors
3. sample design
4. data collection

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

5. formation of the segments on a sorting of respondents into categories
6. establishment of the profile of the segments using multiple discriminant analysis,
multiple regression analysis or some other appropriate analytical procedure
7. develop specific marketing strategies for each segment (Wind, 1978).

Clustering (post hoc) segmentation designs the segments using relevant criteria
induced from research in the market being segmented. In certain cases a mixture of a
priori and clustering approaches my improve the criteria selected (Baker, 2000; Green
et al 1998; Myers, 1996; Smith & Hirst, 2001; Wind, 1978).

Cluster analysis is potentially a very useful technique, however it can prove difficult
in its application (Everitt, 1974).

Ball (1971) identifies 7 possible uses for clustering techniques:

1. finding a true typology
2. model fitting
3. prediction based on groups
4. hypothesis testing
5. data exploration
6. hypothesis generating
7. data reduction

Ideally, clusters should be self-evident simply by reviewing the data set and
distinguishing natural groupings within it. However the logic and robustness of the
criteria selected can be subjective and thus potentially misleading. The need for
refinement of segments has led to the development of 5 types of clustering technique
as identified by Everitt (1974):
1. hierarchical
2. optimisation partitioning
3. density or mode seeking
4. clumping
5. others

Hierarchical clustering techniques are agglomerative (collect into a mass) and are
divisive in nature. The former is typical of the approach of behaviourist who would
seek to cluster individuals based on an understanding of each individual. Economists
would use a divisive approach to segmenting the undifferentiated demand schedule.

Partitioning techniques differ from hierarchical in that they allow for adjustment of
the original clusters, created on the basis of a predetermined criterion. This
techniques allows the fine tuning of a priori cluster segments until an optimum
segment is achieved.

Density techniques attempt to differentiate between clusters of high and low density
based on meaningful parameters of differentiation.

Clumping identifies overlapping clusters as desirable segments for targeting.

The others category covers a multitude of techniques that do not comfortably fit with
the previous 4 categories e.g. Q factor analysis, latent structures (Everitt, 1974).

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

The fact that so many factors can be used to segment markets is problematic. There is
no clear best method of cluster segmentation.

To a large extent the plethora of factors used to define market segments reflects the
difficulty of putting the normative theory of marketing segmentation into practice. The
normative theory as proposed by Smith (1956) is proactive in that one should use
knowledge of consumer characteristics to develop a marketing strategy. Whereas
most marketing managers who use segmentation studies do so reactively in that they
seek to determine the response of different marketing segments to their marketing
strategies…a purist would argue that the managerial approach is more akin to
product differentiation than a normative approach to marketing segmentation (Baker,
2000:263).

There are potentially an infinitive number of ways to segment markets. Wind (1978)
argues that the theory of marketing segmentation implies that there is a single best
way of segmenting a market. Any attempt at using a single basis for segmentation for
all marketing decisions may result in inappropriate outputs and wasted resources.

For a segment to warrant specific attention it must be:

• measurable
• accessible
• substantial
• unique in its response
• stable

Geographic Segmentation

As the name suggests this is the segmenting a geographic landmass into sub-sets. The
vast majority of organisations use this type of segmentation usually without
consciously knowing that is what they are doing. The basis or validity of this method
is that people with similar socio-economic, cultural and lifestyle characteristics tend
to congregate in the same geographic location. As a consequence the postcode of an
individual can reveal characteristics that differentiate that person. Geographic
segmentation is easy to define, measurable and information is readily accessible.

Characteristics that may be of interest to marketers include:

• location and spread (density)

• distribution channels
• language
• values
• behaviour and motivation
• culture and tradition
• historical factors
• climate
• religion

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

Demographic Segmentation

Demography is the study of populations. In demographic segmentation, a given

market is sub-divided on the basis of demographic variables. Consumer preferences
and usage rates are often associated with demographic variables such as:
• age
• sex
• socio-economic basis
• lifestyle
• family life cycle

The major criticism of this approach is that it is overly dependent on occupation as a

criterion and this is less accurate as an indicator of social and economic behaviour.

Geo-demographic Segmentation

Geo-demographic segmentation utilises a mixture of both geographic and

demographic variables. In so doing a segment can be refined and examined using 2
different segmentation classifications. Quinlan (1981) claims that ACORN (A
classification of residential neighborhoods) appears to show a much greater
discrimination than the occupation based scheme of social grading. It has the merit of
being a multi-variate measure based on a single objective criterion. ACORN's unique
advantage over other classifications is that its output is clusters of geographic sub-sets
that can be easily mapped and communicated with. Yorke & Meehan (1986) endorse
ACORN as an important and useful tool in political marketing as it aids and directs
campaign activities. ACORN uses 40 variables, 15 social and economic, 12 related to
age and household composite and 13 related to house type.

Psychographic and Behavioural Segmentation

Dissatisfaction with demographic segmentation has led to the development of

psychographic and behavioural segmentation. Psychographic segmentation or
lifestyle segmentation is more complex but also a more meaningful method of
segmentation because it focuses on an individual’s actual behaviour and lifestyle
rather than trying to infer that certain characteristics will lead to a particular
behaviour. It concentrates on the benefits products and services bring, not on a
functional level but in an emotional and lifestyle enhancing level. Psychographic
segmentation identifies common values and segments customers according to their
beliefs, attitudes, activities, interests and opinions. Political segmentation appears to
suit psychological segmentation because we know that generally the electorate does
have opinions, beliefs and attitudes towards political parties and candidates.
Psychological profiles can be developed for segments based on lifestyle, social
character and personality. The are 3 segment divisions of social character:

1. Traditional directed behaviour (a voter always votes this way)

2. Conformity with social or family groups (socialisation into supporting a party)
3. Individualist behaviour (instrumental consumer buying behaviour of choice of
party)

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

Behavioural Segmentation attempt to group individuals based on their actual actions:
• End use - what is the product to be used for?
• Benefits sought.
• Usage rates - heavy, medium and light
• Loyalty

Criteria for effective segmentation

• distinctiveness
• tangibility
• accessibility
• defensibility

Market Targeting

Targeting must be consistent with an organisation's overall objectives. Assuming the

segmentation of a market is satisfactorily completed, the next task is choosing the
segments to be targeted. The number of segments chosen will be determined by the
available resources available to implement the marketing activities effectively and
efficiently. A key decision is finding the equilibrium between stretching resources to
maximise the number of market segments targeted and ensuring adequate resources
are available for effective implementation of marketing activities. There is also a final
consideration of selecting segments that are generally overlooked and this introduces
the complex question of segment responsiveness. Responsiveness is often overlooked
because there is a lack of rigorous research into what stimuli will cause a favourable
outcome. For example in the 1997 General Election, the Labour Party selected ninety
seats and the Conservative Party about a hundred (Baines et al, 1999). Sometimes
the division between the attractiveness of segments is clear and choice is relatively
straight forward. In other cases the decision is more difficult because the relative
attractiveness of the developed segments is similar. A system for prioritising
segments is required. The Hierarchy of segments model (Figure 2) is a generic
framework for evaluating and prioritising segments. There are 4 distinct segments:

1. Primary targets: Attractive segment(s) that are responsive to stimuli

2. Secondary targets: Less attractive segment(s) that are responsive to stimuli
3. Relationship building: Attractive segment(s) that are less responsive to stimuli
4. Wasteland segments: Unattractive and segment(s) that are unresponsive to stimuli

The advantage of such a grid is that it forces the consideration of what marketing
activities or stimuli are likely to produce a response. Kotler (1997) calls this
actionability of a segment i.e. ability of an organisation to implement strategies to
serve the segment. A segment may indeed be attractive but if the organisation cannot
create a stimulus to produce a response then the resources are wasted.
Measuring the response to individual stimulus can be difficult if near impossible since
cause and effect relationships occur in a complex, multi-variant market environment.

The attractiveness of a segment may be determined by some of the following 12

criteria:

1. a large market share of a segment is held e.g. high brand recognition

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

2. high potential for growth i.e. high relative returns or expected number of votes are
potentially higher
3. the size of the segment i.e. large enough to be interesting or small enough to be
managed
4. lack of competition and/or competitors are in a weak position to respond to the
organisation's marketing
5. the organisation can differentiate products and services to match the segment's
requirements e.g. local or single issues, high profile candidate, topical national
issue
6. segment(s) penetration will help achieve the organisations objectives. These
objectives may be brand building, greater awareness, additional profits, more
customers, greater usage or larger share of the vote etc.
7. ease of access e.g. information needed to identify members of a segment is
available or easily obtained
8. existing relationships e.g. resources are allocated preferentially to a candidate or
constituency (Baines et al, 1999)
9. ease of distribution e.g. e-mail lists are available, distribution of political literature
is easier in urban rather than rural areas
10. resource availability e.g. active local branch, available funding, costs are not
prohibitive
11. demographic or competitive environment changes creates an opportunity that is
potentially attractive e.g. population growth, sitting candidate retires
12. cost benefit analysis is favourable

Responsiveness SECONDARY PRIMARY

to Stimuli TARGET TARGET

WASTELAND LONG TERM

RELATIONSHIP
BUILDING

Attractiveness of segment

Figure 2 Hierarchy of Segments Model

Responsiveness to stimuli may be determined by some or all of the following 6

criteria or activities:

1. products or services can be customised (or can be created) to meet the specific
requirements of the segment
2. specifically designed communications can be created to illicit a response
3. research can be conducted to explore which stimuli will have greatest impact
4. experiments can be carried out to evaluate response
5. distribution channels can be tailored to a segment's needs

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

6. previous research or experience indicates a segment will respond favourably

The factors that cannot be easily identified or factored in are competitor activities. A
segment may also be attractive to one or more competitors. The effect of multiple
targeted campaigns may reduce or neutralise any potential favourable output.
However this in itself may be a favourable result, particularly in terms of game
theory. Responsiveness to stimuli is a subjective a priori estimation of the effects of
stimuli, even if research is conducted. Relative perceived responsiveness to stimuli
(RPRS) may be a better description of the responsiveness criteria i.e. the stimuli most
likely to gain a response relative to alternatives. Various authors in political
marketing have used the expression persuadable voter (Baines et al, 1999; Bradshaw,
1995; Shea, 1996), however a persuadable segment is impossible to objectively
determine and RPRS is an acknowledgement of that.

For practitioners, the difficulty arises in selecting and weighing criteria of

attractiveness and responsiveness. Obviously personal and political agendas will
make this process less objective. There may be a reluctance to use outside assistance
in this process as my fees are extortionate.

Generic Targeting Strategies

Undifferentiated Targeting
• Identifies common needs of consumers
• Appeals to broadest number of buyers
• Treats the market as a homogeneous entity

Uses:
• mass communication techniques
• mass distribution
• narrow product range or limited number of key messages
• attempts to create brand images
• large barriers to market entry are created and maintained

Differentiated Targeting
• Focuses on specific needs of distinct customer groups (market segmentation) or
product differentiation (disaggregation )
• Utilises accurate segmentation data in creating products and values for customers
or modifies the products
• Operates in one or more segments of a market
• Costs are increased due to research, product modification, production costs,
administration, distribution, promotions, consultants fees etc

Concentrated Targeting
• Company resources are directed towards one or few chosen market segments
• The company attempts to acquire a large share of a given market segment

Advantages:
• Specific knowledge of markets
• Usually high profit margins or particularly responsive segment

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

• Specific and compelling communication is needed
• Strong brand image acquired.

Market Positioning

The next stage in the process of developing an effective marketing strategy, is to

clearly position products or services within the identified target market(s).
Positioning refers to the place in the market that a company or product/service
occupies relative to competitors (Hooley, 2000). The positioning should take full
cognisance of the relative positioning and strength of competitors. Positioning is in
the mind of the customer (Ries & Trout, 1981). Positioning can be a mixture of real
benefits and the image created. Positioning is essentially benefit based. The values of
the customers within any target market will be the basis of any product offering. The
skill of the marketer is to provide additional added value over and above that offered
by competitors. Product differentiation can be achieved by:
1. added features which customers value
2. highly valued level of service pre and post sale
3. valued image created by advertising and brand quality
4. product availability that differs from competitors’
5. pricing at a level that is valued by customers.

The key is to only offer additional benefits that are truly valued by the target
audience. Too many companies take the easy option and reduce their price or in the
case of politics, promise the undeliverable. This in turn may have a negative effect
since customers' perception of quality is associated with price. Election promises
create a level of expectation that will lead to disappointment if not delivered.

There are 5 key factors for successful positioning:

1. clarity of the positioning idea in terms of what the competitive advantage is and
clarity of understanding of this position in the minds of customers
2. consistency of position is important for customers to know where they stand with
a company i.e. a consistent and sustained approach is required long term
3. credibility of positioning. If a company claims to offer high quality products then
the customer must agree that the quality of the products is indeed high. What the
customer perceives is absolute. Alternatively, if the customer thinks medium
quality goods are high quality then they will value them as high quality
4. competitiveness: products must if they are to achieve a competitive advantage,
actually offer value that competing products do not
5. communicable: the message about the position must be able to be communicated
to the target audience. As such the message should be simple, attractive and
easily encoded and decoded. The impact of a political leaflet is questionable,
particularly in the heat of a campaign when many of the electorate are engulfed by
paper. An example of good simple communication was the Green Party's slogan
of the Scottish parliamentary elections 2003, 2nd Vote Green. This was a
reference to the PR regional vote that was widely regarded (wrongly) as a second
preference vote. The message was successful and the Greens won 8 MSP places.
Other political parties attempted to communicate to their supporters that they had
3 separate votes (Scottish Parliament FPTP, Scottish parliament regional list and
local government vote) and should use all three votes for them. However this

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

 message did not get across clearly as research conducted by the author confirms
(Bannon, 2003b).

Product Positioning

There are 4 stages in the positioning process:

• conduct market research to identify key attributes for each segment

• shortlist all competing products that offer those attributes
• identify optimum levels for each attribute
• prepare a perceptual map.

Competitor analysis and customer profiling is the key to successful positioning. This
can be objectively and operationally difficult. The starting point is to establish the
criteria that customers use when objectively or subjectively evaluating different
product offerings. Critical Buying Factors (CBF's) are those key features that provide
essential benefits to the customer i.e. the key factors that effect the buying decision.

Stages in the competitor analysis are:

1. a range of CBF's are selected by a priori or clustering techniques

2. the CBFs are weighted by customers
3. a segment exists if a sufficient number of customers rate the CBFs the same
4. a segment must be large enough that it is economically viable to target
5. competing product's CBF's are rated
6. segments are targeted were the organisation's CBF's score highest

This is a practical tool for the formation of segments and evaluating an organisation's
products in the current competitive environment. Where an organisation's product
scores poorly, the following options are available:

• sub-divide the chosen market segment into a subset of customers where your
product rates higher
• develop a higher rating in one or more of the critical buying factors
• withdraw from market segments
• develop new critical buying factors

Implementation

Implementation is the translation of the marketing segmentation study results into a

working marketing strategy. Implementation is the process of developing marketing
plans of activities for the targeted market segments. No rules can be offered to assure
successful implementation and the academic literature on this is conspicuous by an
absence. (Wind, 2000) suggests a few generalisations likely to increase successful
implementation.

1. involve all relevant decision makers

2. segmentation characteristic should be as innovative as possible
3. the segments developed should provide guidelines for the generation of creative
execution

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

4. recognition that product management are not marketing orientated
5. the target audience should be involved in message design

Hooley (2000) identifies 4 main strategy options:

1. reinforce existing position

2. incremental repositioning
3. radical (transformational) repositioning. The New Labour project was a classic
piece of repositioning a political party from left of centre Socialists to the right of
centre. The Tory party would obviously wish to reposition but selecting the right
ground that is unique may prove difficult.
4. competitor de-positioning. This is the process of eroding a competitors position of
dominance.

Marketing Segmentation and Politics

The applicability of marketing to politics is rarely challenged by political marketers

even if some politicians and political scientists have reservations, are sceptical or
down right hostile to it. It is assumed that the political arena can benefit from all the
theories, tools and techniques of marketing. Again, the assumption is that marketing
segmentation theory and techniques potentially can improve the performance of
political organisations and lobby groups. There are four obvious positions to
approach this dichotomy:
1. all members of the electorate are potential voters, therefore the electorate should
be treated as a homogeneous group where no targeting is required and
undifferentiated (mass) marketing adopted. A party decides what it's ideology,
principles and policies are. Political propaganda is used to advocate their political
position and it's left to the electorate to decide.
2. political parties should product differentiate to appeal to the maximum number of
voters in an imperfect market i.e. disaggregation approach is adopted.
3. market segmentation process will help achieve the objectives of the organisation
and thus should be embraced fully.
4. a hybrid model of mass marketing, product differentiation and market
segmentation that best suits the resources, capabilities and is acceptable to key
stakeholder groups

Advantages of undifferentiated mass marketing in politics are:

• identifies common needs of voters and appeals to broadest number of voters
• no requirement to use resources in the marketing segmentation process and the
associated risk of ineffective implementation
• evaluation of market segmentation is not required
• uses mass communication and distribution techniques
• narrow product range i.e. concentrates on a small number of issues
• attempts to create brand images
• large barriers to market entry are created and maintained

All members of the electorate are not equally likely to vote for a party engaged in
mass marketing. Voters do have loyalties, relationships, dislikes and are not empty
vessels into which mass marketing flows and creates a response. Certainly marketing

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

segmentation should be as applicable in politics as consumer goods. The difficulty
arises in deciding:
1. the balance between mass marketing, product differentiation (disaggregation) and
market segmentation
2. resource effectiveness and efficiency
3. gathering relevant, timely, accurate research on the electorate
4. targeting segments that will respond to stimulus i.e. actionability (Kotler, 1997)
5. a message must be able to be communicated to the target audience
6. message issues: media, style and content
7. evaluating the impact of segmentation activities
8. branding issues: vision, values, essence and equity

The majority of political parties campaigning efforts are undifferentiated e.g. TV,
press, radio, posters and leaflets. Manifestos (not that they are read by the electorate
but are usually abridged by the media) appear to be an attempt at product
differentiation, the setting out of one’s stall. However at national and constituency
level targeting is evident. Probably the most obvious evidence of segmentation is the
targeting of constituencies. This is achieved usually by identifying marginal
constituencies. Clearly this is behavioral segmentation i.e. the previous behaviour of
the electorate drives the choice of constituency. This is encouraged by the first past
the post (FPTP) political system i.e. maximisation of seats won not votes. Resources
are allocated towards the targeted marginal constituencies. An examination of
marginal constituencies in May 2003 Scottish Parliamentary election seems to
indicate electoral turnouts are slightly higher in most marginal constituencies possibly
as a consequence of these additional campaigning activities. However the additional
turnout may be due to the recognition of the electorate that every vote will count. This
uncertainty regarding cause and effect calls into question the parties effectiveness and
efficiency of resources used. The targeting of marginal seats may be viewed as mass
marketing on a targeted basis as oppose to proper market segmentation i.e.
segmentation of the electorate as a whole population.

In general, the evidence is that little true targeting takes place relative to mass
marketing. That is not to say that efforts are not made to identify supporters. Local
campaigning becomes important in marginal seats (Baines et al, 1999). Central
resources are targeted towards marginal constituencies as local campaigns are
restricted in spending by law and restricted by there ability to raise funds (spend is
restricted to under £10,000).

Canvassing a targeted constituency is still regarded by most parties as a worthwhile

activity. However, the extent, accuracy and appropriateness of canvassing as a
method of identifying supporters is questionable. Most campaign managers will have
reservations as to the reliability and validity of canvass returns. Canvass returns can
become more accurate by simply not canvassing but engaging in (anonymous) voter
identification. The electorate is not aware of which party is conducting the research
and therefore the interviewee has no reason to deliberately mislead. Validation
research of existing databases can be used to check on the accuracy of existing data.

The exercise of identifying supporters is a resource intensive and pointless activity if

parties consequently do nothing with the information. The activities generally

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

adopted are targeted communications, surveys of opinions, candidate visits, appeals
for resources and reminders to vote.

GOTV (get out the vote) activities are becoming more sophisticated:
• targeted time of communication that suits the individual
• leaflets, text messages, e-mails, phone calls, doorstep reminder etc
• activities can be targeted more towards supporters known sometimes not to vote.
This is achieved by cross referencing databases of supporters with the official
marked-up register of those who participated in previous elections.

Psychographic segmentation is also used by targeting lifestyle either through leisure

activities or occupation. Databases of communities of interest are built up by parties
e.g. fishermen, teachers, nurses, community groups, religious groups, sports clubs,
environmental groups, lobby groups etc. The party organisation can develop
communications that are tailored to the interests of these groups. The communication
is more likely to be received and decoded if the issues are of direct interest.

There are 3 types of social product: the idea, the practice and the tangible object
(Kotler and Roberto 1989). The ‘social idea’ may be an attitude, belief or prejudice
regarding an issue. It may be consciously or sub-consciously held and may not
necessarily be something an individual or group is aware of. The second type of
social product is the area that is of most interest to political marketers because this is
the ‘social practice’ of acting out a belief e.g. the giving of blood or voting in a
particular way. The third type is the ‘tangible object’ the bag of blood or the vote
itself. Political Marketers are interested in achieving and maintaining the social
practice by gaining an insight into the practice and the creation or manipulation of
social ideas.

Social marketing’s roots are in social change strategies that traditionally employed
advertising for mass propaganda as the sole tool to achieving social change. Bias,
manipulation and the intention of influencing are all associated with propaganda and
political campaigning. So can political campaigning, social marketing and political
marketing be viewed as nothing more than political propaganda? Propaganda is most
certainly used in political campaigns. Propaganda also fits within the scope and
boundaries of definitions of marketing. However marketing does not fit within any
definition of propaganda. Marketing’s cornerstone is based on customer focus i.e. an
external focus from the organisation; propaganda is internally focused and self-
indulgent.

The key difference between social marketing and social propaganda is that marketing
is based on research designed to identify what a target group of potential customers
want. ‘In contrast, propaganda is didactic. The propagandist is less concerned to
moderate his/her message in the light of market research, he is convinced of the
essential rightness and is in fact an evangelist’ (O’Shaughnessy, 1996). Given the
evangelical nature of some politicians, political marketing looks to the outsider to be
nothing more than political propaganda; it is practised by evangelists not professional
marketers.

‘In practice there is a real gulf between groups which use marketing and those which
use propaganda – the distinction between these two words is underpinned by a

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

social/political cleavage between established organisations which are trying to
change our believe systems and behaviours, and new rising pressure groups which
prefer an assault on the consciousness to the gentler ethos of consumer persuasion’
(O’Shaughnessy, 1996). Social marketing seeks to use all marketing tools and
practice to effect the desired social changes. Activities such as marketing research,
market segmentation, sophisticated communication techniques, objective setting,
database management, strategic and project planning are some of the standard tools
employed.

Market segmentation can be used to segment the population into social groups with
different socio-economic, socio-demographic, psychological profile (personal
characteristics, values, motivations) and behaviours that allow social marketers to
design a marketing plan for each segment. Table 1 is an example of such
segmentation based on previous voting behaviour.

Party strategists use policies, issues, emotional engagement, loyalty, style of

presentation, campaign slogans and a variety of communications techniques.
However it could be argued that this amounts to the disaggregation of the electorate
leading to product differentiation not a large scale marketing segmentation process.

Political parties know the desired tangible object and the social practice they want to
see i.e. voters, voting for them. The key to electoral success lies in the social idea that
leads to beliefs, attitudes and values that are adopted or retained. This in turn leads to
the establishment, altering or retention of a pattern of behaviour. This in reality is the
study of social psychology i.e. why people react in the way that they do. From the
Political Marketer’s perspective this relates to clear paths of marketing activity.
Firstly the building and maintaining of relationships with key target groups i.e.
activists and supporters. Secondly, the targeting of potential supporters. Within this
potential supporter group are non-voters, swing voters and undecided.

Non-voters are not necessarily the same group of the electorate from election to
election. Studies have shown that non-voters in one election can and do become
voters in the next election (Johnston & Pattie, 1997; Overbye, 1995; Bannon, 2003).
Habitual non-voters have been estimated to represent approximately 6% of the
electorate (Johnston & Pattie, 1997). This implies that 36% of the non-voters at the
2001 General Election do sometimes vote. As national turnout rates continue to
decline, attention is turning to the non-voter.

As a target group, the switcher or floater has attracted much attention. However, with
turnouts falling below 50% (Scottish Parliamentary elections 2003), the non-voting
supporter would appear to be a very attractive segment. The responsiveness to stimuli
of non-voters is the key question that needs addressed by parties i.e. each party has a
large number of supporters who do not vote. There is no requirement to persuade this
segment to support their party, just act on that support by voting. The vast majority of
the electorate are party affiliated (over 80%) and this has remained relatively stable
over the last twenty years. However, the strength of support has diminished greatly
(Bannon, 2003). There may be a causal relationship between strength of party
identification and turnout. If this is the case, then targeted activities to build the
strength of this affiliation is needed and a long-term strategic approach to relationship
marketing adopted.

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

 Segment Behaviour Desired Outcome Action Plan

Politicians Political Competent/non- Strategic input and

Representative accident prone/ implementation
re-electable

Hyperactivist Politically Active Evangelist Involvement in decision

making process

Activist Positive Advocate Loyalty Maintain

Relationship

Supporter Active Vote/ member/ Inform/ nurture/ develop

donor relationship

Potential Supporter/ Passive Vote Persuade/ Communicate

Undecided

Non -Voter Inactive Active Communicate importance

of being an active voter

Non- Supporter Active Negatively Inactivity/ inertia Communicate/ ignore/

(Egan, 1999) disillusion/ squeeze

Opposition Negative advocate Neutralise Dis-information,

negative campaigning

Table 1 Political Marketing Segmentation by Social Group Behaviour

Conclusions

As a management function, marketing is a process of decision making that entails 5

areas of focus:
• Segmentation market
• Target marketing
• Positioning

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

 • Market planning (Doyle, 2000)
• Implementation

It was the recognition of heterogeneity in the demand for goods and services that led
to the disaggregation of the traditional single demand schedule and the acceptance of
a fragmented demand schedule where sub-markets or segments exist.

Despite the consistency of academic approaches to marketing segmentation and

acceptance (at least in theory) by firms of the value of marketing segmentation, too
many firms are not segmenting their markets effectively. Organisations are not basing
their strategies on research based marketing segmentation and there is a need to adopt
a more professional and considered approach (Wind, 2000).
There are potentially an infinitive number of ways to segment markets. Wind (1978)
argues that the theory of marketing segmentation implies that there is a single best
way of segmenting a market. Any attempt at using a single basis for segmentation for
all marketing decisions may result in inappropriate outputs and wasted resources.

For a segment to warrant specific attention it must be:

• measurable
• accessible
• substantial
• unique in its response
• stable

A system for prioritising segments is required. Figure 2 is a generic framework for

evaluating and prioritising segments. The advantage of such a grid is that it forces the
consideration of what marketing activities or stimuli are likely to produce a response.
Kotler (1997) calls this actionability of a segment i.e. ability of an organisation to
implement strategies to serve the segment. A segment may indeed be attractive but if
the organisation cannot create a stimulus to produce a response then the resources are
wasted.
Measuring the response to individual stimulus can be difficult if near impossible since
cause and effect relationships occur in a complex, multi-variant, non-linear, market
environment.
There are 5 key factors for successful positioning:
• clarity
• consistency
• credibility
• competitiveness.
• communicable

All members of the electorate are not equally likely to vote for a party engaged in
mass marketing. Voters do have loyalty, relationships, dislikes and are not empty
vessels into which mass marketing flows and creates a response. Certainly marketing
segmentation should be as applicable in politics as consumer goods.

Market segmentation can be used to segment the population into social groups with
different socio-economic, socio-demographic, psychological profile (personal
characteristics, values, motivations) and behaviours that allow marketers to design a

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

marketing plan for each segment. Table 1 is an example of such segmentation based
on previous voting behaviour.

The responsiveness to stimuli of non-voters is the key question that needs addressed
by parties i.e. each party has a large number of supporters who do not vote. There is
no requirement to persuade this segment to support their party, just act on that support
by voting. The vast majority of the electorate are party affiliated (over 80%) and this
has remained relatively stable over the last twenty years. However, the strength of
support has diminished greatly (Bannon, 2003). There may be a causal relationship
between strength of party identification and turnout. If this is the case, then targeted
activities to build the strength of this affiliation is needed and a long-term strategic
approach to relationship marketing adopted.

References
Acito, F. & Jain, A. (1980) ' Evaluation of conjoint analysis results: a comparison of
methods' Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17 Feb., pp.106-12
Baines, P. ; Lewis, B. & Yorke, D.A. ‘Marketing Planning for UK Political Parties:
Co-ordinated Local Campaigning’ proceedings of the Marketing Academy
Conference, Stirling University, Stirling, July 1999
Baker, M. (2000) ‘Marketing Strategy and Management’ 3rd Edition Macmillan
Business pp.461-462
Bannon, D. (2003) 'Voting, Non-Voting and Consumer Buying Behaviour: Non-Voter
segmentation (NVS) and the underlining causes of electoral inactivity' Journal of
Public Affairs Vol. 3 No. 2
Bannon, D. (2003b) Relationship Marketing and Politics, proceedings of the Political
Marketing Conference, Middlesex University, September 18th-20th.
Beik, L. & Busby, S. (1973) 'Profitability analysis by market segments' Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 37, July, pp.48-53
Balakrishnan, P.; Cooper, M.; Jacob, v. & Lewis, P. (1996) 'Comparative performance
of the FSCL neural net and K-means alogorithm for market segmentation' European
Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 93 No. 2, pp.346-57
Bliss, M. (1980) Market segmentation and environmental analysis, unpublished MSc
thesis, University of Strathclyde
Bonoma, M. and Shapiro, B. (1983) Segmenting the Industrial Market, Lexington
Books, Lexington, MA
Bradshaw, J. (1995) Who will vote for you and why: designing strategy and theme' In
Campaigns and Elections: American style. (Eds) Thurber, J. A. & Nelson, C.
Westview Press, Boulder, USA
Brown, S. (1998) 'Postmodern Marketing 2' Thomson, London
Cui, G. & Choudray, P. (2002) ' Marketplace diversity and cost effective marketing
strategies, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 19, No. 1. pp.54-73 Day, G.;
Shocker, A. & Srivastava, R. (1979) 'Customer orientated approaches to identifying
product boundaries, Journal of Marketing, 43, (4), pp.8-19
De Kluyver, C. & Whitlark, D. (1986) 'Benefit segmentation for industrial products'
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 15, pp.273-86
Doyle, P. (2000) Value Based Marketing, Wiley, Chichester
Enis, B. (1977) Marketing Principles, 3rd Edition, Santa Monica, CA, Goodyear File,
K. & Prince, R. (1996) 'A psychographic segmentation of industrial family
businesses', Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 25, pp.223-34
Everitt, B. (1974) Cluster Analysis, Heinemann, London

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

Fish, K.; Barnes, J. & Aiken, M. (1995) 'Artifical neural networks: a new
methodology for industrial market segmentation, Industrial Marketing Management,
Vol. 24, No. 5, pp.432-8
Flodhammar, A. (1988) 'A salesforce approach to industrial products' Quarterly
Review of Marketing No.13 Winter, pp.5-9
Frank, R. & Green, P. (1968) 'Numerical; taxonomy in marketing analysis: a review
article' Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. V. Feb., pp.83-98
Goller, S., Hogg, A. & Kalafatis, P. (2002) ' A new research agenda for business
segmentation' The European Journal of Marketing Vol. 36 No. 1/2 pp.252-271
Green, P. & Carmone, F. (1977) 'Segment congruence analysis: a method for
analysing association among alternative bases for segmentation, Journal of Consumer
Research No. 3 March, pp.217-22
Green, P.; Tull, D. & Albaum, G. (1988) Research for Marketing Decisions, 5th ed.,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
Green, P. & Krieger, A. (1991) 'Segmenting markets with conjoint-analysis' Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp.20-31
Gronroos, C. (1994) From the marketing mix to relationship marketing, Management
Decision, 32(2), 1994 pp.4-20
Haley, R. (1968) 'Benefits of segmentation: a decision oriented tool' Journal of
Marketing Vol. 32 July, pp.30-35
Hooley, G.. (2000) Positioning, in Marketing Theory edited by Michael Baker,
pp.181-205, Thomson Learning, London
Hummel, F. (1960) 'Pinpointing prospects for industrial sales' Journal of Marketing
Vol. 25, July pp.64-68
Klastorin, T. (1983) 'Assessing cluster analysis results' Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 20, Feb., pp.92-8
Kotler, P. (1997) Marketing Management, 9th Eds. Prentice Hall, New Jersey
Mahajan, V. & Jain, A. (1978) 'An approach to normative segmentation' Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. XV, Aug., pp.338-45
Mitchell, V. (1994) 'Using industrial key informants: some guidelines' Journal of the
Market Reseach Society, Vol. 36, No. 2 pp.139-44
Moriarity, R. & Ruibstein, D. (1986) 'Benefits of segmentation' Journal of Business
Research, No. 14, pp.463-44
Myers, J. H. (1996) Segmentation and Positioning for Strategic Marketing Decisions,
American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL.
Piercy, N. & Morgan, N. (1995) 'Market segmentation: strategic and operational
questions in implementation', Marketing Education Group Conference Proceedings,
pp. 636-45
Quinlan, F. (1981) 'The use of social grading in marketing,' Quarterly Review, pp.16-
29
Rao, V. & Winter, F. (1997) 'An application of the multivariate PROBIT model for
market segmentation and product design', Faculty working paper, College of
Commerce and Business Administration, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL.
Ries, A. & Trout, J. (1981) Positioning, The battle for your mind, Maidenhead:
McGraw-Hill. Resnik, A.; Turney, P. & Mason, J. (1979) 'Marketers turn to counter
segmentation' Harvard Business Review, Sept-Oct pp.100-6
Shea, D. M. (1996) Campaign Craft: The strategies, tactics and art of political
campaign management, Praegar publishers Westport, CT: USA Sheth, J. ; Gardner, D.
& Garret, D. (1988) ‘Marketing Theory, Evolution and Evaluation’ pp. 19-22 & 162-
173

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]

Silk, A. & Kalwani, M. (1982) 'Measuring influence in organisational purchasing
decisions', Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19, pp.165-81
Smith, M., Bruner, J. & White, R. (1956) Opinions and Personality, New York,
Wiley.
Smith, G. & Hirst A. (2001) 'A new approach for a new era of political marketing',
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, No. 9/10 pp.1058-1073
Webster, F. (1978) 'Management science in industrial marketing' Management
Science, Jan. pp..29-39
Wind, Y. & Cardozo, R. (1974) 'Industrial market segmentation' Industrial Marketing
Management Vol. 6 No. 2 pp.17-25
Wind, Y. (2000) Market Segmentation in Marketing Theory edited by Michael Baker,
pp.181-205, Thomson Learning, London
Yorke, D. & Meehan, S. (1986) 'ACORN in Political Marketplace', European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 20, No. 8, pp.63-76

Copyright © 2004 [Political Studies Association]